Jump to content

Is Homosexuality Really A Sin?


Recommended Posts

i totally agree.the bibls says that it is a sin, it also says it is a sin to change the bibles words or follow different ideas than what is written in the bible.its not like we can just say "well just for today i dont think killing people is a sin so im going to kill people today". you follow what is written by God in the bible. end of story.
You guys obviously didn't read the link. Many people talk about what's written in the Bible without actually studying what it means. If you would have read the link you would see a compelling argument against the idea that God condemns those with homosexual orientation.-I don't believe that being of Homosexual orientation is a sin.-I beleive that homosexuals are born that way.-I don't bleieve that the Earth was created in 7 days (at least not in the way we percieve 7 days).-I don't beleive that the Earth is a few thousand years old. That doesn't mean, however, that I think the Bible is "lying" or is untrue in any way. I simply question the interpertation of what was written.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

MELLO, BUFFALO. CHANDLER, BUFFALO. KENYON MARTIN, BUFFALO. JR SMITH, BUFFALO. PIGIONNI, HE'LL BUFFALO YOUR FUKEN COOKIES

I'm more of an Otter man myself, F.

typical moron who doesnt understand.we arnt to actually kill people, just dicourage and look down. the language then and now differs alot.
Huh? Look down? Huh? Jesus talked about loving one another and NOT judging others as that's for God to do. Nowhere does it say you should look down on gays. Also, a lot of you guys don't know a lot of information that seems to be messing with your view about what the Bible is, how it works, and what it says. Any punishments written in the Old Testament no longer apply after Jesus came. He paid the price for all of us so that we no longer had to be punished for our sins. Too many people quote the Old Testament to show how ludicrous the punishments were, but neglect to understand that none of that applies to today, nor does the Bible claim that it is supposed to.
Link to post
Share on other sites
"Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." This could easily be about straight men who decide to have sex with other men. If "leaving the natural use of the woman" isn't natural to a homosexual person, they wouldn't be leaving it. In fact, it would seem unnatural for a homosexual man to have sex with a woman.
wow you must want to come out BAD to come up that lame justification lol. obviously paul is making no such distinction in the passage and it wouldn't make any sense if he was.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You guys obviously didn't read the link. Many people talk about what's written in the Bible without actually studying what it means. If you would have read the link you would see a compelling argument against the idea that God condemns those with homosexual orientation.-I don't believe that being of Homosexual orientation is a sin.-I beleive that homosexuals are born that way.-I don't bleieve that the Earth was created in 7 days (at least not in the way we percieve 7 days).-I don't beleive that the Earth is a few thousand years old. That doesn't mean, however, that I think the Bible is "lying" or is untrue in any way. I simply question the interpertation of what was written.
so pretty much the whole bible IS wide open to interpretation to fit modern science and your personally derived views of what is common sense? how conveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient...church_lady.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, a lot of you guys don't know a lot of information that seems to be messing with your view about what the Bible is, how it works, and what it says. Any punishments written in the Old Testament no longer apply after Jesus came. He paid the price for all of us so that we no longer had to be punished for our sins. Too many people quote the Old Testament to show how ludicrous the punishments were, but neglect to understand that none of that applies to today, nor does the Bible claim that it is supposed to.
irrelevant. a sin is still a sin whether it's covered by jesus or not.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Really? Seems like it's pretty literal to me. Seems to ME like you're picking and choosing. What's the difference? You're selectively choosing which parts of the Bible to believe. I don't think it was common at ANY time for "we should kill them both" to mean the same as "we should make 'tsk-tsk' noises and gestures at them both, you know, in general. Mostly we should just make them feel bad, is what I'm saying." That's hypocritical garbage, and you know it. Wang
They shall surely be put to death is in no way telling me to kill- since I know vengeance belongs to the lord I know that it is not my place, or even my desire to dole it out. This is also alot like the scripture that says the wages of sin is death- it's reffering to a spiritual death. Look, it's not like Daniels alone here. Most religous orginizations are trying to find some way to accept homosexuality-it just further proves my case, that religion as a whole is a farce. God says this as well in the bible. It has little to nothing to do with God and everything about delivering what the people want, and we know from plenty of examples in the bible how God feels about that. That being said, if you wanna be gay, just be gay. To each his own. Just don't expect to find some loop hole in the bible saying it's o.k., because it doesn't exist. Sin is sin, and that happens to fall in that category. Any sin can keep you out of heaven, whether an abomination or just a perpetual liar. It's all requires that heavens doors are closed to the perpetrator.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yikes, not true. Leviticus is often used to condemn homosexuality, but it should be noted that eating shellfish and cutting your hair were part of the same text. In the New Testament Jesus clearly states that we are not under the laws of Leviticus at all. That one book in the Bible is one that many hateful Christians use to prove that God condemns gays. In fact, God doesn't. At all. A Christian had me read the following: http://www.rbc.org/bible_study/answers_to_...wers/30778.aspx and this was my reply: I read that page and still didn't really find anything from God condemning homosexuals. It did say this:"Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." This could easily be about straight men who decide to have sex with other men. If "leaving the natural use of the woman" isn't natural to a homosexual person, they wouldn't be leaving it. In fact, it would seem unnatural for a homosexual man to have sex with a woman. There was nothing on that page that shows God condemning those that are of homosexual orientation. Many of the things written in the Bible about sex wouldn't not seem appropriate to our society today. Whether it be stoning a woman who was found to not be a virgin, to executing couples who have sex during the menstral cycle. Aside from sexual practices between 11-13 year olds, the one that really struck me as being bizarre in today's world would be that it says, if a man dies, his widow is to marry and bear children with his eldest brother, and if unsuccessful, must continue to do so until she bear a boy to one of his brothers. Doesn't that sound kinda sick? I think a huge mistake is being made in the way that homosexuality is perceived from the Bible. The Bible isn't fallable, but we as humans are. Meaning, that we could easily misinterpert it's meaning and I think that's the case here. As Christians we need to trust the Holy Spirit and when Jesus left he said that the Holy Spirit would "teach us all things." In my heart, I feel like this is just one more example of people misinterperting the teachings of the Bible, and it's caused so much bloodshed and pain to an innocent group of people that love God just as much as the next person.
That's ridiculous DN. Thats like me writing this sentence, and lets pretend that I am God for a second. "It is a sin for a man to share a bathtub with another man. That that should be with your wife." Your interpetation would mean that you could then break down classifications of men, and really whos job is that? Gods. How in the world could you possibly make the jump that it's only talking about straight men? Look, it's not an easy thing to look at some of my friends, who are gay, and know what I know. They know how I believe, and they have read the bible, most of them, but it's no different than any other sin. Thye have decided to reject what they see because they want to be who they are- how they are who they were is debatable, and really know one knows. How does anybody latch on to a certain sin and can't change? It becomes a part of who you are.
Link to post
Share on other sites
irrelevant. a sin is still a sin whether it's covered by jesus or not.
Exactly- and broaden that to ANY sin will keep you out of heaven, if you believe in the bible. Crow and I don't agree on much, but he said something awhile back that struck me as pretty insightful and it is the rock solid truth. Most people who claim christianity have no idea what the bible actually teaches, and if they did they would realize that they actually aren't really following christianity, but a weaker interpetation of it. I think it was Crow, but it might have been Yorke.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wang, Shake, The problem is I don't think many of these people understand when they are being hypocritical, they are just spewing out dogma that they've been taught since childhood without actually questioning it. It's shameful really.Dan, Isn't Leviticus in the old testament? Isn't there something about the 'old' law and 'new' law? I think a guy named jesus came and talked about that? So the 'old' law is not to be used anymore, only as a guideline on how to live a good life.Think about Jesus, the type of person he supposedly was, the ideals he taught...what do you think he would have said to gay people today? Do you think he would be understanding? I'll go so far as to give you that fact that homosexuality is not 'right', but only to the point that bipolar disorder isn't right, or psychosis isn't right. That is they are abnormalities.
Sure. Manson gets a pass because he is abnormal.
Link to post
Share on other sites
well maybe then the word "abomination" actually just meant "not the coolest thing". are you really arguing that you can't pick and choose what you believe in the bible, but you CAN pick and choose what the bible means? I can't even really write out how your argument is coming across because it hurts my brain too much. I like cheese but I don't like cheese. yeah.[/quote So much for loving others as you would yourself. CUIN4YEARSDN is completely wrong on this issue. We are not to look down on others, treat everyone with respect, sinner or saint. Christ never advocated anything less.
Link to post
Share on other sites
wow you must want to come out BAD to come up that lame justification lol. obviously paul is making no such distinction in the passage and it wouldn't make any sense if he was.
You are missing something. In those times homosexual offenders were often straight men and it had nothing to do with sex, but instead was all about power. In wars, men would rape the other men but it wasn't a homosexual act at all. It was forced rape.
Link to post
Share on other sites
irrelevant. a sin is still a sin whether it's covered by jesus or not.
You sound really seem ill-informed sometimes. The "sins" in Leviticus for example, weren't sins at all. Did you read the link at all or are you just making assumptions?
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are missing something. In those times homosexual offenders were often straight men and it had nothing to do with sex, but instead was all about power. In wars, men would rape the other men but it wasn't a homosexual act at all. It was forced rape.
The scripture specifically says burning in there lusts towards one another- that's not rape, thats desire to get it on. There is no possible way to get around this scripture. It is as clear and concise as any scripture that condemns a particular sin. Here is a question for you- there are plenty of scriptures that address how men should treat there women, and likewise women there men, all located in the New Testament. Why do you think that the bible doesn't even bother laying perameters for gay relationships? Simple- it doesn't condone them.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm assuming the gay person believes in god. Those people do exist you know. That being said, he could be ****ing a dude in the *** and have a heart attack and die, and according to what the bible says about god, that person goes to heaven.Furthermore, if we are within the realm of the bible, then it IS possible to make inferences about god based on what is laid out in the bible. The bible does address every single circumstance that could ever come and assess it based on godly standards. But you can use these godly standards and apply them to a situation and make an estimate of what god would determine in a given situation.YOU SEEM TO HAVE LITTLE OR NO UNDERSTANDING OF REASONING, LOGIC, OR DEDUCTION.How do you even make a single decision in your daily life. What happens when a situation arises whose circumstances haven't been discussed in scripture, do you just lay down and go to sleep and avoid it?How do you know the situation with the 5 yr old is any different, does god say so in the bible?You have major gaps and flaws in the way you're mind works, you use irrational arguments to make your point because the point you are trying to make cannot be made without being irrational.At what point do you reject god.Hypothetical, instead of the bible stating love your neighbor, the bible said at the age of 28 you must kill your mother. Would you kill her in order to follow the word of god? Remember that story of abraham and isaac? abraham had more faith than anyone, and he could barely bring himself to kill his son.Do you honestly believe that if you were put in the same circumstances as him you could go through with it.
entire post made me laugh...you equate being christian to being a robot...good one
Link to post
Share on other sites
its not like we can just say "well just for today i dont think killing people is a sin so im going to kill people today". you follow what is written by God in the bible. end of story.
ah, but people regularly decide it is okay to kill people in the name of religion. to kill gay people.the problem with any religious authority is how people decide that they are the arbiters for it. if they believe someone is going to hell for sinning, why do the religious feel obliged to join them there by committing murder? really. let them get there in their own time. i'm not religious, so if there is a hell i'll get there in a few years.in the grand scheme of thousands of years of humanity, me out here sinning (not gay, but assorted other sins) for a few more is none of your business aside from maybe pointing it out once.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to make a quick post...DN...in the first article the author spends time talkin about how Sodom was destroyed but that sexual preference was not a part of the reason. Genesis 19 gives a pretty clear picture of the wickedness that the Sodom men were guilty ofGive it a quick read and notice what the men of the city were after. It wasnt Lots daughters. Do i think that the hatred towards homosexuals is warranted? No...I think that people use that sin as a way to avoid owning up to their own sin. It is not a greater sin than lying nor less of a sin than murder...All sin is equal in the eyes of God.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are missing something. In those times homosexual offenders were often straight men and it had nothing to do with sex, but instead was all about power. In wars, men would rape the other men but it wasn't a homosexual act at all. It was forced rape.
no i didn't miss anything. paul thinks men acting on their "burning lust" for "one another" is unnatural reprobate behavior, unrighteous wicked fornication etc etc. i don't see where you get power rape out of that. your original website doesn't even say that - it just tries to brush that chapter aside by saying paul is referring only to the behavior of non-jewish pagan priests.anyway I AGREE WITH YOU 100%. there is nothing wrong with homosexuality - but obviously i wouldn't think so anyway since i don't believe in the concept of fundamental "sin", and i see homosexuality as possibly even a *beneficial* social-evolutionary response to overpopulation. my point (as usual) is that if you take the time and thought necessary to objectively apply THE SAME STANDARD of logical common sense deduction as you are using to judge whether homosexuality is a sin, to the WHOLE of the fundamentalist christian concept of sin/redemption/heaven/hell, the whole thing falls apart as unfair and illogical. instead of parsing small parts of it like you are doing, step back and look at the whole picture, use the same objective logic, and ask yourself if the whole thing really makes sense. IRregardless of whether "a" god exists or not, belief in fundamentalist christianity itself does not stand up to any logical common sense justification you can possibly use. not even close. in fact it requires throwing away objective common sense in the exact same way as treating homosexuality as a sin does.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You sound really seem ill-informed sometimes. The "sins" in Leviticus for example, weren't sins at all. Did you read the link at all or are you just making assumptions?
yes i read the link. since homosexuality is described elsewhere in the bible, whatever leviticus is talking about is irrelevant. the site you linked uses the same double standard i mentioned -A: the bible must be selectively interpreted to fit science and modern common sense, but..B: the bible must be taken literally to justify belief in the christian god AT ALL IN THE FIRST PLACEso if you need the "holy spirit" (or whatever) to enlighten you as to what specific parts of the bible are and aren't literal, how do you know the holy spirit isn't just you telling yourself what you want to hear to feel better about yourself? how do you know the whole bible isn't fables based loosely on jewish historical events (containing numerous logical and historical contradictions)? how do you know jesus wasn't just a man, and everything written about him isn't embellished greatly to meet the authors own personal agendas? (impossible to disprove since there are no contemporary references to jesus and everything written about him was well after the fact). how do you know stroble's book isn't largely propaganda created more for profit than for god? how do you know everything you "feel" emotionally about christianity being true, and god speaking to you (if he does), isn't a psychological/physical response to christianity conveniently filling an unrelated emotional void and/or appeasing some insecurity you happen to have? considering that you live in an overwhelmingly majority christian culture and aren't exposed in depth to other religions, how do you know islam, hinduism, etc. are invalid and christianity is necessarily valid? how do you know atheism or agnosticism aren't logically valid?have you really tried objectively answering those questions using the same standard of scientific evidence/logic/common sense you are applying to whether homosexuality should be considered a sin or not?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I had to leave for awhile and do some shopping, and was thinking about this concept DN is backing and one thing that stood out in my mind, that makes it ultimately ludicrous is that in order to translate the scripture in that manner we have to say that homosexuals are not normal men in God's eyes- they get a pass, because they are different, they are abnormal, and something is genetically wrong with them, and since we are assuming the bible is only speaking to straight men, then homosexuals get a pass, because they cannot help it. Now, that idea is obviously false- I in no way back that or think that, all men have fallen short in the eyes of God. But, assumeing DN was right I could accept that- the question is, could a homosexual? Could a homosexual take the thought that God gives them a pass because in his eyes they are abnormal men? Now, DN did not come right out and say that, but understand when you read into the bible like that that is exactly what takes place, and that wedge that you would like to eliminate actually becomes more jagged and powerful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wanted to make a quick post...DN...in the first article the author spends time talkin about how Sodom was destroyed but that sexual preference was not a part of the reason. Genesis 19 gives a pretty clear picture of the wickedness that the Sodom men were guilty ofGive it a quick read and notice what the men of the city were after. It wasnt Lots daughters. Do i think that the hatred towards homosexuals is warranted? No...I think that people use that sin as a way to avoid owning up to their own sin. It is not a greater sin than lying nor less of a sin than murder...All sin is equal in the eyes of God.
Matt is 100% accurate, as far as the bible is concerned, which is Crows point- either buy into it or don't. I also think that Matt is correct- many people focus on others sin instead of dealing with there own. That's actually part of human nature- the I am not so bad mentality.
Link to post
Share on other sites
hmmm shopping saturday afternoon 2 days before xmas. thought i was the only one dumb enough to do that :D
Few last minute things. Past couple of weeks have been crazy. I was doing alot of studying to pass my series 7 to get my brokerage license, that way I can actually keep my new job at Charles Schwab. I passed. :club: Took alot of time though, I was basically starting from scratch, in that I really didn't know anything about the world of stocks, bonds, mutual funds, IRAs, etc.- I still don't, just enough to pass that test. Anyway, I had little time for anything else.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt:"How do you even make a single decision in your daily life. What happens when a situation arises whose circumstances haven't been discussed in scripture, do you just lay down and go to sleep and avoid it?"How about answering the question, rather then laughing at it then...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, what is anyone's answer to the issue about the 'old' law v. 'new' law. You cannot use leviticus as a means to determine the morality of something today with regard to the Bible....period.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, what is anyone's answer to the issue about the 'old' law v. 'new' law. You cannot use leviticus as a means to determine the morality of something today with regard to the Bible....period.
Well, in the case of homosexuality we see that what is in the Old is carried over into the New, as evidenced by Pauls writings on the subject. Question for you- whne the words "Old Law" are used, do you even know what that means? I would venture by your stance that you don't.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...