Was the word homosexuality introduced into the bible later on?

[xdisciplex]

I just watched Larry King and there was this gay bishop and a lesbian pastor and they both argued for homosexuality. This woman claimed that the word homosexuality was later on introduced in the bible and that first of all the word in greek which was used there had a different meaning and was about abusing a younger person and she said that you can trace this back and see that in the beginning the word which was used here was not homosexuality. Is this true?
But even if it is true it doesn't mean homosexuality is okay. What about this here?

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.

Can it be clearer?
I don't understand how these people can be so convinced of their opinion. Are they really believing that God thinks being gay is okay or are they willfully ignorant? What I noticed is that these gays seem to be totally convinced that God thinks what they are doing is okay and that God created them this way. The lesbian pastor also said that she has a wonderful relationship with God. Do you think this is true? Is this even possible?
I don't know what to think of these people. Are they only being rebellious or are they really deceived that think they are doing the right thing?

 

[pinoybaptist]

just a case of wanting to have their cake, and eat it too.
just shows us how totally depraved man's spirit is.
always something to offer in place of or against God's intent.
In this board, you'll see it in the "yes, God is this and God is that, but....." of arguments.

 

[xdisciplex]

So you think that these people are not honestly wanting the truth but they only want to bend the bible to fit into what they want to be true?
I also noticed that these people tried to give the word truth a bad name because they made it look like what the fundamental christians call truth isn't the real truth.

 

[mcdirector]

That's exactly what they want -- to have their cake and eat it too.

When the ELC (ECL??) part of the Lutheran church was taking a vote over homosexuality, I heard one of their college professors on talk radio. He was right on the money when he said there are two gospels.

The first is that God loves us and meets us where we are -- our desire because we love Him is to change -- to conform to His image. We recognize our need for a Savior because of our sinful nature.

The second gospel is that God loves us and meets us where we are and accepts us as we are and we don't have to change. mmmmm Quite a difference. But it seems to me that is exactly where so many are. It's the I'm OK, you're OK kind of mentality. The sad thing is that we seem to have entire churches (not to mention some denoms) operating from this viewpoint.

In reality, we are but filthy rags and God is HOLY.

 

[Chemnitz]

MCDirector, its E?CA they gave up being Lutheran when they threw out the Bible 50 years ago.

 

[mcdirector]

MCDirector, its E?CA they gave up being Lutheran when they threw out the Bible 50 years ago.

I had 2/3 of the initials right! :laugh: I have a really good friend who is MS, so I do know what she thinks about them.

But it doesn't help matters that they still call themselves Lutheran. Most people don't know any difference -- a Lutheran is a Lutheran like a Baptist is a Baptist.

 

[xdisciplex]

Hmmm...
I have a few questions about this issue.
Is a christian who is drinking and not repentant as bad as a homosexual christian who is practicing homosexuality and not repenting?
I think most christians will say that the homosexual christian is worse but is this really true? I mean there are christians which hold on to some sins and which may even be rebellious, but I don't think they directly lose their salvation because of this. Then where's the difference between a christian who drinks and doesn't want to repent and a gay christian who doesn't want to repent? Isn't it the same?
But more christians focus on homosexuality than on drinking. Homosexuality simply seems filthier to us and is less "accepted" than drinking. But does God distinguish between different sins? In the bible there are passages where God names certain sins and to me this seems like he's categorizing sin. If this is true then this seems as if God indeed distinguishes the severity of different sins.

Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Does this mean that God sees all these sins here as equal in their severity?
Then what about revellings? Does this mean that christians which are obese and like to eat a lot are as bad as murderers?
How many sermons are there about revellings and how many sermons are there about homosexuality?

What I also ask myself is wether christians which claim that there is no such thing as a homosexual are right. Some claim that it's simply a choice. I don't think this makes much sense. If it's a choice then why should anybody choice to be gay? There are gays which already behave strange as children and which say that already as children they knew they were gay and many gays also suffer from this. How does this fit together with the choice-theory?
Also if it was a choice then this would basically mean that all of us once had to make a choice wether we want to be gay or not. I don't think I was ever tempted to become gay. This simply makes no sense and when I imagine being a gay who suffers from being gay and then I hear a christian who is not gay and doesn't have a clue how a gay feels say that being gay is a choice then it would really anger me. Maybe this is the reason why many gays are angry at christians because many christians come off pretty arrogant by saying that it's a choice. What if it's not a choice? Isn't this the same as saying having diabetes is a choice? I bet this would anger a lot of people which have diabetes.
I don't really dig this choice stuff. I would rather assume that being gay could also be genetic. I have seen some gays which had this typical gay voice and also looked gay. I don't think that they made this gay voice on purpose it was simply how they talked.

 

[Chemnitz]

Of course a person who is drinking is better than a homosexual engaged in homoerotic acts and thoughts. Drinking isn't a sin, while homosexual thoughts and actions are sins.

Now the sin inherit with homosexuality is no worse than heterosexual adultry, murder, or theft.

A homosexual is a sinner just like everybody else. It is just their sin is easier to pick on because for many people it doesn't hit close to home.

The argument of genetics is just an excuse so they do not have to own up to their sinful nature. Its no different than saying "the devil made me do it", a lame excuse.

 

[xdisciplex]

I mean being an alcoholic. Is being an alcoholic better than being gay?

 

[genesis12]

I mean being an alcoholic. Is being an alcoholic better than being gay?

Both are deceived. Let those of us who recognize daily sin call it what it is. Sin. No one who is born again can escape the grief that comes with grieving the Holy Spirit. Are those who practice sin, who continue in sin, grieving? Remember that there is a sin unto death. Let God be the Judge of that.

 

[rbell]

xDx, "better" can't be in the same sentence as "sin" when we view it from God's eyes. All sin is repulsive to God.

Sexual sin in general (homosexuality in particular) incorporates so much of our being (mental, physical, it's a sin against one's own body, emotional, etc.) that it bothers us more, and IMO is often more "deep-seated" and tougher to deal with. But sin is sin...and we all need cleansing.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

I just watched Larry King and there was this gay bishop and a lesbian pastor and they both argued for homosexuality. This woman claimed that the word homosexuality was later on introduced in the bible and that first of all the word in greek which was used there had a different meaning and was about abusing a younger person and she said that you can trace this back and see that in the beginning the word which was used here was not homosexuality. Is this true?
But even if it is true it doesn't mean homosexuality is okay. What about this here?

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.

Can it be clearer?
I don't understand how these people can be so convinced of their opinion. Are they really believing that God thinks being gay is okay or are they willfully ignorant? What I noticed is that these gays seem to be totally convinced that God thinks what they are doing is okay and that God created them this way. The lesbian pastor also said that she has a wonderful relationship with God. Do you think this is true? Is this even possible?
I don't know what to think of these people. Are they only being rebellious or are they really deceived that think they are doing the right thing?

Rev. Albert Mohler, who was the Southern Baptist guest on King's show last night, just finished dealing with this issue on his radio show. Once he posts the archive of the show, I will click a link to it so you can listen to it because I think he dealt with the issue very clearly.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[xdisciplex]

Cool.

But I don't understand why many christians are so totally focused on proving that being gay is a choice. Doesn't reality prove them wrong? If it is a choice then why are there gays which suffer from it or which even marry because they hope that everything will work out once they're married? I have seen and heard this many times from gays that they tried to "heal" themselves but it simply didn't work. I think it's somehow really strange when christians simply insist on homosexuality being a choice. This is like saying being heterosexual is a choice. I never choose to be heterosexual I simply am heterosexual. But this also creates problems because if there are in fact gays which are born this way or which started being gay at an early age then what does this imply? Does this mean that God won't hold them accountable for it or that he only holds them accountable if they don't want to be cured from it?

 

[rbell]

So...is pedophilia OK, if they don't "choose" it?

Having sex with one of the same gender is a choice. Otherwise, it's rape.

 

[xdisciplex]

Having sex with one of the same gender is a choice. Otherwise, it's rape.

Sure, this IS a choice. But having homosexual feelings is not a choice.
According to your logic a person which has pedophile feelings but does not act upon them is as normal as a person which doesn't have these feelings but there is clearly a difference or would you say that a person which struggles with pedophile feelings and doesn't act upon them is normal? I don't think that such a person is normal.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Here is the link I promised.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[mcdirector]

Having longings for a drink isn't a choice either. Whether or not that drink is taken is the choice. It is the exercise of self-control.

 

[xdisciplex]

Having longings for a drink isn't a choice either. Whether or not that drink is taken is the choice. It is the exercise of self-control.

But you have to admit that not all people are the same. If ALL people had homosexual fantasies and lusts then you could say that but the normal person doesn't even have such thoughts. Here is already a difference between a homosexual and a normal person + another major difference, which is the fact that a homosexual isn't attracted to women because this would make him bisexual. Heterosexual christians which struggle with lust can simply marry and this way they at least get what they want, homosexuals cannot simply marry. For them there is no "hope". This is a huge difference. Imagine a heterosexual who desires women but knows that he is never allowed to marry. Such a person would also get problems, just look at what many priests do with children. This is a result of not being allowed to have sex.

@ Joseph

The link doesn't work. Do you need real player to open it? I have real player but I noticed before that it doesn't work and I cannot listen to real player stuff. This is strange..

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

@ Joseph

The link doesn't work. Do you need real player to open it? I have real player but I noticed before that it doesn't work and I cannot listen to real player stuff. This is strange..

You need Windows Media Player. I think you can download it for free.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[xdisciplex]

I have Media Player 10 but when I click on the link nothing happens.