scriptural basis for christian objection to homosexuality

Aside from how the Bible admonishes us to behave in our sexual predelictions, does anybody think that the rapid disappearance of real privacy in all walks of life might be having an effect upon how we all regard sexual practices and behaviors? I'm inclined to believe that this is having a profound effect on western societies at least, notwithstanding what scripture tells us to do and how to behave in sexual matters.

It is my opinion that information in the Book of Enoch in the Apocrypha has a lot to do with what is really going on these days. But of course that was banned by the hierarchy long ago and relegated to secondary status as far as sacred text goes. However, our Slavic brothers and sisters still hold it in high regard. Any thoughts ?

flow....:)
 
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

Thoroughly enjoyed your posts, B.

Christians are enjoined from judging others. Jesus said "let him who is without sin cast the first stone..."

And the greatest commandments are "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy might...and thy neighbor as thyself."

If we really took this to heart...
 
"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."


ah...OK. But, didnt I leave my imput a few times? Was that the only thing you could qoute?
 
Prober

Christians are enjoined from judging others. Jesus said "let him who is without sin cast the first stone..."

Right! But, in context of those equally guilty sinners who sort to kill a woman that committed adultery. Didnt Jesus also said to "judge people by their fruits" to know if they are Christian or not? Certianly! Jesus never taught against judging, he taught against judging hypocritically. Jesus, as well as all the Bible, teaches that we must "judge righteous judgement."


And the greatest commandments are "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy might...and thy neighbor as thyself."

The Bible also teaches that if we love people, we'll give them God's means of bring them to salvation - namely, the "offensive sounding" gospel.


If we really took this to heart...

Take context to heart. Its Soooooo important!
 
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.
It is obviously a hetero world. I take it reading here you are not indicating that Heteros should keep their preferences to themselves...Surely you don't want the paper to quit printing those pretty engagement pictures, or young lovebirds walking down the street hand in hand...your statement only applies to homosexuals right?

Yo BB, there are plenty of Christian sects/denominations that accept homosexuals as members of thier church and clergy...tis what the riot is about.
 
"Yo BB, there are plenty of Christian sects/denominations that accept homosexuals as members of thier church and clergy...tis what the riot is about."

Isnt that an oxymoron? Christians follow Jesus' teachings, Jesus follows God the Father's will and God the Father says that homosexuality is an abomination. Homosexuals, like ALL other unrepentant sinners, will face wrath, the Bible says. Therefore, the logical conclussion is that the Christians that accept homosexuality as an alterntive lifestyle, arent Christian at all. Well, not in the strict absoulte Biblical sense at least.
 
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.

What is the command of God in the beginning?

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." - Genesis 1:27-28

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." - Genesis 2:24


It is clear that this is the order of creation, before the fall of Man. That command hasn't changed even after the fall. But you will notice that there was a fundamental change in the countenance of man. The woman now had to give birth with travailing pain, and the man had to work by the sweat of his brow, and the whole creation was cursed. What the fall did was disrupt the perfect nature of creation. The ground was cursed because of Adam's sake. As a result, the natural became unnatural. The thistles and thorns sprouted up in the garden, where there were none before.

I think it also affected the animals. So it is no surprise to me that certain animals exhibit deviant behavior as well, for they are also cursed. When God brings a new heaven and new earth, according to Isaiah 65:17-25, there is a reversal of the curse, and the wolf and sheep the sheep will feed together.

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.

Then perhaps you can direct me to process of halakhah in regards to homosexual behavior. Do you have a link or reference?

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.

I don't think activism is necessary for sexual crimes such as rape, for society at large can agree that it is wrong. What we cannot agree on is on the issues like homosexual behavior and abortion. Both of which oppose clear teaching from the scriptures.

Homosexual behavior is disruptive because it undetermines the sanctity of marriage ordered by God. It doesn't procreate the species. Furthermore, it is subject to the spreading of all kinds of disease which can affect the health of the society. These and other issues affects more than just the two conscending adults.

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.

So tell me, does your tradition treat rebellious children and adulterer's? Shouldn't they be stoned by the congregation? Or is all that kind of thing rhetorical?

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.

I'd say Jesus was far less tolerant about sin than you think:

"Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." - Matthew 5:21-22

"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." - Matthew 5:27-28
 
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.

What is the command of God in the beginning?

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." - Genesis 1:27-28

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." - Genesis 2:24


It is clear that this is the order of creation, before the fall of Man. That command hasn't changed even after the fall. But you will notice that there was a fundamental change in the countenance of man. The woman now had to give birth with travailing pain, and the man had to work by the sweat of his brow, and the whole creation was cursed. What the fall did was disrupt the perfect nature of creation. The ground was cursed because of Adam's sake. As a result, the natural became unnatural. The thistles and thorns sprouted up in the garden, where there were none before.

I think it also affected the animals. So it is no surprise to me that certain animals exhibit deviant behavior as well, for they are also cursed. When God brings a new heaven and new earth, according to Isaiah 65:17-25, there is a reversal of the curse, and the wolf and sheep the sheep will feed together.

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.

Then perhaps you can direct me to process of halakhah in regards to homosexual behavior. Do you have a link or reference?

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.

I don't think activism is necessary for sexual crimes such as rape, for society at large can agree that it is wrong. What we cannot agree on is on the issues like homosexual behavior and abortion. Both of which oppose clear teaching from the scriptures.

Homosexual behavior is disruptive because it undetermines the sanctity of marriage ordered by God. It doesn't procreate the species. Furthermore, it is subject to the spreading of all kinds of disease which can affect the health of the society. These and other issues affects more than just the two conscending adults.

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.

So tell me, does your tradition treat rebellious children and adulterer's? Shouldn't they be stoned by the congregation? Or is all that kind of thing rhetorical?

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.

I'd say Jesus was far less tolerant about sin than you think:

"Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." - Matthew 5:21-22

"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." - Matthew 5:27-28
 
Prober

Christians are enjoined from judging others. Jesus said "let him who is without sin cast the first stone..."

Right! But, in context of those equally guilty sinners who sort to kill a woman that committed adultery. Didnt Jesus also said to "judge people by their fruits" to know if they are Christian or not? Certianly! Jesus never taught against judging, he taught against judging hypocritically. Jesus, as well as all the Bible, teaches that we must "judge righteous judgement."


And the greatest commandments are "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy might...and thy neighbor as thyself."

The Bible also teaches that if we love people, we'll give them God's means of bring them to salvation - namely, the "offensive sounding" gospel.


If we really took this to heart...

Take context to heart. Its Soooooo important!

Love you, Silas!
 
Let's say I'm queer, would you love me too? What if your answer can be only one word - Yes, or No. :confused:
 
I've known a number of gay and lesbian folks over my lifetime. A few of them died prematurely due to AIDS related complications. I can say that as I didn't grow up around homosexuals (that I knew of) it was definitely something that I had to come to understand. I do know that as far as wonderful, caring, compassionate people, speaking in generalities, they are a step above heterosexuals.

I still can't say I understand it, but I don't see that as my job either.

And yes Zag, I could love you gay or straight...speaking agape or philial, not eros, not that I see anything wrong with that.
 
Let's say I'm queer, would you love me too? What if your answer can be only one word - Yes, or No. :confused:

O.K., you're queer!

I don't really know what love is. I think it's when you consider another person to be as vitally important as yourself. I never felt that way about anyone- not my family, not my wife- until I had kids. I love my girls as if they were myself. Actually more because I would sacrifice myself for them. I don't feel that way about anyone else- not you, not my neighbor, not my enemies (whatever that is).

Chris
 
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

Yes, there are Christians out there who take a different view of homosexuals and homosexuality.

After typing all this I realized that it's not making the exact points I want to make...I'll return and try to do a better job but I'll leave this for context on what the Romans passage is talking about.

Just so you don't lose interest, there are many Christians who do not judge homosexuals and homosexuality as have been largely reflected in this thread. The Episcopal Church to which I belong has gay priests and homosexuals participate fully in the life of the Church. This is not evenly accepted by all members of the church or by all Churches in the Anglican Communion, which the Episcopal Church is part of. But, the view you state, that we are not to judge and condemn, but to love and have compassion, is the view I hold along with many others.

Here is an exceprt from Harvard theologian Peter Gomes, who is a Baptist minister, African American, and a gay man.

Gomes said:
"Paul's most significant comments on what we call homosexulaity occur in Romans 1:26-27. "For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error." The first thing to be remembered here is that Paul is not writing about homosexuality in Romans--neither about homosexuality as he would have understood it nor about homosexuality as we now understand it. He is writing about the fallen nature of humankind. It is this fallen nature, this "corrupted will" to use a favorite phrase of Saint Augustine, that has caused both Gentile and Jew to suppress the truth by their wickedness. They are able to know what is knowable aobut God: his invisible nature, his eternal power and deity. The creation itself bears witness to this. The nature, power and goodness of God are not hidden. There is therefore no excuse for this ignorance of God. The people knew God but did not honor God. They were not grateful to God. They substiuted their own minds and their own thinking in place of God. As Paul says in Romans 1:21: "They became futile in their thinking and theri senseless minds were clouded." In other words, the creatures ignored the Creator, and they themselves became the objects of their own worship and veneration. They became worshipers of self, caught up in their own egos, and they gave to created things the glory and dignity that belong to the Creator. This is what he means when he says that in the fallen state of total self-absoprtion and self-deception, human beings, "claiming to be wise...became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptile." This is the golden calf of the Old Testament all over again, the worship of the Canaanite and Babylonian fertility gods, and, in Greco-Roman civilization, the worship of worldy wisdom and philosophy.

We become what we worship. It is this sophisticated psychological insight that Paul applies to those who worship a lie rather than the truth, who submit themselves to images rather that to the divine reality. Such people are disordered, that is, they have their priorities wrong; they have lost their perspective. God's judgement is that they will reap the consequences of these lesser, inferior gods. This is what is meant at verses 24-25: "Threefore, God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever!"...

...

When modern readers scrutinize Romans 1:26, with its discussion of "dishonorable passions," "unnatural relations," and "shameless acts," conditioned as we are by the characterization of homosexual behavior prevalent amoung us since the late nineteenth century, which in the current cultural debate is described both loosely and pejoratively as the "gay lifestyle" and the "homosexual agenda," we are tempted to give a content to those words and a profile, largely negative, to those behaviors and are persuaded by own own infallible opinions that Saint Paul is "obviously" talking about the same thing as we are. The hard question we must persuade ourselves to ask is, is this so?
 
Bananabrain said:
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.

First, you may have started this thread, but you don't own it. I'll write about anything I damn well please. Dondi gave you an excellent response, what more do you want? You seem to be saying that O.K., our Torah condemns homosexuality, but, we don't do what the Torah says anyway, so why should we make an exception for this? Look, this is an extremely well worn topic. It's kinda like, oh I dunno, Christians asking- yet again- about the whole messiah thing. The Bible, old and new T, bloody condemns homosexuality. Let's just be honest and say we don't buy what the Bible says because it's silly and out of date. Why rationalize? I don't accept it and neither do you, so let's just dispense with it.

I wrote this with a smirky grin on my face, so don't take it personally.

Chris
 
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.

I agree that it's acquired, but it's such a subtle process of acquisition that it seems to be instinctual. Just try tearing apart the issue to get to the nuts and bolts. It's so foggy. Heterosexuals, it seems to me, have a set of social programming by which we understand our roles. I understand how to play the game under that set of rules. But homosexuals are wild cards. They don't fit the programming. That's why they're a threat. You can't be sure of the coercive value of the the programming when it comes to homosexuals because they don't conform to the rules.

Chris
 
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.
Come on Q, that's a little off, to say everything you want to say and then leave me without a means of reply.
Firstly it's not as simple as you think. You object to homosexuality, I am not sure that I agree with your objection, but you're a Biblical guy and as such there are more than enough texts in the Bible to justify your objection. That's fine, I can't argue with you there.
It's the stories though, the entirely subjective little observations you use to try and validify your opinion.



Quahom1 said:
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.
Thanks for clearing up the whole nature versus nurture debate.
Quahom1 said:
Same with attraction and revulsion.
You don't believe that we can be conditioned to like or dislike something? to be attracted or repulsed by something?


Quahom1 said:
Oh, you mean like Sparta? Greece? Rome? They all got killed off.
Yes, and so will yours one day.

Quahom1 said:
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!
The 10% aren't asking to control the 90, just the 10. Homosexuals are not asking you to get married to another guy, or do whatever. They're just asking for equality.
 
Back
Top