Homosexuality Is NOT A Sin: What Christ Said And More

[Dark Angel Corry]

linaloki

ty_ping

linaloki

Isaac488

linaloki

Isaac488

I was looking around online and I found this

http://www.kansascity.com/440/story/1272761.html

"Homosexual Demon" being cast out of a 16 year old.
What I don't get is that I wasn't aware that demons even had a gender, let alone have a sexual orientation.

Clearly, you haven't read Jack Chick's works.

Is this for real or some satirical parody thing?

Jack Chick is 100% completely serious and an embarrassment to Christ.

Sometimes, sometimes I like to think that he is being satirical. Simply because I refuse to believe anyone is that big of an a**.

And the world just keeps trying to prove me wrong.

Ain't the world swell?

c'mon loki, aren't you in this world it's doing Fantastically, i think we're doing better than the last few generations /sarcasm

[linaloki]

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

So, all relationships God allows must involve pregnancy? What of the infertile?

Not necessarily, but that gives you the idea of the limitations put forth.

Either they do or they don't. If the limitations on marriage involve the ability to get pregnant, then that bans all infertile people from marriage. I suppose you have some Bible verses to back yourself up?

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

No where does the Bible mention computers, either. Absence does not disallowance make.

Yes, to some degree.

No, to any degree. God is a Just God, and therefore does not have "surprise sins".

Queen Kelley1

If the bible talks about man and female constantly and never seems to include Male/Male and Female/Female. Then that's not a thought to be thought of. Computer is another thing [If I do some research I may be able to say something about computer/tech.]. If I obsessively say black people with white people and don't ever include black people and asians, you'd began to wonder if it's an option or not. Later, I say a Black person was having sexual interaction with Asian and that is sinning. That gives you a clue that I will not accept such. Not only that, I won't let nether the black/Asian person get pregnant if they have intercourse because, I don't accept it. This leave to the logical answer; She doesn't want Blacks and Asians together, but Blacks and Whites.

If God says "X is a sin" then, yeah, it's a sin. If not... then nope.

You know, the Bible also constantly talks about non-interracial marriages. The only time it talks about interracial marriages is to say they're bad and to show how they led Solomon to ruin. Should we then also find interracial marriages sinful?

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

Further, there are many who posit there are several homosexual couples mentioned. Daniel and ________ (I forget), David and Jonathon, and the Roman Centurion who had the faith to heal his (possibly sexual) servant. And Christ talked of eunuchs that, in his day, very well could've referred to homosexuals.

But you've left anyway, so why should I bother attempting to educate someone who wishes to remain ignorant?

I don't understand.

Even though I am not here to receive it, this could be informative to someone in this thread.

Yes, it could. But I see ignorance in you. And, call me an idealist, but I don't like ignorance anywhere. Especially about my religion.

[Ninjatics]

I think that what someone wants to do is their choice.
We shouldn't inhibit their marriage just because of the bible. Mainly they want the rights to make decisions for their life partner if they are hurt or injured. Homosexuality is nothing to be ashamed about. Just don't attract the wrong attention to yourself. Because hate isn't right.

[II C U D D L E H II]

I agree with you.

[Yoru Kurosawa]

linaloki

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

So, all relationships God allows must involve pregnancy? What of the infertile?

Not necessarily, but that gives you the idea of the limitations put forth.

Either they do or they don't. If the limitations on marriage involve the ability to get pregnant, then that bans all infertile people from marriage. I suppose you have some Bible verses to back yourself up?

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

No where does the Bible mention computers, either. Absence does not disallowance make.

Yes, to some degree.

No, to any degree. God is a Just God, and therefore does not have "surprise sins".

Queen Kelley1

If the bible talks about man and female constantly and never seems to include Male/Male and Female/Female. Then that's not a thought to be thought of. Computer is another thing [If I do some research I may be able to say something about computer/tech.]. If I obsessively say black people with white people and don't ever include black people and asians, you'd began to wonder if it's an option or not. Later, I say a Black person was having sexual interaction with Asian and that is sinning. That gives you a clue that I will not accept such. Not only that, I won't let nether the black/Asian person get pregnant if they have intercourse because, I don't accept it. This leave to the logical answer; She doesn't want Blacks and Asians together, but Blacks and Whites.

If God says "X is a sin" then, yeah, it's a sin. If not... then nope.

You know, the Bible also constantly talks about non-interracial marriages. The only time it talks about interracial marriages is to say they're bad and to show how they led Solomon to ruin. Should we then also find interracial marriages sinful?

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

Further, there are many who posit there are several homosexual couples mentioned. Daniel and ________ (I forget), David and Jonathon, and the Roman Centurion who had the faith to heal his (possibly sexual) servant. And Christ talked of eunuchs that, in his day, very well could've referred to homosexuals.

But you've left anyway, so why should I bother attempting to educate someone who wishes to remain ignorant?

I don't understand.

Even though I am not here to receive it, this could be informative to someone in this thread.

Yes, it could. But I see ignorance in you. And, call me an idealist, but I don't like ignorance anywhere. Especially about my religion.

So kiss me softly... deadly...
I'll give you everything you ever wanted, baby...

Yeah, I think we've already been over the "surprise sin" thing already... No God jumping out of the closet and yelling, "SURPRISE SIN!"

Surprise Sinning! Best thing since Surprise Buttsecks! >.>

So kiss me softly, it could be deadly
And give me everything I've always wanted, baby...

[zebppir]

Yoru Kurosawa

linaloki

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

So, all relationships God allows must involve pregnancy? What of the infertile?

Not necessarily, but that gives you the idea of the limitations put forth.

Either they do or they don't. If the limitations on marriage involve the ability to get pregnant, then that bans all infertile people from marriage. I suppose you have some Bible verses to back yourself up?

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

No where does the Bible mention computers, either. Absence does not disallowance make.

Yes, to some degree.

No, to any degree. God is a Just God, and therefore does not have "surprise sins".

Queen Kelley1

If the bible talks about man and female constantly and never seems to include Male/Male and Female/Female. Then that's not a thought to be thought of. Computer is another thing [If I do some research I may be able to say something about computer/tech.]. If I obsessively say black people with white people and don't ever include black people and asians, you'd began to wonder if it's an option or not. Later, I say a Black person was having sexual interaction with Asian and that is sinning. That gives you a clue that I will not accept such. Not only that, I won't let nether the black/Asian person get pregnant if they have intercourse because, I don't accept it. This leave to the logical answer; She doesn't want Blacks and Asians together, but Blacks and Whites.

If God says "X is a sin" then, yeah, it's a sin. If not... then nope.

You know, the Bible also constantly talks about non-interracial marriages. The only time it talks about interracial marriages is to say they're bad and to show how they led Solomon to ruin. Should we then also find interracial marriages sinful?

Queen Kelley1

Quote:

Further, there are many who posit there are several homosexual couples mentioned. Daniel and ________ (I forget), David and Jonathon, and the Roman Centurion who had the faith to heal his (possibly sexual) servant. And Christ talked of eunuchs that, in his day, very well could've referred to homosexuals.

But you've left anyway, so why should I bother attempting to educate someone who wishes to remain ignorant?

I don't understand.

Even though I am not here to receive it, this could be informative to someone in this thread.

Yes, it could. But I see ignorance in you. And, call me an idealist, but I don't like ignorance anywhere. Especially about my religion.

So kiss me softly... deadly...
I'll give you everything you ever wanted, baby...

Yeah, I think we've already been over the "surprise sin" thing already... No God jumping out of the closet and yelling, "SURPRISE SIN!"

Surprise Sinning! Best thing since Surprise Buttsecks! >.>

So kiss me softly, it could be deadly
And give me everything I've always wanted, baby...

rofl you have a point congrats 3nodding

[Queen Kelley1]

Oh boy, homework; once again, I'm back to the usual.
Give me a few minuets or maybe days. BRB xp

[Yuki Goes Rawr]

Queen Kelley1

Oh boy, homework; once again, I'm back to the usual.
Give me a few minuets or maybe days. BRB xp

I think you mean minutes.

[linaloki]

Queen Kelley1

Oh boy, homework; once again, I'm back to the usual.
Give me a few minuets or maybe days. BRB xp

I hope this is a reference to your attempt to actually back up your claims with scripture?

[Queen Kelley1]

Marine Snow

Quote:

I haven't heard this even when Noah was preparing for the great flood. Kissing and making out... I don't think it is a big deal, just make sure you get married to the opposite sex. 3nodding

You do know that linaloki is NOT gay, right?

Yes, I run into post/threads about LGBT and it's all straight people that post them.

First Corinthians 6:9 states that homosexuals are unrighteous and will not inherit the kingdom of God. Since both homosexual desires and actions are condemned in the Bible, it is clear that homosexuals “marrying” is not God’s will, and would be, in fact, sinful.

[Queen Kelley1]

linaloki

Queen Kelley1

Oh boy, homework; once again, I'm back to the usual.
Give me a few minuets or maybe days. BRB xp

I hope this is a reference to your attempt to actually back up your claims with scripture?

This will be a hard; the bible is vague and doesn't have much detail.
Example: God created heaven and earth. No details there.


After this text, I'm just going to copy and paste.

[Queen Kelley1]

Quote:

While the Bible does address homosexuality, it does not explicitly mention gay marriage/same-sex marriage. It is clear, however, that the Bible condemns homosexuality as an immoral and unnatural sin. Leviticus 18:22 identifies homosexual sex as an abomination, a detestable sin. Romans 1:26-27 declares homosexual desires and actions to be shameful, unnatural, lustful, and indecent. First Corinthians 6:9 states that homosexuals are unrighteous and will not inherit the kingdom of God. Since both homosexual desires and actions are condemned in the Bible, it is clear that homosexuals “marrying” is not God’s will, and would be, in fact, sinful.

Whenever the Bible mentions marriage, it is between a male and a female. The first mention of marriage, Genesis 2:24, describes it as a man leaving his parents and being united to his wife. In passages that contain instructions regarding marriage, such as 1 Corinthians 7:2-16 and Ephesians 5:23-33, the Bible clearly identifies marriage as being between a man and a woman. Biblically speaking, marriage is the lifetime union of a man and a woman, primarily for the purpose of building a family and providing a stable environment for that family.

The Bible alone, however, does not have to be used to demonstrate this understanding of marriage. The biblical viewpoint of marriage has been the universal understanding of marriage in every human civilization in world history. History argues against gay marriage. Modern secular psychology recognizes that men and women are psychologically and emotionally designed to complement one another. In regard to the family, psychologists contend that a union between a man and woman in which both spouses serve as good gender role models is the best environment in which to raise well-adjusted children. Psychology argues against gay marriage. In nature/physicality, clearly, men and women were designed to “fit” together sexually. With the “natural” purpose of sexual intercourse being procreation, clearly only a sexual relationship between a man and a woman can fulfill this purpose. Nature argues against gay marriage.

[Anakha the Silver]

Queen Kelley1

Marine Snow

Quote:

I haven't heard this even when Noah was preparing for the great flood. Kissing and making out... I don't think it is a big deal, just make sure you get married to the opposite sex. 3nodding

You do know that linaloki is NOT gay, right?

Yes, I run into post/threads about LGBT and it's all straight people that post them.

First Corinthians 6:9 states that homosexuals are unrighteous and will not inherit the kingdom of God. Since both homosexual desires and actions are condemned in the Bible, it is clear that homosexuals “marrying” is not God’s will, and would be, in fact, sinful.

Someone didn't read the OP. Here, I'll give you that section:

linaloki

1 Corinthians 6:9-10, NIV

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

The next verse isn't commonly translated as homosexual, so we will temporarily depart from our use of the NIV.

1 Timothy 1:10, NASB

and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,

Now. That's what they say in English. Homosexuals, homosexual offenders, effeminate, or sodomites. Let's look at them in Greek.

Homosexual, in Greek, is now: ομοφυλοφιλικός, or omophulophilikos as best as my translating abilities carry me. Now, we'll play spot the word.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Greek

ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι θεοῦ βασιλείαν οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν; μὴ πλανᾶσθε: οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται οὔτε κλέπται οὔτε πλεονέκται, οὐ μέθυσοι, οὐ λοίδοροι, οὐχ ἅρπαγες βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν.

That section that I've bolded is where the words translated to homosexual and company are. Let's look at them closely.

μαλακοὶ, or malakoi, and ἀρσενοκοῖται, or arsenokoitai. Do those look like ομοφυλοφιλικός, or omophulophilikos? On to Timothy.

1 Timothy 1:10, Greek

πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, ἀνδραποδισταῖς, ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται,

See ομοφυλοφιλικός? Doubtful. ἀρσενοκοίταις is what shows up. It says arsenokoitais, which I'm told is the same as arsenokoitai. Still isn't omophulophilikos.

To continue with this, I will quote a man who has done much more research on the subject than I could at my age.

Reverend Mel White from www.soulforce.org

Now what do the writings of Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 say, first, about God, and then about homosexuality? These are the last two places in the Bible that seem to refer to same-sex behavior. We can combine them because they are so similar.

Paul is exasperated. The Christians in Ephesus and Corinth are fighting among themselves. (Sound familiar?) In Corinth they're even suing one another in secular courts. Paul shouts across the distance, "You are breaking God's heart by the way you are treating one another."

Like any good writer, Paul anticipates their first question: "Well, how are we supposed to treat one another?" Paul answers, "You know very well how to treat one another from the Jewish law written on tablets of stone."

The Jewish law was created by God to help regulate human behavior. To remind the churches in Corinth and Ephesus how God wants us to treat one another, Paul recites examples from the Jewish law first. Don't kill one another. Don't sleep with a person who is married to someone else. Don't lie or cheat or steal. The list goes on to include admonitions against fornication, idolatry, whoremongering, perjury, drunkenness, revelry, and extortion. He also includes "malokois" and "arsenokoitai."

Here's where the confusion begins. What's a malokois? What's an arsenokoitai? Actually, those two Greek words have confused scholars to this very day. We'll say more about them later, when we ask what the texts say about sex. But first let's see what the texts say about God.

After quoting from the Jewish law, Paul reminds the Christians in Corinth that they are under a new law: the law of Jesus, a law of love that requires us to do more than just avoid murder, adultery, lying, cheating, and stealing. Paul tells them what God wants is not strict adherence to a list of laws, but a pure heart, a good conscience, and a faith that isn't phony.

That's the lesson we all need to learn from these texts. God doesn't want us squabbling over who is "in" and who is "out." God wants us to love one another. It's God's task to judge us. It is NOT our task to judge one another.

So what do these two texts say about homosexuality? Are gays and lesbians on that list of sinners in the Jewish law that Paul quotes to make an entirely different point?

Greek scholars say that in first century the Greek word malaokois probably meant "effeminate call boys." The New Revised Standard Version says "male prostitutes."

As for arsenokoitai, Greek scholars don't know exactly what it means -- and the fact that we don't know is a big part of this tragic debate. Some scholars believe Paul was coining a name to refer to the customers of "the effeminate call boys." We might call them "dirty old men." Others translate the word as "sodomites," but never explain what that means.

In 1958, for the first time in history, a person translating that mysterious Greek word into English decided it meant homosexuals, even though there is, in fact, no such word in Greek or Hebrew. But that translator made the decision for all of us that placed the word homosexual in the English-language Bible for the very first time.

[Queen Kelley1]

Yuki The Uke

Queen Kelley1

Oh boy, homework; once again, I'm back to the usual.
Give me a few minuets or maybe days. BRB xp

I think you mean minutes.

I have bad habits. sweatdrop
If I'm not corrected, then it's really hard to change over time. It's the same for similar-- I always spell it "simular".

[Anakha the Silver]

Queen Kelley1

linaloki

Queen Kelley1

Oh boy, homework; once again, I'm back to the usual.
Give me a few minuets or maybe days. BRB xp

I hope this is a reference to your attempt to actually back up your claims with scripture?

This will be a hard; the bible is vague and doesn't have much detail.
Example: God created heaven and earth. No details there.


After this text, I'm just going to copy and paste.

Go back and read the OP. You've demonstrated you haven't by using Corinthians. THEN, we'll debate.