THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE LI'BLE TO READ IN THE BIBLE

[KCKID]

Why are SO many Christians hung up on homosexuality? While the average Christian would be hard pressed to locate such a text in their Bibles if asked, they would undoubtedly say “Because it’s a sin according to the Bible.� I personally find such a response difficult to accept and rather strongly suspect that one’s ‘religious belief’ on this issue is NOT the driving force behind their aversion/condemnation of homosexuality. I mean, if Christians REALLY desire to condemn ‘sin’ as they perceive it they could give homosexuals a break and instead have a field day targeting the many other human behaviors going on within society that God appears to hate. But …they don’t . . .well certainly not with the same zeal they do toward homosexuality.

So, what is going on here? Does the Bible really condemn sexual relations between consenting adults of the same gender? Or, does the Bible not address the matter of homosexuality at all …or, at least, not as we today recognize homosexuality? Would the Bible authors have even been aware of one’s innate sexuality as well as the complexities surrounding sexuality in general? Or, in simple terms, would they, as with many males of today, have regarded some males as 'effeminate' (or ‘sissies’) based on both ignorance and their own perceived cultural image of the ‘alpha male’? Or, if these authors were considered to be writing by divine authority, might we then say that God is the instigator of such ignorance and has allowed this ignorance to persist from generation to generation?

My main question in this thread is: of the ‘thimble-full’ of scriptures that are commonly used by Christians to condemn homosexuality (sexual attraction/desire directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex), how many of these texts might be considered to be far too ambiguous (open to several possible meanings or interpretations) to have caused such a furor within Christendom in general and specifically resulted in the division of a number of present-day Christian denominations? Can these few scriptures be analyzed so accurately that they can be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt to condemn homosexuality as we refer to the term today? I say no …they cannot. I’ve given my reasons in the past and will do so again if challenged.

Please discuss the below scriptures, as best you can, exegetically, i.e.
observation: what do the passages say?
interpretation: what do the passages mean?
correlation: how do the passages relate to the topic of homosexuality as we define it today?
application: how should these passages affect your/my life?

Note: I've purposely used the NIV for the following texts.

Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (NIV)

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "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." (NIV).

Romans 1:26-27 - "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." (NIV)

1 Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James, To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for[a] Jesus Christ:
2 Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance.
3 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.
4 For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.
5 Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord[c] at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe.
6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.
7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire . . .etc. (NIV)

Should there be other related Bible texts to the topic feel free to present them based on the above criteria for analysis. I purposely omitted the Sodom and Gomorrah saga since it's been done to death and quite clearly has nothing to do with homosexuality per se. However, likewise feel free to present that strange tale for discussion should you find it to be relevant.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 86 by 99percentatheism]
Who wrote:

I can now rest in that I am not a homophobe or bigot. Just an honest Christian. Nor is any other Christian or Church or denomination that will not bow to secular demands to redefine marriage.

Now that you have put your personal prejudices in issue it is fair to address them. 90% or more of your posts on this forum deal with the issue of same gender marriage and relationships. You have consistently and incessantly compared 'the gay lifestyle' to Sodom and Gomorrah.
But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

You have repeatedly claimed that a loving, committed, faithful and long lasting relationship between members of the same sex is 'sin' and that those loving couples are not only unwelcome but, they should stay as far away as possible, planting their 'rainbow flag' only in earth remote from 'your church.'
But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

You have even complained the word 'gay' has been preempted by the 'gay pride agenda.' You have shouted with 4 superfluous exclamation marks that, "There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced!!!!!"
But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

You write, "What does the rainbow flag represent again? Wellllll gay pride. What does the "Gay Pride Movement" represent again? Pride of sexual behavior." You wrote: "Homosexuals you mean? Why did the pro homosexuals in the RCC keep moving around the other homosexuals that went after boys?
.... Look up PEDERASTY."

But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 92 by Danmark]

And you "personally" attack me. For the record, instead of countering my points and positions.

My apologia follows:

[Danmark Replying to post 86 by 99percentatheism]
Who wrote:
Quote:
I can now rest in that I am not a homophobe or bigot. Just an honest Christian. Nor is any other Christian or Church or denomination that will not bow to secular demands to redefine marriage.

Now that you have put your personal prejudices in issue it is fair to address them.

Wrong. Though ad hom. "I" had no preconceived notions about gay pride or the gay agenda until experiencing it as a social and intensely powerful movement.

90% or more of your posts on this forum deal with the issue of same gender marriage and relationships.

I am not concerned with the standard fare of the common skeptics.org bash-fests. Atheism as a worldview does not demand that Christians celebrate gay pride or homosexuality or the redefining of marriage. I mean, atheists seem homogenized for gay pride (very telling indeed), but their worldviews are purely secular. At least that is what they say. And atheists are not demanding that we Christians celebrate or "affirm" atheism. Remember, I am 99 percent atheist to every other God but One. And atheism and atheists are not all that threatening.

You have consistently and incessantly compared 'the gay lifestyle' to Sodom and Gomorrah.

But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

"And now he wants to judge us? We'll treat you worse than them?" The mob of Sodomites (all the men) to Lot when he pleaded with them not to have homosexual sex with his visitors.

Fascinating that you use a period and not a question mark at the end of the sentences with your quote. You do not get excused from your charge towards me. And I will defend myself fully.

So no, neither the newly invented propaganda word "homophobe" nor "bigot" apply to me. It is well reasoned and well studied positions I have. You may not "personaly" like them or me, but it sure looks like you demand that I kowtow to gay pride demands.

You have repeatedly claimed that a loving, committed, faithful and long lasting relationship between members of the same sex is 'sin' and that those loving couples are not only unwelcome but, they should stay as far away as possible, planting their 'rainbow flag' only in earth remote from 'your church.'

yet "I" authored an incredibly popular thread about "The Gay Denomination."

But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

That is true. I am not. You have to apply the same propaganda label on Jesus and every other voice in the New Testament if that is your yardstick of moral judgment.

You have even complained the word 'gay' has been preempted by the 'gay pride agenda.'

Historically, the word "gay" was taken over by homosexuals and a "pride" movement. "Gay" never used to mean same gender sexuality before the homosexual pride movement took the word for the movement. That is historically correct.

You have shouted with 4 superfluous exclamation marks that, "There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced!!!!!"

But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

And my position there is 100% correct. Therefore your ad hom in the following statement is nothing more than false witness. For whatever reason you feel lead to charge me with it.

You write, "What does the rainbow flag represent again? Wellllll gay pride.

That's a fact.

Costa Rica's Presidential Palace Displays Gay Pride Flag

- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/1 ... 40021.html

What does the "Gay Pride Movement" represent again? Pride of sexual behavior."

Gay does not mean how you hit your tennis backhand. Not even for Billie Jean King and Martina Navratilova. It means sexual behavior.

You wrote: "Homosexuals you mean? Why did the pro homosexuals in the RCC keep moving around the other homosexuals that went after boys?
.... Look up PEDERASTY."

Look up the connection to pederasty IN THIS THREAD some pages back! And not mentioned by a Fundy. Pederasty is homosexuality no matter how that makes you feel about the accurate way I handle history.

But you are "not a homophobe or bigot."

I have proven that the answer to your charge is a resounding NO!

As in NO !!!!!

My apologia stands firm.

Now, why did you go after me "personally" since you know the rules here with the position you hold at this website? Not only did it violate the rules, but it also is a thread derail.

A simple apology, as in an "I'm sorry" from you is all I require. Or better yet, if you are a Christian, give your apologia and its supporting scriptural support for promoting gay pride in The Church. And of course answer my request and flood these posts with scriptural support for homosexualizing The Church. Again: There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced "in the Bible."

If you prefer, I'll whisper that with the help of html tags if you desire. But the facts will still remain:

There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced "in the Bible."

[99percentatheism]

Haven

[Replying to post 87 by Joab]

It fascinates me that you will not address my posts in depth, but rather just provide drive by responses.

It fascinates me that you completely ignore any substantive points I make or relevant questions I ask, but cherry-pick one-line statements from my and others' posts that you personally feel are easy to respond to or will make us look bad.

Nice try, but I do quite a bit of position by position writing. And the only thing I make look bad is the theological attempts to homosexualize the Bible and The Church.

You've consistently avoided almost all of my questions and arguments in this thread and others.

What arguments? Please for propaganda and pop culture psychology to replace Christian truth?

Please don't criticize other posters for something you do quite routinely yourself.

What? I see no one posting any scriptures here that are clearly pro homosexuality. Zippo.

I'll respond to your "green text" this weekend. It requires a very in-depth and detailed response, and I'm all tied up at the moment by a very intense graduate class (100+ pages of reading every day) and moving into a new house.

I could have saved you time. There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced. I am not lying.

Until then, be well, friend.

With all of the insults and hateful labels flung my way in thread after thread after thread? I'll try.

[Joab]

to activists now that want to force pride of same gender sex acts into and onto Christianity,

I've tried this before and all you provided is more unsupported claims, so we'll leave those for the moment.
Could you provide some support for your claim that activists now that want to force pride of same gender sex acts into and onto Christianity,
Thanks.

[Wootah]

As I stated from the outset ...there is NO scripture that addresses one's sexuality per se - either heterosexual or homosexual - that does not involve idolatrous pagan worship practices. As far as the Bible is concerned, Adam and Steve are not even in its sights! I did my homework and learned a lot in the process ...how about the anti-gays do theirs ...?

Moderator Comment
Hi KCKID,

Please don't refer to anti-gays. Just state your arguments, they will persuade or not and regardless people that disagree with you should not be so marked as anti-gay.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 94 by Joab]

This is a debate website. Answer my posts point for point position by position. Snippet demands are a waste of time.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 91 by Danmark]

I've never met a homophobe or a bigot but my wife has a phobia of dogs. I have seen her almost jump onto the road and be killed rather than have a dog run at her.

Having observed someone with a phobia it makes me feel that phrases like homophobe and bigot should be used a lot less.

[Haven]

[Replying to post 91 by Danmark]

I've never met a homophobe or a bigot but my wife has a phobia of dogs. I have seen her almost jump onto the road and be killed rather than have a dog run at her.

Having observed someone with a phobia it makes me feel that phrases like homophobe and bigot should be used a lot less.

I like the term "straight supremacist." It's perhaps a more accurate label that justifiably puts such individuals on the same level as white supremacists and other hate groups and fringe extremists.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 92 by Danmark]

And you "personally" attack me. For the record, instead of countering my points and positions.

The entire post you complain about consists of quotations from you. You claimed you are "not a homophobe or bigot." I simply juxtaposed your own words with your own words. Your words speak for themselves.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 91 by Danmark]

I've never met a homophobe or a bigot but my wife has a phobia of dogs. I have seen her almost jump onto the road and be killed rather than have a dog run at her.

Having observed someone with a phobia it makes me feel that phrases like homophobe and bigot should be used a lot less.

If we strictly looked at the root of the word 'homophobe,' I would agree with you.
Like many words, the meaning does not perfectly correspond with its root.

Homophobe: a person who hates or is afraid of homosexuals or treats them badly

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homophobe

Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia