|
Post by ForeverFree on Dec 19, 2006 13:43:36 GMT -5
If you are NOT a Christian and only believe that the Bible is a story made of legends and fables, is homosexuality still wrong?
It is only wrong if your beliefs and morals make you believe that it is wrong.
Christianity (and a number of other religions) has a history of telling the world that YOU are wrong and WE are right, so you better do what we say or we'll kill you or harass you until you give in, or you'll burn in hell for doing what WE told you not to do.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 19, 2006 14:57:25 GMT -5
IMO, any law that doesn't have a sound idea behind it or is outdated is not worth obeying.
(Okay, that was plagiarism, more or less. More, because it is the exact phrasing of a wise man (other than myself). Less, because it was written in an entirely different context. Because it was meant in another context, I don't think it is appropriate for me to name the author here, thus perhaps implying something that he did not intend. On the other hand, it probably is not right for me to write it as if it were my own, unaccredited to the actual author. Ah, the moral dilemmas in which one finds one's self. But it is a great quote.)
|
|
|
Post by ClayRandall on Dec 19, 2006 15:28:49 GMT -5
IMO, any law that doesn't have a sound idea behind it or is outdated is not worth obeying. Yeah, like Roe v. Wade... Okay, I'll let it go :-)
|
|
|
Post by bowhunter on Dec 19, 2006 16:31:37 GMT -5
Of course! All humans deserve to live life - even Trisomy 21 people, Democrats, Yankees fans, etc. But not Catholics. And who is anyone to say what is good? Las - "Abortion and homosexuality are about the same wrongness in Gods eyes." While we are on the subject of who can say what is good, who are you to say what God sees as wrong? Furthermore, who is anyone to say what should or should not be? I say get rid of gov't for two months. Day one of month three will see only rural residents living because all the opinionated city slickers will kill each other off. And if there are a few city slickers left, the country folk will find them and give the final blow. In month three we can create a new gov't of true freedom of speech, true freedom to bear arms (and legs), true freedom to own property and keep others off, true freedom to choose life or no life, true freedom to cohabitate with whomever, and all the meaning of true freedom; and any who oppose will be dealt with accordingly by the vigilantes who create the new gov't. We need a good cleansing anyway. Too many people think that freedom of speech is freedom to force their opinions on others and make and enforce laws that should never be created. How about letting God decide who has done wrong when the time comes? If you don't believe in homosexuality, then don't have anything to do with those who are homosexual. If you don't believe in abortion, then cut off those who don't care one way or the other. If you are pure in all things . . . well, you're not. It's really not difficult to avoid those things in life that you don't like. Didn't your mommy teach you to socialize only with those that would be positive in your life? Well for goodness sake . . . what am I doing here? AMEN Brother Hawk!! "A country boy CAN survive!!"
|
|
|
Post by Article on Dec 21, 2006 18:23:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by doesnt matter on Dec 27, 2006 20:06:34 GMT -5
For those of you that are supporters of homosexuality or are homosexual, it really doesn't matter how well-supported you are by your kids, your friends or your family. Their stamp of approval does not superceed God's authority. God's Word says it is wrong. There is no scriptural support in the Word of God that establishes same-sex relationships as approved by God or designed by God. The Word states just the opposite. Homosexuality is an abomination to God.
It does not matter what laws are passed that support it. Laws are made by man. It is God's Word that is the final authority of all mankind. Whether you believe this or not, believe in God or not - there will be a day where EVERY knee shall bow and EVERY tongue will confess that Christ is Lord. This will be a universal admittance. Gods Word will be recognized by all and their will be great mourning for those that did not earlier believe. God will judge you for your sin, as He will every human being. The only way to be free from it, is to confess it and stop it. Without Jesus, nothing is forgiven - don't forget that.
God says same-sex relationships are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by mrleo on Dec 28, 2006 0:04:42 GMT -5
Actually, it matters quite a lot to us that our families and friends support us, because they are real people we can see and touch and laugh and cry with and argue and talk with...these seemingly little things are not so little at all.
But what do we mean by support? When I think of support, I think of the friends and family who not only love me but like me and trust me and respect me, regardless of what they think of what God's Word says about homosexuality. They are free to interpret those verses however they choose, and they know that I respect their right to do so. But most importantly, they know and are resting in the knowledge that God is in control and therefore they are FREE of the burden of judging and punishing...all they feel responsible to do in God's name is to love me and let God take care of the rest.
But there are some who are so insecure and irrational they simply can't afford to lay down that burden of judgment. They are carrying around a collection of measuring sticks and lists of rules in their heads, and they're so busy monitoring and recording every infraction, every injustice, they don't realize the damage this is doing to their mind and spirit and even their bodies...even more sad, they don't see how this constant preoccupation, this constant distraction is keeping them from being truly present to enjoy and fully participate in their own lives and the lives of the people closest to them.
And if they acknowledge that I'm not the boogeyman (and they know I'm not), then they have to face the fact that what really makes them uncomfortable is ambiguity--that their belief in what God's Word says about people like me doesn't align with the person they know me to be, doesn't align with common knowledge or science regarding the diversity of human sexuality, and doesn't even align with every other Christian's viewpoint on the subject. But there has to be a boogeyman, there has to be an "other" so that when they look in the mirror it won't ever be staring back at them.
I can picture this scenario, but when I do, I find it hard to imagine that any individual is going to be looking around to see who is mourning and who is not.
I never forget this; in fact, it is this very thought that I find so startling when I think about the Christians in my life who appear to be so loaded down with unforgiveness...I can only conclude that they are choosing to limit Jesus' power in their lives.
|
|
|
Post by Godswordstands on Dec 29, 2006 2:39:53 GMT -5
Right. Free to interpret.
Hitler also had an interpretation that the Jewish people were unclean. He then decided for himself that it was ethically proper and correct to destroy everyone he could reach within the ethnicity of Jew-relation. Those were his ethics.
Muslims had the interpretation that US citizens were horrible and ungodly people who needed to be destroyed. Their interpretation taught them to kill. They then took several planes and commited murder against thousands of Americans, destroying lives and families.
Who am I to say they were wrong?
Who am I to judge Hitler? Who am I to judge those muslims? Afterall, it is "God who is in control." Therefore, I can rest from "the burden of judging and punishing" them or any other person who decides to commit mass geonicide or calculated murder. Afterall, who I am to judge anothers ethics and "interpretations?"
Get real.
Wrong is wrong is wrong. Murder is wrong, just like stealing is wrong, hating is wrong and any other sin that God says is wrong - is wrong.
Where do we get ethics? From where do they come? Someone had to pass them down. Ethics come from God and have been recorded in His Word. Every other "religion" has adopted these ethics to a certain extent because right is right and wrong is wrong. (Then there is distortion on the doctrine of salvation, as they have determined by their own methods, - which is beside the point.)
The point is, when God says something in wrong - it's wrong. There is no deliniation.
I suppose if I start sleeping with a married person, or molesting a child, or stealing from a different home every night, or killing people at random, as long as I am supported by my family - as long as they respect my right to do whatever I want to do with my life and love me besides it - ahhh, then I am O.K.
What bull.
You are lying to yourself and everyone else you try to convince. You know God does not support homosexuality. In fact, He is 100% opposed to it. As a Christian person, it is my repsonsibilty to uphold His word. If upholding it, stings - then, tough. I'd say I am sorry for the accountability in this area, but I am not. Homosexuality is a sin, regardless of your interpretation. Your opinion does not superceed God's authority.
It would be the right thing, if I am ever wrong in some area of my life, that conflicts with God's word, that someone should love me enough to speak the truth and uphold God's word, too.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 29, 2006 8:45:09 GMT -5
To "God's word stands":
One point you seem to be missing: Your belief that the bible as we have it today is the inspired, faultless word of God is an opinion which I and about 4 billion other people do not share. You can base your stance against homosexuality on the bible, and if you do, then by all means you should live by that rule.
But do not expect me to buy it.
And the moment you or any others of your ilk limit my freedom to live openly as a homosexual, or punish me for doing so, you can expect a fight.
I will not allow you to shove your religious beliefs down my throat.
|
|
|
Post by David Longholt on Dec 29, 2006 10:28:25 GMT -5
Gene, in my view you can practice homosexuality all you want. Ultimately the matter will be between you and God.
However, I would appreciate you calling a "spade a spade."
The word "gay" has been hijacked in modern times by the homosexual lobby to describe their trait. It has even found its way into dictionaries in this context.
Originally, "gay" meant "Lively; bright; sportive, merry; dissipated etc. It did not mean "homosexual." Also in some parts it was and still is a fairly common girl's Christian name as well as a surname.
I know females who are called "Gay" as a Christian name and I know both females and males with "Gay" as a surname.
When people are described as "Gay" I expect it to be a reference to either their name or emotional disposition as opposed to their sexual persuasion.
Please return to proper English terminology and use phrases like "living openly as a homosexual man" instead of "Gay man."
Unlike other posters I will not shove religious beliefs down your throat, but I will be alert to any further corruptions of the English language you may make in this regard, irrespective of the influential plagiarisms from the English language by the homosexual lobby.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 29, 2006 10:39:43 GMT -5
Language is not static - it is alive and always evolving, hence, when one looks up the word "gay" in the Merriam Webster Unabridged dictionary online, one finds 8 meanings. Interestingly, number 3 is listed as an obsolete meaning (because language changes), and the last meaning is "homosexual". I use both words interchangebly, and will continue to do so. But for the record, I will go back and change my wording in my post.
|
|
|
Post by mrleo on Dec 29, 2006 11:05:42 GMT -5
Get real? Here's some reality for you: No one is telling you that you can't or shouldn't judge. But unless you're in a position where you have both the right and the ability to actually do something besides judge, where does that leave you except in a state of unresolved anger and frustration? If you can't convince everyone around you that you're right and they're wrong, and discard all the ones who aren't convinced, pretty soon you're going to be surrounded by a small group of people who agree with you (or pretend to), because that is the sole currency upon which you base your interactions with people.
It's the same situation, whether on a large or small scale. Some members of my family believe that homosexuality is a sin and that I'm heading straight for hell, and they are free to believe that. I am free to disagree. But neither of us will know for sure what the truth is until we're dead. In the meantime, if we can't agree that our disagreement on this issue is less important than our relationship to each other and is less important than what we can share with each other, where does that leave us? In a state of unresolved anger and frustration.
The point is, agreeing to disagree doesn't make me feel justified or O.K. It doesn't make me right and it doesn't make the other person wrong, or vice-versa. It simply allows us to get along and enjoy each other while we can. We only have one life - are we going to spend it glaring at each other from opposite sides and accomplish nothing, or are we going to meet in the middle with mutual respect?
Maybe so. You can have your opinion. It doesn't sting me. It only matters to me inasmuch as I respect your right to hold it. But there's a difference between holding an opinion and holding a grudge because you can't convince someone else that your opinion is the only right way to view things. If someone values their opinions more than they value their relationship with me, then I don't see any point in continuing to be around them.
That may or may not be true...but what happens if you disagree with each other about the issue? Do you spend the rest of your life throwing your conflicting opinions at each other, or do you accept what you cannot change and just relate to them and love them?
|
|
|
Post by David Longholt on Dec 29, 2006 11:08:47 GMT -5
Gene, you are correct, language changes, but some changes are inappropriate and unwise. There are many more heterosexual people who are "gay" than homosexual ones ! i.e. happy, merry etc (on account of the est. ratio of 9 in 10 people being heterosexual).
You are what you are and I am in no position to judge you. I have my own weaknesses to address just like yourself (irrespective of whether or not homosexuality is in fact a weakness), so whatever our differences are we both have our work cut out.
I personally feel for those people whom I know have the name "Gay" because it is quite an embarrassment to them. In former times such a position would not have existed.
I'm afraid this is one area of language evolution that I strongly oppose. I have also had to correct my own children who have wrongly assumed that homosexuality is a happy condition on account of the duplicity of meaning of the word "gay."
I am not suggesting that homosexuals are "not happy" but rather the two conditions do not go "hand in hand" (i.e. synonomous).
|
|
|
Post by mrleo on Dec 29, 2006 12:44:49 GMT -5
My grandpa's middle name was Gaylord...he had a life of many ups and downs, survived the Great Depression, was married for over 65 years, fathered five children and lived to the age of 86...finally succumbed to a difficult battle with cancer (not embarrassment).
|
|
|
Post by David Longholt on Dec 29, 2006 12:55:15 GMT -5
With respect, "Gaylord" is not "Gay !" although it can be contrued in the way I have objected to.
Your Grandfather clearly lived most of his life when "Gay" was "Gay" and not "homosexual."
I am much younger than your Grandad and when I was at school, "Gay" was exactly that. No corruption. Perhaps in the last 20-25 years "Gay" has crept in to mean "homosexual" usurping its more traditional and correct meanings.
Gay traditionally meant "happy" or "merry" etc. I am not "Gay" about "gay" being used to describe homosexuality.
I have made my point clear. I do hope you had a "Gay (merry) Christmas" and that you will have a "Gay (happy) New Year."
|
|
|
Post by mrleo on Dec 29, 2006 13:01:15 GMT -5
Thanks - I don't think my Christmas could possibly have been gayer, and I anticipate that the new year will hold even more gaiety.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 29, 2006 13:02:22 GMT -5
Right. Free to interpret. Hitler also had an interpretation that the Jewish people were unclean. He then decided for himself that it was ethically proper and correct to destroy everyone he could reach within the ethnicity of Jew-relation. Those were his ethics. To Godswordstands: As a side note, you chose an interesting illustration to demonstrate that for one to believe that one's beliefs and actions are ethical does not actually make them so. I'll use the same sentence, still historically accurate, to illustrate another point: "Hitler also had an interpretation that homosexual people were unclean. He then decided for himself that it was ethically proper and correct to destroy everyone he could reach within the sexuality of homosexuality. Those were his ethics." Could this happen again? Most would think not. Guess again: In 12 countries of the world TODAY, homosexuality is punishable by death*. Let's put that in real terms: If I were to travel to Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Nigeria, Sudan, or a host of other countries, and if the authorities were to learn that I am, indeed, homosexual, I could find myself on the swinging end of a rope. Would you serve as the hang-man? i don't know. If you were to obey the old testament laws about homosexuality, you would. Lev 20:13 (King James Version): "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_laws_of_the_world
|
|
|
Post by stillstandingonit on Dec 29, 2006 13:40:49 GMT -5
A hangman?
That is a rather pointed statement. Obviously, you did not get my previous point, which is that sin is sin.
A hangman is a murderer.
Murdering is sin.
God is against sin.
No. I would not ever be a hangman. I am not a murderer.
I have many friends that are homosexual and I think they are rather fabulous human beings, but I will not support or agree with their lifestyle. It is wrong. Male genitalia was not created to merge, by nature, with other male genitalia. It is not natural, it does not reproduce life and it is a rather filthy method of sexuality - literally filthy.
I still stand on God's word - which is proven infallable.
You, dear Gene, are lying to yourself and your continual arguement over the Bible's infalliabilty vs. fallibilty is really ridiculous, at best.
Your chosen sin, which you are choosing to commit, will be your cause of distance from God for a long, long time.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 29, 2006 14:15:23 GMT -5
Male genitalia was not created to merge, by nature, with other male genitalia. It is not natural, it does not reproduce life and it is a rather filthy method of sexuality - literally filthy. So when I discount your bible-based argument and refuse to engage, you add physics, nature, reproduction, and hygeine as rationale for your stance on homosexuality? Which is it with you -- godliness or cleanliness? It looks a little like homosexuality is a concept you find personally repugnant for whatever reason, and you will grab for rationale from anywhere you can find it to support your POV.
|
|
|
Post by David Longholt on Dec 29, 2006 15:04:23 GMT -5
"stillstandingonit," I have to disagree with you. A hangman may not be a murderer if he is carrying out a just sentence. The commandment "Thou shalt not kill" refers to the "unlawful killing of another human being, not "every" killing of another human being. There is such a thing as "justifiable homicide" which covers such things as the death penalty and which is a very much different thing from "homicide" or murder. A death sentence imposed by a court of the land may well be a "justifiable killing !"
The same God who said "Thou Shalt Not Kill" also prescribed the death penalty for many serious crimes (and some we would not consider serious nowadays). The death penalty was prescribed inter alia for the unlawful killing of another.
Whilst your sentiments regarding homosexuality are understandable and fit in very well with the law of the Old Testament (which by the way hasn't been done away with), they do not fit in with the New Testament way of "grace" which is a more perfect way.
"Grace" does not do away with homosexuality as a sin, rather it does away with the old ways of how a sinner should be viewed.
|
|
|
Post by stillstanding on Dec 29, 2006 16:36:06 GMT -5
Sin is not acceptable to God. The New Testament, baring the element of Grace, does not abolish God's judgement on sin, nor does it give human beings permission to continue to sin without penalty.
The only way in the New Testament, to receive salvation, is thru Christ's covering over your soul. Continuing on in a sin is still not acceptable to God. You must repent. He still requires that.
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
REPENT - to feel such sorrow for sin or fault as to be disposed to change one's life for the better; be penitent.
For someone like Gene, who totally disregards the Bible's accuracy or reliability, will not honor this Biblical direction. He is simply someone who refuses God's Word. Arguing over it is a circular event. If I refer to physics - taking out the "Word of God," element - it is still known that by natures law's, homosexuality is still not intended by nature - just like humans and animals are not intended in nature. NO REPRODUCTION IS POSSIBLE. PARTS ARE NOT DESIGNED TO MERGE.
We can all create our lines of ethics, picking a chosing this and that, deciding for ourselves what is right and wrong. But, God already decided that. It is God in the beginning and in the end, who stands. It is God who creates, God who decides, and God who finally judges. The Bible is given to us to show us how we are to live while we are here so we can get it right in the end.
New Testament, Old Testament - the only difference between the two is one establishes laws and one fulfills them. The Old shows humans could not fulfill them. The New shows that Christ could and DID.
Christ's covering does not rebut God's judgement on sin. Truly, if you have Christ, you follow Him. Christ is not a supporter of homosexuality. He may love the sinner, but he still hates the sin. You can not be a real follower of Christ and still willingly commit an act of sin over and over again. If you do, you don't truly have the leading or indwelling of the Holy spirit.
God does not abide where He cannot.
His word still stands and that word says that homosexuality is wrong and a sin.
|
|
|
Post by mrleo on Dec 29, 2006 20:23:52 GMT -5
Stillstanding said:
An interesting choice of words, given the topic. You must really love Gene to be so concerned for him - very commendable. Are you a current 2x2? Do you believe in works-based salvation?
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 30, 2006 4:40:49 GMT -5
If I refer to physics - taking out the "Word of God," element - it is still known that by natures law's, homosexuality is still not intended by nature - just like humans and animals are not intended in nature. NO REPRODUCTION IS POSSIBLE. PARTS ARE NOT DESIGNED TO MERGE. This logic would also apply to certain oral activity between heterosexuals. Is that on your list of unacceptable behavior also?
|
|
|
Post by Nickie on Dec 30, 2006 10:58:57 GMT -5
Stillstandingonit says:
'Gene, who totally disregards the Bible's accuracy or reliability, will not honor this Biblical direction. He is simply someone who refuses God's Word. '
I counter his statement with: Stillstanding, by totally disregarding many of the the Bible's inaccuracies or unreliabilities, imposes stringent judgment upon his fellow man. Further, because of the blinders he chooses to wear (by virtue of his interpretation of life as understood only through the lens of the bible, thus black or white with NO gray in between), few, if any, non christian believers would ever desire to believe as he believes.'
|
|
|
Post by Words Words Words on Dec 30, 2006 14:48:02 GMT -5
I am much younger than your Grandad and when I was at school, "Gay" was exactly that. No corruption. Perhaps in the last 20-25 years "Gay" has crept in to mean "homosexual" usurping its more traditional and correct meanings. Your youth is showing. Word usage is determined by the people who are using them. That is why the keepers of the OED are continually updating ther work and are the first to admit that it is not nor ever will be up to date. The word gay has not been corrupted, it has been given a new meaning.
|
|
|
Post by ClayRandall on Dec 30, 2006 17:06:20 GMT -5
Thanks - I don't think my Christmas could possibly have been gayer, and I anticipate that the new year will hold even more gaiety. Hmm.......come to think of it, I did "don some gay apparel" this to sing Christmas carols at function. :-)
|
|
|
Post by bluejay on Dec 30, 2006 23:52:38 GMT -5
Godswordstands said:
A couple of thoughts come to mind here. The examples you give above (adultery, rape/pedophilia, theft, and murder) all have victims. In a relationship between two consenting, adult homosexuals, there is no innocent victim.
Secondly, my understanding from reading mrleo's or Gene's posts is that they do not consider practicing homosexuality to be a sin in God's eyes. Now you obviously do, as many others do as well. But if a homosexual does not believe he's sinning, you're wasting your time continuing to try to convince him otherwise.
Exactly! As a Christian it IS your responsibility to uphold God's word, as revealed to you. I'll even go further with that - I believe it's a Christians responsibility to be an example of God's word through how we live our lives.
Most practicing homosexuals know Christians believe their lifestyle to be sinful. But if they don't have the same inner convictions, why do we continue to rant at them? They know what has been recorded in the Bible.
Christians need to "love the sinner" and live in a manner that they believe is pleasing to God. We need to interact with everyone with respect, kindness & gentleness of spirit.
|
|
|
Post by justamom on Dec 31, 2006 1:21:03 GMT -5
I think some folks just like talking to that brick wall.... LOL
Happy New Year Everyone!
|
|