What does the Bible actually say about being gay?

BBC ^ | October 23, 2003 | BBC

[Fzob]

So how can their views be so contradictory?

There are only contradictory because one view represents truth based on a regulative interpretation of the Bible and the other interpretation is base on lies intended to deceive.

Homosexuality has nearly universally been viewed as a perversion by societies. A perversion that has been tolerated and by the same societies.

[MEG33]

LOL..but notice we are still much tougher on homosexuals than the other things I listed.I would not want a priest or minister to be any of those things,however.

[ovrtaxt]

Why don't we discuss fornicators,slanderers,thieves,adulterers,like we do homosexuals?

In fact, that's how I approach gay people with the Gospel. It's much more effective if you speak about deliverance from sin in general, common to all, than focusing in on the act of homosexuality.

[Noachian]

This shows that radical liberals will open anything to an interpretation that supports their agenda -- even the Bible.

Nothing has changed in 2000 years, we have a Supreme Court doing the same thing today with our Constitution.

[tbpiper]

Intercourse

I think the phrase is 'that we might know them'. The word 'know' means to have carnal knowledge. This artilce just highlights some old and very shallow scholarship.

[Fzob]

Why don't we discuss fornicators,slanderers,thieves,adulterers,like we do homosexuals?

Because fornicators, slanderers, thieves, adulterers are not trying to convince the whole world that the bible says it's ok to fornicate slander, steal, commit adultery and convince everyone that the above is normal and acceptable behavior.

[Aquinasfan]

Intercourse can also mean to "join in conversation".

LOL! And BBC can also mean Broadcasting Bull Crap.

[Jonah Hex]

Agreed. I know I teach my kids those acts are sins and managed (so far) to set a good example.

[HarleyD]

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." Heb 13:8

If it was an abonination back then it still is today and always will be.

[mtbopfuyn]

Seems pretty plain to me, and I'm not buying into those flimsy gay excuses.

[HarleyD]

"When Jesus mentions Sodom, hundreds of years later, it appears to be in a context of a discussion of hospitality, rather than one of sexual morality.

This was rich. I missed this. I don't remember a commandment, "Thou shall act like Martha Stewart." :O)

[jocon307]

Well meg, those people are certainly considered sinners, although I admit the fornicators & adulterers have been getting a bit of a break lately. But I doubt the Episcopals would be nominating for Bishop some heterosexual lothario who had mutliple affairs or just catted around. And as for the drunks, the Baptists, at least, maybe others, certainly other individuals, consider drinking at all a sin. (Mormons, there are some others.)

Notice that none of these offenses are said to be equivalent to murder or rape or other violent acts. So I think these must be "sins" that many feel are not so sinful. Do any of us really think that human nature has changed much in two thousand, or six thousand, or ten thousand years? I believe it hasn't changed at all.

[Tailgunner Joe]

quite disgusting.

[MEG33]

Seen a movie,magazine or TV program lately?Remember the open marriage craze and "consenting adults" ,or sex education,passing out condoms in school?Our own Surgeon General's take on teen age sex?I don't think anyone has claimed it is Biblically approved of but certainly they bring up King David.

I simply think we can be hypocrites if we only concentrate on homosexuality.I find it thought provoking that slandering is listed with these things.Gives one pause when flame wars go over the line!

[mdmathis6]

What complicates the arguement, are the passages in which Johnathan is queried by Saul as to the where abouts of David(The famous ARROW story in which David asks Jonathan to ascertain his father's intentions towards him). Saul out and out accuses Jonathan of having feelings for David "like a woman", for Saul suspects Jonathan is not telling him the truth. Nevertheless, Jonathan himself has had children(Nathan who never spawned kings but is suspected to be part of the lineage of Mary..who birthed the king of kings...Nathan was crippled as a child but I guess managed to get a wife and had kids). If David and Jonathan had had a homosexual relationship...the PROPHET NATHAN I'm sure would have come around to condemn it and pronounce God's curse!

[Adder]

There is something particularly disgusting when mo's and their apologists take perfectly good and straight[pun intended] words and twist them into a justification for depravity.
Admittedly, the story of Daniel and Jonathan could be read as a "love" story in the physical sense. But that ignores the host of other documents of a similar time where men profess their love for one another. In those it is used more in the sense of commeraderie, the love of a soldier for his fellow soldiers, for the deep friendships that develope, for the respect that men hold for one another in certain circumstances. Its trite but its like a sports team or fishing buddies, or just best friends.
The major religions all hold that mo-ism is wrong and is to be avoided. That just sticks in these people's craw so they make these unsubstantiated and unsupportable attacks. Unfortunately, too many are too willing to ignore what is right, what is TRUE, to be "welcoming" to the butt rangers. I believe it is Revalations that mentions something about evil being good and good, evil. Id est demonstratum.

[Skooz]

He said the same about eating shrimp.

God set down dietary laws in the Law.

Jesus fulfilled the Law and thus, did away with the provisions of the Law (dietary restrictions, animal sacrifice, a human high priest, etc).

The dietary and sacrificial prescriptions of the Law are specifically removed in the New Testament books of Acts, Galatians, and Hebrews.

The New Testament continues to call homosexual relations a sin and an abomination.

[TheCrusader]

"Why don't we discuss fornicators,slanderers,thieves,adulterers,like we do homosexuals?"

Because they are not the same as the sin of homosexuality, which is a sin against both God and nature. Even more importantly, there are no organized groups out there proudly calling themselves "theives and adulterers", who go about trying to legitimize their sin by pushing for minority status and asking for public funding for their health care, and even promoting their filth amongst our children in public schools. Get it yet?

[JesseHousman]

What do you think about your article?

If you believe homosexual acts are somehow rendered paradoxical, then you believe falsely. Homosexuality is disgusting to true Christians who exercise logical thinking. Of course one doesn't have to be a genius to understand that God, through His Word, considers homosexual acts an abomination deserving of a one-way ticket to hell.

[StonyBurk]

the hermeneutic is wrong-- to be fair to the Scripture one
must attempt to discern what a word meant to the audiance
in the Old Testament Hebrew via studies in time and culture. In New Testament Greek in similar terms. the interpretation in terms of anti-Gay-- or Gay is ethocentric and junk science in other words B.S.