Bible passages about homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter mommy_k
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mommy_k

Guest
Can someone please provide?

Also, what is the most mentioned sin in the bible?

I need this for a debate with someone.–especially new testament verses for the first request. Thank you

Mommy K
 
Leviticus 18:22: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.”
Leviticus 20:13
'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death;

In the New Testament
Bible passages relating to homosexuality.

1 Corinthians 6:9: “Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor homosexuals nor sodomites … will inherit the kingdom of God.”

1 Timothy 1:10: “… law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly … the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching.”

Romans 1:26-27: “Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.”

Most mentioned sin in the bible: idolatory
 
mommy_k said:
Can someone please provide?

Also, what is the most mentioned sin in the bible?

I need this for a debate with someone.–especially new testament verses for the first request. Thank you

Mommy K
Click to expand...
I would suggest Raymond F. Collins, *Sexual Ethics and the New Testament: Belief and Behavior *(2000). He is a Professor of New Testament and former dean at Catholic University of America. His book has received favorable reviews for its detailed historical-critical research. Although he can be politically correct to the point of irritation sometimes, he consistently brings to light what Jesus and Paul actually conveyed by their words.

He acknowledges that homosexual behavior was a known fact of the ancient world, but goes on to note that there was a Jewish consensus against such behavior well before the time of Christ. Even non-biblical Jewish writings as far back as 250 BC distinguished the Jews from Gentiles by the fact that Jews did not engage in homosexual activity. Collins stresses that Paul was aware of and built on this consensus in his own writing.

Secondly, while it is self-evident that Paul’s generation did not know the Medieval formulation of the natural law, it is equally true that natural law theory goes back significantly before Christ to the Stoic idea of a “law of nature.” Roman writers later took over this idea. Cicero 50 years before Christ wrote one classic expression of it. Professor Collins observes that two Jewish contemporaries of Paul, Philo of Alexandria a philosopher and Flavius Josephus an historian, as well as Paul himself speak about “nature” (physis in Greek) with regard to homosexual activity. Philo and Josephus speak about homosexual acts as being against the laws of nature and Paul speaks about them as being “para physin”, which is correctly translated as “against or contrary to nature” (Romans 1:26-27). Collins goes on to say that by using the word “physis” these three were bringing themselves into dialogue with the philosophers of the time who emphasized a law of nature in their sexual ethics.

It is also self-evident that Paul could not have known the modern psychological definition of homosexuality. Nonetheless, according to Collins, it goes beyond the evidence of Paul’s words to claim his writings merely forbid certain actions while making no reference to one’s inclinations. Paul’s use of “physis” means what is natural by God’s creative intent in human beings. This coincides with Jesus’ vision of sexuality–that “from the beginning” it is heterosexual and within marriage.
 
mommy_k said:
Can someone please provide?

Also, what is the most mentioned sin in the bible?

I need this for a debate with someone.–especially new testament verses for the first request. Thank you

Mommy K
Click to expand...
It should be noted that in the New Testament, none of the apostles refers to Jesus’ condemnation of homosexuality since Jesus did not utter a word about the topic. And in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), the explicit references to homosexuality are only with regard to male homosexuality, not female homosexuality. The latter is added in the New Testament.
 
meltzerboy said:
It should be noted that in the New Testament, none of the apostles refers to Jesus’ condemnation of homosexuality since Jesus did not utter a word about the topic. And in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), the explicit references to homosexuality are only with regard to male homosexuality, not female homosexuality. The latter is added in the New Testament.
Click to expand...
Would it be safe to say that the verse mentioned would imply that both sexes not lie with their own?
 
kimg901 said:
Would it be safe to say that the verse mentioned would imply that both sexes not lie with their own?
Click to expand...
According to many Orthodox Jews, it cannot be implied. Therefore, they have relied on other passages of the Hebrew Bible, as well as the Oral Law, which suggest that Jews should not follow the customs of pagan countries, which included female homosexual behavior. Further, the “abomination” label attached to homosexuality is subject to interpretation in the eyes of Conservative and Reform Jews, based on the context of other verses, specific cultural proscriptions, and the Hebrew meanings of such terms in the hierarchy of moral culpability in keeping with the definitions of sin in Judaism.
 
On a subject which is SO controversial, in some respects, I think the Catechism of the Catholic Church falls short of providing practical guidance.

consider

1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.

This is a broad piece of advice, and I can’t see why it wouldn’t apply to the acting out of a person’s homosexuality, as follows,

It’s clear stated and understood that homosexual conduct is forbidden by the Bible, but the above-quoted paragraph seems to say that a person may not be GUILTY of that sin (or other “grave” conduct, like lying, stealing, or whatever) because of these other factors.

This paragraph does not deny the objective moral depravity of homosexuality, but it seems to say that a lot of sins are not necessarily to be imputed to a person, for the reasons vaguely stated above.

and , read on:

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

**2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.**

So, the church acknowledges that homosexuality is a psychological disorder, so it must be applicable to paragraph 1735, quoted above. No? Why talk about psychological disorders in the first place? I think that homosexuality is the ONLY psychological disorder mentioned in the Catechism. IF Paragraph 1735 does not apply to homosexuality, then words have lost their ordinary meaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top