Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no such thing as "eternal" in your bubble.... so take up your mocking with God.
If you think you know better, then will see who's the invincible arrogant .......you or God.
My belief system is irrelevant when discussing yours. I am proposing that YOU are correct in how you determine homosexuals will not gain eternal life. If you are correct, then you are disobedient to God because you do not follow all of Gods laws and even believe you do not have to follow them all.
I am taking the position that your belief system may be correct, if it is, then your fate is the same as a homosexuals.
If I am wrong about what I believe now, ok, I can understand, and always have that I can be, however, your ignoring the fact that if I start believing what YOU believe, then I will subject it to the same scrutiny that I have to anything I have ever believed.
I hold myself subject to what I believe, even when I believed in eternal separation from God, I held myself to the understanding of what I would reap if it was true. So what I believe now is NOT the issue.
YOU are saying what I believe is wrong, I am showing you how YOUR belief system will apply to myself and YOU. That is what you have the greater problem with because YOU know you are disobedient to God when placing your life in the same manner you place a homosexuals.
So get over trying to say I am wrong because I am talking about the facts that must be considered if I am to change my mind about what I believe and agree with YOU.
False premise, you are already on the wrong track. My disagreement with you does not show that I do not study the bible.
First, you are proving the thread title correct with this post.
Secondly you cannot define homosexuality using those verses. Heterosexuals can exchange the natural relations for unnatural ones. So can homosexuals because the verse above is about relations that are of an abusive self gratifying manner, using others for your own sexual need.
It is known that often sexual relations void of love can take the form of not actually caring who you have sex with, men with men when a man is actually naturally inclined to men. The nature of scripture is about how our hearts are geared to one another, there is nothing in there that defines homosexuality. You believe it does because the thread title is correct.
Clearly the verse in question tells you that having sex with the same sex is unnatural. The Bibles arguement is not about abuse, or not having a caring relationship. It is about same sex encounters.
Clearly the verse in question tells you that having sex with the same sex is unnatural. The Bibles arguement is not about abuse, or not having a caring relationship. It is about same sex encounters.
No it is not simply because the scriptures apply to every himan being, you will not know how to apply that rational to a hermaphrodite.
That's right .... you're wanton refusal of the obvious has nothing to do with it.
Leviticus 18:22
“ ‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.' "
Leviticus 20:13
“ ‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.' "
"their blood will be on their own heads" .... God had the last laugh with the invincible arrogance of Sodom & Gomorrah.
You are aware those verses were not written in English right, and they have an entirely different meaning in Hebrew? Those 2 verses are about Prostitution. And detestable/abomination is a mistranslation. It is To'evah in Hebrew. A To'evah is a taboo or something a particular group should not engage in. In the context of Leviticus, the prohibition is on men becoming temple prostitutes like the Caananites, and taking on the submissive sexual role reserved for a woman. The Hebrew word for "to lie" when referring to a man, is Shakab, which is always used for some kind of forced/deceitful/ or otherwise non-consensual sexual act. For example, it's used when Lot's daughters got him drunk and raped him.
Leviticus 18: 1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘I am the LORD your God. 3You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices.
The chapter tells you right there what the prohibition was on. Doing what the Canaanites and Egyptians did, which was pagan sex rituals. Hence, why it was "To'evah" for the Israelites to do it. Deuteronomy confirms this message: Deut 23: 17 No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute.
Not to mention, it was directed exclusively to the Israelites - meaning those laws only apply to them, not all of humanity.
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lust. (EVEN THEIR WOMAN EXCHANGED NATURAL SEXUAL RELATIONS FOR UNNATURAL ONES. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with woman and were inflamed with lust for one another. MEN COMMITTED SHAMEFUL ACTS WITH OTHER MEN, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
So yes, Scripture does say that woman as with the men exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones, and like the men were inflamed with lust for one another. No matter how hard you try to twist the Scriptures. No playing with words will allow you to escape the clear and obvious understanding of the written word.
You should study it first, you obviously do not understand it well. Romans is about heterosexual Greeks and Romans engaging in prostitution and pederasty. They had unbridled passion as discussed by Plato.
The Bible condems homosexuality, don't blame me for that reality. And any truth revealed form the Bible requires one to consider the verses that adresses the topic. And the topic here is on homosexuality.
It condemns self-righteous conservative know it alls too. Have you repented of that sin?
Well of course, when it is shown that the bible does not clearly talk of behavior that defines homosexuality then you have to revert back to a general and vague idea that any interaction is condemned.
You do this because you cannot clearly define homosexuality as wrong in the bible any more than what the bible says about behavior condemns heterosexuality.
What part of the statements saying that a man should not have sex with a man and woman with a woman is it that you find profoundly cryptic? You see, we as Christians know what is expected of us in terms of heterosexual behavior. Let me enumerate it for you.
1. Hetero sex only within marriage.
As simple as that. Now, what part of not having sex relations outside of the marriage bond is it that you find so cryptic as to be beyond clear human comprehension?
BTW
I didn't say ANY interaction. I said what the Bible said-homosexual interaction. Is that also too cryptic for you?
What part of the statements saying that a man should not have sex with a man and woman with a woman is it that you find profoundly cryptic?
That verse wasn't written in English. That statement has 2 different words for "to lie" in the same sentence. It's also in a chapter about pagan worship of the Egyptians and Caananites and is addressed exlusively to the Israelites.
Have you ever heard of linguistics, context, or culture?
What part of the statements saying that a man should not have sex with a man and woman with a woman is it that you find profoundly cryptic? You see, we as Christians know what is expected of us in tewrms of heterosexual behavior. Let me enumerate it for you.
1. Hetero sex only within marriage.
As simple as that. Now, what part of not having sex relations outside of the marriage bond is it that you find so cryptic as to be beyond clear human comprehension?
False premise, if the law of the land allowed homosexual marriage your point evaporates. The law of the land does not dictate what is biblical.
You also are not understanding that homosexuality is not defined by sexual positions.
That verse wasn't written in English. That statement has 2 different words for "to lie" in the same sentence. It's also in a chapter about pagan worship of the Egyptians and Caananites and is addressed exlusively to the Israelites.
Have you ever heard of linguistics, context, or culture?
Here is what a Jewish Rabbi has to say about that:
Quote:
Excerpt:
No, the Hebrew there does NOT mean to rape! Nor does it imply anything about Temple prostitution, the other attempt to circumvent the meaning). Nor does this section apply only to Levi'im- those trying to claim that the book of Vayikra (the Hebrew name which does NOT have anything to do with Levites!) applies only to the Kohanim and Levi'im evidently do not know much about Judaism! Such a claim would imply that the laws of Kashrus (the Jewish dietary laws) don't apply to all Jews- after all, they are found in this book!
In short- as far as Jews are concerned this passage refers to sodomy, homsexual sex between two men. All kinds of convoluted logic by apologists does nto alter the fact that the Hebrew is clear here, has a clear and distinct meaning, and has been understood as such by the Jews ever since it was written. None of the ancient Jewish sources ever imply this has any other meaning (though some claim it can be expanded to include other forbidden acts!); and the idea of it meaning sodomy and applying it to two men can be found in the Mishnah- contemporary to the time of the Temple! The only way people can come up with new meanings for it is to ignore the actual Hebrew meaning and the way Jews have interpreted this for the last 3500 years! Source(s):
Orthodox Jew; acting Rabbi; Torah; Talmud
BTW
As for context, that's irrelevant since the moral precepts carried over into Christianity. What didn't carry over were such things as the ceremonial and dietary precepts such as animal sacrifices and circumcision of the flesh and refraining from eating certain meat such as pork. Anyway, if indeed God tagged the practrices of the Caananites detestable, then that's exactly what he meant-detestable. Or do you have another definition for that as well?
Deuteronomy 18:12
Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you.
Leviticus 18:24 "'Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled.
Leviticus 18:25 Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants.
Last edited by Radrook; 05-12-2011 at 02:54 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
