Is being Gay really that bad?

[Jbuza]

Most so-called-authorities-on-the-Bible do not understand the Bible. There is no place in the Bible where the word homosexual can be found because the word homosexual was only invented in the mid nineteenth century.
The word "effeminate" as quoted in the King James version which is the original recognized version of the orthodox Greek text merely refers it as anyone prostituting themselves, men or women for money. And in Romans 1:27 merely means men becoming lustful after prostitutes rather other men or women by paying them in the form of money. As a Doctor of Divinity with a degree in religious science of 45 years, I am applauded of the ignorance of today's ministers who misquote the Bible and absolutely do not understand it. They have no business spreading a false gospel to anyone, let alone mislead others in spreading untruths which in it's self is a sin. Instead of picking out one segment of society and twisting things around to confuse and control people for their own misguided and sinful desires, they need to go after the real sinners; slothness, gluttony, fornicators, cheating on spouses, child abuse, corruption, fraud, murder, drug users, domestic terrorism and spreading lies about the Bible. But no, because they have something themselves to hide, they make up things they claim are in the Bible, then pick out some minority and use it as their all time scapegoat and mislead thousands. These liars and false prophets are warned about in the Bible in the last days who will mislead even the very elite of God, for they themselves are condemned of Hell

OK I can't help it. Why don't you show me how the Bible teaches drug users are the "real sinners", while homosexuality is fine by the bible.

I think you are what you say others are.

[Shirtless]

The reason is because they are homosexuals and by attacking other homosexuals makes them feel less of a homosexual themselves.

Ok then, attacking me personally won't get us anywhere,

I have to agree with IRQ on that point, but as a former homophobe myself I have to say that Goodbrother is dead on--it's about turning insecurity into anger; fear into hate.

You fail to realize that, at the least, the act of homosexuality is a SIN. SIN SIN SIN according to the Word of God and therefore those that beleive on Him believe that it is a SIN also. Why? because God say's it is.

Few people realize just how weak the case against homosexuality is in the Bible. But the truth is that saying so in BIG RED LETTERS doesn't make it so.

Thinking that something is a cup, doesn't make it a cup. Don't even get me started about how quoting the word "abomination" is a joke if you look at the context.

Why don't you show me how the Bible teaches drug users are the "real sinners", while homosexuality is fine by the bible.

First of all, and this must be made clear: it is YOU, the accusers, that have the burden of proof. YOU must make the case against homosexuality. People are innocent until proven guilty. Would the case against homosexuality stand up in a court of law? You decide...if you're willing to truly look at the case.

I beg all of you--as someone who personally used to think the same as you do, who had great, great conviction of the belief that homosexuality was wrong--just let it go. You don't need this on your soul. It's not worth it.

[bizzt]

The reason is because they are homosexuals and by attacking other homosexuals makes them feel less of a homosexual themselves.

Ok then, attacking me personally won't get us anywhere,

I have to agree with IRQ on that point, but as a former homophobe myself I have to say that Goodbrother is dead on--it's about turning insecurity into anger; fear into hate.

You fail to realize that, at the least, the act of homosexuality is a SIN. SIN SIN SIN according to the Word of God and therefore those that beleive on Him believe that it is a SIN also. Why? because God say's it is.

Few people realize just how weak the case against homosexuality is in the Bible. But the truth is that saying so in BIG RED LETTERS doesn't make it so.

Thinking that something is a cup, doesn't make it a cup. Don't even get me started about how quoting the word "abomination" is a joke if you look at the context.

Why don't you show me how the Bible teaches drug users are the "real sinners", while homosexuality is fine by the bible.

First of all, and this must be made clear: it is YOU, the accusers, that have the burden of proof. YOU must make the case against homosexuality. People are innocent until proven guilty. Would the case against homosexuality stand up in a court of law? You decide...if you're willing to truly look at the case.

I beg all of you--as someone who personally used to think the same as you do, who had great, great conviction of the belief that homosexuality was wrong--just let it go. You don't need this on your soul. It's not worth it.

Shirtless it has been shown Countless number of times about Homosexuality. That act is a Sin period. There is no other interpretations etc.... HOWEVER it does not mean that Christians should love the person any less. I have sinned many however I must always uphold the Law of God and the Truth of his Word
Rom 6:6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to sin;
Therefore if I am Crucified with him any Sin must be done away with.

The Act of Homosexuality is a Sin and the Word of God Proves it!

Lev 20:13 And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, having in like manner with these given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27 and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due.
Rom 1:28 And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32 who, knowing the ordinance of God, that they that practise such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also consent with them that practise them.


Shirtless everyone should have the Law, and Mind of God on their Mind! Because without the Law like Paul said in the Bible how would we know not to Covet?
Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Howbeit, I had not known sin, except through the law: for I had not known coveting, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet:

So showing the Above Scriptures tells us Lying with another Man is a Sin then should we not condemn that Sin or should we turn our Heads and be weak-minded people who can't stand for the things of God.

That should be enough for us to wrap our minds around

[Jbuza]

I agree Bizzt.

And since it can be shown that it is sin, it seems that the burden of proof is shifted to the homosexuals to point out where in the Bible we see that it is OK.

[IRQ Conflict]

Good post Bizzt.

Shirtless, the only reason I bolded, Italicized and painted the word SIN was because of my frustration at peoples lack of willingness to see the truth. People such as myself and Bizzt have posted Scripture multiple times as to what God thinks of the SIN of man lying with man as with a women.

Sir, to say that the Biblical case against homosexuality is weak, shows beyond a shadow of doubt that you my friend being "willingly ignorant" need to really do some praying that the Holy Spirit will take those blinders off.

Do you believe what the bible say's or do you believe what man say's?

[Jay_7]

Good post Bizzt.

Shirtless, the only reason I bolded, Italicized and painted the word SIN was because of my frustration at peoples lack of willingness to see the truth. People such as myself and Bizzt have posted Scripture multiple times as to what God thinks of the SIN of man lying with man as with a women.

Sir, to say that the Biblical case against homosexuality is weak, shows beyond a shadow of doubt that you my friend being "willingly ignorant" need to really do some praying that the Holy Spirit will take those blinders off.

Do you believe what the bible say's or do you believe what man say's?

To me it sounds like hes taking parts out he doesnt like.

[Shirtless]

Call me crazy, but I'm getting the feeling that I'm in the presence of some open minded people, so I'll give this a shot.

I have made these arguments before. You'll probably see them posted a few times on this forum, but here they are:

All passages in Leviticus are completed and have fulfilled their purpose since the death and resurrection of Christ. Half of the NT is about that fact. Also, Leviticus and the Law was directed to the Israelites. Are you a Jew?

But let's suppose that you're a Jew from pre-B.C., there are other things you must do: do NOT eat anything in the sea that does not have both fins and scales...

Leviticus 11
9These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

10And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.

So much for the whole "gayness is an abomination" argument. You also cannot wear clothing woven from two types of fabric. You cannot sew fields with two different kinds of seed, etc etc etc.

Evidence from Leviticus would not be entered into a court of law.

Jud 1:7
Few scholars, and a lessoning number of Christians believe that S&G was about homosexuality. Unless you guys really want to emphasize this one passage, I'll just skip over it. Never-the-less, it does not mention homosexuality specifically; it would not be entered into a court of law.

Romans 1:27-28
This might be entered into court, but those who cite it would be pulverized during cross.

A. The whole chapter is about idolatry
B. Because of this idolatry, God gave them up to their own desires...so the "vile passions" were NOT the cause of God abandoning them, only the result of it.
C. The "vile passions" he is referring to is in the context of wide-spread pagan sexual rituals, which include temple prostitution by both male and female priests, non-gay priests cross-dressing to blur gender lines for their transgendered god, ritualized castration to create the same effect, etc.
D. Paul is writing to someone in Rome, it's like one end of a telephone conversation. It's hard to tell what he's referring to.
E. He provides a list of sins that these people do in 1:29-30, yet strangely homosexuality is not one of them.
F. Homosexuality was common in that period, in that region. If Paul was against homosexuality at all, he would have been MUCH more specific.

Paul is simply bashing idolatry in the form of sexual worship. Murder, adultery, theft, and idolatry are mentioned hundreds of times, yet the anti-gay agenda focuses on these sad excuses for evidence.

[IRQ Conflict]

Do you believe what the bible say's or do you believe what man say's?

Jud 1:7
Few scholars, and a lessoning number of Christians believe that S&G was about homosexuality. Unless you guys really want to emphasize this one passage, I'll just skip over it. Never-the-less, it does not mention homosexuality specifically; it would not be entered into a court of law.

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
2Ti 4:5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.


Nuff said.

[Shirtless]

Ditto. This is why I pray for you. I used to be just like you. Just let it go, for God's sake. The Bible is not anti gay.

Reading the Bible should not be like looking at a cloud and seeing whatever you want to see. It should be based on sound doctrine, not artificial flakey doctrine. I have provided an argument...how 'bout you?

[jerickson314]

All passages in Leviticus are completed and have fulfilled their purpose since the death and resurrection of Christ. Half of the NT is about that fact. Also, Leviticus and the Law was directed to the Israelites. Are you a Jew?

This does not mean we cannot glean moral values from Leviticus when other considerations are present.

But let's suppose that you're a Jew from pre-B.C., there are other things you must do: do NOT eat anything in the sea that does not have both fins and scales...

Leviticus 11
9These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

10And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.

So much for the whole "gayness is an abomination" argument. You also cannot wear clothing woven from two types of fabric. You cannot sew fields with two different kinds of seed, etc etc etc.

You also can't have sex with your sister, according to Leviticus.

Evidence from Leviticus would not be entered into a court of law.

As circumstantial evidence, you certainly could. Not as an entire case, though.

A. The whole chapter is about idolatry
B. Because of this idolatry, God gave them up to their own desires...so the "vile passions" were NOT the cause of God abandoning them, only the result of it.
C. The "vile passions" he is referring to is in the context of wide-spread pagan sexual rituals, which include temple prostitution by both male and female priests, non-gay priests cross-dressing to blur gender lines for their transgendered god, ritualized castration to create the same effect, etc.
D. Paul is writing to someone in Rome, it's like one end of a telephone conversation. It's hard to tell what he's referring to.

See here (a little over halfway down.) This article also discusses Leviticus.

E. He provides a list of sins that these people do in 1:29-30, yet strangely homosexuality is not one of them.
F. Homosexuality was common in that period, in that region. If Paul was against homosexuality at all, he would have been MUCH more specific.

The fact is that Paul did mention the issue directly, and wouldn't have needed to repeat himself. He was more explicit in passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and 1 Timothy 1:10, which provide the evidence needed to make Leviticus compelling.

BTW, you never responded to most of my critique of the Epistle stuff way back when.

I will remind you that my position is not that we should lack compassion towards those involved in homosexual behavior, but that we should recognize same-sex behavior (SSB) as a sin. Same-sex attraction (SSA) is not addressed in the Bible, and there is no reason to believe that it is a sin. Even SSB is no worse than other forms of sin, including the forms of sin that inevitably affect the lives of Christians today. It certainly isn't an automatic hell condemnation or anything like that.

Also see this article.

[Brigham]

Same Sex attraction, in this sense, Would be lusting after the Same Sex. And "If u have lusted in your mind, u have committed adultry". So if u think about acting the sin, u have sinned. So SSA IS SSB, since u have thought about it. God bless.


-Brigham

[IRQ Conflict]

Brigham, It's a little more to it than just the 'thought' of it. If this was your intention to bring across. I want to expound on it to make it clear for everyone that, if a thought comes to you and "you cast it down" you are in fact fighting the principality that brought it to you in the first place and is NOT a sin.

However, if you "entertain" the thought "dwell" on it, that IS a sin.

2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds;)
2Co 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

God Bless

[Brigham]

Srry if i wasnt more clear. I agree IRQ, thats why i said "If u think about Acting the sin". My fault 4 not bein clear enough. God bless.


-Brigham

[Jay_7]

Romans 1:27: 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.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... version=31;

Another passage which suggest being homosexual is wrong

[ray]

Marriage is a religious institution and therefore part of a system of beliefs. If the government is allowed to make laws changing this religious belief, then what other ones will you allow them to change?

Ray