Did Jesus Bless Homosexuality?

Concerned Women for America ^ | 11/1/05 | Warren Throckmorton, PhD

[sure_fine]

My Opinion of Homo's and Liberals is best said in the text below:

Romans 1:21-31

1:21 Because, though they knew God, they did not glorify him as God, nor were they thankful; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

1:23 And exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling corruptible man, and birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.

1:24 Therefore God gave them up, through the lusts of their own hearts, to sexual impurity, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves:

1:25 Because they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

1:26 For this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for even their women exchanged natural relations for that which is against nature:

1:27 And likewise the men, leaving their natural relations with woman, burned in their lust toward one another; men with men doing that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

1:28 And as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper.

1:29 They were filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malevolence; whisperers,

1:30 Slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

1:31 Without understanding, untrustworthy, without natural affection, unmerciful:

[Clint N. Suhks]

Those claiming Jesus never had anything to say about homosexuality always omit his repeated references to Sodom and Gomorrah

Jesus mentions this fate more often than just Matt and Luke. He advises that this fate, for those who won't receive His Word, in Mark and John and numerous other books, as a fate worse than the homosexuals received, as a fate worse than death.

[BizzeeMom]

This is an article by Dennis Prager, Jewish conservative: Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then Christianity) Rejected Homosexuality

[jmaroneps37]

"And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality..."
Here's just one of the problems in this question: using a Bible that was written to allow a king to marry as many times as he wanted to. Jesus didn't say the part about
" .. except for sexual immorality..".
This is like finding a right to abortion in the Constitution,but it aint in there!

[RobbyS]

Many people look at Galatians and Paul's fulmination against THE Law, and take this as their text against ALL law. But Romans leaves no doubt that he prized his heritage as a Jew and by no means repudiated the ethical code of his people who were, as the gays would say. "homophobic."

[RobbyS]

Thanks for spreading this around. To me this is the last word against the Christian and Jewish apologists for homosexuality.

[BizzeeMom]

It is an awesome piece, I like to post it whenever I can! :)

[Sam the Sham]

Precisely.

That is why I detest people who call themselves "New Testament Christians". Jesus was no "New Testament Christian". He constantly and continually presented himself as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. He was constantly quoting the Old Testament. The parable about the vineyard giving only wild grapes came from Isaiah.

"Then, starting with Moses, He explained what pointed to Him in all of scripture."

Jesus was a Jew speaking to Jews. They all knew the laws of God. No one needed to have it repeated to them what "abomination" meant.

[Sam the Sham]

I keep thinking of Ezekiel 9 where God showed Ezekiel the Babylonian exile a vision of His temple filled with worshippers of Asherah and Tammuz.

That didn't happen overnight. Doubtless "open minded" priests explained that in the modern world they should be more inclusive and tolerant towards other faith traditions. Asherah, Yahweh. What's the difference ? It would be so judgemental to limit worship to just worshippers of God.

[no dems]

"I have begun to wonder if the Greek word eunouchoi (eunuchs) might also include someone without natural attraction to the opposite sex."

I hardly think so, especially when you read the rest of that verse: "...and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake."

KEY WORDS: "for the kingdom of heaven's sake." I don't think people were "born" homosexual for the sake of the Kingdom of God.

[no dems]

"I thought this was an interesting exegesis."

Let me offer mine: We live in a world that is under a curse. That "curse" works it's way out in each of us differently. Some people have to deal with the effects of homosexuality as a result of that curse. That does not mean that God lets them off the hook. They need salvation through Jesus Christ just as does the adulterer, the habitual criminal, those predisposed to alcoholism or drugs, etc., etc. etc.

[RatRipper]

Right on, Sam. I am with you on all that. "He who has seen me has seen the Father." God did not change one iota between the times of the Old and New Testament, and Jesus gives us a wealth of insight into the unchanging nature of God.

[chesley]

You are so correct. This has always been a problem of the ages. Paul also addresses it.

2 Corinthians 11:13-15 (King James Version)

13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.