Homosexuality Is NOT A Sin: What Christ Said And More

[Awaiting His Return]

Yoru Kurosawa

Anakha the Silver

Yoru Kurosawa

Awaiting His Return

Topic 4, New Testament: Condemning Gays?

Some will say that homosexuality falls under the category of sexual immorality, as mentioned in Acts 15:29. But commonly mistranslated for homosexuality is a section in Romans:

Romans 1:24-27, NIV

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

Umm... You kinda skipped over the parts of the verses that says homosexuality is a sin. Let me put them in color for you.

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context. It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument. Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him. Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I believe so.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

I don't know the full details of that one, but I believe the story is that Jesus healed the Centurion's male lover because the Centurion was faithful? I don't know about the last part, but I do know that the first part is correct.

Emphasis is mine because some people might miss it.

Also, I absolutely hate it when I think of the snappy responses AFTER I've posted the original post *glowers at my previous post*

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I'm familiar with the story of the faithful Centurion, but I don't see anywhere where the healed man was his lover.

In Luke 7:1-10 is where the account is. In the King James version, it says that the servant was "dear unto him", but it doesn't say they were lovers. Even in the New International version, it says the servant was "valued highly" by the master.

[Yuki Goes Rawr]

Awaiting His Return

Yoru Kurosawa

Anakha the Silver

Yoru Kurosawa

Awaiting His Return

Topic 4, New Testament: Condemning Gays?

Some will say that homosexuality falls under the category of sexual immorality, as mentioned in Acts 15:29. But commonly mistranslated for homosexuality is a section in Romans:

Romans 1:24-27, NIV

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

Umm... You kinda skipped over the parts of the verses that says homosexuality is a sin. Let me put them in color for you.

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context. It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument. Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him. Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I believe so.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

I don't know the full details of that one, but I believe the story is that Jesus healed the Centurion's male lover because the Centurion was faithful? I don't know about the last part, but I do know that the first part is correct.

Emphasis is mine because some people might miss it.

Also, I absolutely hate it when I think of the snappy responses AFTER I've posted the original post *glowers at my previous post*

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I'm familiar with the story of the faithful Centurion, but I don't see anywhere where the healed man was his lover.

In Luke 7:1-10 is where the account is. In the King James version, it says that the servant was "dear unto him", but it doesn't say they were lovers. Even in the New International version, it says the servant was "valued highly" by the master.

Do you know greek?
Speaking of greek, here's a fat man in a toga, appreciating music:

[Awaiting His Return]

Yuki The Uke

Awaiting His Return

Yoru Kurosawa

Anakha the Silver

Yoru Kurosawa

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I believe so.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

I don't know the full details of that one, but I believe the story is that Jesus healed the Centurion's male lover because the Centurion was faithful? I don't know about the last part, but I do know that the first part is correct.

Emphasis is mine because some people might miss it.

Also, I absolutely hate it when I think of the snappy responses AFTER I've posted the original post *glowers at my previous post*

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I'm familiar with the story of the faithful Centurion, but I don't see anywhere where the healed man was his lover.

In Luke 7:1-10 is where the account is. In the King James version, it says that the servant was "dear unto him", but it doesn't say they were lovers. Even in the New International version, it says the servant was "valued highly" by the master.

Do you know greek?
Speaking of greek, here's a fat man in a toga, appreciating music:

No, I must admit I don't. But even Young's Literal Translation says the servent was "much valued by him". There's still no proof that they were gay.

**EDIT: "The Bible text designated YLT is from the 1898 Young's Literal Translation by Robert Young who also compiled Young's Analytical Concordance. This is an extremely literal translation that attempts to preserve the tense and word usage as found in the original Greek and Hebrew writings." Source - http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Youngs-Literal-Translation-YLT-Bible/

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

ty_ping

*Offers Elf money to take a fall*

Ooh, shiny.
Hey look, a bear just came out of hibernation!

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

Awaiting His Return

Yoru Kurosawa

Awaiting His Return

Topic 4, New Testament: Condemning Gays?

Some will say that homosexuality falls under the category of sexual immorality, as mentioned in Acts 15:29. But commonly mistranslated for homosexuality is a section in Romans:

Romans 1:24-27, NIV

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

Umm... You kinda skipped over the parts of the verses that says homosexuality is a sin. Let me put them in color for you.

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context. It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument. Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him. Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

FURTHER EDIT: Back to the argument... Last I checked, God supports love. He never said what kind of love, which means it's an all-encompassing definition. Boy love, girl love, straight love, gay love, he doesn't care. Love is love is love. The other problem I have with your "argument" is that last I checked some people had sex to show their love to their partner. If you're saying that sex =/= love, then what the hell are straight people who love each other doing when they have sex?

Wait, let me guess... succumbing to lust! That's a sin no matter how you put it, doesn't matter who's doing it.

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

Look, I'm not trying to be hateful, and I know my answer seemed like it, but it did anger me (more than a little) about what I read. I should have been more careful with my words, and I'm sorry.

But I don't agree. God created sex for married people to enjoy, but He never spoke positively of gay sex in the Bible. If you can find otherwise, I'll be happy to read it.

He shouldn't have to.

Frankly, I don't have the time tonight to examine the Greek pertaining to the Centurion. As I generally prefer to stop short of but-it-speaks approvingly-of-homosexuality anyway, I'm just going to have to go ahead and let Ty fill you in on that manly chunk of the bible.

And yes, it is manly.
It is a very manly passage.
Moving on!

That's not how revealed religions work. If there is a revealed law against certain things, it stands to reason that the law is specific in its indictment and approach. And the law says nothing against gay sex in the way that it says nothing against heterosexual sex.

Since we're on the topic of known and revealed matters, could you support your claim that God created sex for married people to enjoy?

Awaiting His Return

Also, sex isn't love. Yes, married people have sex with each other as a way of expressing their love, but sex in itself isn't love. You can go out and have sex with some random person you just met, and it doesn't mean you love them. Sex between married people isn't a sin either.

Why would sex between unmarried people be a sin, especially in today's society?

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

Awaiting His Return

Yuki The Uke

Awaiting His Return

Yoru Kurosawa

Anakha the Silver

Yoru Kurosawa

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I believe so.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

I don't know the full details of that one, but I believe the story is that Jesus healed the Centurion's male lover because the Centurion was faithful? I don't know about the last part, but I do know that the first part is correct.

Emphasis is mine because some people might miss it.

Also, I absolutely hate it when I think of the snappy responses AFTER I've posted the original post *glowers at my previous post*

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I'm familiar with the story of the faithful Centurion, but I don't see anywhere where the healed man was his lover.

In Luke 7:1-10 is where the account is. In the King James version, it says that the servant was "dear unto him", but it doesn't say they were lovers. Even in the New International version, it says the servant was "valued highly" by the master.

Do you know greek?
Speaking of greek, here's a fat man in a toga, appreciating music:

No, I must admit I don't. But even Young's Literal Translation says the servent was "much valued by him". There's still no proof that they were gay.

**EDIT: "The Bible text designated YLT is from the 1898 Young's Literal Translation by Robert Young who also compiled Young's Analytical Concordance. This is an extremely literal translation that attempts to preserve the tense and word usage as found in the original Greek and Hebrew writings." Source - http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Youngs-Literal-Translation-YLT-Bible/

Smells like an appeal to authority to me.
Neither of these translations definitively address anything. Why should I take their words over the text itself?

[ty_ping]

Awaiting His Return

Topic 4, New Testament: Condemning Gays?

Some will say that homosexuality falls under the category of sexual immorality, as mentioned in Acts 15:29. But commonly mistranslated for homosexuality is a section in Romans:

Romans 1:24-27, NIV

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

Umm... You kinda skipped over the parts of the verses that says homosexuality is a sin. Let me put them in color for you. Indecent acts is not codeword for "TEH GHEY!" Unless you think "Man Sex" is the only indecent act in the world.
So public sex, Underage sex, Forced Sex and Guro are all perfectly okay, so long as no penises are going into male bums.
Also, you're ignoring context.

Quote:

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context.

Only gives like 2 accounts of a man Lying with or Knowing a woman in a good account. Doesn't make heterosexuality wrong does it.
(I'd argue it does but that's just me)

Quote:

It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

Aaaaaaccctually...
Daniel 1
God Brings Daniel to Ashpenaz who was known as "Prince of the Eunuchs"


"Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs."

Vayiten ha-Elohim et-Daniyel chesed V'rachamim lifnei sar hasarisim
וַיִּתֵּ֤ן הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־דָּ֣נִיֵּ֔אל לְחֶ֖סֶד וּֽלְרַחֲמִ֑ים לִפְנֵ֖י שַׂ֥ר הַסָּרִיסִֽים׃

רַחֲמִיםV'rachamim: Meaning Love or tender love or physical love

There is the question then of “What is a eunuch?”

The Greek word used is eunouchos, which means literally “guardian or keeper of the couch. one who is unable to marry or refuses to marry."
The Hebrew cariyc which refers to "eunuch" or certain types of officers.

The term refers to those who were often placed in positions of highest trust in royal palaces and wealthy households.
Given their intimate access to the women of the household, they had to be men who could be trusted not to have affairs with (or force themselves upon) the women — because to do so would cloud the line of succession to the throne and confuse inheritance rights. Someone who is a prince (Given this is a faulty translation as this person was just referred to as a high ranking official but this could also mean prince or someone close enough to the king to influence him*coughmalelovercough*) would not be castrated, but it is within full possibility that he was Gay or disinterested in women completely.

Quote:

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument.

So you don't love anyone you have sex with only your family? Well aren't you a lust filled hypocrite.

Quote:

Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him.

well... One could argue, but I tend to make the regs kinda ill when I argue for that one...

Quote:

Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

I understand. You're saying that all romantic love is lust and a Man and Woman don't actually feel love for one another it's just lust so when Men and Women come together it is just as sinful as when Homosexuals come together because the Love God commanded us to feel was Agape which is a pure brotherly love. All sex, heterosexual and homosexual alike is sinful in nature as it is not Agape.

Oh I agree with you there. But that makes Heterosexuals bad too and people tend to get all huffy when I tell them that their marriage is a sinful thing and their children simply proof of their shameful lusts.

[linaloki]

Awaiting His Return

linaloki

Topic 4, New Testament: Condemning Gays?

Some will say that homosexuality falls under the category of sexual immorality, as mentioned in Acts 15:29. But commonly mistranslated for homosexuality is a section in Romans:

Romans 1:24-27, NIV

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

Umm... You kinda skipped over the parts of the verses that says homosexuality is a sin. Let me put them in color for you.

Please ruminate on what makes an "indecent act". If the ONLY indecent act you can come up with that two or more men would be involved in is homosexual sex, then your imagination and knowledge of Bacchic rituals are very lacking.

Awaiting His Return

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context. It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

So what? It doesn't really speak of heterosexual relationships in a "good context". Most often, it's simply neutral or negative. So what matters about the absence of a homosexual relationship? Though David and Jonathon might give a run for the money.

Awaiting His Return

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument. Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him. Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

Except that's not exactly the crux of my argument... Besides, homosexuality is NOT sex. You can be a homosexual and a virgin. And please explain how romantic love is mutually excluded from agape love? If my romantic love leads me toward agape love for that person, then how can you say with certainty that the romantic love was not granted by God?

YOUR argument kinda lacks the ability to hold up, since it's dependent on 3 things...

1) Homosexuality is the same thing as homosexual sex; they are inseparable.
2) Homosexual sex is the only indecent act one man can perform in tandem with another.
3) The absence of positive recognition of an act, in this case homosexual sex, means the act is assumed as a non-condoned act.

All three are theologically and factually flawed premises.

[ty_ping]

Yoru Kurosawa

Anakha the Silver

Yoru Kurosawa

Awaiting His Return

Topic 4, New Testament: Condemning Gays?

Some will say that homosexuality falls under the category of sexual immorality, as mentioned in Acts 15:29. But commonly mistranslated for homosexuality is a section in Romans:

Romans 1:24-27, NIV

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

Umm... You kinda skipped over the parts of the verses that says homosexuality is a sin. Let me put them in color for you.

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context. It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument. Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him. Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I believe so.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

I don't know the full details of that one, but I believe the story is that Jesus healed the Centurion's male lover because the Centurion was faithful? I don't know about the last part, but I do know that the first part is correct.

Emphasis is mine because some people might miss it.

Also, I absolutely hate it when I think of the snappy responses AFTER I've posted the original post *glowers at my previous post*

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

You guys are thinking of Matthew 8:5-13, Luke 7:1-10

To summarize, we are told that a solider or "centurion" (Roman official) came to Jesus to ask him to heal his "servant", Jesus said he would come to the guys house but the centurion said there was no need for Jesus to do so, he believed that if Jesus simply spoke the word, his servant would be healed. Marveling at the man’s faith, Jesus pronounced the servant healed (and we assume he was)

Now the word here of note is παῖς or Pais which can mean Child (Son, daughter, maid or young man) or a young slave/servant of some esteem, it is a term of endearment as it has been used in referance to Jesus.
In non-biblical terms it is used to refer to the type of young, often teenage, lover of the master of the house, a boy who is given a trusted and endeared place in his owners bed.

***(Now to keep cultural context, mind that the position of a wife was not much higher than that of a slave, she was property. And that people were considered adult at the age of 12 to 15. If you wanted a male "Wife" in that time you would gain one the same way anyone got a wife, and that was by buying one. These male spouses were called "Pais")***

Now one may argue that the term slave or servant has been mistranslated and should be "Son" instead, however in Luke they specifically call the servant a δοῦλος Dulos or specifically "Slave/manservant" so we know this person is not his son. Luke furthermore calls the servant ἔντιμος entimos which means basically "beloved". Luke further still calls the servant a Pias as well which leaves little to no doubt that this servant is beloved to the centurion.

***(Please not cultural context. This is a ROMAN centurion trying to get the societal equivilant of PROPERTY healed. Would you go to a Satanist and ask him to heal your I-pod? Would you go to a homeless man and beg on your hands and knees for him to heal your dog? This was a man who was in the top rings of society, who was going to someone in the bottom rings of society to beg him to save what his peers would have seen as property.)***

Even FURTHER the centurion refers to other slaves that he owns, he calls them Dulos but only speaks of the sick slave as his Pias, making an even greater distinction that THIS slave is special to him. (Awwww)

We also have to consider who the centurion is. In the Bible we have a lot of people asking for healing for themselves or their family. People willing to trust and believe in Jesus either for self gain or as a last chance hope for a loved one. This is the only case of someone seeking help for a slave, and the only case of a Roman seeking help at all.

This was *not* a Jewish man, this was a man who did *not* believe in the God of Jesus but in desperation to save someone he loved came to a holy man with such trust, such hope, such faith that he didn't even need Jesus to come to his house, he believe Jesus could heal his beloved by word alone.

Not only was this faithful Homosexual given his wish, he was exemplified by Jesus who said he has not seen faith like this Roman anywhere from any Jew in Israel.

[Yuki Goes Rawr]

Awaiting His Return

Yuki The Uke

Awaiting His Return

Yoru Kurosawa

Anakha the Silver

Yoru Kurosawa

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I believe so.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

I don't know the full details of that one, but I believe the story is that Jesus healed the Centurion's male lover because the Centurion was faithful? I don't know about the last part, but I do know that the first part is correct.

Emphasis is mine because some people might miss it.

Also, I absolutely hate it when I think of the snappy responses AFTER I've posted the original post *glowers at my previous post*

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

I'm familiar with the story of the faithful Centurion, but I don't see anywhere where the healed man was his lover.

In Luke 7:1-10 is where the account is. In the King James version, it says that the servant was "dear unto him", but it doesn't say they were lovers. Even in the New International version, it says the servant was "valued highly" by the master.

Do you know greek?
Speaking of greek, here's a fat man in a toga, appreciating music:

No, I must admit I don't. But even Young's Literal Translation says the servent was "much valued by him". There's still no proof that they were gay.

**EDIT: "The Bible text designated YLT is from the 1898 Young's Literal Translation by Robert Young who also compiled Young's Analytical Concordance. This is an extremely literal translation that attempts to preserve the tense and word usage as found in the original Greek and Hebrew writings." Source - http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Youngs-Literal-Translation-YLT-Bible/

In the origional text the word used to describe the servant is also the same word used at the time to describe a homosexual lover/servant all in one.

[ty_ping]

Awaiting His Return

Yoru Kurosawa

Awaiting His Return

Topic 4, New Testament: Condemning Gays?

Some will say that homosexuality falls under the category of sexual immorality, as mentioned in Acts 15:29. But commonly mistranslated for homosexuality is a section in Romans:

Romans 1:24-27, NIV

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

Umm... You kinda skipped over the parts of the verses that says homosexuality is a sin. Let me put them in color for you.

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context. It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument. Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him. Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

Despair turns into pain; anger turns into hate

Did you not take an English class? What do the words "Therefore" and "Because" mean?

EDIT: @Anakha Are you talking about the Centurion and his lover?

FURTHER EDIT: Back to the argument... Last I checked, God supports love. He never said what kind of love, which means it's an all-encompassing definition. Boy love, girl love, straight love, gay love, he doesn't care. Love is love is love. The other problem I have with your "argument" is that last I checked some people had sex to show their love to their partner. If you're saying that sex =/= love, then what the hell are straight people who love each other doing when they have sex?

Wait, let me guess... succumbing to lust! That's a sin no matter how you put it, doesn't matter who's doing it.

Revenge calls my name--spellbound by my rage

Look, I'm not trying to be hateful, and I know my answer seemed like it, but it did anger me (more than a little) about what I read. I should have been more careful with my words, and I'm sorry.

But I don't agree. God created sex for married people to enjoy,

Actually, God never created sex at all, never really intended us to do anything but masterbate. We figured out the sec thing all by ourselves and God has never really been that happy about it.

Quote:

But He never spoke positively of gay sex in the Bible. If you can find otherwise, I'll be happy to read it.

Daniel 1, Matthew 8, Luke 7 and Acts 8

Others argue Ruth 1 and 2 Samuel 1 but I think those one's are pushing it just a tad.

Quote:

Also, sex isn't love. Yes, married people have sex with each other as a way of expressing their love, but sex in itself isn't love. You can go out and have sex with some random person you just met, and it doesn't mean you love them. Sex between married people isn't a sin either.

So if Gays get married and have sex with the person they love it's not a sin.

Pardon the "Well Duh"

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

ty_ping

Quote:

Your argument is... strange. Even if Adam and Eve weren't the first or only people, the Bible never gives account of a man "lying with" or "knowing" another man in a good context.

Only gives like 2 accounts of a man Lying with or Knowing a woman in a good account. Doesn't make heterosexuality wrong does it.
(I'd argue it does but that's just me)

Well, heterosexuality is unsupported. because like homosexuality, it doesn't even exist as a concept in the texts
Therefore it must be wrong.
QED
[/context rape]

ty_ping

Quote:

It never gives account of God leading a man to another man.

Aaaaaaccctually...
Daniel 1
God Brings Daniel to Ashpenaz who was known as "Prince of the Eunuchs"


"Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs."

Vayiten ha-Elohim et-Daniyel chesed V'rachamim lifnei sar hasarisim
וַיִּתֵּ֤ן הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־דָּ֣נִיֵּ֔אל לְחֶ֖סֶד וּֽלְרַחֲמִ֑ים לִפְנֵ֖י שַׂ֥ר הַסָּרִיסִֽים׃

רַחֲמִיםV'rachamim: Meaning Love or tender love or physical love

There is the question then of “What is a eunuch?”

The Greek word used is eunouchos, which means literally “guardian or keeper of the couch. one who is unable to marry or refuses to marry."
The Hebrew cariyc which refers to "eunuch" or certain types of officers.

The term refers to those who were often placed in positions of highest trust in royal palaces and wealthy households.
Given their intimate access to the women of the household, they had to be men who could be trusted not to have affairs with (or force themselves upon) the women — because to do so would cloud the line of succession to the throne and confuse inheritance rights. Someone who is a prince (Given this is a faulty translation as this person was just referred to as a high ranking official but this could also mean prince or someone close enough to the king to influence him*coughmalelovercough*) would not be castrated, but it is within full possibility that he was Gay or disinterested in women completely.

Suddenly, I feel a profound sense of entertainment toward Romans 1 arguments.

One day...
"Hey Paul, how's it going?"
"Man, these arsenokoites are such a drag, they're not going to inherit s**t"
"You mean like eunochos?"

*Paul beats man to death with heavy Torah scroll*

ty_ping

Quote:

Also, your argument about God supporting all love is just completely misused. Yes, God supports love. Sex... it isn't love. I love my brother, but... I mean, ya know? That's a silly argument.

So you don't love anyone you have sex with only your family? Well aren't you a lust filled hypocrite.

Quote:

Love doesn't mean romantic love. We are commanded to love God, that doesn't mean we're to have physical relationships with Him.

well... One could argue, but I tend to make the regs kinda ill when I argue for that one...

Quote:

Do you understand what I'm saying? Your argument doesn't hold up.

I understand. You're saying that all romantic love is lust and a Man and Woman don't actually feel love for one another it's just lust so when Men and Women come together it is just as sinful as when Homosexuals come together because the Love God commanded us to feel was Agape which is a pure brotherly love. All sex, heterosexual and homosexual alike is sinful in nature as it is not Agape.

Oh I agree with you there. But that makes Heterosexuals bad too and people tend to get all huffy when I tell them that their marriage is a sinful thing and their children simply proof of their shameful lusts.

Was there a non-Roman Catholic commandment against non-Agape love?
*ducks*

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

ty_ping

Awaiting His Return

But I don't agree. God created sex for married people to enjoy,

Actually, God never created sex at all, never really intended us to do anything but masterbate. We figured out the sec thing all by ourselves and God has never really been that happy about it.

Poke poke. Wasn't God pretty much just pissed off about the points at which people didn't exactly figure that out so well? I mean, he pretty well had to reach down and slap the Israelites and tell them they were doing it wrong an more than one occasion.

I mean, I'd be pissed too if I had to tell my idiot b*****d pseudo-children that animals were not for sex.

[SuRprIsE mE AgaIN]

God created adam and eve...not adam and steve xp

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

SuRprIsE mE AgaIN

God created adam and eve...not adam and steve xp

Get out.