I Have A Question...

[dirtdevilgrunt13]

Y i J u

Leviticus 20:13

"The penalty for homosexual acts is death to both parties. They have committed a detestable act and are guilty of a capital offense."

Deny that.



God loves you way to much for homosexuality to be acceptable.

WHO ARE YOU TO DECIDE WHO LIVES AND DIES?! THERE QUOTES! GOD LOVES HER! THAT's HIS CHILD!  

[Y i J u]

dirtdevilgrunt13

Y i J u

Leviticus 20:13

"The penalty for homosexual acts is death to both parties. They have committed a detestable act and are guilty of a capital offense."

Deny that.



God loves you way to much for homosexuality to be acceptable.

WHO ARE YOU TO DECIDE WHO LIVES AND DIES?! THERE QUOTES! GOD LOVES HER! THAT's HIS CHILD!

I obviously did not write Leviticus, apparently it was wrote by Moses. Correct me if I'm wrong. Moses was a disciple of God, was he not?

And what do you mean "There quotes".
Of course God loves all his children.
But yes, the BIBLE says this. STRAIGHT OUT.
Homosexuality IS a SIN.
GOD SAID IT.  

[stopthebanningplease]

Y i J u

dirtdevilgrunt13

Y i J u

Leviticus 20:13

"The penalty for homosexual acts is death to both parties. They have committed a detestable act and are guilty of a capital offense."

Deny that.



God loves you way to much for homosexuality to be acceptable.

WHO ARE YOU TO DECIDE WHO LIVES AND DIES?! THERE QUOTES! GOD LOVES HER! THAT's HIS CHILD!

I obviously did not write Leviticus, apparently it was wrote by Moses. Correct me if I'm wrong. Moses was a disciple of God, was he not?

And what do you mean "There quotes".
Of course God loves all his children.
But yes, the BIBLE says this. STRAIGHT OUT.
Homosexuality IS a SIN.
GOD SAID IT.

What language was Leviticus written in, originally? I'll give you a hint- not English.

Since this passage is not originally in English, we need to address translational difficulties and errors. Here is the verse again:

[20:13] "If a man [ish] lies with a male [zakhar] as with a woman [ishshah], both of them have committed an abomination [to'ebhah]; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them." (NRSV)

Let's look at these words.

Ish and ishshah - Male/female, man/woman, etc. Nothing special here, it's just the basic man and woman. It can imply "husband, procreator, and father" and "wife, sexual partner, mother, concubine, or prostitute."

Zakhar - This one is tricky. Zakhar (#2145, "male") along with zekhur (#2138, a variant with the same meaning9) occur only 86 times in the OT10 – compared with 2,160 times for ish.11 As a companion word to zakhar, neqebhah (FEMALE, #5347), occurs 22 times in the OT. These rare terms are applied to animals and birds as well as humans – but, more important, interpreters have noted that zakhar/zekhur often refer to sacrificial animals and circumcised men12 and in worship contexts (Strong, Brown). Appearing 60 times in the Pentateuch (Gen-Deut), for example, these terms are applied 10 times (17%) to sacrificial animals, 9 times (15%) to circumcised males, and 10 times (17%) to Israelite priests – half of the total use (49%).


The more specialized meanings of zakhar and neqebhah become clear right from the beginning of Genesis, where we read that God created Adam and Eve, the first "male" and "female," to fill and rule over the earth and to have fellowship with him (Gen 1:27-28, 5:2) – amazing sacred duties. Later, Noah is instructed to take representative land creatures, "male" and "female," into the Ark, to keep their species alive during the Flood (Gen 6:19; 7:3,9,16). God instructs Abraham to begin circumcising all the "males" of his family and lineage as a sign that the Israelites are His special, covenant people. In all of these cases, zakhar refers not just to a male, but to a male dedicated to God, with some special sacred function to perform. In fact, surveying all of the uses of zakhar/zekhur throughout the OT, one can discern in a full 90% of the cases a special sacred significance. As well as applied 32 times to sacrificial animals, circumcised males, and Israelite priests (37%), these terms are applied 28 times to certain classes of Israelite males who held special, sacred duties (36%) – including all Israelite men who were to visit the Lord's sanctuary three times yearly, men tied to the Lord in a sacred vow, men counted as potential warriors for holy war, Jews who returned from exile to Jerusalem to renew Temple worship, newborn sons in Israel (future spiritual heads of families), and boys dedicated to the Lord (like Samuel). Besides applied to Yahweh, however, the concept of "sacred male" (zakhar/zekhur) is also found applied to males dedicated to pagan deities (12%) – including the Midianites who first led Israel into licentious worship of Baal, other Canaanite men who would lead Israel astray, and their male (phallic?) idols.13

To'ebhah - The Hebrew word refers basically to something considered "offensive" by someone.7 For example, we are told that eating with foreigners (Joseph's brothers), shepherding (as an occupation), and sacrificing to foreign gods (Yahweh) were "abominations" to the Egyptians (Gen 43:32, 46:34; Ex 8:26). Strong lists to'ebhah ("abomination" or "abominable") as appearing 116 times in the OT. While the word is used 21 times in Proverbs to refer to general wicked attitudes and actions (e.g., pride, lying, murder, sowing discord, etc., cf. Prov 6:16-19), such non-cultic application is unusual. Elsewhere, in the law, history, and prophets, to'ebhah is used most of the time to condemn the worship of false gods and related cultic practices in Canaan – which, not unexpectedly, would be most hateful to Yahweh. The only specific use of to'ebhah in Leviticus is in 18:22/20:13, although there are four other vague, nonspecific uses of the term (18:26,27,29,30). Note that another word, sheqets (Strong #8263), is also translated as "abomination" in Lev (esp. ch. 11), applied to certain "unclean" creatures that the Israelites were not to eat.


In Deuteronomy (where Moses gives the Israelites a review of the Law received in the wilderness before they enter the Promised Land, Deut 1:3), we can see how the Lord tends to use to'ebhah in conjunction with the Israelites. In Deuteronomy, to'ebhah is applied 11 times to cultic practices and only 4 times to general wicked acts. Specifically, the Lord condemns as "abominations" the Canaanite idols and (even) the metals they are made of (7:25-26); worshipping idols or the sun, moon and stars (17:2-5); enticing other Israelites to turn to idols (13:12-15); sacrificing children to the god Molech (12:31); and foretelling the future, practicing magic, casting spells, and communing with spirits, etc. (18:9-12). In later OT historical and prophetic books (ignoring nonspecific uses as well as the wisdom genre of Proverbs), to'ebhah is applied 41 times (87%) to foreign cultic practices, compared to only 8 times to non-cultic wicked acts. In the whole OT, then, to'ebhah is used 81% of the time in legal, historical, and prophetic material to condemn foreign idolatry and related cultic practices – a very high percentage and a focused meaning that appears even before the Israelites enter the Promised Land. Therefore, it behooves us to search for how the same-sex male a**l intercourse banned in Lev 18:22/20:13 might be related somehow to the Canaanite worship of false gods.


From all this, we find the following:

"If a man [ish] lies with a man dedicated to a god, with a specific duty to perform [zakhar] as with a woman [ishshah], both of them have committed an unacceptable cultic/ritual act [to'ebhah]; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them."




Refute or concede. All of this information was pull from the link www.epistle.us  

[dragongirl42391]

It is clear that the Bible points out homosexuality as a sin, and even if you find other verses to support homosexuality in the Bible, you cannot deny the fact that in the Bible it says, homosexuality....is....a...sin. Period.
But this is actually completely beside the point.
The most important thing to remember is that every rule God sets for us, is to keep us safe! Remember all those rules that God gave the Jewish people? All those seemingly silly and pointless rules that said which animals were unclean to eat? Well, its a good thing they listened to these seemingly picky rules, because scientific evidence found today is showing that eating these animals back then would most likely be unhealthy for the Jewish people to eat because of sanatation, disease and other such things. These unclean animals are listed in Leviticus 11:1-47.
Isn't that funny, how the verses that list the unclean animals are in the same book that has verses from God about homosexuality?

Leviticus 18:22
"You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, that is an abomination."

I tell you, it wouldn't surprise me in the LEAST bit if later science discovered homosexuality to be unhealthy or have other risks.
God doesn't set rules to tempt us. He sets rules to prevent us from meeting earthly consequences. To PROTECT us. So here is my loving and concerned warning....LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAYS!  

[trinity343]

ok ok...i've been asked on here to post some sort of argument to refute what has been said to support homosexuality as not being a sin...

well as my signature says..i know nothing i havn't been taught so i decided to get some help from a couple professors here at school...although i can't remember quite everything i'll quote one directly due to we talked over email...actually i'll just post the entire email for you all to read....if i can think of anything else to say i'll post it afterwards...this will be a 2 part post

Larry Jenks

I read your email and the attached file. I have a few quick comments to
suggest.
1. The key question raised is whether homosexual behavior is sin or a result
of nature.
2. Paul clearly calls homosexual relationships sin repeatedly. To try to
qualify his statements as referring to "illicit homosexual acts outside of
marriage" doesn't fit his argument (Like in Romans 1:26, 27 where his point
is not extramarital affairs but relationships "against nature" which in
verse 27 he clarifies as homosexual acts.) To counter Paul's clear statement
they fall back on 21st century relativism that says that what is "natural"
for one person is not natural for another. To escape Paul's judgment on
homosexual acts they say that for those who are "by nature gay" it is not
sin.
3. Thus the crux of the question is whether some people are "born gay." The
main passage they use is Matthew 19 where the see three types of "eunuchs"
with the first class being those born eunuchs. They interpret this as
meaning being born gay. There are several problems with this logic:
a. It is not the natural meaning of eunuch. In the Old Testament the word
for eunuch is from a root word that means to castrate. In the NT, the Greek
word for eunuch has a similar meaning. In secular Greek it was also used of
castrated animals and even sterile plants.
b. In Matthew 19:12, Jesus is not listing three "classes of eunuchs" but
listing three WAYS a person can BECOME a "eunuch." By birth defect, by being
castrated and by choosing to live without sexual relationships. Jesus' point
is that if you get married stay married and if you are not married stay
celibate.
c. Homosexual studies have tried to prove that homosexuality is "in the
genes." However, the only studies that claim to support this conclusion were
done by gays and have been discredited scientifically. Major studies by
universities show no discernible link.
d. The person in your blog gives several indications that he thinks that
since he has these desires they must be from God. (like at the end of his
post) The problem with this is that we have a fallen nature that wants to
justify what our conscience condemns. A ***** could use this same
argument to prove his relationships with children is "from God."
4. The attempt to make various "couples" in scripture to be gays is also
flawed. Jonathan and David, Ruth and Namoi are give as examples. If these
were "legitimate homosexual relationship" than the fact that David, Jonathan
and Ruth all get married (to persons of the other sex) would result in
unfaithfulness to their original "partners" and that would be sin. There is
no way that these can be construed as homosexual relationships.
The main problem is that these people want to feel good about doing what God
calls sin. They are not honestly looking for the truth but for an excuse for
continuing in sin.

 

[trinity343]

here is the second post...also from the same professor..

oh yeah...just so you know he is a New Testament/Greek professor here at my school (Toccoa Falls College [www.tfc.edu])

Larry Jenks

One more thought. One of the arguments used for "born a eunuch" meaning
"born gay" was that in antiquity it was used that way. Not so. I have quoted
below John Gills comments on this verse. Gill was especially conversant with
the Jewish writings and often quotes from them. Notice that he not only
quotes them but gives where to find the passages he quotes. Hope this helps.
LJenks

Mat 19:12 - For there are some eunuchs,.... Our Lord here distinguishes the
various sorts of persons, that can and do live in a single state with
content: some by nature, and others by violence offered to them, are
rendered incapable of entering into a marriage state; and others, through
the gift of God, and under the influence of his grace, abstain from marriage
cheerfully and contentedly, in order to be more useful in the interest of
religion; but the number of either of these is but few, in comparison of
such who choose a conjugal state, and with whom it is right to enter into
it, notwithstanding all the difficulties that may attend it. Some men are
eunuchs, and of these there are different sorts; there are some,

which were so born from their mother's womb; meaning, not such who, through
a natural temper and inclination of mind, could easily abstain from
marriage, and chose to live single; but such who had such defects in nature
that they were impotent, unfit for, and unable to perform the duties of a
marriage state; who, as some are born without hands or feet, these were born
without proper and perfect organs of generation; and such an one was, by the
Jews, frequently called, סריס המה, "an eunuch of the sun (n)": that is, as
their doctors (o) explain it, one that from his mother's womb never saw the
sun but as an eunuch; that is, one that is born so; and that such an one is
here intended, ought not to be doubted. The signs of such an eunuch, are
given by the Jewish (p) writers, which may be consulted by those, that have
ability and leisure. This sort is sometimes (q) called סריס בידי שמים "an
eunuch by the hands of heaven", or God, in distinction from those who are so
by the hands, or means of men, and are next mentioned:

and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: as among the
Romans formerly, and which Domitian the emperor forbid by a law (r); and
more especially in the eastern countries, and to this day among the Turks,
that they may the more safely be entrusted with the custody of their women;
and this sort the Jews call סריס אדם, "an eunuch of men", or בידי אדם, "by
the hands of men". The distinction between an "eunuch of the sun", and an
"eunuch of men", is so frequent with the Jews (s), and so well known to
them, that a question need not be made of our Lord's referring to it:

and there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs; not in a literal
sense, in which the words are not to be taken, as they were by Origen; who
though otherwise too much pursued the allegorical way of interpreting
Scripture, here took it literally, and castrated himself (t); as did also a
sort of heretics, called Valesians (u), from one Valens an Arabian; and
which practice is recommended by Philo the Jew (w), and by Heathen
philosophers (x), for the sake of chastity. But here it means such, who
having the gift of contingency without mutilating their bodies, or indulging
any unnatural lusts, can live chastely without the use of women, and choose
celibacy:

for the kingdom of heaven's sake; not in order, by their chaste and single
life, to merit and obtain the kingdom of glory; but that they might be more
at leisure, being free from the encumbrances of a marriage state, to attend
the worship and service of God, the ordinances of the Gospel church state,
to minister in, and preach the Gospel of Christ, and be a means of spreading
it in the world, and of enlarging his kingdom and interest.

He that is able to receive it, let him receive it: whoever is able to
receive cordially, and embrace heartily, the above saying concerning the
expediency and goodness of a single life, and having the gift of contingency, can live according to it; let him take it, and hold it fast, and act up to it; he may have less of worldly trouble, and be more useful for God in the Gospel of Christ, and to the interest of religion; but this should be a voluntary thing: no man should be forced into it; and he that goes into it, ought to consider well whether he is able to contain, or not.

(n) T. Bab. Yebamot, fol. 75. 1. 79. 2. & 80. 1. Maimon. Hilch. Ishot, c. 2.
sect. 14. (o) Maimon & Bartenora in Misn. Yebamot, c. 8. sect. 4. (p)
Bartenora, ibid. & Maimon. Hilch. Ishot, ut supra. (q) T. Bab. Yebamot, fol.
80. 2. (r) Philostrat. vit. Apollon. l. 6. c. 17. (s) Misn. Yebamot, c. 8.
sect. 4. Zabim, c. 2. sect. 1. T. Hieros. Yebamot, fol. 9. 4. Maimon. Hilch.
Ishot, c. 2. sect. 26. & 4. 18. Mechosre Caphara, c. 3. sect. 6.
Mishcabumoshab, c. l. sect. 5. (t) Euseb. Ecel. Hist. l. 6. c. 8. (u)
Augustin de Haeres. c. 37. & Danaeus in ib. (w) Lib. quod deterius, p. 186.
(x) Sexti Pythag. Sent. p. 8.

 

[kaleinh]

dragongirl42391

It is clear that the Bible points out homosexuality as a sin, and even if you find other verses to support homosexuality in the Bible, you cannot deny the fact that in the Bible it says, homosexuality....is....a...sin. Period.

Disregarding your claim that the Bible says homosexuality is a sin, why do you say that homosexuality is a sin even if we can find passages in the Bible that support it? That is nothing more than cherry-picking; as the Bible must be regarded by Christian at the very least as morally inerrant in its original form, it must also be internally consistent. In other words, if we interpret one passage as condemning homosexuality, and another as supporting it, we must be interpreting one passage wrong.

Quote:

But this is actually completely beside the point.

Any discussion about the root of doctrine, the Bible, is NEVER beside the point.

Quote:

The most important thing to remember is that every rule God sets for us, is to keep us safe! Remember all those rules that God gave the Jewish people? All those seemingly silly and pointless rules that said which animals were unclean to eat? Well, its a good thing they listened to these seemingly picky rules, because scientific evidence found today is showing that eating these animals back then would most likely be unhealthy for the Jewish people to eat because of sanatation, disease and other such things.

However, with current sanitization technology, we are able to eat animals like these with impunity. =D

Quote:

These unclean animals are listed in Leviticus 11:1-47.
Isn't that funny, how the verses that list the unclean animals are in the same book that has verses from God about homosexuality?

And by the same rule of thumb, if they no longer serve a meaningful purpose, we should not be forced to follow them.

Quote:

Leviticus 18:22
"You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, that is an abomination."

I tell you, it wouldn't surprise me in the LEAST bit if later science discovered homosexuality to be unhealthy or have other risks.

First off, homosexuality=/=gay sex. PLEASE stop saying this, everyone!
Second, homosexuality has never been shown to have any risks in and of itself. Science also says that it is impossible to change homosexuality. If you do not agree with that, don't try to use what science says on the subject.

Quote:

God doesn't set rules to tempt us. He sets rules to prevent us from meeting earthly consequences. To PROTECT us. So here is my loving and concerned warning....LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAYS!

Finally, did you not read the post directly above you?! It clearly lists exactly what is wrong with your interpretations of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, AND gives links for more information! LEARN BEFORE YOU SPEAK.  

[lordstar]

trinity343

lordstar

imagoodhugger

Okay I've read the bible and I love Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior but um...I was wondering if it was okay, to like guys if i am a guy. I've been wondering, and I've been bi since 8th grade and now in 9th and I just wanted to know if it was accepted by God and Jesus.

Just know that one honest doubter is worth more than a horde of blind believers. Find your own path and experience life because the answer cannot be found just by asking.

yes but finding our own path must be based within a Christian world view. meaning that we make God our priority and know that he has made all of us in his image making each of us unique and important to him. part of this though is knowing What God wants of us, which a lot of it it in his word.....some we learn from what experiences he brings us through.

But basing this path within a Christian world view is not finding his own path. Why MUST anyones path be based within a Christian world view. Make up your own mind and quit blindly following the guy next to you.  

[trinity343]

lordstar

trinity343

lordstar

imagoodhugger

Okay I've read the bible and I love Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior but um...I was wondering if it was okay, to like guys if i am a guy. I've been wondering, and I've been bi since 8th grade and now in 9th and I just wanted to know if it was accepted by God and Jesus.

Just know that one honest doubter is worth more than a horde of blind believers. Find your own path and experience life because the answer cannot be found just by asking.

yes but finding our own path must be based within a Christian world view. meaning that we make God our priority and know that he has made all of us in his image making each of us unique and important to him. part of this though is knowing What God wants of us, which a lot of it it in his word.....some we learn from what experiences he brings us through.

But basing this path within a Christian world view is not finding his own path. Why MUST anyones path be based within a Christian world view. Make up your own mind and quit blindly following the guy next to you.

having a Christian world view isn't blindly following the guy next to you...it's faithfully following Jesus Christ, who is the only God and the only way to God. it doesn't have to be something that 'you do just because the other guy is doing' but instead having a Christian world view is allowing God's word and the Holy Spirit to shape how you look at the world and all of God's creation. meaning when i look at you i don't see you as just another bothersome human who could be a waste of my time...but instead i see you as a creation of God, who yes, has gone astray, but is still loved by God nonetheless and of whom God wishes would come to him and become his child. we have to allow our faith in Christ to affect how we see things other wise our faith in Christ is pointless and fruitless.

even while having a Christian world view we can still 'find our own path' as you say, but instead of it being just some random path that we stumble down and never find our own purpose in, God has created us to be unique in our path, while allowing him to guide us into who were are being recreated to be in Christ. God loves everyone, so much that he is unwilling to let us stay in the sinful state that we are in....but he can only work in us to change us if we are willing to allow him to change us. if we are not, then we are apart from him and our final destiny is hell, if we are willing to let him change us and work in us, then our destiny is to be a child of God and to share in his inheritance.  

[lordstar]

trinity343

lordstar

trinity343

lordstar

imagoodhugger

Okay I've read the bible and I love Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior but um...I was wondering if it was okay, to like guys if i am a guy. I've been wondering, and I've been bi since 8th grade and now in 9th and I just wanted to know if it was accepted by God and Jesus.

Just know that one honest doubter is worth more than a horde of blind believers. Find your own path and experience life because the answer cannot be found just by asking.

yes but finding our own path must be based within a Christian world view. meaning that we make God our priority and know that he has made all of us in his image making each of us unique and important to him. part of this though is knowing What God wants of us, which a lot of it it in his word.....some we learn from what experiences he brings us through.

But basing this path within a Christian world view is not finding his own path. Why MUST anyones path be based within a Christian world view. Make up your own mind and quit blindly following the guy next to you.

having a Christian world view isn't blindly following the guy next to you...it's faithfully following Jesus Christ, who is the only God and the only way to God. it doesn't have to be something that 'you do just because the other guy is doing' but instead having a Christian world view is allowing God's word and the Holy Spirit to shape how you look at the world and all of God's creation. meaning when i look at you i don't see you as just another bothersome human who could be a waste of my time...but instead i see you as a creation of God, who yes, has gone astray, but is still loved by God nonetheless and of whom God wishes would come to him and become his child. we have to allow our faith in Christ to affect how we see things other wise our faith in Christ is pointless and fruitless.

even while having a Christian world view we can still 'find our own path' as you say, but instead of it being just some random path that we stumble down and never find our own purpose in, God has created us to be unique in our path, while allowing him to guide us into who were are being recreated to be in Christ. God loves everyone, so much that he is unwilling to let us stay in the sinful state that we are in....but he can only work in us to change us if we are willing to allow him to change us. if we are not, then we are apart from him and our final destiny is hell, if we are willing to let him change us and work in us, then our destiny is to be a child of God and to share in his inheritance.

"just another bothersome human"
well that gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside

I hate to break it to ya m8 but when you put all your cards on the scale the only thing ya got to show is a book (the works within being thoroughly tainted) that a select group of people created years after the fact and 2000 years of tradition

the fact that such things weigh so heavily is testament that an honest doubter is far outnumbered by blind believers

challenge the status quo
adopt a different viewpoint and see where it takes you
if the path you find is that same as where you started that’s fine

I must be honest and true to my heart
I've looked down many paths my friend and still I continue to keep my eyes open
but a path constructed for someone is just artificial

you make many good points but in order for any of them to make any sense at all one must first assume that the Bible is fact and make other concessions.

kind of like wave/particle duality  

[trinity343]

Quote:

"just another bothersome human"
well that gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside

meant to me more a generic 'you'...sorry i thought about it afterwards...like way afterwards when i wasn't anywhere near a computer...about how it was worded...but it's just an example of a thought that could occur...not necessarily one that has....or even is directly aimed at you personally

Quote:

I hate to break it to ya m8 but when you put all your cards on the scale the only thing ya got to show is a book (the works within being thoroughly tainted) that a select group of people created years after the fact and 2000 years of tradition

yeah but just b/c you consider it to be just a book and not proven to be true...by human means mind you...doesn't mean it isn't any less true. it just comes down to you choice to accept Christ as God or not, that's the beauty of the free will that God gave us. however...if we choose wrong there are always consequences to our decision/chooses/actions/and so on.

Quote:

the fact that such things weigh so heavily is testament that an honest doubter is far outnumbered by blind believers

oh i agree..an honest doubter is much better then a blind believer...in the end a blind believer can not truly stand up for what they believe without completely relying on what others what taught them and they can not word something in their own words..much less comprehend it to it's full extent. this is even biblical b/c there are many in the Bible that were called great men/women of faith even though they are also some of the biggest doubters...meaning they tested what was brought before them to make sure it was of God before going out...some even growing angry at God for something that happened. they were not turned away...but instead they were made known for the faith that they had made their own. however, we shouldn't turn away the wisdom of those who a have come before us and have experiences that we ourselves might never have.

Quote:

challenge the status quo
adopt a different viewpoint and see where it takes you
if the path you find is that same as where you started that’s fine

i agree...challenge the status quo...go against the flow. that's what the Bible is all about, going against the norm of society. pretty much everything in the Bible goes against the normal human instinct which is what makes it so unique to a lot of other beliefs and such. most everything else is almost completely self-centered...while true Christianity is God-centered...which means as well people-centered (since we are to become more like Jesus and since he was obviously people-centered...we should be as well). but at the same time we are taught to respect authority b/c they are their b/c God appointed them to be in that position...even those who we consider to be 'evil' 'bad' authorities...we just have to deal with what's there until God shows a way to make a change.

also i think this depends on what your definition of what a viewpoint is.

Quote:

I must be honest and true to my heart
I've looked down many paths my friend and still I continue to keep my eyes open
but a path constructed for someone is just artificial

well in that case i shall pray for you. it's not a bad thing to keep your eyes open...i understand there are many ways in which Christianity can seem artificial...b/c of the way in which ppl talk about it...and their lack of faith or those not living it they way it's meant to be lived out (meaning they focus on their selves). God had told us (through Paul's teachings) that we are to test things to make sure they are of God...and sometimes...ok a lot of the times (especially in the States and other western countries) fake christians are normalities that it seems a lot of people tend to ignore.

Quote:

you make many good points but in order for any of them to make any sense at all one must first assume that the Bible is fact and make other concessions.

well i'll take that as at least somewhat of a compliment..thanks ^-^

i agree though yes...a lot of biblical points can only be believed/agree upon by those who believe the Bible in it's entirety. and the only way to be able to do that is by the Holy Spirit, b/c our human nature naturally resist and rejects the truths of the Bible, the Holy Spirit just allows us to see past our human nature

Quote:

kind of like wave/particle duality

ooo physics smile


i have a question for you though..i'm curious as to your age and to what area of this small world do you reside in  

[trinity343]

dragongirl42391

It is clear that the Bible points out homosexuality as a sin, and even if you find other verses to support homosexuality in the Bible, you cannot deny the fact that in the Bible it says, homosexuality....is....a...sin. Period.
But this is actually completely beside the point.
The most important thing to remember is that every rule God sets for us, is to keep us safe! Remember all those rules that God gave the Jewish people? All those seemingly silly and pointless rules that said which animals were unclean to eat? Well, its a good thing they listened to these seemingly picky rules, because scientific evidence found today is showing that eating these animals back then would most likely be unhealthy for the Jewish people to eat because of sanatation, disease and other such things. These unclean animals are listed in Leviticus 11:1-47.
Isn't that funny, how the verses that list the unclean animals are in the same book that has verses from God about homosexuality?

Leviticus 18:22
"You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, that is an abomination."

I tell you, it wouldn't surprise me in the LEAST bit if later science discovered homosexuality to be unhealthy or have other risks.
God doesn't set rules to tempt us. He sets rules to prevent us from meeting earthly consequences. To PROTECT us. So here is my loving and concerned warning....LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAYS!

that verse has been used plenty a times Dragongirl...in their minds they have refuted the verse and have decided that it doesn't contain to our current culture. they decided this by their own understanding of the hebrew and greek language and how they think it was used during that time.

i agree with you that God makes the laws and commandments, for the most part, to protect us from our own ignorance on certain subject matters...however he makes a good bit of the laws to also keep of from sin which is what separates us from who he is. he also knows that we cannot follow the law perfectly and had told us (through Paul) that even breaking one is the same as breaking them all. however Paul has also taught that if it wasn't for the law we could not know that we have sinned b/c we wouldn't know right from wrong, except for what we are selves decide which is which. it is the law that makes us know we have done wrong and with that a realization of the need of a Savior is made. however like i said above this realization still cannot be made without the help of the Holy Spirit...like when the disciple asked Jesus who then can be saved. he told them 'with man it is impossible but with God all things are possible'

we ourselves cannot save ourselves b/c we are trapped in sin that, by our human nature..do not completely realize is sin, except in extreme cases..and even those mostly b/c that is what our culture has made to be sin/crimes and such.

i personally would find it interesting as well if they could prove some kind of damaging side to homosexuality but i highly doubt they will..at least physically, i believe the heaviest damage that it does is to the spirit, b/c it is a perversion of how God created human sexuality to be. but until they can/if they can prove that it does some sort of emotional/mental/social/physical harm to a person that argument can't even be made  

[kaleinh]

trinity343

dragongirl42391

It is clear that the Bible points out homosexuality as a sin, and even if you find other verses to support homosexuality in the Bible, you cannot deny the fact that in the Bible it says, homosexuality....is....a...sin. Period.
But this is actually completely beside the point.
The most important thing to remember is that every rule God sets for us, is to keep us safe! Remember all those rules that God gave the Jewish people? All those seemingly silly and pointless rules that said which animals were unclean to eat? Well, its a good thing they listened to these seemingly picky rules, because scientific evidence found today is showing that eating these animals back then would most likely be unhealthy for the Jewish people to eat because of sanatation, disease and other such things. These unclean animals are listed in Leviticus 11:1-47.
Isn't that funny, how the verses that list the unclean animals are in the same book that has verses from God about homosexuality?

Leviticus 18:22
"You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, that is an abomination."

I tell you, it wouldn't surprise me in the LEAST bit if later science discovered homosexuality to be unhealthy or have other risks.
God doesn't set rules to tempt us. He sets rules to prevent us from meeting earthly consequences. To PROTECT us. So here is my loving and concerned warning....LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAYS!

that verse has been used plenty a times Dragongirl...in their minds they have refuted the verse and have decided that it doesn't contain to our current culture. they decided this by their own understanding of the hebrew and greek language and how they think it was used during that time.

Unless you can challenge our interpretation, our interpretation stands. That said, I'll be refuting your professor sometime later today; in fact, if I could have your professor's email, that would be great. ^-^

(By the way, this is Shiroi Kokoro no Mendori/lykongitsachicken/Everybodys Happy Now/stopthebanningplease. My last account was banned, they've sent me just as much reason for it as with the other four.)  

[mazuac]

Here's what I say...

Hate the Sin, Love the Sinner biggrin