The Bible and Homosexuality

WND.com ^ | 03-11-04 | Farah, Joseph

[Solamente]

[SheLion]

But you cannot say it says something it does not say.

Amen.

[Agnes Heep]

... men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

"Receiving in themselves that recompence of their error." Sounds a lot like HIV.

[twntaipan]

Kerry knows absolutely nothing about the Bible---and even less about Mississippi.

[teletech]

There are NO fence riders in God's Kingdom! No such thing as accepting God half way!

[familyofman]

"What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

Let's void all divorces. Or, we could stone the adulterers just like in days gone by. We may even have to incorporate teachings from the Koran, Hinduism, and other religions - since we are a melting pot.

[AppyPappy]

Let's void all divorces. Or, we could stone the adulterers just like in days gone by.

Or maybe we could just speak the truth boldly.

[King Black Robe]

The definition revolutionists would have us believe that the great sin of Sodom was poor hospitality. hahahahaha! Oh yes, that's such a menacing thing in contrast to all other sins that God had to completely destroy Sodom.

I really think conservatives should get into the redefinition business too. Hmmmm....think of the laws we could ignore or create with this new progressive method.

[stainlessbanner]

ping em

[stranger and pilgrim]

Yes. Homosexuality is a sin. So is judging. So is hatred. Anything we do that we know is wrong is a sin. So, the question for us is do we concentrate on the sins of others and, in doing so, become a sinner ourselves by our hatred and judging evil spirit? Or do we find a way to love the sinner, recognizing that the soul that sins is in need of God's holy spirit?

Yes. Homosexuality is a sin. Holy hatred of the evil spirit thoughts that produce homosexuality is fine. But hatred of the homosexual, the sinning soul, is not.

We all need to be really careful where we let our own thoughts lead us. Our very lives are at stake.

[WKB]

ping em


Is that fast enough SIR?

[Bosco]

Let's void all divorces. Or, we could stone the adulterers just like in days gone by.

Not a bad idea. It certainly would make men and women think twice before marrying and committing adultery. I think the stoning would be a bit too much, though. I am all for raising the bar on marriage and the consequences of divorce and infidelity.

Can anyone tell me how our culture benefits from adultery? Homosexuality?

[chatham]

There are Millions of Homosexuals who have died because of aids and if that doesn't make a statement that Homosexuality is not the right way to go then nothing will.

[MissAmericanPie]

Ps 22:15
My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.

Ps 22:16
For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

Strongs Concordance "dogs" 3611: to yelp, or else to attack. A euphemism meaning a male prostitute.

This section of scripture from Psalms 22 recording the thoughts of Christ on the cross, clearly reveal that the nature of homosexuality has not changed in centuries, nor it's desire to mock decency.

[af_vet_1981]

Yes. Homosexuality is a sin. So is judging. So is hatred.

1. Homosexuality is always an abomination.
2. Judging is only a sin if it is unrighteous judgment.
3. Hatred is only a sin when it is unrighteous.

[aruanan]

The Bible and Homosexuality

There's no doubt in what it actually says on the topic; same for adultery, fornication (of any variety), murder, slander, etc.; even calling a Christian who doesn't provide for his family worse than an unbeliever. It's just that if A wants B and C says he cannot have it and A wants some aspect of C to make his life more palatable, then A has to come up with reasons to nullify C's injunction against B. Some of the more popular ones are:

1. Denial--C really doesn't say that at all.

2. Reinterpretation--C doesn't really mean that at all; the words were mis-translated.

3. Contextualization--C means that only in that particular sitz em leben, the Mosaic Law, but we as Christians aren't under that law but under grace where there is neither male or female and, so, it doesn't apply to us.

4. Redaction--these things said by C about B were obviously added by later editors or copyists in an attempt to justify some measure of control they were trying to impose on the religious establishment of their time and, so, we are justified in disposing of them so we can get back to the original text (this method was a favorite of Jefferson)

Strangely, though, the "original text" in 4. looks just like what they had set out to find in order for them to attempt to control the religious establishment of the present day.

[CatoRenasci]

Perhaps Kerry's thinking of some recent, feminist-gay-lesbian-transgendered person sponsored translation of the Bible that has removed any gender-specific language and replaced it with the feminine or gender neutral language. As a Roman Catholic, of course, Kerry has probably never read the Authorized Version (King James) translation once so universal among Protestants. More likely, he was taught from the Douay translation based on St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate and reads the more recent Jerusalem Bible.

[trebb]

Some try to twist the special friendship between David and Jonathan into a perversion instead of allowing that men can have love for men without being perverts.

[gathersnomoss]

Agreed. Watch where you step.