Homosexuality and the Bible - Thumpers welcome

[ckweb]

Originally posted by Sava
The Bible is a collection of myths and parables which is not meant to be taken literally. People wrote the bible, not God. The Bible is not the word of God either. Most of the morals that the Bible teaches are good. But unfortunately, too many sheep believe in the Bible literally.

And it was so by a Savan fiat!

[Boris Godunov]

The problem with Biblical references to homosexuality is that they really aren't.

The modern understanding of sexual orientation really didn't even begin to come into being until the late 19th century. Before that, there was no concept that people could actually be, for whatever reason beyond their control, "oriented" towards the same gender in terms of physical attraction. It was assumed that people who engaged in such acts were heterosexuals behaving in unnatural ways. Well, yes, for a heterosexual, it would unnatural.

The word "homosexual" didn't even exist until then, so any Biblical translation that uses the word is practicing a deliberate distortion and should be tossed out.

Now, if you also factor in the association of homosexual acts to pagan cultures and rituals, it is easy to see why the Biblical admonition against such acts exist, as they viewed it like idolatry.

Now (except for an increasingly small minority of people), we know better and realize that many people are simply not heterosexual and that their natural feelings of attraction are to the same gender. We know that gays, by and large, seek relationships exclusively with the same gender. And gays are entering into long-term, monogamous unions blessed by their churches.

So, like all those other silly Biblical injunctions in Leviticus, we can see that the prohibitions against "homosexuality" are out of date and not relevant to our world anymore.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by ckweb


Huh? Christians are not in view in Ezekiel!! Judah is the one being condemned in that passage. Even so, I could agree that it has some applicability. Personally, I agree that Christians should not focus on anyone sin but should concentrate on the message of grace through Christ Jesus. *snip*

Yes, of course the passage was not referring to Christians. But you must agree that the things that were writen by the prophets have application to the present day "people of God" (or Christians) today. The Old Testament is not just an interesting story that only applied to people who are long dead. And the present day corrpution in the churches cannot escape the censure of Jesus to the Pharisees simply because he was addressing a specific group of religious hypocrites. The pattern is the same and God requires that which is past. In that sense Jeremiah and Ezekiel are like modern day prophets if you know what I mean.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by red_jon

I know that in the New Testament Jesus never mentions homosexuality.

Jesus does mention homosexuals. He says some are born eunuchs and some are made so by men.

He doesn't however condemn homosexuals.

Jesus doesn't seem to have been very interested in sexual morality at all. Certainly nowhere near the degree of some of his later followers.

Jesus hardly mentions the subject of sex at all. He saves a woman caught in adultery and clearly thinks fidelity in marriage is important but that's about it.

[ckweb]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
The problem with Biblical references to homosexuality is that they really aren't.

The modern understanding of sexual orientation really didn't even begin to come into being until the late 19th century. Before that, there was no concept that people could actually be, for whatever reason beyond their control, "oriented" towards the same gender in terms of physical attraction. It was assumed that people who engaged in such acts were heterosexuals behaving in unnatural ways. Well, yes, for a heterosexual, it would unnatural.

The word "homosexual" didn't even exist until then, so any Biblical translation that uses the word is practicing a deliberate distortion and should be tossed out.

Now, if you also factor in the association of homosexual acts to pagan cultures and rituals, it is easy to see why the Biblical admonition against such acts exist, as they viewed it like idolatry.

Now (except for an increasingly small minority of people), we know better and realize that many people are simply not heterosexual and that their natural feelings of attraction are to the same gender. We know that gays, by and large, seek relationships exclusively with the same gender. And gays are entering into long-term, monogamous unions blessed by their churches.

So, like all those other silly Biblical injunctions in Leviticus, we can see that the prohibitions against "homosexuality" are out of date and not relevant to our world anymore.

A sound liberal argument . . . I would differ with you on certain points but I respect that your position is carefully stated and thought-out.

[ckweb]

Originally posted by Lincoln


Yes, of course the passage was not referring to Christians. But you must agree that the things that were writen by the prophets have application to the present day "people of God" (or Christians) today. The Old Testament is not just an interesting story that only applied to people who are long dead. And the present day corrpution in the churches cannot escape the censure of Jesus to the Pharisees simply because he was addressing a specific group of religious hypocrites. The pattern is the same and God requires that which is past. In that sense Jeremiah and Ezekiel are like modern day prophets if you know what I mean.

Hence, I stated, "Even so, I could agree that it has some applicability."

I'm sorry if I was a little sharp. Being a student of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, one of my pet peeves is taking the Old Testament out of context, which happens all the time in sermons and other popular literature (i.e. Prayer of Jabez). So, I'm a little defensive on that issue. The context of a passage should always be observed first.

[Sava]

See this is what's wrong with this new testament, Protestant Christianity... I wasn't born into sin, and I don't need a savior. The whole idea is repulsing. God created us into a world of sin where we are guilty until proven innocent? Dirty until cleansed? Sinful until saved? It's all a bunch of bullcrap. It's silly notions like this that drive fundmentalism in the world. Islam isn't the only religion that gets twisted to serve some selfish psychotic end.

Even if I don't believe in Christianity, and it turns out that it is the TRUE religion (when I die and meet God, etc) I doubt he's going to care whether I believed in this crap anyways. He's probably going to be concerned with my actions on Earth and whether or not I'm a good person. Christianity and the Bible, Judiasm and the TOrah, Islam and the Qu'Ran... it's all a creation of man. Not God...

[Jon Miller]

so many people here do not understand Christianity

Jon Miller

[joseph1944]

Lev 18;22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination

[Boris Godunov]

Lev 19:19Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed: neither shall there come upon thee a garment of two kinds of stuff mingled together.

If you've worn polyesther, you are an abomination.

Lev19:27Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard. Lev19:28Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am Jehovah.

Shave your beard? Got a tattoo? Abomination.

How about this gem:

Lev21:17Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed throughout their generations that hath a blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. 21:18For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or anything superfluous, 21:19or a man that is broken-footed, or broken-handed, 21:20or crook-backed, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or is scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; 21:21no man of the seed of Aaron the priest, that hath a blemish, shall come nigh to offer the offerings of Jehovah made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. 21:22He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy: 21:23only he shall not go in unto the veil, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I am Jehovah who sanctifieth them.

So God doesn't want people born with deformities to be equal, how nice.

Shall I bother bringing up the passages that ban eating shellfish, instruct you on how to buy and sell your slaves, or how women who go into a temple while having their period must be stoned?

[Alexander's Horse]

Its really hopeless to quote the old testament to justify a Christian position on homosexuality. Firstly Jesus said the old law had passed away and if hadn't passed away it had been outrageously misinterpreted. Secondly, the old testament sexual laws were really heavily influenced by an overt racialism, strongly linked to reproduction. So for example incest was okay as long as it maintained the hereditary line! Homosexuality seems to have been condemned mainly because it would not lead to children.

Jesus was more interested in the quality of relationships, the "do unto others as you would like them to do unto you" principle. This is not as easy as it sounds and covers gays as much as heterosexuals. So if you treat people/sexual partners with respect then I don't see any evidence Jesus had a problem with homosexuality. If you treat other people as sex objects however, whether you are gay or straight, then Jesus disapproves of that, in the strongest terms.

[Dan Severn]

*thump*

Fags are gay; they go to hell.

*thump*



Seriously, though, I fail to see how one's relationship with the eternal spirit is related to the nature of his nooky. It's revolting to me, but it's really none of my business. Some are like that. The kind of person you are has much more relevance than the people you find attractive.

[Alexander's Horse]

The only people that Jesus really criticises in the New Testament is people who judge and condemn other people. He has no time for people like that. In fact he says whenever you judge and condemn another person in God's eyes the only person you judge or condemn is yourself.

Some of you so-called Christians should think about that.

The Jesus that I know spent his whole life lifting people up, healing them, helping them, inspiring them and making them feel good about themselves. I just don't see any way Jesus would be into condemning homosexuals or homosexuality.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
or how women who go into a temple while having their period must be stoned?

Sing

Everybody must get stoned



Make sure you are nearly incomprehensible when you sing it or you won't sound like the original.

[Alexander's Horse]

The only New Testament figure I recall who had a problem with homosexuals was Saint Paul - and that probably was a form of self loathing because I strongly suspect Saint Paul was gay and in the closet.