scripture and homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter feetxxxl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
feetxxxl said:
i’ve been waiting for levitical law to be explained thru romans new covenant understanding, that" love your neighbor as yourself "is the summation of all the law.

and that under the new covenant, we dont have the old relationship to the written code. the law helps us to be conscious of sin, but not sin of regulation, because we dont have the old relationship to the written code, because now sin is about violation of spirit. because in christ we are now led by and serve of the spirit.

in other words sin under the new covenant is about …not wearing mixed fabric, doing household chores on the sabbath, or that marriage can only be between a man and a woman, etc…but sin is now about that which comes against the spirit of the commmandment, the commandment being about spirit, and about that which is against the fruit of the spirit a(gal5) which is the essence of the spirit of god
Click to expand...
Thaks for that.

How come I have 10-posts more than you and you are a ‘regular’ member while I am still a ‘new’ member? :eek:
 
I happen to have a couple homosexuals in my life who, aside from the gay thing, live generous, compassionate lives, and it’s hard for me to believe that God would instill a natural urge in them which was absolutely contrary to His law. I think someday we will discover a “gay” gene, or genetic abnormality which will not necessarily have the Church saying “we’re okay with gay”, but maybe not being so fast to condemn them, much the way the Chuch has addressed suicide, with consideration to severe mental illness. While I believe it is their hurdle to overcome, I don’t believe it is for any one of us to decide the truth between them and God. All we can offer is love to homosexuals, as we do with all our brothers and sisters, for we are all guilty of sin each and every day. Just because his sin is a public lifestyle that people know about, doesn’t make it any worse than the sin I hold private to myself.
 
See, I am heterosexual. Any sex that I have outside of the bonds of marriage is a sin. Period. My urges or intentions do not matter. How I am for the rest of my life does not matter. It is the same way for someone who has SSA. Any sex that they have outside of marriage is a sin.

It does not matter if there is a gene or not SSA is no stronger than heterosexual urges. Basically, sex within marraiige is ok, sex outside is a sin.
 
Agreed, sex outside marriage is a sin. Fornication, perversion, whatever you want to call it. But I can’t bring myself to believe that our forgiving God would condemn them all to hell for it. Why is their fornication any worse than some unmarried heterosexuals’? I just find it disheartening that we’re so quick to point the finger at someone who WE believe has sinned, and try to prove their sin in the Bible, instead of loving them, and praying for them, and letting God decide. If they were sinning in their hearts, don’t you think they already know that? I’d say at that point it’s between them and God.
 
leslierx82 said:
If they were sinning in their hearts, don’t you think they already know that?
Click to expand...
No, I don’t think so, and I think you’ve hit upon the crux of the matter.

You can sin against God, in doing something you believe is not a sin. That is to say you may not be “sinning against your heart” , while sinning in your heart, against God.

For example, this thread starts with denying that the scripture condemns homosexuality. That theme is continued, where it’s stated that it’s not a sin. They sincerely believe it is not a sin, and so they do not " know" they are sinning.
 
I don’t know…I always thought that if you do something that you KNOW is against what God would want, that was a sin. So if someone doesn’t KNOW what they are doing is wrong, how is this sin? You could say, God instills the knowledge of right and wrong in them, so they are conscious of sin when it is committed, but that contradicts your other argument, that people can commit sins against God without sinning against their heart. If God has gifted the notion of right and wrong, they would have knowledge of this and therefore, a sin against God would be a sin against their heart. Contrarily, that which is not a sin against one’s heart would not be a sin against God, if God had given wisdom of knowing right from wrong already.
Ignorance is not grounds for condemnation.
 
leslierx82 said:
I happen to have a couple homosexuals in my life who, aside from the gay thing, live generous, compassionate lives, and it’s hard for me to believe that God would instill a natural urge in them which was absolutely contrary to His law. I think someday we will discover a “gay” gene, or genetic abnormality which will not necessarily have the Church saying “we’re okay with gay”, but maybe not being so fast to condemn them, much the way the Chuch has addressed suicide, with consideration to severe mental illness. While I believe it is their hurdle to overcome, I don’t believe it is for any one of us to decide the truth between them and God. All we can offer is love to homosexuals, as we do with all our brothers and sisters, for we are all guilty of sin each and every day. Just because his sin is a public lifestyle that people know about, doesn’t make it any worse than the sin I hold private to myself.
Click to expand...
I’m sure Hitler, apart from the hatred for Jews thing, probably also lived a generous, compassionate life. A lot of people who knew him intimately seem to have had a deal of good to say about him as a human being. Do you think Hitler’s sin was because of a ‘God-given urge’, or was it rather something else that made him flout God’s law? Original sin and concupiscent human nature maybe?

See humans have all sorts of urges. Where they come from ultimately is up for debate - but it’s what we do with those urges that makes the difference between a godly and ungodly life. We have urges to eat but some of us abuse food, we have urges to drink but some abuse alcohol. We have angry feelings, some lash out and hurt others. And we have sexual urges which we also misuse - whether it be adultery, fornication or homosexuality.
 
I think most would argue that there is a vast difference between the mass genocide of 30 million (??) Jews and being a homosexual. I’m still not saying it’s “right” to be gay, merely that it’s WRONG to condemn those who are. And that recent realizations about mental illness and genetic abnormalities may make a difference in how we view those who are different. If you are genetically a frog, you will always be a frog, and though you may try not to, you will ultimately eat flies. Some are born with mental disabilities, such as Down’s Syndrome. Does this mean that they are to be held liable when they simply walk into a store and proceed to eat candy they haven’t paid for? I’m just saying that all of us sin, and as long as we’re loving one another, we should not be condemned by man for what is God’s to decide.
 
Some are born with mental disabilities, such as Down’s Syndrome. Does this mean that they are to be held liable when they simply walk into a store and proceed to eat candy they haven’t paid for.

That’s what I was trying to get across. :This down syndrom person HAS committed a crime, whether they see it or not, and someone is going to have to provide for reparations.

And what you call condemnation is a facet of persons trying to tell the down syndrome person what they are doing is wrong, so they have to stop.
 
Actually, there is a difference between judgment and condemnation. Judgment is a morality-based guideline which we can make decisions in favor or against certain criteria. Condemnation is stepping in for God and stating that certain things are so, a.k.a. “Damning” those for their wrongdoings.

We can make judgments; we should not pass condemnations. Every person deserves love and respect, and we are obligated to offer no less.
 
In my understanding judgment in favor is acceptance, and judgment in opposition is condemnation.

hate the sin, love the sinner. after all, right?
 
leslierx82 said:
I think most would argue that there is a vast difference between the mass genocide of 30 million (??) Jews and being a homosexual. I’m still not saying it’s “right” to be gay, merely that it’s WRONG to condemn those who are. And that recent realizations about mental illness and genetic abnormalities may make a difference in how we view those who are different. If you are genetically a frog, you will always be a frog, and though you may try not to, you will ultimately eat flies. Some are born with mental disabilities, such as Down’s Syndrome. Does this mean that they are to be held liable when they simply walk into a store and proceed to eat candy they haven’t paid for? I’m just saying that all of us sin, and as long as we’re loving one another, we should not be condemned by man for what is God’s to decide.
Click to expand...
I find it interesting that you lump homosexuality in with mental illness and genetic abnormalities…
 
Heterosexual sex outside of marriage is the same type of sin as homosexual sex: a mortal one. There is no difference from that aspect. Both will send the unrepentant to hell.

There is a difference between not knowing and not accepting something as a sin. On another thread, we see FreeMasons who do not know that one cannot be a Catholic and a Freemason. The fact that they did not know before that day reduces the level of culpability that they have. Some, however, know but cannot accept it. They have different reasons, from not thinking that the Church can make that pronouncement to thinking that, at least in the US, the information used to make the decision was bad. That does not reduce the level of culpabilty in the same way. I strongly doubt that there are many people who do not know the Church’s stance on homosexual sex.

Is it fair that those with SSA are denied the same ability to find a mate as heterosexuals? Yes and no. In the eyes of hte world, no it is not fair. They should have just as much of a chance to have intimate relationships as others. IN the eyes of God, yes, as this is the cross that they have to bear. DO not forget that in the Bible, those who sacrifice sex for the kingdom are blessed.

We live in a world that is both self-centered and self-gratifying. The fact is that the message that the church has goes against both of these aspects. I am sorry that it is difficult, but life is difficult.

I was one of the ones who made the statement about the old Mosaic Laws. Yes, the new Commandments are to love God with all of your being and to Love your neighbor as yourself. How is it love to send your neighbor to hell? Sex outside of marriage is a sin. There is no way around that.
 
feetxxxl said:
“Someone else already explained about the moral vs. ritual laws. The moral code was left, ritual replaced. The ten commandments being an example.”

slavery is now considered an intolerable evil… was that not part of the moral code?
Click to expand...
Chattel slavery and the slavery of the Levitical code are two very (VERY) different things. Yes: chattel slavery is always morally evil. But the slavery of the Levitical code is more like indentured servitude, limited in time, done with the consent of the “slave”, and with a lot of built-in protections. Calling both systems by the same word is confusing (like using the word “law” for 1) civil codes, 2) moral codes, 3) ritual codes, 4) thermodynamics, and 5) motion.
 
Delora said:
No, I don’t think so, and I think you’ve hit upon the crux of the matter.

You can sin against God, in doing something you believe is not a sin. That is to say you may not be “sinning against your heart” , while sinning in your heart, against God.

For example, this thread starts with denying that the scripture condemns homosexuality. That theme is continued, where it’s stated that it’s not a sin. They sincerely believe it is not a sin, and so they do not " know" they are sinning.
Click to expand...
Good insight. When the eyes of the heart are darkened, they cannot see. Nevertheless, we have the obligation to inform our conscience and to conform our hearts to the divine and natural law.

The idea that “God” “makes” people have desires that go against the natural order is perplexing to me. The fact that one desires something does not automatically translate into the idea that God put the desire in my heart.

And, as others note: we spend a LOT more of our lives NOT having sex than havng it, whether we are married or not. And even withing marriage, the amount of time we spend controlling our sexual urges outweighs the time we spend satisfying them to such an extent that one sometimes is inclined to believe that celibacy might actually be easier.
 
leslierx82 said:
Agreed, sex outside marriage is a sin. Fornication, perversion, whatever you want to call it. But I can’t bring myself to believe that our forgiving God would condemn them all to hell for it. Why is their fornication any worse than some unmarried heterosexuals’? I just find it disheartening that we’re so quick to point the finger at someone who WE believe has sinned, and try to prove their sin in the Bible, instead of loving them, and praying for them, and letting God decide. If they were sinning in their hearts, don’t you think they already know that? I’d say at that point it’s between them and God.
Click to expand...
Wait. Who said homosexual sin is “worse” than heterosexual fornication. NOT! Thish thread was started by someone advocating the homosexual lifestyle; so nobody is pointing any fingers.

What is “between a person and God” is the state of his soul. What is public is a lifestyle and the articulation of doctrine.
 
Tim_Hayes said:
xixxvmcm85

You have to tell me what you specifically disagree with first. Hell go onto various homosexual activist web sites and check out the claims they make for the purpose of court action, many in court document site the 1-3% figure.

I also work in the investigation field as a police officer, at various times specifically inviestigating sexual abuse crimes reported by adults in relation to the sexual abuse they received when they were young, and guess what not surprisingly many of them were are or had been practicing homosexuals, naturally enough quite a lot weren’t, but an awful lot were.

To even critique what I have said shows me that you have no understanding of human nature whatsoever, It is a simple fact that as humans we have free choice and whilst the natural tendancy is towards heterosexuality, that natural tendancy can be “easily” warped over time.

In fact imagine how these young boys feel, someone shows them fatherly type affection, showers them with “love” and then one day starts putting the moves onto these boys, who in many cases are very vulnerable. Imagine someone who is a fatherly type figure saying that sex between men and boys is a natural.

Well at the end of the day sex is a basic carnal instinct and it is a natural desire to achieve sexual satisfaction, so all you have to do is mould the conditons upon which sexual satisfaction is achieved and suddenly you have environmentally effected change. That is why a huge number of homosexuals report being abused when they were younger.

Are you not aware of studies doen for eg. that show a disproportionately higher number of homosexuals amongst single mothers than married mothers.

In fact snce your in the jail system you should realise that quite a lot of men turn towards homosexual behaviour within prison and subsequently don’t “practice” it when released.

I used to supply facts regularly to people and show them where they are from, but most of us like to be blind when it is something we don’t like to accept.

Once we attach emotions to a relationship then it is so much harder to be critical, so naturally enough If I tell you that something is wrong tomorrow, but you know nice people who do it, then it is natural to want to excuse the behaviour.

I have a geat deal of sympathy for those who are homosexual because many if not most of them whether born that way or environmentally made that way have a hard life, but then so do many people.

Geez in many ways I hope people are born with the problem, that way when we all stand before God, surely he must look and judge accordingly and have compassion for a problem born out of a very strong natural tendancy towards sexual gratification gone wrong.
Click to expand...
I disagree with your purported statistics. Please don’t confuse my calling you out on your incorrect numbers as a condoning of homosexual behavior.

Your appeal to “jailhouse behavior” leads me to believe that I may have misunderstood your initial post (that something intrinsic about a homosexual NATURE predisposes one to pedophilia, which has been time and time again shown to be a false hysteria).

You asked about my qualifications to speak about this specific facet of the issue, so here goes:

I obtained my BS in Molecular & Cell Biology w/ emphasis in Genetics. Next week I’ll have my MS in Neuroscience & Behavior, I worked two years at San Quentin California State Corrections in Marin County as a psychotherapy aide.

A few things I must quibble over:
  1. Heterosexuality is not necessarily the “natural” predisposition. To make such a blanket statement about all individuals demonstrates YOUR fundamental lack of knowledge about biology. Again please don’t misconstrue this as me actively condoning homosexual sex. I’m simply defending the nature of the individual.
  2. Appeals to anecdote make pitiful “evidence”. What you have “seen” during your years as a police officer cannot necessarily bring you to either conclusion about homosexuality and pedophilia. True there are no experiments conducted to show definitive cause-effect (obviously because such an experiment would be not only illegal but grossly unethical), however case studies that have sample sizes I’m sure vastly larger than what you have personally seen are much better indicators than your personal experience.
Again, you might want to familiarize yourself with the APA & AMA.

I reiterate, if I have misunderstood your position, I humbly apologize.
 
xixxvmcm85 said:
  1. Heterosexuality is not necessarily the “natural” predisposition. To make such a blanket statement about all individuals demonstrates YOUR fundamental lack of knowledge about biology. Again please don’t misconstrue this as me actively condoning homosexual sex. I’m simply defending the nature of the individual.
Click to expand...
Thank you for stating this as eloquently as I wish I could have. This is what I mean by my “defense” (if you can call it that) of the homosexual stance. I don’t mean to equate it with mental illness, but simply to draw this correlation:
Once upon a time, the Church viewed certain kinds of mental disorders as demonic possessions. After medical breakthroughs, we learned that biological conditions exist, which present such misunderstood symptoms. That being said, why are we so overconfident that homosexuality canNOT be a similar condition…the body’s biological make-up presents the “symptom” of homosexuality. Possibly something similar to compulsive disorders. It would be ignorant to assume we KNOW who’s going to heaven or hell. Even though the Church may have a certain stance now, it’s not unheard of for the Church to amend their stance when faced with new discoveries. Who knows, someday there may even be medication which can alleviate such symptoms. Then perhaps the sin is not the condition of homosexuality, but rather standing back scrutinizing the act without attempting to determine reason. In a sense, holding gays hostage to their sin, and forcing them into a life burdened by an unfair stigma. Like the quoted poster, I’m by no means an advocate for homosexuals, but I think it should be our mission to strive for ways to help them, not to just say, “Don’t be that way, or you’re going to hell for sure!!”
 
mercygate said:
Chattel slavery and the slavery of the Levitical code are two very (VERY) different things. Yes: chattel slavery is always morally evil. But the slavery of the Levitical code is more like indentured servitude, limited in time, done with the consent of the “slave”, and with a lot of built-in protections. Calling both systems by the same word is confusing (like using the word “law” for 1) civil codes, 2) moral codes, 3) ritual codes, 4) thermodynamics, and 5) motion.
Click to expand...
1 Kings 9:21
that is, their descendants remaining in the land, whom the Israelites could not exterminate —these Solomon conscripted for his slave labor force, as it is to this day.

—Leviticus 25:46
You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly

Deuteronomy 24:7
If a man is caught kidnapping one of his brother Israelites and treats him as a slave or sells him, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you.

should where scripture treats slavery as a munificient relationship.

i find it interesting, given the historical characterizations of jews in the way they treated gentiles, that out of this you can come with them being the ideal ethnic slaveholders.

regardless of how try to paint slavery, it is still absolute dominance of one person over another, which makes it absoluely a moral issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top