scripture and homosexuality

[jay29]

in the new covenant of christ we are called to live the three commandments of love.

does your not not answering also mean it doesnt?

Didn’t Jesus state He didn’t come to destroy the Law?

Didn’t Jesus say Heaven and Earth will pass away before one letter of the Law will?

 

[feetxxxl]

No, brother - God’s commands (though not the Levitical law) are for all time, not just for the Old Covenant. Which is why Jesus told the rich young man that he had to OBEY the ten commandments of Moses if he would have eternal life, and loved him for his faithful obedience to them, and that is why theft, murder etc are just as sinful today as they were in Moses’ day!

YOU’RE STILL NOT GETTING IT. IF YOU LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. THEN YOU AUTOMATICALLY DONT MURDER, STEAL, BEAR FALSE WITNESS, ETC. AND IN ADDITON YOU FULFILL THE LAW…IN THE SAME WAY CHRIST DID.

True, Jesus gave the two GREAT commandments - but remember there are TWO of them, not just the one that you love to quote. And note the first and most important is loving God with our heart, mind, soul - and yes, our body. Our bodies belong to God first and foremost, not to ourselves, not to others, and our sexual faculties are to be used as HE mandates, not simply as we desire, yes?

WE LOVE GOD BECAUSE HE LOVED US FIRST. WE RETURN WHAT WE HAVE RECEIVED,AND IN THAT SAME LOVE WE LOVE OURSELVES, AND IN THAT SAME LOVE WE LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR.

Note too that this FIRST and greatest command sometimes conflicts with ‘loving’ (as we mistakenly perceive love) our neighbour. To underline this, Jesus said we must be prepared to HATE our family and friends for His sake, so the two commands aren’t equal and our mistaken ideas of ‘love they neighbour’ sometimes breaks the GREATEST command to love God above all else.
ANSWERED ABOVE
What I say is that if you TRULY love someone, then above all you want them to be saved, you want heaven for them. Nothing else in terms of making them feel good, or making yourself feel good, even the most wonderful emotional relationship with them, matters in the slightest if in gaining it you’ve damned your own soul and theirs.
WE DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO GIVE OR TAKE AWAY ANYONES SALVATION. EPHESIANS 2:8-9 WE ARE SAVED BY GRACE THRU FAITH, IT IS A GIFT FROM GOD, AND IT IS NOT BY WORKS, LEST ANY MAN SHOULD BOAST.

WORKS …ANYTHING A HUMAN DOES OR DOESNT DO

PAUL SAYS IN ROMANS WE DO NOT GAIN GOD’S RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FOLLOWING THE LAW.

THERE ARE A MILLION REASONS FOR FOLLOWING A LAW BESIDES LOVE. 1COR 13 SAYS ANYTHING DONE WITHOUT LOVE, DOES NOTHING AND GAINS NOTHING.
So if you truly love someone, above all you don’t want them to sin and you don’t want to lead them into sin. This is the supreme good and the ultimate form of love.

ALL YOU ARE DOING IS INCAPSULATING YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF SIN IN THE LEADING OF WHAT YOU THINK THE LAW SAYS…BEING LED BY THE LAW…CONSIDER OWNING THIS.

Now if God’s commands, including the command against homosexual sex, still are applicable, as Christ says they surely are, then you are in fact in serious danger of damning your own soul if you disobey them, by engaging in homosexual sex among the other sins, and dragging anyone else who you influence to disobey them into damnation with you.
WHERE IN SCRIPTURE DOES IT SAY THIS? IN FACT PLEASE ANNOTATE YOUR PARAPHRASING OF CHRIST’S AND GOD’S WORDS.

Quote:
so what is the spirit in being attracted to, wanting to have a shared committed relationship of sharing life’s joys and difficulties, successes and failures, wanting to be physically and emotionally close, which involves sexual intimacy which of itself is an affirmation of the devotion of the committed relationship, come against the summation of all the law. loving ones neighbor as oneself?

The spirit comes against it because it is a sinful spirit - one which mocks God’s laws regarding sex and marriage, which laws still apply every bit as much as the Ten Commandments do, as St Paul teaches us.

AGAIN FROM HERE ON DOWN YOU ARE LED BY YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW …AGAIN BEING LED BY THE LAW…AGAIN, CONSIDER OWNING IT
It is not a true spirit of love, nor is it true love either of self or neighbour, because it goes against how God bids us to express our love. And remember not all expressions of love are according to God’s will, not all are of His spirit, adulterous love certainly isn’t.

You can understand, surely, that an adulterous relationship may fulfil all the criteria

ADULTERY IS NOT POSSIBLE IF ONE LOVES NEIGHBOR, WITH THE LOVE HE RECEIVED FROM GOD, RETURNED TO GOD AND LOVES HIMSELF WITH.

you have listed, but is nonetheless wrong and NOT of God because it breaks one’s marital vows. One is bound to love one’s wedded spouse and forsake all others, so any adulterous relationship, no matter how wonderful, is NOT confoming to the command to love our neighbour.

So it is with homosexual sex - it fulfils your criteria but nonetheless is NOT of a true spirit of love of self and neighbour, since it goes against how God bids us express that love.

YOU ARE SAYING THAT ONE CANNOT LOVE ANOTHER OF THE SAME SEX WITH THE SAME DEVOTION AND COMMITTMENT AS A MAN CAN LOVE A WOMAN…

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT ONE OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS IS ABOUT FALSE WITNESS.

WITNESS…"THAT WHICH WE HAVE LOOKED AT, WHICH WE HAVE SEEN WITH OUR EYES AND HANDS HAVE TOUCHED(FELLOWSHIPPED)"1JOHN1

"IF WE WALK IN THE LIGHT AS HE IS IN THE LIGHT WE HAVE FELLOWSHIP WITH ONE ANOTHER"1JOHN1

WITNESS WITHOUT FELLOWSHIP IS WITNESS WITHOUT WALKING THE LIGHT …AND .WOULD BE BY DEFINITION BE WITNESS OF WALKING IN THE DARK.

AND THAT’S IF THERE IS EVEN A WITNESS…HAS THERE ACTUALLY BEEN A WITNESS…IN FELLOWSHIP?

Above all - if one truly loves oneself one desires salvation above all else - one desires it above even an emotional or any other relationship with others. As Christ warned us, one must be prepared to hate and offend all the world rather than do anything which is even potentially offensive to God, which homosexual sex certainly is.
AGAIN PLEASE ANNOTATE
Brother, think about these things. People have NOT changed so much since their creation that marriage and sex serve different functions today than they did in Adam and Eve’s time. And above all God certainly hasn’t changed HIS plans for sex and marriage, nor His laws about them.

---

YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT ACCORDING TO THE LAW ,MALES HAD UNLIMITED LICENSE WITH FEMALES AS LONG AS IT NOT BREAK LAWS OF PROPERTY.

MEN WERE ALLOWED CONCUBINES IN ADDITION TO MULTIPLE WIVES, WHICH WERE FOR SEXUAL PLEASURE.

JUDAH HAD SEX WIITH TAMAR(HIS DAUGHTER IN LAW) BECAUSE SHE PASSED HERSELF OFF AS A PROSTITUTE

 

[feetxxxl]

Didn’t Jesus state He didn’t come to destroy the Law?

Didn’t Jesus say Heaven and Earth will pass away before one letter of the Law will?

FULFILLMENT OF THE LAW IS LOVE, SO THAT IN LOVING OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELF, WE ARE FULFILLING THE LAW, THE COMMAMDMENT BEING THE SUMMATION OF ALL THE LAW.

 

[LilyM]

OF WHAT SPIRIT IS IT, THAT MAKES IT ILLEGITIMATE AND SINFUL?

Of the same spirit that is at the root of all sins - the spirit that influences us to prefer inferior things (including human love and respect and human relationships) to the will of God.

WOULD DAVID HAD TAKEN HIS NEIGHBOR’S WIFE IF HE HAD LOVE HIM AS HE LOVED HIMSELF.

David doesn’t seem to have THOUGHT he was doing anything wrong or not loving his neighbour by taking Bathsheba - and probably justified his behaviour to himself in similar terms to you justifying yours - that he loved her therefore it must be OK. It doesn’t seem to have been until Nathan spoke to him that he truly realised the wrongfulness of what he did.

FORNICATION IS SO BROAD…DOES THAT MEAN MARRIAGES PERFORMED AT VEGAS NUPTIAL DRIVE-INS ARE MARRIAGES…THEN THE STATE SHOULD BE CONDEMNED FOR ENCOURAGING SIN

In as far as marrying adulterous couples, yes. But the mere fact of a marriage being performed in Vegas or what have you certainly doesn’t make it sinful. If the couple are serious in their vows (and most actually are at the time of marriage) then they should hold to them regardless of where they married.

But that’s by the by. By ‘fornication’ I simply mean sexual sins that occur outside of marriage and thus do not constitute adultery. For example pornography, pre-marital sex (nowhere in Scripture is premarital sex condoned!) and the like.

EXACTLY AS IT SAYS LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOU LOVE YOURSELF…HOW, WHEN AND WHERE DO YOU LOVE YOURSELF?

THIS IS SO BROAD IT MAKES NO SENSE.

Allow me to try to explain it a little better then. Can we agree that salvation - heaven - is the best of all possible good things that a person can have, that all other good things (money, power, relationships) are good only in an inferior and lesser way?

If I truly love someone I desire what is MOST good for them, no? So I desire and do everything I can to bring about their salvation - I show them a good example, I teach them to avoid sin and so on.

Like a truly loving mother will teach her child to eat their vegetables and clean behind their ears because she knows these things are good for the child, whereas giving the child chocolate and leaving the child unbathed may make it feel better, but ultimately aren’t good for it.

So, it follows that I love myself best when I do what is conducive to my salvation and avoid sin. Which means I love myself best when I obey God’s law, among doing other things, including His law against homosexual sex.

Likewise I love others best when I do what is conducive to their salvation and teach them likewise to avoid sin. Which means I love THEM best when I don’t lead THEM into sin (for example by having gay sex with them - or adulterous or any other kind of illicit sex).

I DON’T truly love myself or others when I wallow in sentiment and warm fuzzy feelings towards them that I mistakenly call ‘love’, and under that false guise give in to sinful inclinations.

WHICH MEANS BEING LED BY THE LAW…WHY DONT YOU OWN IT?

If by ‘being led by the law’ you mean recognising that the Law is based solely in love and fulfiilling it out of love for God who instituted it, then have no intention of not owning it.

After all, ‘love IS the fulfilling of the Law’, as you say, but that verse doesn’t mean that you can do whatever you want and call it ‘love’ and thus claim it is of God as you do.

On the contrary, you need to read that verse together with Jesus’ other statements such as ‘if you love me you will keep my commandments’, which clearly show the verse to mean that we can love God BY and THROUGH fulfilling His law and keeping His commandments.

So love and the Law go hand in hand and don’t contradict each other as you seem to think. Neither is ‘love’ an excuse for any behaviour that is contrary to the commandments.

Where you’re going wrong is thinking that love of neighbour necessarily and always equates to the greater command, which is love of God above all. It doesn’t, especially when we have a mistaken notion of what love of neighbour means, and sometimes ‘love’ (as we misinterpret it) of neighbour directly contradicts the greater command to love God.

 

[feetxxxl]

Of the same spirit that is at the root of all sins - the spirit that influences us to prefer inferior things (including human love and respect and human relationships) to the will of God.

David doesn’t seem to have THOUGHT he was doing anything wrong or not loving his neighbour by taking Bathsheba - and probably justified his behaviour to himself in similar terms to you justifying yours - that he loved her therefore it must be OK. It doesn’t seem to have been until Nathan spoke to him that he truly realised the wrongfulness of what he did.

In as far as marrying adulterous couples, yes. But the mere fact of a marriage being performed in Vegas or what have you certainly doesn’t make it sinful. If the couple are serious in their vows (and most actually are at the time of marriage) then they should hold to them regardless of where they married.

But that’s by the by. By ‘fornication’ I simply mean sexual sins that occur outside of marriage and thus do not constitute adultery. For example pornography, pre-marital sex (nowhere in Scripture is premarital sex condoned!) and the like.

Allow me to try to explain it a little better then. Can we agree that salvation - heaven - is the best of all possible good things that a person can have, that all other good things (money, power, relationships) are good only in an inferior and lesser way?

If I truly love someone I desire what is MOST good for them, no? So I desire and do everything I can to bring about their salvation - I show them a good example, I teach them to avoid sin and so on.

Like a truly loving mother will teach her child to eat their vegetables and clean behind their ears because she knows these things are good for the child, whereas giving the child chocolate and leaving the child unbathed may make it feel better, but ultimately aren’t good for it.

So, it follows that I love myself best when I do what is conducive to my salvation and avoid sin. Which means I love myself best when I obey God’s law, among doing other things, including His law against homosexual sex.

Likewise I love others best when I do what is conducive to their salvation and teach them likewise to avoid sin. Which means I love THEM best when I don’t lead THEM into sin (for example by having gay sex with them - or adulterous or any other kind of illicit sex).

I DON’T truly love myself or others when I wallow in sentiment and warm fuzzy feelings towards them that I mistakenly call ‘love’, and under that false guise give in to sinful inclinations.

If by ‘being led by the law’ you mean recognising that the Law is based solely in love and fulfiilling it out of love for God who instituted it, then have no intention of not owning it.

After all, ‘love IS the fulfilling of the Law’, as you say, but that verse doesn’t mean that you can do whatever you want and call it ‘love’ and thus claim it is of God as you do.

On the contrary, you need to read that verse together with Jesus’ other statements such as ‘if you love me you will keep my commandments’, which clearly show the verse to mean that we can love God BY and THROUGH fulfilling His law and keeping His commandments.

So love and the Law go hand in hand and don’t contradict each other as you seem to think. Neither is ‘love’ an excuse for any behaviour that is contrary to the commandments.

Where you’re going wrong is thinking that love of neighbour necessarily and always equates to the greater command, which is love of God above all. It doesn’t, especially when we have a mistaken notion of what love of neighbour means, and sometimes ‘love’ (as we misinterpret it) of neighbour directly contradicts the greater command to love God.

I BELIEVE I ANSWERED THIS, IN RESPONDING TO YOUR NEXT EMAIL

 

[LilyM]

I BELIEVE I ANSWERED THIS, IN RESPONDING TO YOUR NEXT EMAIL

Stop typing all in capitals, it’s the equivalent of shouting and is incredibly rude.

Firstly - stop with this false dichotomy betwen love and the Law. The two DO go hand in hand, although some people do the works of the law without the love.

Love is a matter of both the will (choosing to do loving things like breakfast in bed, making dinner for the beloved and so on) and the emotions, and it’s not real love without both the will and the emotions being involved. In terms of God this means we must BOTH obey His commands AND combine that with sentiments of love towards Him.

The two must go hand in hand, true, but to say that the loving emotion towards God has to come before loving acts of the will (obeying His commands) is ridiculous - it’s like arguing that the chicken came before the egg.

Ask anyone who has been in a successful long term relationship - sometimes love is a matter of FORCING yourself to act in a loving way even when you DON’T ‘feel it’. Although if you were always forcing yourself that would indicate that something was deeply wrong.

A lot of parents, similarly, will tell you that the actions (looking after the child, feeding and bathing them) came first and the emotion came later. But would you DARE to assert that that parent didn’t love their child from the instant they were born? They’d violently disagree.

So you are creating an absolutely false distinction when you try to separate the loving act of obeying God’s commands and the emotion of love towards Him that comes from the Holy Spirit and insist that the one must come before the other.

And you don’t seem to understand about sexuality or marriage either - the amount of committment, devotion, and even ‘love’ that a man and woman, or man and man, have for each other has absolutely no bearing on whether their relationship is of God or acceptable to Him or not. There are many totally committed and loving couples who are nonetheless in sinful relationships - for lots of different reasons. Homosexuals among them. Weren’t David and Bathsheba committed and devoted to each other, after all?

As I said (which you didn’t bother to respond to) David probably said the same thing when considering taking Bathsheba that you are saying here - ‘she and I love each other therefore it’s OK’ - well it wasn’t for him and it isn’t for you.

Ask yourself this - and then tell the rest of us - what would you do if tomorrow your pastor or whoever this ‘anointed’ teacher is who has been instructing you in your faith turned around and said ‘you know what, I’ve been reading this all wrong, see here … and here … and here … homosexual behaviour is actually wrong’?

Would you give even half a second’s thought to the fact that they may be right, that homosexual acts might REALLY be wrong, or would you simply be out of there in a heartbeat looking for some other ‘anointed’ teacher to tell you what YOU want to hear and not God’s truth?

 

[feetxxxl]

Stop typing all in capitals, it’s the equivalent of shouting and is incredibly rude.

IT MAKES IT EASIER WHEN I GO BACK AND REEDIT

Firstly - stop with this false dichotomy betwen love and the Law. The two DO go hand in hand, although some people do the works of the law without the love.

<all law…written code requires interruptation. for instance “neighbor” meant anyone in your own tribe, in the old covenant, in christ it means everyone

Love is a matter of both the will (choosing to do loving things like breakfast in bed, making dinner for the beloved and so on) and the emotions, and it’s not real love without both the will and the emotions being involved. In terms of God this means we must BOTH obey His commands AND combine that with sentiments of love towards Him.

The two must go hand in hand, true, but to say that the loving emotion towards God has to come before loving acts of the will (obeying His commands) is ridiculous - it’s like arguing that the chicken came before the egg.

you are confusing the love of 1cor13 with something emotional. do you think that in gal5 the fruit of the spirit, is simply emotional feeling. no, each of the nine are spirit. spirit creating spirit. one of the fruit is love, the love that is god. in some cases this love has none of the appearnaces of human understanding of love.

where would the sin be? there is no spirit of homosexual bonding that is of the sin nature. homosexuals bond of the same spirit as heterosexuals. they are not found wanting in any sector of socierty compared to heterosexuals. where is the sin?

why do you put so little credibility in jesus 's words" we would recognize them by their fruit" essence of spirit.

what do you think lasts…the shared devotion that gay believers have to each other in their marital relationship, in their belief in christ or your understanding of the law?

from all you answers would my conclusion be wrong, that you have witnessed no spirit in homosexual bonding that comes against the spirit of the commandment. your objection comes from your understanding of the law.

am i also to understand that your entire commentary on homosexuality is without any witness?

 

[Bwsherman]

In case anyone is interested…

the traditional Jewish view of homosexuality is that the ACT is sinful, but not the DESIRE (as I understand it, this is also the RC view.)

This is how a Jew (even an Orthodox Jew!) can technically BE a person with a homosexual orientation, but as long as he remains celibate and does not act upon the desire, he has not sinned.

Traditional Judaism, as far as I know, takes no stand on female homosexuality…the sin involved in active male homosexuality involves the wasting of seed (which females cannot do), as well as the fact that in ancient times, male homosexuality was often part of pagan worship.

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut. I am afraid that even though your stance corresponds to that of the Catholic Church it is going to fall on deaf ears. Thanks again though. It was good to get some new perspective.

 

[revelations]

why do you put so little credibility in jesus 's words" we would recognize them by their fruit" essence of spirit.

I know a homosexual who taught our RCIA class. He lives a chaste life, and in fact is married and has a wife. He follows the word of God, and loves God above all else.

Here is the testimony of another ex-homosexual:
davidmacd.com/web_pages/gay_testimony.htm

Here’s a sample:

Many people in the MCC really did yearn for God, but the culture of denial was very strong and no one dared question the morality of same sex relationships. They considered such questions “hate.” They used words like tolerance, inclusiveness, and diversity. So everybody at the Church got along fine as long as no one talked about the elephant in the middle of the room, which was the sex. People were encouraged to consider the Bible cafeteria style, “take what you like and leave the rest.” They dismissed Bible quotes against gay sex by saying, “God is love, the Bible is outdated, theologians disagree etc…, so gay sex is fine.” I have a full discussion of the Bible and gay sex here.

Please, read the whole thing. Essentially, you are saying the same thing. “Disregard the law of God and consider the spirit of homosexuality”

Now, for the other part. Feetxxxl, it is clear that you don’t want to hear what we have to tell you. It is clear that you have decided to remain in your error. We here who have been posting have fulfilled our Christian duty to inform you of your errors, but out of pride, or fear, or whatever, you have chosen to ignore the truth. We will pray for you.

The episcopal church is full of errors, and we have them to thank for the current state and acceptance of birth control today. A church that uses the popular opinion of its members to decide dogma and orthodoxy is not a church that fulfills the will of God, especially by adopting positions that contradict the scriptures and spirit of Christ so deeply.

I left the episcopal church a long while ago, especially when the priest started talking about how sex is God’s gift to us. Wrong, life and the ability to create life, is God’s gift.

I will pray for you.

 

[LilyM]

where would the sin be? there is no spirit of homosexual bonding that is of the sin nature. homosexuals bond of the same spirit as heterosexuals. they are not found wanting in any sector of socierty compared to heterosexuals. where is the sin?

It’s not for you, being in a homosexual relationship, to determine whether it is ‘of God’ or not. No-one who sincerely but mistakenly sins even dreams that they’re doing something which isn’t sinful - nonetheless they are mistaken and they DO sin.

Not found wanting in any sector of society? Really? That’s why gays are free to marry exactly as heterosexuals are in every jurisdiction on the planet, hmmm? THAT is society’s judgement - knowledge, based on ‘witness’ if you will, and collective experience - that gays ARE in fact incapable of forming a valid marriage. They ARE found wanting, in this regard if no other.

If I enter into a relationship with my brother or my father - presuming I hadn’t grown up with them and never had a relationship with them AS father or brother) - I could make exactly all the same arguments you’re making, and with just as much truth.

I could say that I had genuine deep love, devotion and commitment, the same as any heterosexual woman has for a man, and that in my eyes and according to my experience and ‘witness’ the relationship was of a good spirit and of God. I could do more than you - I could trot out the example of Abraham and Sarah who in fact were half brother and sister. None of this would make my position a single bit true or make me anything other than a sinner.

And it’s not enough for you that the Bible AND your teacher have told you, in almost so many words, that gay sex is wrong? See how you’ve proven exactly everything that I told you about you only wanting to hear what pleases you rather than God’s truth? The teacher wouldn’t tell you what you want to hear, so of course they’re the ones that are wrong.

why do you put so little credibility in jesus 's words" we would recognize them by their fruit" essence of spirit.

I recognise you by your fruit and see nothing in it that is of God or the Holy Spirit, and everything that is of stiffneckedly wanting your own way and not His. Of course you’re going to disagree - every sinner does disagree about their pet sins being sins.

what do you think lasts…the shared devotion that gay believers have to each other in their marital relationship, in their belief in christ or your understanding of the law?

MY (by which you mean the Christian world’s) understanding of law existed for 1,800 years before you or your gay partners (and whatever you or the law may end up calling your relationships they are NOT marriages in God’s eyes) were born. And it will continue to exist long after you’re all dead. Don’t make me laugh by talking about your ‘love’ being lasting.

There’s no question that your so-called ‘marriage’ doesn’t count for anything compared to God’s law or my (which I emphasise again is the collective Christian 1,800-year-long) understanding of it.

I’m not aware of any homosexual relationship (and I know WAY more than my fair share of homosexual relationships, so don’t assume I know nothing) that has lasted anywhere near as long as the average marriage does, so to even talk about gay devotion and commitment being comparable to heterosexual is laughable.

from all you answers would my conclusion be wrong, that you have witnessed no spirit in homosexual bonding that comes against the spirit of the commandment. your objection comes from your understanding of the law.

Yes your conclusion would be wrong. Of course I have witnessed an evil spirit in association with homosexual bonding (if by that you mean homosexual sex and homosexual marriage). A spirit that is contrary to the commandment.

Gays, in my experience, love only two things. One is their own pleasure. The other is their own false idea of what God really wants of them. They’ve made a false idol of their sexuality, and worship it instead of the true God, as is admirably demonstrated in your failure to listen to your teacher because he or she didn’t tickle your ears with what you wanted to hear.

I’ve witnessed the disintegration of our society, its morals and values, its Godliness, a degradation of the institution and sacrament of marriage itself, directly associated with increasing acceptance of homosexual relationships. Any attempt to classify these as ‘marriages’ can only degrade God’s sacrament even further than it has been already, and that you would desire such ruin certainly means you don’t love your neighbour either.

 

[Eden]

THEN WHY DONT YOU SIMPLY ANSWER MY QUESTION? HOW DOES IT COME AGAINST THE COMMANDMENT?

by not answering my question are you saying it doesnt?

This is starting to remind me of the old Saturday Night Live sketch about Mr. Short-Term memory, who used to ask the same questions over and over again because he had forgotten that the question had just been answered.

 

[feetxxxl]

Not found wanting in any sector of society? Really? That’s why gays are free to marry exactly as heterosexuals are in every jurisdiction on the planet, hmmm? THAT is society’s judgement - knowledge, based on ‘witness’ if you will, and collective experience - that gays ARE in fact incapable of forming a valid marriage. They ARE found wanting, in this regard if no other.

they are denied thru an understanding of the law, not by anything of spirit. of the gay marriages performed in massachussetts, is there any indication that they are trending toward the 50% heterosexual divorce rate, or that they are any where near the divorce rate of heterosexual marriages that were performed during the same time period as those gay marriages.

for 1900 years the world wide consensus denied women being able to vote( because eve was credited with the fall of adam), children had absolutely no rights,(because the law allowed only thoase rights they received thru their father, and ethnic slavery was condoned(sanction by pope innocent Vlll who also supported the spanish inquisition)

the taboo about incest is because of biology

not interested in hypotheticals

my understanding is through the teachiong of ther new covenant.

ithess test everything , keep the good

you will recognize them by their fruit. fruit being fruit of the spirit, paul said in romans that we are led and serve in the spirit.

my test is thru witness in fellowship…is up close and personnal

"that which we have looked at, have seen with our eyes and our hands have touched"1john1

it has been thru carrying their burdens(sermon on the mount), walking in their shoes(fellowship), and in community of worship and intercessory prayer.

"if we walk in the light as he is in the light we have fellowship with one another"1john1

surely any witness that is not in walking in the light…is a witness of darkness.

what is your test of fellowship witness?

for someone who is so concerned with the ten commandments i am amazed your lack of concern for “false witness”. i would have thought the first thing you would have done would have to go the churches that support homosexuallity, believers who share your same inheritance, to make a face to face witness of what you consider a sin, if for no other reason than out of love for your brothers and sisters in christ.

“Gays, in my experience, love only two things. One is their own pleasure. The other is their own false idea of what God really wants of them. They’ve made a false idol of their sexuality, and worship it instead of the true God, as is admirably demonstrated in your failure to listen to your teacher because he or she didn’t tickle your ears with what you wanted to hear.”

it is interesting in this heterosexually obsessed society, with its strip joints, sexual manipulation of the market place, the hedonistic rituals of college spring break, you would accused homosexuals with heterosexual log in your own eye.

do you realize how far homosexuals will have to go to be any where near the 50% divorce rate of heterosexual marriage?

by your broad statements and your lack of interest in being a scripturally valid witness, you appear to be more concerned with protecting position than in attempting to seek the truth.

is your witness is merely an overview which is influenced by church doctrine?

am i to understand that your winesst is for the 320 million world wide.(4% of 8 billion)

again …what is your test…according to scriptures description of a valid witness?..as in 1john1

 

[revelations]

you will recognize them by their fruit. fruit being fruit of the spirit, paul said in romans that we are led and serve in the spirit.

Dude, list me some of the good fruit that is borne solely of homosexuals. List me the good fruit that only active LGBT people can provide.

My test is that God intended us to “Go forth and multiply”, now tell me, how can gay couples fulfill this? Explain to me how gay couples can fulfill this commandment, the very first, of God?

 

[revelations]

do you realize how far homosexuals will have to go to be any where near the 50% divorce rate of heterosexual marriage?

 

[revelations]

Finally something to consider is the city of san francisco. Do they adequately represent the fruit of the gay movement? Is this the fruit you speak of:
folsomstreetfair.org/

Or this (WARNING EXPLICIT, NOT SAFE FOR WORK):
zombietime.com/folsom_sf_2007_part_1/index.php

Open air orgies for all to see, even in front of children present at the fair? Is THIS the spirit you speak of?

I think you would be hard pressed to find ANY heterosexual activity that is so lewd and public and focused solely on sex. So you sir, take the log out of your eye.

Are these examples of what we can expect in the future?

 

[LilyM]

feetxxxl;3741121:

Can you guess why the divorce rate is so high? Can you guess any of the reasons?

I’ll give you one, that is the de-sanctification of the once holy sacrament of matrimony. Now you can get married wherever you want, and the marriage between a man and a woman has in most cases been reduced to a legal agreement.

Another is that the definition of marriage is being blurred, now men can marry other men and women other women.

The institution of marriage is under a full scale attack from gay groups. The end effect is that marriage isnt seen as something special anymore, hence the divorce rate is high. I am willing to bet you a fair amount of money that if gay couples are allowed to marry on a large scale, they will approach, and even rival the current rate of heterosexual marriage dissolutions.

Amen - you want some actual statistics, feet? A male gay marriage in Sweden, where gay marriage HAS been legal for ten years, has a 50% higher chance of breaking up than a heterosexual marriage, the average female gay marriage has a 170% higher chance of breaking up (source: saltshakers.org.au/html/P/9/B/288/)

Why the massive disparity if gay married couples are just as committed to each other as heterosexual married couples, hmmm? It’s nothing to do with the law (the law is the same for all, at least in Sweden, right?) and everything to do with the inherent instability of gay relationships RIGHT across the board - in every single country, regardless of legal status.

THAT is the fruit by which I judge gay relationships, and it is NOT a good fruit.

 

[rusty20]

I read the first 10-ish pages, and had quite a bit of good laughs.

Everyone is so hung up on translation. In the Catholic vs. ALL mentality of these boards, the translation of the particular verse is given 100% precedent. It is an endless battle.

I saw, countless times, the “anti-homosexual” (thats my label, deal with it ) posters quote scripturee from various translations of the bible which clearly indiciate homosexual ACTS are sinful by their very nature.

While reading the “pro-homosexual” responses, I couldn’t help but laugh at how they denied straight-forward quotes and passages. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of homosexual acts. It Is In The Bible. That is why sodomy is named so. this is not hard to comprehend. it seems like the “pro-homosexual” crowd in this thread refuse to accept they are wrong and continually make some type of “thats not the way I see/interpret that passage” cop out. Its very simple: Homosexual acts are continually condemned by the Bible. Nothing anybody says or feels can change this.

ALSO: People seem to think any translation of the Bible, especially their own, is valid. I disagree, to an extent. If you believe that God has a code of morals set out for us (no killing, stealing, etc), then you probably agree this is in the Bible. God’s divinely inspired word has a distinct purpose and meaning. thus, a specific correct meaning of the Biblical texts exists. i’m not here to say which meaning that is (Catholic Church ), but just to see if anybody understands my point…

 

[truagape]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut. I am afraid that even though your stance corresponds to that of the Catholic Church it is going to fall on deaf ears. Thanks again though. It was good to get some new perspective.

Howdy!! I was just wondering if you ever got your hands on that Jerusalem Bible.

 

[feetxxxl]

I read the first 10-ish pages, and had quite a bit of good laughs.

Everyone is so hung up on translation. In the Catholic vs. ALL mentality of these boards, the translation of the particular verse is given 100% precedent. It is an endless battle.

I saw, countless times, the “anti-homosexual” (thats my label, deal with it ) posters quote scripturee from various translations of the bible which clearly indiciate homosexual ACTS are sinful by their very nature.

While reading the “pro-homosexual” responses, I couldn’t help but laugh at how they denied straight-forward quotes and passages. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of homosexual acts. It Is In The Bible. That is why sodomy is named so. this is not hard to comprehend. it seems like the “pro-homosexual” crowd in this thread refuse to accept they are wrong and continually make some type of “thats not the way I see/interpret that passage” cop out. Its very simple: Homosexual acts are continually condemned by the Bible. Nothing anybody says or feels can change this.

ALSO: People seem to think any translation of the Bible, especially their own, is valid. I disagree, to an extent. If you believe that God has a code of morals set out for us (no killing, stealing, etc), then you probably agree this is in the Bible. God’s divinely inspired word has a distinct purpose and meaning. thus, a specific correct meaning of the Biblical texts exists. i’m not here to say which meaning that is (Catholic Church ), but just to see if anybody understands my point…

please annotate, and give an explanation of what is annotated.

 

[wisdomseeker]

in the new covenant of christ we are called to live the three commandments of love.

does your not not answering also mean it doesnt?

where did you read in the SS that the love Jesus talks about has anything to do with sex?
please answer me this.

distortion, distortion, distortion.
the devil did it in the Garden of Eden.