The Bible and same sex relationships: A review article

Redeemer Report ^ | June 2015 | Tim Keller

[lonestar67]

Fabulous post.

this is really good.

Excellent rebuttal to the idea that the Bible can condone homosexuality.

[farming pharmer]

Shellfish and homosexuality both have an ‘ick’ factor. Who knew? BTW, I despise both. Yuck!

[Amendment10]

One of the Bible’s basic warnings regarding things like same-sex sexual relationships is “Do not be deceived” as shown by 1 Corinthians 6:9.

[left that other site]

Moses, Paul, Peter, and John the Revelator all had something to say about this issue...and I will trust them over Vines, martin, and whoever.

[Mrs. Don-o]

This is really excellent, Gamecock, and I’m bookmarking so I can use it later. Will follow this thread tomorrow to see what other FReepers are thinking about it.

[Mercat]

Later

[bayliving]

Bump for later reading.

[ConjunctionJunction]

The author seems to subscribe to the theory that no sin is worse than any other. Pretty good response to that theory here:

Is Homosexual Practice No Worse Than Any Other Sin? by Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D.

[Chuckster]

Just because your homo friend is a nice guy it does not mean that homosexuality should not be a sin.

People who say homosexuality is normal and healthy conveniently ignore the fact that if it were normal the human race would not have survived long enough to learn to master fire, let alone domesticate wheat.

[delchiante]

What if we ask why Eve’s punishment deals with conception and reprduction if we believe His punishments fit the crimes.

Or why Adam was punished with a cursed ground which would seem a punishment contrary to his ‘crimes’- if not for genesis 38:9 if Adam ‘spillled’ something on the ground like Onan did..

Imagine if ‘fruit’ isn’t fruit and ‘trees’ arent really trees in the garden..

And Adam and eve engaged in abominable sex with ,well, we can fill in the blanks.

Not sure ‘gay’ christians or jews would like that version of the garden.. The g rated is good for children. But the adult version may be too adult for most..

Maybe Adam and Steve should be changed to Adam and satan. That would really upset some’apple’ carts..

[lurk]

We think of sins in different strata from mild to severe. Rome codified them into categories. In truth, all sin equally kills.

There is only one solution for all sin, the blood of Christ.

[RnMomof7]

Good post ...

[AnAmericanMother]

Very good, well thought-out, persuasive post which maintains a level and charitable tone throughout.

We need more folks like this raising these arguments.

[Gamecock]

Thanks for your kind words.

Tim Keller is a minister in the Presbyterian Church in America (one of the conservative ones) and pastors a church with over 5000 members in NY City.

We have worshiped there several times and are amazed to see how many young (20s-30s) folks worship there.

Solid preaching occurs there, IMHO.

Blessings.

GC

[gattaca]

bump

[hecticskeptic]

Two comments...

Yes, there are things in the Bible that Christians no longer have to follow but, if the Scripture is our final authority, it is only the Bible itself that can tell us what those things are. This is a great quote.

There is so much more that could be said about 'missing the Biblical vision'. The Bible makes no reference to sexuality in terms of hetero or homo sexuality.... there is only sexuality as an intrinsic characteristic of mankind that manifests itself as actions that God approves of and actions that he doesn't approve of...and some of those that He doesn't approve of are simply referred to as an abomination. We have hit a point in our culture where people are more inclined to refer to matters that they don't necessarily agree with as "that might be your truth" without calling it what it is... a sick abominable perversion.

[hecticskeptic]

We think of sins in different strata from mild to severe.

Right.... and of course the most mild is the sin that is already there when a baby is born! Psalm 51:5 "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

[imardmd1]

Thanks for your research effort. The only thing I always respond negatively to (not to you and your work here) is that English writers and speakers continually fall into the linguistic trap by using the word "homosexual."

My reason for rejecting it? It has no meaning because the activity has nothing to do with reproduction. It is about mutual gratification of an impulse meant for other purposes. the words "homogratification" or "homogratifiers" might replace the pejorative "Sodomy" or "sodomites" but "homosexual"? Never!

Why? Whether or not one is a creationist or evolutionist, the design of the mammal sexual organ systems exists for only one purpose: to effectively deliver one kind of haploid cell to another haploid cell for union; with a signaling system that prompts the participants that the action of the probing venture has been completed.

Mental and/or mechanical activation of the signaling system is a perversion of its design, and misdirection of its use through mutual gratification is essentially a form of madness that defrauds the perpetrators of having done anything useful, and cheats the community of its means of propagation.

Therefore, the whole activity is a lie, invented to justify the lack of sufficient means and/or motivation to excite the system into its normal design function and overall value to the species.

So, I'm not calling it "homosexuality" in conversing about same-gender defrauding, and beg others to also insist on realistic terminology in the propaganda pushing it.

[imardmd1]

Correction:

I just wrote this too hastily, so I want to repair at least one thought:

"Mental and/or mechanical activation of the signaling system through mutual gratification is a perversion of its design, and misdirection of its use through mutual gratification is essentially a form of madness . . ."

and, inserting a modifying phrase:

"Therefore, the whole same-gender sex organ excitement activity is a lie . . ."