When the Bible does not promote or condone, then what?

[micatala]

This thread is prompted by the often-made statement.

I have asked you to provide any evidence "from the Bible" (since you have offered that you are a priest), where sodomy/perderasty-homosexuality-Gay, is celebrated, supported, condoned, promoted, or preached as acceptable, anywhere in the New Testament

The implication is that, since the Bible nowhere promotes, condones, or 'celebrates' homosexuality, this is further indication it should be condemned.

Question for debate:

Is this a valid conclusion?

Are there other examples of behaviors, views, etc. that are not promoted, condoned, or celebrated in the Bible, but that Christians typically do not condemn?

[Suzanne]

The TRUTH Is that HOMOSEXUALITY brings with it by it's own sinful acts of UNATURAL SEXUAL RELATOINSHIPS, it's own woes and sorrows NOT only for themselves but many times and most often for the parents of those ones that practice this unatural YEARNING AND FULLFILLING LUST FOR SEXUAL GRATIFICATION.. OF The flesh.

With some people, this may indeed be true. And the same can (and does) happen to a significant degree with "heterosexuality". Anyone who is honest and reasonably astute realizes that.

Of course there are heterosexuals that have deseases come on them EVEN SEX RELATED DESEASES.. IF THEY PERMIT themselves to be PROMISCUOUS ON DATES AS IF IT IS RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY AFTER THE NIGHT ON THE TOWN.

DO you realize that now days if I would go on a date with someone. and end up at the end of the night out. having sex with that man . I would actually be having what was left behind if that person was having sex with just about every date he had gone out with. is it any wonder people die from AIDS and SYPHILIS and JUST MIGHT pass on deseases to any child they might have in the future???

I DO NOT believe GOD MADE ANY MISTAKES. when HE CREATED MAN. IT is THE MAN AND WEOMAN THAT DID NOT Just FOLOW HIS LEAD and GUIDENCE from the beginning. HE DID AFTER ALL MAKE MAN IN HIS IMAGE!!!! and then MADE THE WOMAN FROM THAT MAN THAT WAS IN HIS IMAGE TO BE A HELPER AND MATE FOR MAN.. MEANING TWO MALE AND FEMALE MEANING TO BE TOGETHER AND MULTIPLY THE EARTH TOGETHER NOT with THE WOMAN HAVING TWO HUSBANDS or the MAN HAVING TWO OR MORE WIVES. ALL AT THE SAME TIME>> NO ONE MAN GOD CREATED and ONE WOMAN HE CREATED and THEN THEY were to HAVE CHILDREN >>>>> AND MULTIPLY THE EARTH> well we do BUT FOR AND SINCE the BEGINNING OF ABRAHAM. THERE HAS been SEX being between other then ones own wife. and then IN the EGYPTIAN and OTHER CULTURES then man!!!!! AGAIN MAN DECIDES that it is OK and LEGAL TO HAVE HAREMS, OF WIVES.. YET I HAVE NOTICED THAT NEVER IN THE SCRIPTURES did a WOMAN EVER HAVE TWO OR MORE HUSBANDS AT THE SAME TIME!!!!! NO the woman was used and degraded in the mens eyes BY The very treament of the woman as being used as PROSTITUTES BY WHOM MEN!!! and ONE woman not being enough as GOD HAD PLANNED and made man and woman to be. BUT NO MANKIND decided he had to have more ONE WAS NOT ENOUGH I GUESS> and of course then came the Q WOMAN DOING ALMOST all the work in and outside the house the COOKING, THE CHILDREN, THE FIELDS, THE SHOPPING, and what did men do?? SIT and REIGN S KINGS???? ORDERING LL AROUND TO do HIS PLEASURE AND what HE WAS WANTING DONE!!! when all along GOD DID NOT PLAN IT THAT WAY AT ALL!!! MEN LOVE YOUR WIVES AS YOURSELF. MEN LOVED THEMSELVES TO SIT AND ORDER THE WIVES AROUND AND LEAVE EVERYTHING FOR THEM TO DO!!!! BUT APPARTENTLY did not love the WIFE(S) ENOUGH TO DO THE SAME> BY just shareing all the CHORES HUH????? AS GOD HAS ALREADY SAID IT should be done..

HE DESTROYED SODOM AND GOMORRAH for all the SEXUAL DEPARVITY IN THAT PLACE. with FIRE!!!!!!! THEN TURNED the WIFE OF LOT into a PILLAR of SALT. all because she LOOKED BACK.. ON what she was leaving behind.. OH MY OH MY.. NOW WHY would GOD do such a thing??

SEEMS REALLY ODD doesn't it.. THAT ALL THROUGH the SCRIPTURES we can point to the woman and IT is the woman that are being USED BY THE LORD AND even BEING THOSE THAT SIT AT HIS FEET and LISTEN TO HIM, WASH HIS FEET, YET IT IS ALSO the WOMAN THAT GAVE BIRTH TO THE SAVIOR THAT Came and saved the world AND HIS CREATED BEINGS!!!! from their sins HUH???????? IT WAS the WOMAN THAT HE SAID "GO AND SIN NO MORE!" WHEN ALL the MEN FOLK CAME TO ASK ABOUT STONEING HER TO DEATH . I WONDER HOW AND why there would have been any need for THEM EVEN ASKING the LORD HJESUS THIS IF IT WERE NOT for the MAN OR MEN THAT CAUSED HER to be IN THAT situation in the first place. MAKING A WOMAN A WHORE!!!!!!!!! AND NO DOUBT A MAN THAT JUST MIGHT HAVE ALREADY HAD A WIFE nothing was said about this.

IT WAS ALSO A WOMAN that JESUS SAAID to her/ "BECAUSE OF YOUR FAITH YOU HAVE been HEALED!." WHAT FAITH?? SHE SAID::::: "IF I BUT TOUCH the hem OF HIS GARMENT I WILL BE HEALED." and she was.. A WORD SPOKEN BY FAITH BELIEVING IN HER HEART THAT WHAT SHE WAS HOPEING FOR WOULD COME TO PASS and so it was done just as she had said it would be done .

WORDS from the heart when spoken and believed that they will be manifested and come to pass can and will come to pass. THE SCRIPTURES Teach it . THE WORD HAS been written of it. and JESUS CHRIST whom was the only begotten Son of God . that was that manifestation of that WORD THAT WAS GOD!!! THAT WAS ALSO TOLD TO BE COMING. and did .. and then PROMISED TO SEND THAT comforter to THOSE HE SPOKE TO ABOUT the COMFORTER that Holy Spirit that would come , and that THAT JOHN THE BAPTIST said about that one that would come after him that would baptise With the Holy Spirit.. well it all came to pass and it is still being done this day as it was then . BY THE HEARING of the WORD OF TRUTH!

And WHAT is THE!! TRUTH!!!..

IT HAS been WRITTEN and SAID . and TOLD, and TAUGHT. TO MANY .

IT is THE GOSPEL. THE TRUTH OF WHAT the LORD HAS had written OF HIMSELF!
IN the beginning GOD, GENESIS 1;1:
SO THE LORD had a BOOK OF REMEMBERANCE WRITTEN FOR ALL!! THAT FEAR!! THE LORD, and MEDITATE ON HIS NAME. MALACHI; 3:16:
IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD, JOHN 1:1:

There was a COMEDIAN SEVERAL YEARS AGO, HIS NAME ESCAPES ME NOW. BUT, HIS FAMOUS LINE WAS; "I GET NO RESPECT!"

WELL sorry to say GOD DOES NOT GET ANY RESPECT AT ALL now days.. IF HE EVER HAD any GIVEN TO BEGIN WITH..

AHHHHH BUT FOR the BLOOD!!!!!!!!! DO I THANK GOD for the BLOOD? DO I THANK GOD FOR HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON JESUS CHRIST? YES I DO and so should YOU!!!!!!! so should all..

I am not holding my breath until all DO THOUGH.. or I would be dead long before my time. AND GOD HAS MY TIME already down for MY DEPARTURE from here and this earthly life and vessel that is and has been ON the road to DEATH since COMING out of the womb.. WE ALL HAVE THIS FUTURE to look toward. LIKE IT OR NOT we all MUST FACE THIS DEATH. of the BODY OF THIS MATERIAL FLESHLY VISABLE. BUT AHHHHHHHH FOR THE GRACE OF GOD I SHALL YET LIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. HOW do I KNOW????? well BECAUSE MY LORD has already PROMISED and TOLD me so.

SEEK YE FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GOD HAS NOT. LIED TO ME!!!! and if the truth were known HE HAS NEVER LIED TO YOU EITHER!!! OR AANYONE AT ALL...

IT is MANKIND THAT CAN and does LIE and I MEAN that LITTERALY BOTH men and woman. WE ALL HAVE!!!!!!!! AND why??? TO SAVE OUR BUTTS??? from what???? PUNISHMENT THAT WE KNEW would be given.. BY THOSE IN AUTHORITY??????? who has authority in the life of a CHRISTIAN???????????? NONE OTHER THEN CHRIST THE LIVING CHRIST THAT RULES and REIGNS IN HEAVEN and on EARTH. HAVING been GIVEN ALL AUTHORITY in HEAVEN and ON EARTH. BY the FATHER IN HEAVEN.THAT is GOD ALMIGHTY

FATHER, SON, AND HOLY SPIRIT THEY ARE ONE!!!!!!!!!

You and others may not view "homosexuality" as moral (for whatever reasons), but it's hardly unnatural. How can it be UN-natural, when it is clearly a part of human nature for many many people to be homosexual? Now, I could certainly agree that "homosexuality" is more "rare" compared to "heterosexuality", but it is quite "natural". If it were not, homosexuals would likely be so rare, as to not be seen on a regular basis.{quote}

Well used to be that they were not known many of them already knew the SHAME OF BEING HOMOSEXUAL. they KNEW within what the TRUTH WAS about SEXUALITY and what GOD HAS CREATED and why/ because BACK THEN THE TRUTH WAS MADE KNOWN OF what GOD HAS SAID and done AND WHAT GOD HAS MADE and why??? AHHHHHH BUT TO MANY WAY TO MANY HAVE FORGOTTEN their FIRST LOVE!!!!! THAT ONE THAT HAS GIVEN Them LIFE IN the BEGINNING.. THUS IT HAS been written. "I KNEW YOU BEFORE YOU WERE IN YOUR MOTHERS WOMB." I AM SO THANKFUL THAT GOD KNEW me BEFORE I was even THOUGHT ABOUT BY MY DAD and MY MOTHER. I am also thankful that I had a HERITAGE of BIBLE GOD BELIEVERS IN MY FAMILY LONG before MY MOTHER and DAD were BORN. and LONG before MY GRANDPARENTS were BORN..

I CAN GO BACK five GENERTIONS ON MY MOTHER's SIDE. FIVE GENERATIONS. YET ON my dad's I can go back two at the most. BUT THEY all on both sides were BELIEVERS THE LORD. and many many lived in faith just as IT has been written. THE JUST LIVE BY FAITH!. MY FAITH IN MY LORD GOD HAS GOTTEN me this far in this life and HE SURE will get me all the way to the end HE HAS PLANNED for me.

MY GRANDMOTHER NEVER KNEW what the WORD GAY MEANT EXCEPT A HAPPY PERSON. AND at the age OF &0 some years MY parents INFORMED HER of this TERM that was NOT used in our house because IT HAD become a WORD FOR HOMOSEXUALS THAT were still HIDING THEMSELVES FROM OTHERS AS TO THEIR SINFUL WAYS.. BEING ASHAMED AND KNOWING THAT MANY HURTS and MANY SORROWS would COME UPON THEM AND ALL THEIR PARENTS.. BRINGING DISHONOR TO THEIR own PARENTS> THAT HAD BROUGHT THEM INTO THIS WORLD. WHEN ALREADY THEY HAD been TAUGHT "HONOR THY MOTHER AND FATHER!!!"
ONE does not HONOR A FATHER AND MOTHER BY BECOMING AND HAVING SEXUAL DESIRES that are NOT NORMAL > AND MALE TO MALE OR with BEASTS HORSES, CATTLE, and such are not normal SEX..... IT USED TO BRING SHAME ON the FAMILIES. JUST AS PRGNANCIES OUT OF WEDLOCK USED TO BRING SHAME . THESE were AS BAD AS MURDER, STEALING, AND BEING A HABITUAL LIAR NOT ABLE TO BE TRUSTED WITH OR IN ANYTYHING. SAID OR DONE.

WE HAVE SUNK SO LOW IN OUR IMMORAL DEPRAVITY AND GOTTEN SO FAR AWAY FROM OUR MORAL GROUNDING AND OUR BASIC RIGHT AND GOOD TO SAY AND DO . we are DROWNING IN OUR OWN SINFUL UNRIGHTEOUS DEEDS AND ACTS. IT IS TIME!!!!!!!!! to wake up to the TRUTH of all the DOWNGRADING OF WHAT is RIGHT AND GOOD TO do INSTEAD OF just DOING YOUR OWN THING AGAINST GOD and HIS WAY!!!!!!!! and that means NOT HAVEING SEX with the same sex or marrying the same SEX. PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!! SIN IS THE DEATH NELL OF ANYONE THAT continues in their SIN WILLFULLY KNOWING THE TRUTH OF THAT SIN!!!and THE LORD HAS ALREADY ORDAINED MALE AND FEMALE!!!!!!!!!!!!

ENOUGH SAID!!!!!! by me anyway.. if it is not rtecieved as a TRUTH THEN ALL those that DO NOT RECIEVE the TRUTH . will suffer for their own sin and UNRIGHTEOUS BEHAVIOR AFTER BEING TOLD AND HEARING THE TRUTH!!!! I HAVE SAID what I KNOW IS A TRUTH if it is not believed because I SAID IT> then READ IT for YOURSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE EVIDENCE IS THERE AND IT CAN BE SEEN THE DEVISTATION OF THIS IMMORAL SEXUAL behavior. OF COURSE Those that do not want to see will not see truth even when it is given to them now will they???????????? only those wanting truth hear it.


ME I would rather have TRUTH any day rather then be lied to ......

Homosexuals are certainly not the MAJORITY of the human population, but they are still so numerous in number, that a logical person would know that more than a few "external" or "environmental" factors are what is behind the prolific numbers of homosexual people.

So, while I can agree that some would not approve of homosexuality, I strongly disagree that homosexuality is somehow UN-natural. That it's unnatural may surely be a part of one's traditional-Christian (or moral) view of it, but there is certainly much more to consider than that alone.

-Mel-

[micatala]

In the original languages, their intent, and, in context of the Jews and Christians, homosexuality finds not one place where it is encouraged, condoned, promoted OR celebrated.

You again repeat this. If I haven't been explicit enough before, let me say again that I accept that there are no passages in the Bible that explicitly condone homosexuality, homosexual sex, or homosexual marriage. The whole point of this thread is what believers should do when this is the case.

I have argued that such explicit condoning is not necessary for a practice to be considered moral. I have provided examples where this is the case. My position is that in spite of there being no explicit condoning of homosexuality, there are good Biblical reasons not to consider it inherently immoral. There are even more good Biblical reasons not to prohibit homosexuality or homosexual marriage for those who are not believers.

I have argued that the NT passages which speak against homosexuality do not speak of homosexuality as we understand it today, and do not prohibit homosexuality or homosexual sex in all cases, but rather are directed towards homosexuality that is associated with idolatry. I believe I have made a good case that this was all Paul was addressing in his passages on homosexuality. Thus, my view is that those who believer these passages prohibit homosexuality as an inherent orientation, or homosexual sex in all circumstances, are reading beyond what the text says.

God and His prohets always warn of the problems associated with joining in with the detestable practices of the non-believers.

What the Israelites found detestable, Jesus did not. What is detestable changes over time. What does not change for Christians is that God expects us to love Him, and to love each other (believers and non-believers alike, even our enemies).

If this were not true, then eating certain kinds of meat, wearing certain clothes, associating with lepers, associating with women in certain places, allowing women to speak in church, etc. would all still be "detestable."

In my view, what people, both Christians and non-Christians, find detestable is often highly subjective. In addition, being "detestable" does not necessarily equate with being immoral or un-Christian.

However, traditional does not necessarily equal correct, and we have a number of examples of traditional interpretations (e.g. on slavery, origins of race, the structure of the solar system, etc.) being wrong.

And traditional does mean immutable.

Actually, no it does not.

Oh really? The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not immutable? Repentance is not immutable? There is some other way to God than what Jesus proclaimed?

I never said these teachings were not immutable, nor that there are no immutable teachings or doctrines. I have merely established that some traditional doctrines of the OT and others in the NT are not considered immutable today by Christians. I have provided examples.

Citing other examples of doctrines that are immutable and implying that I might not accept them as immutable is a red herring, and does not negate the established fact that there are doctrines that are not immutable, and some of these may have been considered immutable at one time.

Yes, marriage in Jesus time, at least in his society was probably always a man and a woman.

So Jesus was only God in Roman times. Uh yeah.

I never said this, and in no way implied this.

Other interpretations that would still be valid would be that the earth is immovable and the sun revolves around it,

That's in the Bible?"

Yes, it is. Martin Luther certainly held it to be an immutable Biblical truth, as did most other early Protestant leaders, not to mention Pope Urban the VIII and others Catholics.

I have never claimed that God's nature or purpose changes. However, clearly people have changed, at least in certain ways, including how they think about God, the level of their understanding of both God and the universe, and in other ways.

Jesus opposed that. The Sanhedrin members tried to change things and Jeses set them straight. Those that follow God have the right to defend their position against political power-mongers that want Christian tithes.

What do you mean? What were the Sanhedrin changing? If I look in the gospels, I see Jesus opposing the traditional teachings of the Sanhedrin, not the other way around. It is true that what is considered "traditional" may only be a few centuries or sometimes even only a few decades old. I am not saying the Sanhedrin's views or teachings were immutable, or that they had existed throughout the history of the Hebrew people. However, they clearly were the traditional views of their day.

To say Jesus was in opposition to changing traditional views does not square with what was actually going on the gospel. Jesus' teachings on forgiveness, sin, the role of women in society, and many other things were radically different from the traditional views of his time, and even radically different then any teaching that had preceded him in the Old Testament. Consider for example his statements on 'it is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God then for the camel to pass through the eye of a needle.'

Where in the OT was such a statement ever considered "traditional" in any way?

As a result, God changes how he interacts with us, just as a father changes how he interacts with his children as they mature.

That is true. That does not change marriage. That does not change the incompatibility to have sodomy celebrated in the Church. Or, as Paul puts it those who are or practice arsenokotai. Christians must make a stand against this attack by homosexualism. It takes no prisoners. All, must submit to "it." That is even your point Micatala. Otherwise you would agree that homosexuals should start their own organizational religion.

The Christian view of marriage has already changed a lot since Jesus' time. Polygamy is by and large not allowed. Inter-racial marriage is allowed. Marriage with non-believers is allowed. People now choose their own spouses, rather than having their families do the choosing.

Immutable would mean essentially "cannot be changed."


Traditional means "has not changed for a long time." There is a big, big difference.

In traditions we see immutable statements.

As has been shown, sometimes yes and sometimes no. Not all traditions are immutable, nor do Christians hold all traditional teachings to be immutable. That is clear from history.




I would like you to explain exactly what you mean by 'homosexualization' and also, I may not have been clear in my position.

I am in no way trying to force anything on anyone. I am simply suggesting that Christians voluntarily change their views on homosexuality. If I persuade no one, I am willing to accept that. I am not expecting or asking for 'submission' and frankly most people who advocate for a change in view on homosexuality are not either.

I am a Christian and have no intention of changing that. I am not interested in starting a new religion. If I were to 'change churches' or 'start a new church' it would still be a Christian church.




Let me be very specific.

Suppose we have two homosexuals who would like to have a committed "married" relationship. To this point in their lives they have both been celibate. They are Christians and have been good church members in their church. They have not revealed their orientation to anyone. They have both prayed and examined their consciences and can come to no other conclusion than God has made them as they are.

They approach their pastor with their situation. They do not ask the pastor to marry them, but say they will go through a civil ceremony in a location which allows this (assume there is such a place, even outside the country). They do not ask anything of the pastor other than to allow them to continue to be members in their long time church. They promise not to speak to anyone within the church about their orientation or relationship, although they have to allow that they might not be able to keep it secret.

They present no threat to the children or others of the church, as they have vowed not to talk about homosexuality at all. They will make every good faith effort to keep their relationship secret.

In what way does this couple present any danger to the church? Would you say that this couple is attempting to 'homosexualize' the church?

[1John2_26]

Quote:
In the original languages, their intent, and, in context of the Jews and Christians, homosexuality finds not one place where it is encouraged, condoned, promoted OR celebrated.

You again repeat this. If I haven't been explicit enough before, let me say again that I accept that there are no passages in the Bible that explicitly condone homosexuality, homosexual sex, or homosexual marriage. The whole point of this thread is what believers should do when this is the case.

And i have presented a polite avenue for those that do not want to repent and be converted to Christianity. Do what Mormons and followers of L. Ron Hubbard have done. Stop the incessant and maniacal and hysterical attack on Christians. It's eerily like Sodom.

I have argued that such explicit condoning is not necessary for a practice to be considered moral. I have provided examples where this is the case.

Non and anti-Christians have pointed out correctly "that God" killed people: men, women, and children. yet, Christians do not condone abortion. Not the good ones anyway. I have that right to that judgement.

My position is that in spite of there being no explicit condoning of homosexuality, there are good Biblical reasons not to consider it inherently immoral.

In your Church, do what thou wilt. Too much ground has been won by Satan on the break-up of familes to allow the insanity and demonic nature of marrying two same-sex couples to become a doctrine in the Church. Jesus did not give even a shred of a hint that same-gender marriage can sneak its way into the "two wrongs make us right," dogma.

There are even more good Biblical reasons not to prohibit homosexuality or homosexual marriage for those who are not believers.

Pagans can do whatever dtestable things they want to, to their hearts content. I have never said anything to the contrary.

I have argued that the NT passages which speak against homosexuality do not speak of homosexuality as we understand it today, and do not prohibit homosexuality or homosexual sex in all cases, but rather are directed towards homosexuality that is associated with idolatry.

You have "bought into" that extreme liberal interpretation. We seperate our walk as Christians right there. Homosexuals are demanding to be entered into the church without any repentance. None. They screwam in hysteria that "God made them that way." And everyone has to celebarte them or they will get charged with a civl rights violation. These deranged individuals have now made the Taliban, Al Queda, The Gestapo, atheists, etc., etc., Christians with full membership in the Church. In fact nothing is wrong anymore.

I believe I have made a good case that this was all Paul was addressing in his passages on homosexuality. Thus, my view is that those who believer these passages prohibit homosexuality as an inherent orientation, or homosexual sex in all circumstances, are reading beyond what the text says.

I believe you are wrong, and are reading into the texts 2006 politics. And, 2006 heretical liberal theology. Your are smashing down the doors of every church on earth to except homosexualization or stand as bigots, homphobes and criminals. Paul's rendition of "what" homosexuality "is" in Romans, and what men and women homosexuals do, sounds like MTV ten minutes ago. You are forcing eisigesis where exegesis is demanded.

Quote:
God and His prohets always warn of the problems associated with joining in with the detestable practices of the non-believers.

What the Israelites found detestable, Jesus did not. What is detestable changes over time. What does not change for Christians is that God expects us to love Him, and to love each other (believers and non-believers alike, even our enemies).

Which of course makes homosexuals our enemies. Why would you want to force these people into our Churches? I cannot understand your motives, without using Biblical references that are purely un-nice.

If this were not true, then eating certain kinds of meat, wearing certain clothes, associating with lepers, associating with women in certain places, allowing women to speak in church, etc. would all still be "detestable."

The Bible details Peter's lesson on foods. Jesus on marrige. Paul on homosexuality. You have no Biblical support for your position on "Sodomy" becoming an acceptable doctrine in the Church. By the testimony of the text against same-gender sex acts and those that do them.

In my view, what people, both Christians and non-Christians, find detestable is often highly subjective.

Until the emotional aspect is taken away by the objective.

In addition, being "detestable" does not necessarily equate with being immoral or un-Christian.

Of course. "The destable" dwell in the mission fields. I am a convert from that camp.

However, traditional does not necessarily equal correct, and we have a number of examples of traditional interpretations (e.g. on slavery, origins of race, the structure of the solar system, etc.) being wrong.

And Christians decided the issues. You will not be able to get gay and lesbian sex held in the same honor directed towards deviant sex as slavery. The African-American Pastor's are speaking on that. I have spoken to some of them.

1John wrote:
And traditional does mean immutable.

Actually, no it does not.

Oh really? The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not immutable? Repentance is not immutable? There is some other way to God than what Jesus proclaimed?

Micatal wrote:
I never said these teachings were not immutable, nor that there are no immutable teachings or doctrines. I have merely established that some traditional doctrines of the OT and others in the NT are not considered immutable today by Christians. I have provided examples.

In fact you did. It's just a matter of time. All things are open to the same liberal-progressive treatment in coming generations. You are joining in on the movement to dilute Christianity to just another club.

Citing other examples of doctrines that are immutable and implying that I might not accept them as immutable is a red herring, and does not negate the established fact that there are doctrines that are not immutable, and some of these may have been considered immutable at one time.

If marriage the way Jesus described it, can be corrupted by political power-mongers, there is nothing that is out of reach for altering Biblical truth.

1John wrote:
micatala wrote:
Yes, marriage in Jesus time, at least in his society was probably always a man and a woman.

So Jesus was only God in Roman times. Uh yeah.

I never said this, and in no way implied this.

Things change. Oh well. You not only implied this, but you support the liberal theologians that have already declassified Jesus as a nice story told to children. No different than a Hans Christian Anderson tale. The same liberal theology that is forcing gay sex onto Christians, has wiped away most immutable doctrines before they got around to their final goal. I assert that Satan is at work in liberal theology that attacks core doctrines. I stand before the Lord in all honesty on that. I beg you and anyone else that calls themself a Christian to flee this plague of progressive evil enveloping our world and our Churches. This is a fun debate until we get around to the serious of the matter. As we'll see down below.

Quote:
Other interpretations that would still be valid would be that the earth is immovable and the sun revolves around it,

That's in the Bible?"

Yes, it is. Martin Luther certainly held it to be an immutable Biblical truth, as did most other early Protestant leaders, not to mention Pope Urban the VIII and others Catholics.

I am neither a Lutheran or a Catholic. Didn't Luther get around to threatening Jews? And Catholicism is dealing with its odd repercussions of their past dogam's and pederastic fruit as we write. I'm not impressed with either movements in many aspects. But, I'll bet they come around. In fact I know they are. The Gay Agenda and progressive relativism is the second greatest threat to the Church catholic. And we are all being called together that have a common goal of the Gospel.

1John wrote:

micatala wrote:
I have never claimed that God's nature or purpose changes. However, clearly people have changed, at least in certain ways, including how they think about God, the level of their understanding of both God and the universe, and in other ways.

Jesus opposed that. The Sanhedrin members tried to change things and Jeses set them straight. Those that follow God have the right to defend their position against political power-mongers that want Christian tithes.

What do you mean? What were the Sanhedrin changing? If I look in the gospels, I see Jesus opposing the traditional teachings of the Sanhedrin, not the other way around.

You need more study. The Sanhedrin members that Christ dealt with were political appointees of Herod; a political appointee of Rome. Also, they were corrupting the teachings of God. They were not reaching out to sinners to repent, but, to pay up. You cannot buy you way into heaven. Not even with civl rights legislation to force submission of Christian Churches to political power 2006.

It is true that what is considered "traditional" may only be a few centuries or sometimes even only a few decades old. I am not saying the Sanhedrin's views or teachings were immutable, or that they had existed throughout the history of the Hebrew people. However, they clearly were the traditional views of their day.

You are not going to arrive at progressive ideological politics 2006, Micatala. What liberals and progressives have done to the Gospel is just as evil as what the Sanhedrin did to the Israelites in Jerusalem.

To say Jesus was in opposition to changing traditional views does not square with what was actually going on the gospel. Jesus' teachings on forgiveness, sin, the role of women in society, and many other things were radically different from the traditional views of his time, and even radically different then any teaching that had preceded him in the Old Testament.

Yet, Christ Jesus presented a teaching on marriage that makes one cringe when thinking about altering the union of a man and a woman. Go as righteous as you wnat to Micatala, but, you are still left with having marriage a man and a woman.

Consider for example his statements on 'it is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God then for the camel to pass through the eye of a needle.'

Where in the OT was such a statement ever considered "traditional" in any way?

That is your theolgy on altering Christian Churches to submit to homosexual politics? I will search the Proverbs and get back to you. I'm thinking Ecclesiates is going to help out as well. Greed and gluttony and selfishness may indeed lend support to my views on altering Christian Churches for the Gay Agenda. I'm looking forward to the research.

Quote:
As a result, God changes how he interacts with us, just as a father changes how he interacts with his children as they mature.

That is true. That does not change marriage. That does not change the incompatibility to have sodomy celebrated in the Church. Or, as Paul puts it those who are or practice arsenokotai. Christians must make a stand against this attack by homosexualism. It takes no prisoners. All, must submit to "it." That is even your point Micatala. Otherwise you would agree that homosexuals should start their own organizational religion.

The Christian view of marriage has already changed a lot since Jesus' time. Polygamy is by and large not allowed. Inter-racial marriage is allowed.

Marriage has not changed "a lot" at all. Not in Christian Churches. Ploygamy is sensible "to me" as many women seem to have absolutely no problem having sex with a man that has children from another woman. The Israelites were of mixed races Micatala. Forgetting Ruth? She was a Hittite. As was my favorite Biblical person Uriah!

Marriage with non-believers is allowed. People now choose their own spouses, rather than having their families do the choosing.

And Paul's teaching on that still supports only man-woman Micatala.

Quote:

Quote:
Immutable would mean essentially "cannot be changed."

Traditional means "has not changed for a long time." There is a big, big difference.

In traditions we see immutable statements.

As has been shown, sometimes yes and sometimes no.

My only point. Exactly.

Not all traditions are immutable, nor do Christians hold all traditional teachings to be immutable. That is clear from history.

It is non-Christians and anti-Christians and heretics that are forcing this altering of Christianity to submit to homosexualization of Christians. We are not to yoke ourselves to unbelievers.

I would like you to explain exactly what you mean by 'homosexualization' and also, I may not have been clear in my position.

One of the last stops on the slippery slope. We have seen that tolerating gays and lesbians has them teaching children to embrace and celebrate homosexuality as something they should choose to do in their lives. "Because" it is normal anmd natural. No Christian can support that. Jesus made His threats more than clear on causing the children to stumble. You are getting me &#@!@* off. Just the idea of teaching children to become homosexuals because they may indeed have these fellings within them is as dark as it gets. Yet, that beast has been loosed upon children in so many ways, I will not be sorry for our destruction as a nation. Whatver happens to me I will remember what Job said about the judgment of God: "Though He slay me, yet, will I trust in Him." I will never stand with those that are homosexualizing our society. I cannot do so and love Christ Jesus. I am a follower of His way. I may indeed sin against Christ in many ways, but I do not promote others to celebrate my sinning.

I am in no way trying to force anything on anyone. I am simply suggesting that Christians voluntarily change their views on homosexuality.

That will never happen. It cannot.

If I persuade no one, I am willing to accept that. I am not expecting or asking for 'submission' and frankly most people who advocate for a change in view on homosexuality are not either.

That is ashamed that you are so naive. the noose being tightened around the necks of Christians that hold to the Gospel by secularists, is a fact.

I am a Christian and have no intention of changing that. I am not interested in starting a new religion. If I were to 'change churches' or 'start a new church' it would still be a Christian church.

I cannot walk with you on this subject. Not one step. I suggest we go our seperate ways on this subject. If you do not want people to repent of their sins in your church, that is not a safe place for me or my family.

Let me be very specific.

Of course. That is the only thing I respect.

Suppose we have two homosexuals who would like to have a committed "married" relationship. To this point in their lives they have both been celibate. They are Christians and have been good church members in their church. They have not revealed their orientation to anyone. They have both prayed and examined their consciences and can come to no other conclusion than God has made them as they are.

They approach their pastor with their situation. They do not ask the pastor to marry them, but say they will go through a civil ceremony in a location which allows this (assume there is such a place, even outside the country). They do not ask anything of the pastor other than to allow them to continue to be members in their long time church. They promise not to speak to anyone within the church about their orientation or relationship, although they have to allow that they might not be able to keep it secret.

So this Pastor does not preach and teach forgiveness of sins? Confession and repentance? The Pastor is to keep secrets from his congregation? He is to become complicit in this deal? This is a horrible analogy.

They present no threat to the children or others of the church, as they have vowed not to talk about homosexuality at all.

Umm, let me quote them:

They promise not to speak to anyone within the church about their orientation or relationship, although they have to allow that they might not be able to keep it secret.

No Christian can teach children to choose homosexuality. If these guys want to get married and be members of a Christian Church why would they not follow Christ Jesus and His teachings on what marrige "is?" Also, quite the creepy scenario here when they ahve said that they cannot be held to their promise of decency. I know of no divorced couple that teaches children to choose to get divorced "when they grow up." Not even one couple, or individual.

They will make every good faith effort to keep their relationship secret.

Confession of sins makes "secrets" a sin.

In what way does this couple present any danger to the church?

For one thing, they have forced a Pastor to lie to his congregation. I want no part of that kind of place.

Would you say that this couple is attempting to 'homosexualize' the church?

I would say they did homosexualize the Church. The way you described the events. They altered honesty and the Gospel for this Pastor and his congregation, in one fell swoop. See, the issue is, that these people feel they are doing nothing wrong. Every other person in the Church has had to come to terms with their sins and repent. There is no difference in these gay guys and a bunch of gang members that feel they were born into the life they live. Who wants their children celebrating gang life, by condoning gangsters to be gangsters?

Let's move on to another subject. You are a great person. this always gets to be insulting sooner or later. I just wish for peace between the opposing sides.

You worship in your Church and I'll worship in mine. BUT, please, help us out and stop your associates from criminalizing our dissent and disapproval of homosexuality and the homosexualization of our Churches and our familes. We have far more Biblical support for our views than liberals and progressives do for theirs. Paul was converted when he attacked the Church, so do not think I mean any harm to anti-Christians. I just mean to protect my brothers and ssiters in Christ. Christ Jesus said, in this you will know who we are. By the love we have for one another. I am putting my neck on the line for the beautiful Christians I love so dearly.

Yes, I love my enemies, but still there is insult undeniable in that proclamation.

[Suzanne]

In the original languages, their intent, and, in context of the Jews and Christians, homosexuality finds not one place where it is encouraged, condoned, promoted OR celebrated.

You again repeat this. If I haven't been explicit enough before, let me say again that I accept that there are no passages in the Bible that explicitly condone homosexuality, homosexual sex, or homosexual marriage. The whole point of this thread is what believers should do when this is the case.

I have argued that such explicit condoning is not necessary for a practice to be considered moral. I have provided examples where this is the case. My position is that in spite of there being no explicit condoning of homosexuality, there are good Biblical reasons not to consider it inherently immoral. There are even more good Biblical reasons not to prohibit homosexuality or homosexual marriage for those who are not believers.

I have argued that the NT passages which speak against homosexuality do not speak of homosexuality as we understand it today, and do not prohibit homosexuality or homosexual sex in all cases, but rather are directed towards homosexuality that is associated with idolatry. I believe I have made a good case that this was all Paul was addressing in his passages on homosexuality. Thus, my view is that those who believer these passages prohibit homosexuality as an inherent orientation, or homosexual sex in all circumstances, are reading beyond what the text says.

God and His prohets always warn of the problems associated with joining in with the detestable practices of the non-believers.

What the Israelites found detestable, Jesus did not. What is detestable changes over time. What does not change for Christians is that God expects us to love Him, and to love each other (believers and non-believers alike, even our enemies).

If this were not true, then eating certain kinds of meat, wearing certain clothes, associating with lepers, associating with women in certain places, allowing women to speak in church, etc. would all still be "detestable."

In my view, what people, both Christians and non-Christians, find detestable is often highly subjective. In addition, being "detestable" does not necessarily equate with being immoral or un-Christian.

However, traditional does not necessarily equal correct, and we have a number of examples of traditional interpretations (e.g. on slavery, origins of race, the structure of the solar system, etc.) being wrong.

And traditional does mean immutable.

Actually, no it does not.

Oh really? The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not immutable? Repentance is not immutable? There is some other way to God than what Jesus proclaimed?

I never said these teachings were not immutable, nor that there are no immutable teachings or doctrines. I have merely established that some traditional doctrines of the OT and others in the NT are not considered immutable today by Christians. I have provided examples.

Citing other examples of doctrines that are immutable and implying that I might not accept them as immutable is a red herring, and does not negate the established fact that there are doctrines that are not immutable, and some of these may have been considered immutable at one time.

Yes, marriage in Jesus time, at least in his society was probably always a man and a woman.

So Jesus was only God in Roman times. Uh yeah.

I never said this, and in no way implied this.

Other interpretations that would still be valid would be that the earth is immovable and the sun revolves around it,

That's in the Bible?"

Yes, it is. Martin Luther certainly held it to be an immutable Biblical truth, as did most other early Protestant leaders, not to mention Pope Urban the VIII and others Catholics.

I have never claimed that God's nature or purpose changes. However, clearly people have changed, at least in certain ways, including how they think about God, the level of their understanding of both God and the universe, and in other ways.

Jesus opposed that. The Sanhedrin members tried to change things and Jeses set them straight. Those that follow God have the right to defend their position against political power-mongers that want Christian tithes.

What do you mean? What were the Sanhedrin changing? If I look in the gospels, I see Jesus opposing the traditional teachings of the Sanhedrin, not the other way around. It is true that what is considered "traditional" may only be a few centuries or sometimes even only a few decades old. I am not saying the Sanhedrin's views or teachings were immutable, or that they had existed throughout the history of the Hebrew people. However, they clearly were the traditional views of their day.

To say Jesus was in opposition to changing traditional views does not square with what was actually going on the gospel. Jesus' teachings on forgiveness, sin, the role of women in society, and many other things were radically different from the traditional views of his time, and even radically different then any teaching that had preceded him in the Old Testament. Consider for example his statements on 'it is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God then for the camel to pass through the eye of a needle.'

Where in the OT was such a statement ever considered "traditional" in any way?

As a result, God changes how he interacts with us, just as a father changes how he interacts with his children as they mature.

That is true. That does not change marriage. That does not change the incompatibility to have sodomy celebrated in the Church. Or, as Paul puts it those who are or practice arsenokotai. Christians must make a stand against this attack by homosexualism. It takes no prisoners. All, must submit to "it." That is even your point Micatala. Otherwise you would agree that homosexuals should start their own organizational religion.

The Christian view of marriage has already changed a lot since Jesus' time. Polygamy is by and large not allowed. Inter-racial marriage is allowed. Marriage with non-believers is allowed. People now choose their own spouses, rather than having their families do the choosing.

Immutable would mean essentially "cannot be changed."


Traditional means "has not changed for a long time." There is a big, big difference.

In traditions we see immutable statements.

As has been shown, sometimes yes and sometimes no. Not all traditions are immutable, nor do Christians hold all traditional teachings to be immutable. That is clear from history.




I would like you to explain exactly what you mean by 'homosexualization' and also, I may not have been clear in my position.

I am in no way trying to force anything on anyone. I am simply suggesting that Christians voluntarily change their views on homosexuality. If I persuade no one, I am willing to accept that. I am not expecting or asking for 'submission' and frankly most people who advocate for a change in view on homosexuality are not either.

I am a Christian and have no intention of changing that. I am not interested in starting a new religion. If I were to 'change churches' or 'start a new church' it would still be a Christian church.




Let me be very specific.

Suppose we have two homosexuals who would like to have a committed "married" relationship. To this point in their lives they have both been celibate. They are Christians and have been good church members in their church. They have not revealed their orientation to anyone. They have both prayed and examined their consciences and can come to no other conclusion than God has made them as they are.

They approach their pastor with their situation. They do not ask the pastor to marry them, but say they will go through a civil ceremony in a location which allows this (assume there is such a place, even outside the country). They do not ask anything of the pastor other than to allow them to continue to be members in their long time church. They promise not to speak to anyone within the church about their orientation or relationship, although they have to allow that they might not be able to keep it secret.

They present no threat to the children or others of the church, as they have vowed not to talk about homosexuality at all. They will make every good faith effort to keep their relationship secret.

In what way does this couple present any danger to the church? Would you say that this couple is attempting to 'homosexualize' the church?

No they are just proving once again that They are understanding that THIS RELATIONSHIP is one that is to be HIDDEN and therefore not an ACCEPTED WAY OF LIVING and HAVING A LOVING RELATIONSHIP between TWO INDIVIDUALS whom HAPPEN TO be TWO OF The SAME SEX. which is NOT the WAY OF OUIR LORD GOD CREATOR of THE FIRST MARRIAGE, MAN and WOMAN. FOR if something is OK WITH GOD then IT should also be OK with THE BELIEVER OF GOD and HIS WORD OF TRUTH of what HIS WAY of doing things is. CRIMINAL's HIDE if at all possible the CRIME they have COMMITTED. IF they KNOW THAT A PUNISHMENT for that CRIME will be GIVEN BY Their FELLOW MAN PEERS... when we as PEOPLE HAVING any KNOWLEDGE AT ALL of what GOD SAYS about RIGHTEOUS LIVING and RIGHTEOUS BEHAVIOR and RIGHTEOUSNESS then WE AS believers that KNOW what GOD HAS said and done DO ALL WE POSSIBLY CAN TO do IT HIS WAY NOT what WE THINK IS HIS WAY.. IF we have READ what HIS WAY is THEN WE Have NO EXCUSE for doing it another way do we? BESIDES. YOU NOR I CAN HIDE our UNRIGHTEOUS behavior from GOD. FOR HE SEES and KNOWS IT all anyway. This is why the BLOOD WAS shed TO BEGIN with. TO COVER FOREVER OUR SIN FROM The EYES of GOD OUR HEAVENLY FATHER. IT does not HOWEVER GIVE us a LICENSE to continue in a SINFUL ACTION AFTER coming to the knowledge of what GOD HAS SAID IS SIN!!!!!!!!!!!! THE BOTTOM LINE is THIS!!!

God has SAID HAD WRITTEN and IT will not change. A MAN LYING WITH A WOMAN AS WITH A MAN is an ABOMINATION AND A SINFUL ACT DEED THING TO DO BY ANY TWO MEN OR TWO WOMAN. PERIOD!!!! now you and all that ARE LIVING AND HAVEING SEXUAL RELATIONS with EACH OTHER being THE SAME SEX CAN MAKE all the EXCUSES and TURN FROM what THE TRUTH of GOD's WORD IS all YOU want to but in the end YOU THAT ARE INVOLVED IN SUCH A RELATIONSHIP ARE still WRONG and IN SINFUL LIVING NOT TURNING from it.. BUT JUST DENYING GOD'S WORD and HIS TRUTH of what HE has already said and ordained as RIGHT WAY and WRONG WAY. TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPs. SODOMY is an act of UNATURAL SEXUAL RELATIONS. When ONE is SODEMIZED,,, THIS means having ANAL SEX, SEX with FOREIGN OBJECTS, ANYTHING THAT is NOT THE NATURAL WAY of THE SEX ACT. WHICH IS A MAN and woman have SEX THE WAY MAN and woman are MADE TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS. EACH having the PARTS for GODS WAY. IF NONE know what that means maybe they need an education on anatomy and how the MALES and FEMALES are MADE.... PHYSICALLY and why and what each parts purpose is and reason for GOD MAKING THAT PART in such a way.

[micatala]

I suggest we go our seperate ways on this subject.

Perhaps this is a good suggestion. I do feel like we have had a good debate, and that we have come to a somewhat better understanding of each other's positions and why we hold them, even if we don't agree.

The main sticking point, of course, is that I don't believe the Biblical text supports the notion that homosexuality, homosexual sex, and homosexual marriage are in and of themselves sinful in all cases. Many, including yourself, disagree with this. Thus, I see no need for homosexuals to repent, at least not for the mere fact that they are sexually attracted to people of the same gender and not the opposite gender.

If I do not persuade others to this position that is fine. All I am asking for is an acknowledgement that it is to their own maker that homosexuals will be responsible, not other believers. When a church in good conscience cannot accept homosexuals as members simply and only because of their homosexuality, I am disappointed, but am certainly not going to attempt to force the issue.

I'll make a few comments of clarification on some of the points made.

They will make every good faith effort to keep their relationship secret.

Confession of sins makes "secrets" a sin.

No they are just proving once again that They are understanding that THIS RELATIONSHIP is one that is to be HIDDEN and therefore not an ACCEPTED WAY OF LIVING and HAVING A LOVING RELATIONSHIP between TWO INDIVIDUALS whom HAPPEN TO be TWO OF The SAME SEX.

I can understand the concern about 'deception' here. A couple of comments.

First, as I have said before, homosexuals have many reasons for keeping their orientation and relationships 'secret' other than any 'shame' they might feel. They have real reason to fear real, even violent, persecution, for one.

Secondly, my hypothetical couple is not acquiescing to keep their relationship secret because of shame but because of sensitivity to the feelings that the pastor and some congregation members might have. THis is in line with Romans 14 and 15 where Pauls tells believers 'do not let what you believe is good to be spoken of as evil' and also 'do not put any stumbling block before your brother.' Their motivation is not shame, but a desire to to follow God's word and act in love towards others who would have concern about their orientation and/or relationship.

What else could they do? It is the same as Paul's example of believer A feeling eating meat is fine, but keeping this fact 'secret' from believer B so as not to offend him or weaken his faith. Believer A is not acting out of shame for his actions, as he is 'fully convinced in his own mind and in faith' that his actions are not sinful. And yet, Paul asks him to keep his actions secret for the good of this brother. In my example, I am having the homosexual couple do exactly this same thing. I don't see that this is lying. If it were, then Paul is telling people to lie.

I hope you understand that this hypothetical couple has been put in a terrible bind by the attitudes of many Christians. They have no wish to offend, but neither do they accept that their orientation or relationship is inherently sinful. You may not agree with this, but I believe I have shown they have ample Biblical reason to feel this way, and if they are willing to be accountable to God in the end, that is their business.

They screwam in hysteria that "God made them that way." And everyone has to celebarte them or they will get charged with a civl rights violation. These deranged individuals have now made the Taliban, Al Queda, The Gestapo, atheists, etc., etc., Christians with full membership in the Church. In fact nothing is wrong anymore.

Again, I know I am suggesting a big change in thinking for those with a traditional viewpoint on homosexuality. However, I am absolutely not suggesting 'nothing is wrong' anymore. Yes, when 'moral boundaries' change it always creates concern and we should not undertake these changes lightly (I think I mistyped and wrote 'rightly' a few posts back).

But such changes in BIblical interpretation have been made successfully in the past without the total dissolution of all moral boundaries. I am suggesting what I think is a reasonable change that does not effect the central tenets of Christianity anymore than the change in outlook from the earth-centered to sun-centered world-view, the acceptance of Black's and women as 'equal human beings', the allowance that OT laws are not required of Christians, etc.

God and His prohets always warn of the problems associated with joining in with the detestable practices of the non-believers.

What the Israelites found detestable, Jesus did not. What is detestable changes over time. What does not change for Christians is that God expects us to love Him, and to love each other (believers and non-believers alike, even our enemies).

Which of course makes homosexuals our enemies. Why would you want to force these people into our Churches? I cannot understand your motives

I know some homosexuals are anti-Christian. I am not sure why those that are believers need to be considered enemies. At any rate, I am not trying to 'force' them in, I am simply hoping that Christians in general come to accept homosexuality as not being sinful.

My motives are born out of a conviction that this is an unnecessarily divisive and painful issue for the church, and that homosexuals are often treated unfairly, hatefully, and are marginalized for no real good reason. In the current situation, I believe the church is losing by excluding this entire group of people, and many who could be saved and come into the church are now not because they perceive, rightly or wrongly, that Christians hate them. They think, and I think with some justification, that many Christians are asking homosexuals to carry a burden that they themselves are not willing to carry. They perceive, rightly or wrongly, that many CHristians are not acting in love, but perhaps more out of fear, or pride in their own righteousness. Mel has often spoken eloquently of this dynamic.



Is some of this criticism of Christians unfair? Perhaps. As with many issues, those on opposing sides often have a hard time understanding or being sympathetic to their opponents, and I think it is true that some in the homosexual community are not sympathetic to the viewpoint or feelings of Christians who believe they are doing nothing more than trying to follow their faith and convictions in good conscience. If I could accomplish nothing more than persuade a few people to gain a better understanding and sympathy for the position and situation of homosexuals, then I will consider that a success.

Let's move on to another subject. You are a great person. this always gets to be insulting sooner or later. I just wish for peace between the opposing sides.

Sounds good. I appreciate your comments, and understand it is a difficult topic. I am all for peace between however many sides there are on this.

[melikio]

God has SAID HAD WRITTEN and IT will not change. A MAN LYING WITH A WOMAN AS WITH A MAN is an ABOMINATION AND A SINFUL ACT DEED THING TO DO BY ANY TWO MEN OR TWO WOMAN. PERIOD!!!!

What did God write? Prove it, please. If HE did write it, are YOU and others interpreting and handling it properly? (I don't think so.)

now you and all that ARE LIVING AND HAVEING SEXUAL RELATIONS with EACH OTHER being THE SAME SEX CAN MAKE all the EXCUSES and TURN FROM what THE TRUTH of GOD's WORD IS all YOU want to but in the end YOU THAT ARE INVOLVED IN SUCH A RELATIONSHIP ARE still WRONG and IN SINFUL LIVING NOT TURNING from it..

So you would believe and say; you have a right to your interpretation and subsequent biblical views.

BUT JUST DENYING GOD'S WORD and HIS TRUTH of what HE has already said and ordained as RIGHT WAY and WRONG WAY. TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPs. SODOMY is an act of UNATURAL SEXUAL RELATIONS.

How do you know what "truth" absolutely is? And are you applying it in so direct a manner to YOURSELF, as you obviously intend to apply it to "homosexual" people? If not, then why are you demanding something sexually of homosexuals, that in the purest and most practical sense heterosexuals (Christian and otherwise) will not apply or enforce consistently amongst themselves?

When ONE is SODEMIZED,,, THIS means having ANAL SEX, SEX with FOREIGN OBJECTS, ANYTHING THAT is NOT THE NATURAL WAY of THE SEX ACT.

This happens, but it's just STUPID to point out. Not everything that people do for/to one another is "natural". And even in nature, things don't always go the way we might imagine. (Watch the Discovery Channel for a few days, and see what I mean.)

WHICH IS A MAN and woman have SEX THE WAY MAN and woman are MADE TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS. EACH having the PARTS for GODS WAY.

This is nothing more than the WAY you interpret what people should do with the "PARTS", it is not the full definition of what God wants for every homosexual person on the planet. YOu think it is, but you don't really know that (for everyone), and you cannot prove otherwise; you really CANNOT.

IF NONE know what that means maybe they need an education on anatomy and how the MALES and FEMALES are MADE.... PHYSICALLY and why and what each parts purpose is and reason for GOD MAKING THAT PART in such a way.

Maybe you need an education on how many variances or abberations actually exist or affect people in this world. You can proclaim the ideal as you perceive it, but even using the Bible, you surely CANNOT define this for each and every soul on the planet; you don't have the universal authority or wisdom to make many of the claim above that you do.

Now, if you would have prefaced everything you said with, "I believe..." or "It is my opinion that...", then you would have been absolutely true in all that you said.

And that IS the limitation that MUST stand ultimately; you and no one else are ever going to control homosexuality or homosexuals; not morally anyhow. The "Bible" (as most interpret it today) does NOT support coercion, manipulation and oppressive control of people, to force them into one's "concept/s" of holiness or moral preference; which is exactly what some are in the habit of doing, they intend to somehow FORCE people to "change" or "honor" God, within the parameters they have determined are "right".

The real world (this physical realm) hasn't worked that way, and it likely never will. There are tools for dealing with othr people (namely, "love"); but it will NOT be a "Christian" world, in the sense which many fundamentalists or literalists tend to expect.

I knew what the Bible said about things, likely before I knew anything else (if you knew my parents, you'd know this was true). I know that by the interpretations which many apply to reality, that certain things seemingly should not be. And interestingly enough, even simple concepts aren't always "consistent".

Lance Bass of the vocal group "N-Synch" is as gay as he is handsome. I never suspected the man was gay, not really. He SURELY had access to a "heterosexual" enviroment and was (a main point) raised in the SOUTHERN BAPTIST traditions; surely not a person who had not heard and possibly did the same soul-searching that SCORES of homosexual-Christians have had to do.

But where YOU and so many other clearly go "wrong", is not that you don't consult the Bible for your own personal viewpoint, but that you seem to wish to ENFORCE your views, by evoking the kind of "AUTHORITY" which you in no way possess (except for YOUR OWN PERSON), or those commited to regard what you believe and say. You (and others) truly cannot dictate to others (whether sinful in your eyes or not), what they can, cannot, should or shoudn't do with their body parts.

That overbearing biblical-Christianity (not all Christians) which some seem to live for, is certainly one of the most problematic things in this world. And I think Jesus historically addressed that type of problem. People (especially these day in America, and other places on the globe), are in the evil habit of RIDING homosexual people; for ANYTHING (and not just activities pertaining to one's "anus", practically everything).

As it is, certain Christians have created such a toxic environment for homosexuals (from young children to full adults), that they are surely dehumanized by even those who really should know how to love them. That is, it IS FASHIONABLE to mistreat and oppress people, merely for having a homosexual-orientation; THAT IS ALL IT TAKES. And as I remember from being a teenager, I had NO ONE to talk to about it (except GOD, and I was fortunate in that sense). This is not something that all "Christians" and others openly CALL for, it is something that is so deeply engrained in standard (often traditional) religious thinking, that many people don't even realize how pervasive it truly is. It is something that is "imposed", but not necessarily or divinely CALLED FOR.

It's not surprising that "religion" (not necessarily God Himself, as no one is able to prove) does change over time; even views of what is right/wrong must be reviewed from time to time. Even though many of use apply our perceptions of what "perfect" or "right" means, there is little to no guarantee that we also have our perceptions aligned with that of the "Creator". Which is why those who would impose their "faith" upon others, are typically stepping beyond the level of authorization they are assigned.

You'd have to be a darned-near-perfect judge to call "morality" for all others (even using one's Bible); and the best we can do (as illustrated by Jesus and many others) is to love as we have been loved; that our live may reflect the same.

[Suzanne]

OUR LORD GOD OUR CREAATOR HAS ALREADY CREATED MAN and WOMAN, TO be MADE ONE IN HIM UNDER HIM AND TO DO HIS WILL .. YET MAN DID NOT DO THIS.. so ALL THE SINS YOU SEE PEOPLE DO THIS DAY is A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS ORIGINAL FIRST DISOBEDIENCE TO WHAT GOD HAD SAID TO NOT DO!!!!!!!!! DO NOT EAT the FRUIT OF THAT TREE of KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL!! MURDER, THEFT, BAREING FALSE WITNESS.. AND ALL MANKINDS SINFUL ACTS ARE BECAUSE of THAT CHOICE ADAM MADE. AND THEN when THE FATHER ASKED HIM WHAT HAVE YOU DONE????? HE BLAMED THE WOMAN GOD HAD MADE FOR HIM.. THE BLAME GAME!!!!! is still going on for many woman YET some MEN HAVE COME TO UNDERSTAND their WRONGDOING and HAS BEEN BLESSED because of it. JUST AS MANY WOMAN HAVE ALSO had to bare their PART of the WRONG THEY HAD DONE EVEN THOU THEY HAAD been DECIEVED.. TO BEGIN WITH. YET the WOMAN WAS NOT GIVEN the DEATH SENTANCE IT was THE MAN ADAM THAT was GIVEN THE DEATH SENTANCE. HOW would GOD CORRECT THIS SINFUL ACT THAT ALL HE HAD MADE WOULD NOT BE LOST FOREVER???????????????????

IT WAS BLOOD THAT WAS shed TO COVER SIN IN THE BEGINNING .. YET IT is THE SHED BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST THAT TOOK AWAY OUR SIN FOREVER ...... " FOR GOD, SO LOVED THE WORLD HE GAVE, HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON THAT whomsoever shall believe in HIM SHALL NOT PERISH. but have eternal life." JOHN 3;16:


NOW IF YOU WANT TO MAKE HOMOSEXUALITY A NON SINFUL ACTION then LET'S WIPE MURDER, THEIVERY, and LIES ALL OFF THE LIST ALSO AS being SINFUL ACTS THAT MANKIND CONTINUES IN and SAY NO MORE DEATH NO MORE CRIMINAL JUSTICE DONE BY ANY COURTS LAYWERS JUDGES NO MORE JAILS PRISONS OR PUNISHMENT FOR THESE SINFUL ACTS THAT GOD HAS ALREADY ORDAINED AND SAID ARE SINFUL ACTIONS THAT ARE NOT RIGHT NOR GOOD TO DO>>> NOT ADHEREING TO HIS WILL FOR US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FOR EACH AND EVERYONE IS A SIN IN THE LORD GODS EYE.. LET's JUST FORGET ABOUT THE HOLY BIBLE TORA SCRIPTURES AND WORD OF GOD ALL TOGETHER .. HOW would this suit you all that DO NOT believe IN WHAT GOD HAS SAID is an ABOMINATION TO HIM!!!!!!! MAN LAYING WITH A MAN AS WITH A WOMAN meaning HAVING SEX WITH MAN TO MAN and woman TO woman.. LET GODS WORD GO BY THE WAYSIDE IF YOU CHOOSE BUT NOT ALL OF WE WHO KNOW what SINFUL ACTS ARE. we all have been MADE GUILTY OF ALL BECAUSE A LIE IS A SIN> and we all have BEEN THERE DONE THAT. YET WE CAN BE CHANGED IN OUR HEARTS and MINDS> AND YES even TURN FROM OUR SINFUL WAYS> SEX BETWEEN A HUSBAND AND WIFE MALE AND FEMALE MARRIED COUPLES IS NOT A SIN!!!!!!!!!!! SEX BETWEEN TWO WOMAN AND TWOM MEN IS A SIN!! and YOU NOR NONE can change this TRUTH AND NEITHER will any HOMOSEXUAL CHANGE what GOD HAS already said ABOUT WHAT THEY CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN WHICH IS A SIN TO GOD AND IN THE EYES OF GOD .

NOW DO I HAVE TO BE MEAN OR MURDER OR HATE THEM .. NO BUT neither do I have to AGREE AND CONDONE THEIR SIN.. AS I SAID EARLIER THEY ARE JUDGED BY THEIR OWN CHOICE THEY MAKE FOR IN THE END IT is THEY THAT will HAVE NO EXCUSE TO TELL THE FATHER IN HEAVEN .""" OH WELL I DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A SIN. NO they have no excuse because all KNOW what THE LORD HASCSAID is a sin . except all that WOULD RATHER NOT ACCEPT HIMHIS WORD AND HIS TRUTH AS HE HAS HAD IT WRITTEN TAUGHT AND SAID and ALREADY ORDAINED...




PEOPLE THAT never can TURN and ACCEPT Their SINS and TURN FROM THEM WILL DIE with REGRETS. AND MOST OFTEN LONG before their time because of their DIREGARD for what they have been TOLD AND HAS HAD REVEALED TO THEM.

I KNOW I HAVE sinned and will I continue sinning I PRAY I do not willingly and KNOWINGLY.. BUT IT is ONLY BY HIS SPIRIT THAT I MAY BE ABLE TO NOT do so.. YET even then I MAAY still DO something that is against GOD THAT HE does not will for me to do. YET I also know I HAVE NO EXCUSE> that is why I PRAY and ask HIM FOR FORGIVENESS .. and I do not have to GO through a PRIEST or MINISTER or PASTOR to ask GOD for FORGIVENESS either. I CAN HOWEVER FORGIVE MY ENEMIES and also ask for forgiveness from those that I may have DONE SOMETHING WRONG AGAINST. IF I REALLY HAVE been WRONG IN what I HAVE done. IF I HAVE been UNFAITHFUL TO A FRIEND . then THIS I would hope they whoever they are would forgive me. BY UNFAITHFUL I AM TALKING ABOUT SEXUAL UNFAITHFULNESS. BUT I also understand that this then can be a problem with building up trust again. and that may never come for this is a BREECH OF COVENANT THAT is very hard to heal and forget and IT is always laying underneath .. to take away a part of what was in the beginning. GOD CAN FORGET but we as MEN AND WOMAN MAY HAVE A BIG problem FORGETTING. the BREECH. THAT is why I DIVORCED.. FIRST OF ALL HOW MANY TIMES BEFORE I ACTUALLY DECIDED TO HUNT HIM DOWN .. so I would then KNOW and HAVE PROOF.. HE WAS still up to this wrong doing after marriage. once having it I would not be able to be assured of FIDELITY from then on. AND I AS A WOMAN will share MY HUSBAND with NONE!!! BEEN THERE done that ONCE was to many times.. NO MORE>>>>>>>

I may not have to be concerned about that anymore .... BUT then again I AM YET HERE and GOD ONLY KNOWS.. what HE HAS for me to HAVE DO OR ACCOMPLISH before I am outa here. MY LIFE HERE will be over and LIFE HERE will continue for all I leave behind. I KNOW THAT.. I AM JUST HOPING TO SEE PEACE IN JERUSALEM before I AM NOT HERE ANYMORE. IF THAT COMES then I pray I can enjoy it for a bit. along with my kyds :):):):):) I am just watching it all ..

I suggest we go our seperate ways on this subject.

Perhaps this is a good suggestion. I do feel like we have had a good debate, and that we have come to a somewhat better understanding of each other's positions and why we hold them, even if we don't agree.

The main sticking point, of course, is that I don't believe the Biblical text supports the notion that homosexuality, homosexual sex, and homosexual marriage are in and of themselves sinful in all cases. Many, including yourself, disagree with this. Thus, I see no need for homosexuals to repent, at least not for the mere fact that they are sexually attracted to people of the same gender and not the opposite gender.

If I do not persuade others to this position that is fine. All I am asking for is an acknowledgement that it is to their own maker that homosexuals will be responsible, not other believers. When a church in good conscience cannot accept homosexuals as members simply and only because of their homosexuality, I am disappointed, but am certainly not going to attempt to force the issue.

I'll make a few comments of clarification on some of the points made.

They will make every good faith effort to keep their relationship secret.

Confession of sins makes "secrets" a sin.

No they are just proving once again that They are understanding that THIS RELATIONSHIP is one that is to be HIDDEN and therefore not an ACCEPTED WAY OF LIVING and HAVING A LOVING RELATIONSHIP between TWO INDIVIDUALS whom HAPPEN TO be TWO OF The SAME SEX.

I can understand the concern about 'deception' here. A couple of comments.

First, as I have said before, homosexuals have many reasons for keeping their orientation and relationships 'secret' other than any 'shame' they might feel. They have real reason to fear real, even violent, persecution, for one.

Secondly, my hypothetical couple is not acquiescing to keep their relationship secret because of shame but because of sensitivity to the feelings that the pastor and some congregation members might have. THis is in line with Romans 14 and 15 where Pauls tells believers 'do not let what you believe is good to be spoken of as evil' and also 'do not put any stumbling block before your brother.' Their motivation is not shame, but a desire to to follow God's word and act in love towards others who would have concern about their orientation and/or relationship.

What else could they do? It is the same as Paul's example of believer A feeling eating meat is fine, but keeping this fact 'secret' from believer B so as not to offend him or weaken his faith. Believer A is not acting out of shame for his actions, as he is 'fully convinced in his own mind and in faith' that his actions are not sinful. And yet, Paul asks him to keep his actions secret for the good of this brother. In my example, I am having the homosexual couple do exactly this same thing. I don't see that this is lying. If it were, then Paul is telling people to lie.

I hope you understand that this hypothetical couple has been put in a terrible bind by the attitudes of many Christians. They have no wish to offend, but neither do they accept that their orientation or relationship is inherently sinful. You may not agree with this, but I believe I have shown they have ample Biblical reason to feel this way, and if they are willing to be accountable to God in the end, that is their business.

They screwam in hysteria that "God made them that way." And everyone has to celebarte them or they will get charged with a civl rights violation. These deranged individuals have now made the Taliban, Al Queda, The Gestapo, atheists, etc., etc., Christians with full membership in the Church. In fact nothing is wrong anymore.

Again, I know I am suggesting a big change in thinking for those with a traditional viewpoint on homosexuality. However, I am absolutely not suggesting 'nothing is wrong' anymore. Yes, when 'moral boundaries' change it always creates concern and we should not undertake these changes lightly (I think I mistyped and wrote 'rightly' a few posts back).

But such changes in BIblical interpretation have been made successfully in the past without the total dissolution of all moral boundaries. I am suggesting what I think is a reasonable change that does not effect the central tenets of Christianity anymore than the change in outlook from the earth-centered to sun-centered world-view, the acceptance of Black's and women as 'equal human beings', the allowance that OT laws are not required of Christians, etc.

God and His prohets always warn of the problems associated with joining in with the detestable practices of the non-believers.

What the Israelites found detestable, Jesus did not. What is detestable changes over time. What does not change for Christians is that God expects us to love Him, and to love each other (believers and non-believers alike, even our enemies).

Which of course makes homosexuals our enemies. Why would you want to force these people into our Churches? I cannot understand your motives

I know some homosexuals are anti-Christian. I am not sure why those that are believers need to be considered enemies. At any rate, I am not trying to 'force' them in, I am simply hoping that Christians in general come to accept homosexuality as not being sinful.

My motives are born out of a conviction that this is an unnecessarily divisive and painful issue for the church, and that homosexuals are often treated unfairly, hatefully, and are marginalized for no real good reason. In the current situation, I believe the church is losing by excluding this entire group of people, and many who could be saved and come into the church are now not because they perceive, rightly or wrongly, that Christians hate them. They think, and I think with some justification, that many Christians are asking homosexuals to carry a burden that they themselves are not willing to carry. They perceive, rightly or wrongly, that many CHristians are not acting in love, but perhaps more out of fear, or pride in their own righteousness. Mel has often spoken eloquently of this dynamic.



Is some of this criticism of Christians unfair? Perhaps. As with many issues, those on opposing sides often have a hard time understanding or being sympathetic to their opponents, and I think it is true that some in the homosexual community are not sympathetic to the viewpoint or feelings of Christians who believe they are doing nothing more than trying to follow their faith and convictions in good conscience. If I could accomplish nothing more than persuade a few people to gain a better understanding and sympathy for the position and situation of homosexuals, then I will consider that a success.

Let's move on to another subject. You are a great person. this always gets to be insulting sooner or later. I just wish for peace between the opposing sides.

Sounds good. I appreciate your comments, and understand it is a difficult topic. I am all for peace between however many sides there are on this.

[melikio]

Secondly, my hypothetical couple is not acquiescing to keep their relationship secret because of shame but because of sensitivity to the feelings that the pastor and some congregation members might have. THis is in line with Romans 14 and 15 where Pauls tells believers 'do not let what you believe is good to be spoken of as evil' and also 'do not put any stumbling block before your brother.' Their motivation is not shame, but a desire to to follow God's word and act in love towards others who would have concern about their orientation and/or relationship.

Of course! And that is where my mind/actions have typically been. I definitely agree with your overall "Christian" views on homosexuality.

There are MANY heterosexual people I love deeply, and I know the "social" effect of someone being homosexual, upon many who aren't. (How could a homosexual help knowing about that?) People who care about others, can certainly be misunderstood, but to assume that every homosexual who may react to certain things that are critical of their sexual-orientation is acting out of "shame", is a massive mischaracterization of who/what homosexuals happen to be.

I've never been particularly "proud" of being homosexual; and I am not defined by my sexual-orientation or subsequent desires. But I'm certainly beyond letting just any "JOE" with some biblical knowledge, presume to "define" who or what I am. No "Bible" or reasonable interpretation of what is "Christian" supports that; especially when the dehumanization of people is involved. I think that many Christians need to reconsider what it is that THEY must do, as it relates to homosexuality and homosexuals.

-Mel-

[melikio]

NOW IF YOU WANT TO MAKE HOMOSEXUALITY A NON SINFUL ACTION then LET'S WIPE MURDER, THEIVERY, and LIES ALL OFF THE LIST ALSO AS being SINFUL ACTS THAT MANKIND CONTINUES IN and SAY NO MORE DEATH NO MORE CRIMINAL JUSTICE DONE BY ANY COURTS LAYWERS JUDGES NO MORE JAILS PRISONS OR PUNISHMENT FOR THESE SINFUL ACTS THAT GOD HAS ALREADY ORDAINED AND SAID ARE SINFUL ACTIONS THAT ARE NOT RIGHT NOR GOOD TO DO>>> NOT ADHEREING TO HIS WILL FOR US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now, if YOU want to equate homosexuality with those things you listed, so be it. JUst don't expect me or other more reasonable people to see the "connection".

Is being "homosexual" a sinful thing, Suzanne?

Does the Bible promote being "heterosexual" (as many do)? Do husbands sodomize their spouses and call it ok?

Does the Bible "condone" or "promote" the BS homosexuals typically endure (in the name of God or "truth")?

And I don't think we ever got a decent answer from you about DIVORCE; what does the Bible say about that, and how much do people regard that?

-Mel-

[Suzanne]

God has SAID HAD WRITTEN and IT will not change. A MAN LYING WITH A WOMAN AS WITH A MAN is an ABOMINATION AND A SINFUL ACT DEED THING TO DO BY ANY TWO MEN OR TWO WOMAN. PERIOD!!!!

What did God write? Prove it, please. If HE did write it, are YOU and others interpreting and handling it properly? (I don't think so.)

I did not say GOD WROTE THE BIBLE OR THE TORA.. I SAID HE "HAD IT WRITTEN..." AND YES HE DID SAY THROUGH THE ONE THAT WROTE the FIRST FIVE BOOKS MANY THINGS .. THAT HE MOSES COULD WRITE IT DOWN .. AS FOR UNDERSTANDING ..

How would you UNDERSTAND HIM if HE HAS SAAID and had MOSES WRITE IT down .. NOT ONLY IN the OLD TESTAMENT BUT also IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. Leviticus 20;13: "IF A MAN LIES with a MAN AS HE LIES with a WOMAN. BOTH OF THEM HAVE COMMITTED AN ABOMINATION."
ROMANS 1; 27: Likewise also the men leaving the NATURAL USE of the woman burned in their LUST FOR ONE ANOTHER. men with men committing what is shameful and recieving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.. and even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting." Ephesians 5;7:-11: FORNICATION ???? is SEX between unmarrieds.. I AM NOT in agreement with this either.. YET APPARENTLY ALMOST EVERYBODY IS AS ONE NIGHT STANDS AND SEX AFTER A DATE OR AN ALL NIGHTER IS ALWAYS EXPECTED BY MANY AND IS DONE without and thought at all at the consequences or wrong doing of this..

My daughter was guilty of this AND SHE KNEW what MY VEIWS and BELIEFwas and is about such actions.. YET SHE WAS AFTER ALL NOT UNDER MY ROOF ANYMORE. BUT when she was THERE WAS NON OF THIS TO BE DONE and wasn't either. WAS I INNOCENT OF this same SIN??? NO BUT I DID MARRY the GUY. BUT THAAT did not excuse nor make it ok .. AND I PAID for the DISCRETION. HAVING IT end in DIVORCE. because of not just one reason but actually two.. which I have not mentioned .

now you and all that ARE LIVING AND HAVEING SEXUAL RELATIONS with EACH OTHER being THE SAME SEX CAN MAKE all the EXCUSES and TURN FROM what THE TRUTH of GOD's WORD IS all YOU want to but in the end YOU THAT ARE INVOLVED IN SUCH A RELATIONSHIP ARE still WRONG and IN SINFUL LIVING NOT TURNING from it..

So you would believe and say; you have a right to your interpretation and subsequent biblical views.

NO INTERPERTAION about it. YOU do have a dicrtionary don't you??? look up HOMOSEXUAL, FORNICATION, BEASTIALITY, JUST REPEATING what THE LORD YOUR GOD and MINE HAS ALREADY HAD written for US TO ABIDE BY. and NOT DO!!!!!

BUT JUST DENYING GOD'S WORD and HIS TRUTH of what HE has already said and ordained as RIGHT WAY and WRONG WAY. TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPs. SODOMY is an act of UNATURAL SEXUAL RELATIONS.

How do you know what "truth" absolutely is?

YOU ARE IN A REALLY BAD SITUATION if you HAVE NO IDEA WHAT the DIFFERENCE IS between A TRUTH AND A LIE when THE EVIDENCE OF WRONG DOING IS APPARENT AND SIN IS ALREADY NAMED AMONG MEN AND WOMAN BECAUSE IT HAS ALREADY been WRITTEN FOR US TO KNOW WHAT SIN IS???????

And are you applying it in so direct a manner to YOURSELF, as you obviously intend to apply it to "homosexual" people?

IMPLYING WHAT?? TO MYSELF???? I HAVE never been nor do I ever intend to have sexual relations with a woman.. I do not in the first place have any desire to have sex with any woman.. I was not made to desire a woman. I WAS however GIVEN TO DESIRE MY HUSBAND if I had one.. OF COURSE I do not. yet how does DESIRE COME ABOUT in the first place for a HUSBAND OR SEXUAL ACTS??? must have to be something that ATTRACTS one to another. or there would never be any husbands or wives or sexual acts to be done in the first place. and GOD DID MAKE MAN and woman NOT TWO men OR TWO WOMAN TO MARRY EACH other and have sex together. YET AT THIS time of my life I have come to realize that SEX is not all there is to a marriage between a man and a woman. BUT IT Is the UNION THAT MAAKES THEM ONE in CHRIST COVENANT betwen the MAN THE WOMAN and CHRIST. COULD SAY IN SPIRIT. FOR WE ARE SOULS. Yet I also have learned that the verse about not being UNEQUALLY YOKED. has a deeper meaning now then before.

If not, then why are you demanding something sexually of homosexuals, that in the purest and most practical sense heterosexuals (Christian and otherwise) will not apply or enforce consistently amongst themselves?

How do you mean and what do you mean BY PUREST and MOST PRACTICAL SENSE????

When ONE is SODEMIZED,,, THIS means having ANAL SEX, SEX with FOREIGN OBJECTS, ANYTHING THAT is NOT THE NATURAL WAY of THE SEX ACT.

This happens, but it's just STUPID to point out. Not everything that people do for/to one another is "natural". And even in nature, things don't always go the way we might imagine. (Watch the Discovery Channel for a few days, and see what I mean.)

WELL I GUESS THAT is what SEPERATES MANKIND from the ANIMALS HUH?? WE KNOW what GOD, OUR LORD and SAVIOR HAS SAID is the RIGHT WAY HUH?? OF COURSE LIKE YOU seem to agree with that SEX ANYWAY YOU CAN GET IT IS FINE AND OK even IF IT IS AGAINST GOD'S WAY HUH????? OK GO BY what the animals do and disregard what GOD HAS said is the way for, WE as MANKIND TO DO ESPECIALLY after being TOLD THE RIGHT OF IT ..

WHICH IS A MAN and woman have SEX THE WAY MAN and woman are MADE TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS. EACH having the PARTS for GODS WAY.

This is nothing more than the WAY you interpret what people should do with the "PARTS", it is not the full definition of what God wants for every homosexual person on the planet. YOu think it is, but you don't really know that (for everyone), and you cannot prove otherwise; you really CANNOT.

IF NONE know what that means maybe they need an education on anatomy and how the MALES and FEMALES are MADE.... PHYSICALLY and why and what each parts purpose is and reason for GOD MAKING THAT PART in such a way.

{quote]
Maybe you need an education on how many variances or abberations actually exist or affect people in this world. You can proclaim the ideal as you perceive it, but even using the Bible, you surely CANNOT define this for each and every soul on the planet; you don't have the universal authority or wisdom to make many of the claim above that you do.

I have authority to tell the truth of what GOD HAS ALREADY HAD written about these things .. THIS DOES NOT MEAN ANY will AGREE with WHAT GOD HAS ALREADY ORDAINED NOW DOES IT??? NEITHER DOES IT MEAN YOU WILL UNDERSTAND NOR AGREE WITH ME LET ALONE the WORD WHOM WAS IS AND WILL ALWAYS be GOD ALMIGHTY AND IT is HE YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND and HEAR and KNOW and LISTEN TO AS TO WHAT HE HAS ALREADY SAID. and HAD WRITTEN FOR YOU AS WELL AS for me.

and that means I DO NOT DESIRE NEVER HAVE AND NEVER WILL DESIRE A WOMAN TO SATISFY ANY SEXUAL URGES I MAY HAVE which I do not. I NEITHER HAVE TO do what others do so freely have sex with just anyone whom happens to be available at any given time, or happens to be a date??? at the time. I do not..

Now, if you would have prefaced everything you said with, "I believe..." or "It is my opinion that...", then you would have been absolutely true in all that you said.

THE SCRIPTURES are GOD'S WAY and I JUST REPEAAT what HE HAS already SAID is the RIGHT and GOOD and ORDAINED way for SEXUAAL RELATIONSHIPS . MAN TO WOMAN, WOMAN TO MAN PERIOD... PLAIN AND SIMPLE unless you want to make it complicated by just ignoring HIM and MKE IT and TAKE IT and HAVE IT ANYWAY YOU WANT IT AND LIKE IT. NOT GOD'S WAY THOUGH FOR YOU OR ANYONE ELSE NO MATTER who they are . MALE TO MALE IS A SIN AND AN ABOMINATION and so to WOMAN TO WOMAN SEX. LIE TO YOURSELF and everybody else all you want to will not change the TRUTH GOD HAS already said and done.

And that IS the limitation that MUST stand ultimately; you and no one else are ever going to control homosexuality or homosexuals; not morally anyhow. The "Bible" (as most interpret it today) does NOT support coercion, manipulation and oppressive control of people, to force them into one's "concept/s" of holiness or moral preference; which is exactly what some are in the habit of doing, they intend to somehow FORCE people to "change" or "honor" God, within the parameters they have determined are "right".

IT is NOT WHAT WE SAY IT IS WHAT GOD ALMIGHTY HAS ALREADY HAD SAID and ORDAINED AND HAD WRITTEN FOR US ALL TO LEARN ABOUT AND LIVE BY!!!!!!!!! there is a RIGHT and WRONG . way of DOING THINGS.. whether you like it or not that is just the way it is.

The real world (this physical realm) hasn't worked that way, and it likely never will. There are tools for dealing with othr people (namely, "love"); but it will NOT be a "Christian" world, in the sense which many fundamentalists or literalists tend to expect.

HAVE I EVER SAID THAT THIS WORLD AND PEOPLE WILL BE PERFECT????????????? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I knew what the Bible said about things, likely before I knew anything else..

REALLY WELL THEM IF YOU ALREADY KNOW what GOD HAS HAD WRITTEN why the heck you DISAGREEING WITH HIM THEN???????????? DO YOU believe GOD HAS SOMEHOW CHANGED HIS MIND ABOUT MURDER THEFT AND THE SINS THAT MANKIND DOES???? AND HE HAS MADE SIN NO LONGER SIN??? AND MURDER AND THEFT IS SOMEHOW OK TO DO NOW?? JUST BECAUSE IT IS NOW 2006 and NOT THE BEGINNING AND NOT DURING MOSES AGE and THE TIME OF HIS BURNING BUSH and THE EARTHLY SACTUARY OF ANIMAL SACRIFICES????? you think somehow HE HAS CHANGED HIS MIND AND CRIMINALS AND SIN OF ALL THIS WRONGDOING IS NO LONGER WRONG TO DO ?????

(if you knew my parents, you'd know this was true). I know that by the interpretations which many apply to reality, that certain things seemingly should not be. And interestingly enough, even simple concepts aren't always "consistent".

GOD will never condone SINFUL ACTS EVEN IF HE FORGIVES Them AND SEES ONLY the BLOOD OF JESUS> SIN IS STILL SIN AND FOR THAT HE ALSO HAS LAID OUT the CURSES for them. SIN !!!!!! CAUSES DEATH!!!!! and so it does.. IN MANY MANY MANY CASES TO SOON in other cases WE ALL DIE ONCE!!!!!

Lance Bass of the vocal group "N-Synch" is as gay as he is handsome. I never suspected the man was gay, not really. He SURELY had access to a "heterosexual" enviroment and was (a main point) raised in the SOUTHERN BAPTIST traditions; surely not a person who had not heard and possibly did the same soul-searching that SCORES of homosexual-Christians have had to do.

But where YOU and so many other clearly go "wrong", is not that you don't consult the Bible for your own personal viewpoint, but that you seem to wish to ENFORCE your views, by evoking the kind of "AUTHORITY" which you in no way possess (except for YOUR OWN PERSON), or those commited to regard what you believe and say. You (and others) truly cannot dictate to others (whether sinful in your eyes or not), what they can, cannot, should or shoudn't do with their body parts.

WE do not dictate what ONE CAN OR CAANNOT DO!!! anyway I don't. BUT WHAT I DO SAY is what GOD SAYS IS WRONG AND IS A SINFUL ACTION FOR ANY TO DO. what YOU OR ANYONE DOES with that INFORMATION OF GOD'S WORD OF TRUTH AS HE HAS ALREADY SAID AND HAD DONE AND WRITTEN IS AN INDIVIDUAL CHOICE!!!!!!!!! BUT I WOULD BE IN THE WROING for not speaking up for what I know is a truth about what GOD HAS said and what ERROR ANY IS IN. WE AS CHRISTIANS are to CORRECT AND INSTRUCT TELL OF THE ERRORS THAT ARE being done.



That overbearing biblical-Christianity (not all Christians) which some seem to live for, is certainly one of the most problematic things in this world. And I think Jesus historically addressed that type of problem. People (especially these day in America, and other places on the globe), are in the evil habit of RIDING homosexual people; for ANYTHING (and not just activities pertaining to one's "anus", practically everything).

As it is, certain Christians have created such a toxic environment for homosexuals (from young children to full adults), that they are surely dehumanized by even those who really should know how to love them. That is, it IS FASHIONABLE to mistreat and oppress people, merely for having a homosexual-orientation; THAT IS ALL IT TAKES. And as I remember from being a teenager, I had NO ONE to talk to about it (except GOD, and I was fortunate in that sense). This is not something that all "Christians" and others openly CALL for, it is something that is so deeply engrained in standard (often traditional) religious thinking, that many people don't even realize how pervasive it truly is. It is something that is "imposed", but not necessarily or divinely CALLED FOR.

It's not surprising that "religion" (not necessarily God Himself, as no one is able to prove) does change over time; even views of what is right/wrong must be reviewed from time to time. Even though many of use apply our perceptions of what "perfect" or "right" means, there is little to no guarantee that we also have our perceptions aligned with that of the "Creator". Which is why those who would impose their "faith" upon others, are typically stepping beyond the level of authorization they are assigned.

You'd have to be a darned-near-perfect judge to call "morality" for all others (even using one's Bible); and the best we can do (as illustrated by Jesus and many others) is to love as we have been loved; that our live may reflect the same.[/quote]

JUST because one does not like the TRUTH IT DOES NOT MAKE IT ANY LESS TRUTH >> THAT is THE BOTTOM LINE> as for LOVE OF GOD OR OUR LOVE FOR GOD'S PEOPLE??????? WELL I BELIEVE GOD HAS MADE PEOPLE BECAUSE MAN AND WOMAN ARE PEOPLE> AND GOD HAS CREATED US AS DIFFERENT FOR A REASON AND FOR HIS PURPOSE> IF YOU do not agree take it up with GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARGUE with HIM ALL YOU WANT TO . BUT I GUARRENTEE YOU HE will not change HIS MIND ON WHAT SIN IS!!! JUST SO ALL CAN CONTINUE IN THEIR SIN AND NOT HAVE ANY CONDEMNATION when THEY ALREADY KNOW that what they are doing is wrong in the first place.

THOSE THAT HAVE BELIEVED IN HIM ARE NOT CONDEMNED,, BUT ALL THAT HAVE NOT BELIEVED ARE CONDEMNED ALREADY...... GOD IS NOT GOING TO GO BACK TO YESTERDAY and CHANGE THE WORD SO ALL IN YESTERDAY CAN BE BLAMELESS. HE WILL NOT GO INTO TOMORROW AND CHANGE THE WORD SO AS TO HAVE THISE SINS DISAPEAR TOMORROW SO ALL THAT DO THEM DO NOT GET ACCOUNTEED FOR THOSE SINS. YET TODAY!!!!!!!!!! YOU AND MANY MANY MANY MORE HAVE A CHANCE TO CHOOSE WHEHER TO HAVE SEX WITH THAT GUY TONIGHT THAT YOU ARE WITH IF IT IS NOT A HUSBAND OF YOURS> and THOSE THAT ARE CONTEMPLATING HAVING SEX WITH THE SAME SEX??? THEY CAN CHOOSE TO NOT> ALSO.. CHOICE TODAY DO IT GODS WAY OR FORGET IT ..........SAME with ANY OTHER SIN ONE MIGHT be GOING TO CONTEMPLATE DOING JUST because they CONSIDER IT OK WHEN IT IS ALREADY KNOWN TO BE NOT RIGHT AND GOOD TO DO!!!!