scriptural basis for christian objection to homosexuality

Gotta disagree with you a little bit, Cav. I thought Josh's annecdote was a pretty good example of the mainstream attitude.

Chris
 
Hey, I'm into me and mine and my stuff...don't get me worng! If the Gays start threatening that I'll reach for my gun. Uh, my nail gun I guess since I don't have a gun...gun.

Chris
 
And I agree on the 90% distaste being wrong...I'd say in the US where they are now saying there is 11% of the population engaging in homosexual (gay, lesbian, bisexual) activity...I'd say another 10-20% are openly accepting of this activity in their friends, co-workers, relatives, and associates.

I'd say the number of those that experience utter revulsion is under 60%...but the problem factor there is that many of those, as experienced by the headlines and personal experience are actually not out of the closet yet ie many homophobes have homosexual tendencies.

Back to your regular programming about which chapters and verses we choose to use to condemn others.
 
Well, a lot of people are accepting of homosexuality in general, but sit a sample group down, wire'em up, and have them watch a gay male porno movie. I mean, I'm very liberal, and I don't give a damn what consenting adults do, but I'd find that a tad revolting at least.

Chris
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
Gotta disagree with you a little bit, Cav. I thought Josh's annecdote was a pretty good example of the mainstream attitude.

Chris
Click to expand...
Sure, I would agree that it's a good example of mainstream attitudes. It seems though, that Q is using this story to try and back his claim that humankind has a instinctive repulsion to homosexuality.
Though I guess that the people repulsed by homosexuality are in the majority, I object to his claims that figure is over 90%.
I also object to his claim that this repulsion is instinctive and not acquired.
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
Well, a lot of people are accepting of homosexuality in general, but sit a sample group down, wire'em up, and have them watch a gay male porno movie. I mean, I'm very liberal, and I don't give a damn what consenting adults do, but I'd find that a tad revolting at least.

Chris
Click to expand...
Ok, now try and picture a really ugly woman, how would you feel watching her in a hard-core porno?
 
wil said:
And I agree on the 90% distaste being wrong...I'd say in the US where they are now saying there is 11% of the population engaging in homosexual (gay, lesbian, bisexual) activity...I'd say another 10-20% are openly accepting of this activity in their friends, co-workers, relatives, and associates.

I'd say the number of those that experience utter revulsion is under 60%...but the problem factor there is that many of those, as experienced by the headlines and personal experience are actually not out of the closet yet ie many homophobes have homosexual tendencies.

Back to your regular programming about which chapters and verses we choose to use to condemn others.
Click to expand...


Well, see, that is just the thing. Our society is becoming more tolerant of this behavior. People who have hid in their closets for decades are coming out in droves. Why? Because they feel less threatened by society that their behavior is taboo.

Even Clinton's policy of the military's "Don't ask, Don't tell" was recently critiqued by the same military official who came up with the policy in the first place, stating that he changed his mind about gays being destructive to the moral of the troops.

And that was my point about Sodom and Gomorrah. It wasn't homosexuality, per se, that was the ultimate cause for their destruction, it was the general rebellious unrighteousness, including homosexual behavior, toward God that triggered the judgement upon them. God couldn't find even 10 righteous people among them, save Lot and his family.
 
1 Corinthians 6

1Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
2Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
4If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.
5I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
6But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
7Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?
8Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.
9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, noreffeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
12All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
13Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.
14And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.
15Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
16What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
17But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
18Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
20For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.
 
cavalier said:
This is absurd, using a personal anecdote as some kind of revelation about the nature of human beings is ridiculous. So is an assertion that over 90% of people are instinctively revulsed by homosexuality.
What about those societies where homosexuality was commonly practiced? What happened to their instinctive revulsion?
Click to expand...
Nothing absurd about reality...heteros do not like homosexual behavior. That is the way things are. However no one has a problem until it is brought up by the ones coming out of the closet. Then it is in one's face.

Keep the damn sexual preference to self! Telling the whole world about it and demanding recognition for it...now that is absurd! It's plain rude. if nothing else. And don't attempt to force feed kids, people, the church into accepting something that they don't want.

Let me put it another way. Someone says "I'm an alcoholic". Then folk nod their heads in understanding and do what they can to avoid putting the temptation of drinking in front of the confessor. But if the professed alcoholic starts drinking, then people get irritated with the behavior of the individual. It's self destructive and damaging to those around the person.

Homosexual behavior and agenda may not be considered destructive to those engaged in it, but it is a societal disruptor. It can tear family's apart and churches too.

The audacity that gay rights advocates have demanding that 90% of society agree with and give in to maybe 10% of the population because of their personal preferences is absurd. That is ludicrous!

And yes, I put spot lighted (public) homosexual behavior in the same group as adultery, binge drinking, divorce and doing drugs. They all tear at the fabric of society.

v/r

Joshua
 
17th Angel said:
No idea who Rock Hudson is lol, but anyway...

We? Humans? The bible is supposed to be the word of god... I am sure this awesome diety could determin if a person was gay or not.
Click to expand...

Well, Paul did complain of a "thorn in his side", and constantly asked God to take that affliction away from him. God told Paul His grace was enough. I think God meant to keep Paul humble (otherwise his powerful personality and drive might have damaged God's work).
 
cavalier said:
Sure, I would agree that it's a good example of mainstream attitudes. It seems though, that Q is using this story to try and back his claim that humankind has a instinctive repulsion to homosexuality.
Though I guess that the people repulsed by homosexuality are in the majority, I object to his claims that figure is over 90%.
I also object to his claim that this repulsion is instinctive and not acquired.
Click to expand...

No I'm not. Any farmer who has livestock will tell you that the steer who is acting queer is simply horny and confused, but they'll get over it. He doesn't put them down for mounting another male. But he knows better. Ain't gonna have more baby livestock letting that action continue.

I never stated that 90% objected to anything. What I said was that 10% does not have the right to tell 90% what to think or accept.

I'm gonna point you to preschool children. Girls and boys act differently with each other. Boys tend to be gentler with the girls, and rougher with each other. No one taught them that. It is instinctive. Same with attraction and revulsion.

Funny that the bible doesn't condemn lesbianism like it does male homosexual behavior...I wonder why?

In any event, I think we should agree to disagree on this issue. Neither one one is going to change their way of thought, so it is mute.

v/r

Joshua
 
Quahom1 said:
Funny that the bible doesn't condemn lesbianism like it does male homosexual behavior...I wonder why?

Joshua
Click to expand...

It does, bro. Note Romans 1:18-32. Both gay men and woman are discussed there and are abiding in great and terrible wrath.
 
i think a lot of these posts (but definitely not dondi's) have gone really off-topic. i am not terribly interested in what people's personal responses/likes-dislikes might be. i am interested in the integrity of why they feel their religious texts, traditions and authorities support this.

BlaznFattyz said:
it is not enough to follow ceremonial rituals of cleanliness if one is spiritually immoral and thus defiled internally. its not food that causes you to be defiled, but your actions that come from within your heart.
Click to expand...
i don't think anyone disagrees with this, as far as i can see jesus is here expressing a point of view that is very much supported by the prophets and by the rabbis who were his contemporaries. i should point out here that the rabbis i mean are more or less those who would have described themselves as "pharisees", but the propagandist paradigm of the "pharisee" as hypocrite belongs to a later period. our sages criticise the "sadducees" in much the same terms - but that's a different argument. either way, jesus, the prophets and the rabbis here are of one mind. however, it's also important to remember that these are not actually rituals of "cleanliness" per se. the words usually translated as "clean" or "unclean" certainly have nothing to do with hygiene. they are to do with spiritual fitness or unfitness to be used in particular ways, but this is a complex system and not easily understood. suffice it to say that a priest or levite who is "clean" can serve in the Temple, a "clean" person may engage in marital relations and communal dining and a "clean" food can be tithed or a "clean" animal sacrificed. "clean" may not be mixed with "unclean". in fact, the best way to understand it is as a system of, as it were, spiritual plumbing. your "pipes" are either "clean" (unblocked) or "unclean" (blocked). your spiritual "pipes" also receive input from and output into your actual "pipes", via eating, sex and various actions. the gateway point from one to another is via immersion in a ritual pool (rather like baptism) after a prescribed time. i hope this makes sense.

in this way one can understand permitted sex to be a linking of two people's "piping" systems, whereas non-permitted sex is when the pipes cannot be properly fitted together for one reason or another, e.g. during menstruation or the forbidden homosexual act. either way it is not really the act per se that is wrong but the context of it - i suppose the difference is that there are no circumstances in which the homosexual act is permitted (at least between men, although ironically enough i believe there may be leeway for heterosexuals!) as opposed to other acts, which may be situationally, relationally or temporally wrong. in this way we harmonise our external actions with the Divine Will.

Silas said:
Religion aside. Is this really a topic we have to discuss?
Click to expand...
last time i checked, silas, you were not in charge of what gets discussed here on the forum. if you don't want to discuss this, don't discuss it. i am unlikely to miss your input. see you later, matey.

Dondi said:
I'm sure you have considered that many of the dietary laws commanded by G!D were hygienic in nature in the ancient Jewish culture, i.e. eating pork was just plain unhealthy. They didn't have refrigerators or preservatives that we have today, so I can see the value in G!D keeping His people healthy.
Click to expand...
this is a PoV often expressed by those who subordinate the Will of G!D to reason and/or science and, of course, as you correctly surmise, if that's the reason and nowadays you can eat your pork chops and oysters without getting food poisoning there's no reason to keep the commandment. obviously that's not something i agree with, because it is elevating something above the Law and that would be a negation of what we are about. so that is not an argument i can accept.

Since sexual immorality is listed, then it stands to reason that the Noahide might just want to learn what exactly "sexual immorality" consitutes. Where else to go but to the OT and the Mosaic Law. Thus when coming to Leviticus 13:15, we have an understanding that homosexuality is an abomination to the Lord. It may not be a requirement for Noahides to obey the Law, but we can certainly use it as a guide.
Click to expand...
aha! but what you're doing there is jumping to conclusions, big-time styley. the first thing the jewish approach would do is say "and what precisely do we mean by that"? unfortunately, there is never enough detail in the Torah to tell us. for example, by far the worst type of sexual immorality in our terms is what used to be known as "temple prostitution" - and that doesn't really exist any more. in fact there's an extremely strong case for saying that the meaning of "sexual immorality" is so strictly defined that it is hard to consider any consensual activity as qualifying under this heading. moreover, if you are appealing to the noahide law, it is not interpreted by mr noahide-in-the-street, but through the lens and process of halakhah. you can't just make up your own interpretations according to what appeals to you. what is more, it is extremely hard to argue that you should spend any effort on giving homosexuals a hard time while there are still rapists and other sexual exploiters out there. you would have a hard time convincing me that what someone does with their partner in the privacy of their bedroom, which i neither see, approve, nor am involved in, is more important than something which affects me, like a rapist. if you're going to use a guide, you should use the right guide, not make it up yourself.

For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.

It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
" - Deut. 30:11-14
Click to expand...

It is not with the outward observance that G!D wants, but the inward obedience.
Click to expand...
in the nicest possible way, you have absolutely failed to appreciate the point i was making. the way we understand this section is that the Law is not something that sits off in some theoretical field somewhere - it is something we are commanded to interpret and understand; but this means *through the prism of tradition* which means via the halakhic process, *not* everyone deciding for themselves what something means. there must be a majority opinion, as it says in the Torah - see exodus 23:2.

as for ezekiel 36:26-28, he is certainly not advocating the abrogation of the practice of the Law in favour of its spirit. no jewish prophet would. they might criticise those who violate its spirit but he (and i) would not concede that the Law was therefore being correctly practiced. the correct practice of the Law *is* informed by its spirit and the two are one.

All the same, if you want to dabble in semantics and call one thing a sin and another thing a tresspass, it is still unpleasing to G!D.
Click to expand...
ok, but we are concerned with understanding the unfolding will of G!D - but the fact remains that we consider this an issue between man and G!D not man and man - so it is not up to humans to start poking around in each others bedrooms without a by-your-leave.

Yeah, but animals are not created in the image of G!D
Click to expand...
they still have the lower souls - and they are still part of Creation and part of the Design. i stand by my objection.

what do "cultures" have to do with obeying G!D?
Click to expand...
we do not believe in a One Right Way. we believe there are many faces to Torah and that someone who has never even heard of Torah can still be a good person as long as they keep the noahide laws. i believe this still constitutes a major difference between us.

Homosexuality, along with all the other things you listed, are but symptoms of a bigger problem: rebellion against G!D.
Click to expand...
umph. everyone's got to have priorities. if you'd rather oppress people who are doing nothing that affects you than deal with things that you are actually able to improve then i think you are attempting to preempt the Divine. if G!D really hates gays (which i doubt) then G!D is perfectly able to punish them without your help. on the other hand, G!D is *definitely* relying on us all to save the planet, bring world peace, end hunger and so on. what sort of humans do nothing to help themselves whilst spending their time criticising others?

And that was my point about Sodom and Gomorrah. It wasn't homosexuality, per se, that was the ultimate cause for their destruction, it was the general rebellious unrighteousness, including homosexual behavior, toward God that triggered the judgement upon them. God couldn't find even 10 righteous people among them, save Lot and his family.
Click to expand...
good point, although lot and his daughters are hardly righteous - he even offers his daughters to the mob in place of the angels and they themselves are the one who instigate his drunken incest.

incidentally, lesbianism is not mentioned in the Torah, although it is discussed in the Talmud with some disapproval, although not actually forbidden. women are not obliged to marry, although men are, so there is a loophole. the minimalist position is that only actual homosexual penetration is prohibited - but being gay as an intrinsic status does not exist. the halacha is only interested in homosexual activity. interestingly enough, that is more or less what the science seems to be saying.

it seems therefore on the basis of 1 corinthians 6 (thank you Prober) and romans we have a set of pretty comprehensive condemnations of both homosexuality and lesbianism. fortunately for me, these are not jewish texts and there is a big difference in way that judaism approaches this issue.

i'd like to ask if there are any christians here who take a different view of homosexuals other than outright condemnation of the sinner via the sin - i'm not seeing much love here. are there christian texts which refuse to condemn homosexuals out of love and compassion? it strikes me that jesus seems to be far less quick to condemn than some christians seem to be.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top