homosexuality in perspective

IFBReformer,

What about same gender couples who are not living together and not engaging in sexual acts?

Also, as far as biblical passages to hmosexuality being unnatural, the only references I find are in regards to beastiality, fornication, and sodomy (usually lumped together similarly). I'm not trying to start a debate. But if you have specific verses, I'd appreciate it if you could post them.

 

Because they want this sin to be recognized as a "right". Because they want to teach our children that this kind of behavior is normal. Because they want to call anyone who dosen't accept their behavior a "bigot". The ironic thing is, I suppose, while we get upset when they call us bigots, we should really be happy about it.

Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matt 5:11-12)

 

Thanks IfbReformer for a good topic. You left out a very important passage that defends your position of some sins being more significant than others - in this case sexual sins:

Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body. (1 Corinthians 6:18-20)

Committing a sexual sin is like going into the Holy of Holies part of the Tabernacle or Solomon's temple (where only the high priest was allowed to go after ritual cleansing) and committing your sin!

 

ifbreformer, i respect your query into this and so I will try to explain the problem here. Adultery is done everyday and it is sin and most everyone knows it is wrong, even though they do it. It is done in secret most of the time. Sodomy is being forced on us to accept as normal. It is not normal or natural. If we don't stand against it, while we can then it will be accepted as normal. Abortion is wrong and has always been sin, now it is looked upon as a right and legal and protected. However, we must still stand against it.

Sin is always sin no matter how big or little. the problem is when sin becomes accepted as just an alternate lifestle.

 

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1:26-27 NIV)

just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire. (Jude 7 ESV)

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.(Leviticus 20:13 KJV)

To me "abomination" qualifies as defining that which is unnatural. If something is loathsome and detestable, it cannot be natural.

 

Have you looked at what the Bible calls "abomination"? Quite a grab-bag. (Fact is, it means different things to different Biblical authors, but that's another story.)

I haven't looked up all the references, but the general thrust of this article is right on the money:

at least as far as the variety of "abominations" are concerned. As noted, it includes all sexual sin. And it includes many other things that would not qualify as "unnatural" as the term has been developed in this thread.

My own opinion is that the basic idea has more to do with the "unclean" before God than with the "hated" by God. "Unclean" is not "unnatural", and one of the major jobs Jesus has done on the cross and, in our midst, since then, is to reconcile the unclean world to God. This is why, for example, the Candace's eunuch could be baptized, though he could not have entered the temple. And this story has profound ramifications where GLBT believers are concerned.

Haruo

 

Haruo,

If GLBT believers can practice and not repent (turn from) their sin, can I be a practicing and unrepenting murderer and still be saved by God's grace?

Gimme that gift of everlasting life Lord, but don't ask me to surrender my life to you so that you can make me a new creation in your image!

[ June 28, 2003, 12:57 AM: Message edited by: John Wells ]

 

Dear Haruo and Joshua,
This is something I honestly don't understand about what you believe and why.
What restrictions do you actually think should be drawn?
If, for example, committed, monogamous GLBT relationships are okay, where in the Bible or in your reasoning does it have to be committed or monogamous?
Are other restrictions against things like bigamy, polygamy, bestiality, and incest also anachronistic in your thinking? Why?

Karen

 

John,

I do not believe GLBT believers are ipso facto in sin; there is plenty of sexual sin abroad in the GLBT population, no question, and when the Holy Spirit convicts them of it those in those sins ought to repent (and do, just as much as straight people do, I believe).

The GLBT believers I know have surrendered their lives to God, and have been made a new creation in God's image, just as much as any of us, as far as I can tell. The fact that God has not seen fit to negate or revise their sexual orientation I see as evidence that it is not in need of it; you see it as evidence (proof?) that they are lying. Our quite different hermeneutical assumptions apparently make these outcomes each seem "the obvious truth" to us. We both see through a glass darkly, and God will eventually make it all clear as Saran Wrap (or whatever the Koiné Greek for "Saran Wrap" was).

Haruo
who finds your name a bit disconcerting, since the only John Wells I know {his English personal page (click)}, Professor J. C. Wells, Phonetician at the University College, London, author of the most popular Esperanto/English/Esperanto Dictionary and translator of "Puer nobis" into Esperanto, is gay!

 

Hi, Karen, I can't speak for Joshua, but I draw a fairly heavy line between consensual relations and non-consensual ones, as far as what the state ought to be in the business of prohibiting goes.

I am generally not in favor of polygamy, but don't consider it my job (nor the state's) to police it. Bestiality is analogous to statutory rape, in that there is a presumption that consent is impossible. Incest is too complex to tackle here (and the Biblical teaching on it is complicated, too). Again, where it is consensual I am not in favor of criminalizing it.

Haruo

 

someone posted the romans verses that described men no longer desiring the natural use of the womanas being a cause of homosexuality. I do not see this in the context in which it is presented. so an alternative take....

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

the verses of the natural use of women are that the womans role to man, is as a helpmeet. she gives to the man. the verse reverses the role whereas the woman no longer gives and the man takes from here. destroying the image of christ to mankind of loving the wife.
As man struggles to compete in his world, he turns to those he competes with (envy) and compromises to combine knowledge, to compete on a much larger scale.

men with men doing that which is unseemly.

(compremising and envying) and guess what their doing in their competitions. proving to self and other men that mankind (flesh) can please God through trying to be Good.

or plainly making up law to follow to please God.

which is displeasing to God. man kills each other because they are holding envy towards each other.

this is the world underneath the facades of denominations of christian religions.

and yes, religion strikes back to deflect the understanding..those homosexuals and their perversions.....

but who is the murderer and who holds envy towards their brothers.?

notice in romans that these scriptures speak of people who KNOW GOD..and their turning into reprobates. imagine that..

 

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

This is talking about those who practice these without repentance, not the occasional backslidder. So do you openly challenge God on this God-inspired statement by Paul?

No relation and opposite sexual orientation. Please don't invite me to the family reunion!

 

In verse 26, chresis which is translated "function" in the NASB, means use as pertains to the sexual use of a woman. That kinda destroys your first rambling!

In verse 27 about the men, katergazomai aschemosune translates "committed that which is unseemly pertaining to nakedness" (literal Greek). Both verses are talking about sex and not the worldly stuff you conjured up! BTW, the NASB reads:

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. (Romans 1:26-27)

Sorry, but you are way off base!

 

John, Im just offering some spiritual insight.

do you not see two versions of interpretation here.? carnal and spiritual.

one version that is to keep the carnal christian in derision, and the other version which is to give Gods wisdom to the spirit.

so both interpretations are here, which is right?

oh ps John,..Chapter two of romans gives further insight to interpret my previous post...

Does homosexuals go out of their way to judge christian religions..or is it christian religions going out of their way to judge homosexuals ?...

Rom 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Rom 2:2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.
Rom 2:3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

Me2

 

I do not believe that the terms I italicized there are synonymous with "GLBT believers". Certainly it is a commonplace that sinners will not inherit the kingdom of God, and I would not challenge it. The power in the blood of Jesus is wonderful stuff; it is no respecter of sexual orientations.

Haruo

 

Me2 and Haruo,

The only sinners I go out of the way to point out their lostness (judge as you say!), are sinners who make a travesty of the redemptive work of the blood of Christ by denying its power to change their lives by freeing them from the bondage of sin, whether that be homosexual, heterosexual promiscuity, lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, gossiping, slandering, coveting, etc. NNE can choose to continue in their sin (any of the above) and be truly saved.The scriptures have been quoted enough on this and I'm too tired to provide them again.

 

Hi john,

I agree, our brothers and sisters in christ should be aware that sin is detrimental to the growth and their continual abiding in the holy spirit..

but to the point that the church "isolates and ridicules" in the name of following righteousness is another goal altogether.

Me2