Sonya_Min
**sigh** Romans Chaptah 1 starting at verse 26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In 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.
28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Since you choose to ignore opposing standpoints on verses, I will give you the basic rundown of an argument against your position on these verses. If you want to get into detail on it, or ask your boyfriend, feel free. I'm game.
If you managed to make me crack open my BDAG for this argument, you'd be the first in about a year, just so that you know. Based on your postings, however, I'm not betting your at a point where you can discuss this seriously, rather than simply take the interpretation you are handed by rote and treat it as canon law.
Ananel
Romans 1:18-32 is the key to the argument. However, there are a series of problems with the classic interpretation of the passage.
One, we rarely take verses 26-27 in context with the rest of the passage. The lusts spoken of are the result of godlessness and the refusal of the gospel of God. The godless ones are described as being given over to their passions. This loss of control is key and important to the Greeks and Romans Paul is writing to, and was considered a very bad thing. It is important to realize that the passage is not centered on homosexual relations, no matter how you interpret it.
Two, the relationships are referred to as being unnatural. The term pushin is the Greek word for natural and refers, in general, to that which is according either to socially accepted morals or to one’s innate nature. The society Paul is writing to, both Roman and Greek, considered homosexual relationships to be quite natural. What would have been considered unnatural to the Romans would specifically have been something where a citizen was ‘on bottom.’ Such a position degrades the citizen’s status and was considered to be a horrible thing.
Three, the shameful lusts that are spoken of are not specifically described. Unlike Leviticus, where they are listed, the passage assumes that its audience knows what is being spoken of. While Paul is a born and trained Jew, familiar with the ceremonial law, he is preaching to newly converted Christians in Rome and Greece. These people, though somewhat familiar with Jewish beliefs, could not have been considered familiar enough to assume that “shameful lusts” meant what is said in Leviticus. Paul is not a man to leave explanations unclear. When necessary, he goes into great detail and repetition to make his point absolutely clear and understood. Therefore, by context it seems he is speaking to the Roman’s understanding of shameful, the subjugation of a citizen for example. Further, pathos (lusts) does not necessitate a sexual connotation.
Four, the fact that we have women doing things with women instead of men and that we have men doing things with men instead of women is clear from what Paul says in verses 26-27. However, Paul does not at any point say what is being done. He lacks the clarity of Leviticus. Any number of things could be occurring, and without a clear indication that the text is specifically speaking of homosexual sex acts on any level we are familiar with today we cannot claim that Romans 1 clearly declares that the ceremonial law still applies in this case.
Sonya_Min
the ONLY reason God ever turned from His People was because of their sin. And if their is no seperation of sin and man, how do you define action as part of someone? God hates sin! (Hence why God kept destroying His people.) But He spared us, those who prayed for forgivness. He knew that our actions were sickness and wanted to save us through GRACE! (Now we're getting somewhere.) 23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23
I am not one who says homosexuals are sinless. I say that homosexual sex in and of itself is not sinful.
Sonya_Min
Now since we are talking about grace, (BTW this is how I love others and how God loves others.) The law condemns us. The apostle Paul speaks as the law as a curse instead of a covenent. And that only by GRACE we are saved. God sees our sin, and loves us still. As one person said, i was only showing my hatred for homosexuals, when it was quite the opposite. First, You don't know my heart or even how i feel about it. I was even once homosexual. But as the scripture above proves that it's not what God wanted for my life, and am quite in love with my boyfriend who is studing to be a senior pastor. I am simply stating that yes, God doesn't like it. Because God is a god of order. 1 Corinthians 14:33. But he still loves you, because he sees past your sin. "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us." Romans 5:7-9
"God is a God of Order" does not equal "X Levitical Law stands." They are different statements. I do not, personally view you or your boyfriend to hate homosexuals. I view you to be subjects to a poor, highly assumptive interpretive system that was developed by Chrysostom, incorporated within Augustine's moralist writings and perpetuated in the mainstream Medieval Church in relation to almost all things sexual in nature. You are symptoms of a greater ill of pharisaical hypocrisy that mires the church in poor understanding of the will of God. I doubt that it will cost you your souls by any stretch, but it has done great damage to many Christians I have known over the years, some of whom were homosexual or bisexual, but others of whom were not and simply saw the hypocrisy for what it was.
Even a hipshot read of Romans 1:26-27 made me say "so ... what did they do?" The greek only made the matter clearer to me that the passage was not clear on who or what these people did. Only if you walk in with the assumption that this is an anit-f*****t passage is it easy to see this as 'obviously a condemnation of gays.' A half-way objective read of the passage sees no such clarity.
As to your sexuality: I am sorry that you felt a need to change who you had become in this regard. I find conscious shifting of sexual preferences on that scale can sometimes be unhealthy, psychologically speaking, and such self-mutilation isn't something that I feel God asks us to do.
Sonya_Min
But I don't think it is right to be angry at me because I think it's wrong for me to live that life. I'm not trying to tell anyone how to live. Just what God has to say about it. You asked, I'm telling you. and I do not think of myself as equal to Christ. For I am even lower than the angels, in which through Christ sets me above, Mark 16:15-18. Also please observe Psalm 8:4-6 and Hebrews 2:5-7 (I have to go so i'll finish this later)
*coughs* No, my dear. You are trying to tell people how to live. Fess up to it. I'm trying to teach you how to behave as a Christian, and you're doing the same. We are attempting, both of us, to teach the other 'how God wishes us to live,' but ultimately we are trying to convince each other to change our paths on some level. I don't expect you or your boyfriend to do so, but I would be frank in my wish that you would at least be this intellectually honest.
Oh, and your boyfriend training to be a senior pastor doesn't precisely send shivers down my spine, btw. There's healthy odds that when he finishes, his skills and mine will be roughly comparable in terms of the greek and the hebrew, even if I'm a mite rusty.
![Rookherst[KOS]'s avatar](http://a2.cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/1c/32/2b1f6af436321c_flip.png?t=1193918574_6.00_11)
