Is homosexuality a result of imperfection?

[Konquistador]

Konquistador----In your last few posts---Are you serious or are you just baiting for response????????????

Happy

I am not trying to be provokative, if you mean I am saying things I don't believe just to "poke" someone or drive them beserk or get a reaction.

I have done intensive study of the "clobber" passages which are commonly used to say that a committed, stable homosexual relationship is a sin. I have read scholarly texts about translations of words, about secular and religious writings that use these same words and how they are used in both Hebrew and Greek at the time the various books of the Bible was written, I have studies Roman and Greek and Jewish cultures about social and sexul issues, I have read relevant parts of the Code of Justinian which contains intrincate details about eunuchs. I have read dozens of different texts about interpreting the contexts of the NT passages. Calling a committed homosexual relationship a sin simply has no foundation in the Bible.

There is virtually no English translation of Leviticus 18:22 using the original Hebrew Masoretic text, for instance, that is even close to accurate, even when the context of that verse about pagan rites is ignored. Thiis a simple fact. And the translations of the Septuaigint version of the OT mistranslate into English as well.

 

[happyharold4]

I think too much study hath made thee mad

Happy

 

[Fraction]

I think too much study hath made thee mad

I think you should take the mad jokes to 4chan or something. The guy is just pointing out what he has discovered in research. Maybe you should learn from it and look it up for yourself. From what I have gathered so far, is that the guy is actually pretty accurate. Like it or not.

 

[agua]

Lev 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.


I don't see any ambiguity in Leviticus and it is inline with Judes account of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Jud_1:7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Sodom was destroyed principally for sexual immorality and from Genesis 19 we can see homosexuality is evident.


Gen_19:5 And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally."


God does not approve of homosexuality.

 

[Konquistador]

Lev 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.


I don't see any ambiguity in Leviticus and it is inline with Judes account of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Jud_1:7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Sodom was destroyed principally for sexual immorality and from Genesis 19 we can see homosexuality is evident.


Gen_19:5 And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally."


God does not approve of homosexuality.

The problem is, your quotations from Leviticus are NOT what the original text says. Search it out for yourself for reasonable translations on the internet, or go to your university library and research both the Greek and Hebrew actual texts. No Bible in English has a translation that properly translates the original Hebrew.

And Genesis 19 quotatations are clearly about rape, if one wishes to put a sexual twist on specific verses out of the whole story about Lot, the angels, and the townspeople -- but in no way can this text be interpreted as condemning loving committed same-sex relationships.

Furthermore, if Jesus says the sin of Sodom is inhospitality, that pretty much settles the question altogether, unless you happen to believe that Jesus was not God and therefore didn't know what he's talking about when he says what the sin of Sodom was. Read Mark 6:11 and verses surrounding Matt 10:15. Also read multiple internet searches you can do on ancient Israelites and hospitality, the lack thereof was considered zimah (sin against God) not just toevah (abomination -- against ritual purity).

Jesus also offered "eunuchs by birth" as an example of God's creation that was an alternative to what He said about heterosexual marriage and divorce. (Matt 19:3-12) Jesus uses the exact phrases that both Roman law and rabbinical writings use to describe what we today would call homosexuals.

I challenge any Christian to give theological grounds, if they believe Jesus was part of the trinity and therefor was God, or even if they only believe Jesus just spoke for God as a prophet, to say that what Jesus said about the sin of Sodom or about homosexuals (eunuchs by birth) was not the most authoritative word of God and can be dismissed. If you dismiss what Jesus said the scriptures meant, how can you possibly call yourself Christian?

 

[Konquistador]

I think too much study hath made thee mad

Happy

Yes, it is mad to take quotations of bad translations and to take verses out of context. This used to be called "heresy". It would be ever so nice for so-called Christians to actually stop using rotten translations and taking verses out of context just to prove their preconceived notions and therefore use the Bible to justify intolerance contrary to what God actually says in the Bible. Don't bother with facts, just confirm your prejudices.

 

[spirit1st]

All scripture has Equal value! Jesus never spoke anything , that was not given to Him by the Spirit of Truth ! just as all others were given the Truth by the very same Spirit of Truth!
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Joh 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.


Joh 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

Joh 12:50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

 

[Konquistador]

All scripture has Equal value! Jesus never spoke anything , that was not given to Him by the Spirit of Truth ! just as all others were given the Truth by the very same Spirit of Truth!
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Joh 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.


Joh 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

Joh 12:50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Jesus actually said the opposite of what you say. Verses about the law in Leviticus, for example, are NOT equal to what Jesus said they meant, and you have a choice as a Christian to pick and choose either a specific law from Leviticus or what Jesus said the summary of the law meant. Are you actually saying, as a Christian, that what Jesus said scripture meant has no more importance than what anyone else says?

Since you like to point out specific verses of scripture, would you please find the quotation where Jesus says what the summary of all law and scripture is? Commonly called the Great Commandments? Please quote these verses in context. And then explain to all of us how what Jesus said the summary of what God wants is not true and is overridden by other isolated passages of scripture. Also, point out any verse where Jesus said he did not speak for God. Please explain how Leviticus is correct about the abomination of gathering grain on the Sabbath, when Jesus explicitly told the Pharisees that they were wrong to accuse the innocent disciples for meeting their needs by gathering grain on the Sabbath (Matt 12)

It is inconceivable to me how any so-called Christian, who supposedly believes that Jesus IS God, or at least speaks with the authority of God, can say that what Jesus says about scriptures and what God wants is wrong and not as correct as other isolated verses of the Bible. Please explain how I am wrong, if I believe what Jesus said the scriptures mean, or what he said about what God wants, is closer to the truth about what God wants than any other verses of the Bible.

 

[agua]

The problem is, your quotations from Leviticus are NOT what the original text says. Search it out for yourself for reasonable translations on the internet, or go to your university library and research both the Greek and Hebrew actual texts. No Bible in English has a translation that properly translates the original Hebrew.

And Genesis 19 quotatations are clearly about rape, if one wishes to put a sexual twist on specific verses out of the whole story about Lot, the angels, and the townspeople -- but in no way can this text be interpreted as condemning loving committed same-sex relationships.

It is good that you now see the sexual reference here . Yes it was about rape in Genesis 19 and it was same sex rape mentioned.

Gen 19:4-5 Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. (5) And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally."


And it is shown in Jude 1:7 very clearly as well.

Furthermore, if Jesus says the sin of Sodom is inhospitality, that pretty much settles the question altogether, unless you happen to believe that Jesus was not God and therefore didn't know what he's talking about when he says what the sin of Sodom was.

Read Mark 6:11 and verses surrounding Matt 10:15. Also read multiple internet searches you can do on ancient Israelites and hospitality, the lack thereof was considered zimah (sin against God) not just toevah (abomination -- against ritual purity).

Mark 6:11 tells us of the result of Sodom's sins and not the type. Any place that does not receive the disciples message will receive the same result as Sodom's sin. That is, rejecting the Gospel of Christ will end in destruction in the same way that Sodom's sexual depravity lead to its end. Pretty clear.

Jesus also offered "eunuchs by birth" as an example of God's creation that was an alternative to what He said about heterosexual marriage and divorce. (Matt 19:3-12) Jesus uses the exact phrases that both Roman law and rabbinical writings use to describe what we today would call homosexuals.

In Matthew 19:3-12 , Jesus was teaching about marraige and divorce, and firstly repeats the teachings from God in Genesis 1:27
and Genesis 2:24 about the creation of man and woman and their union in marriage. He then goes on to answer the disciples question on if it is better to not marry than run the risk of being unhappily married and divorcing. Jesus replied showing it is possible to stay unmarried and used the example of being a "eunich" in different ways. Some men were born sexually disfunctional, some were catstrated by men, and some made the choice to abstain sexually for " the Kingdom of Heavens sake".You can compare this with Pauls words in 1 Corinthians 7:7-9 where he states it is good to remain unmarried as long as you do not burn with desire. The whole context is about honouring marriage and being sexually pure. The use of "eunich" has nothing to do with homosexuality but describes those who abstain from sexual activity by choice or because of anatomy.

I challenge any Christian to give theological grounds, if they believe Jesus was part of the trinity and therefor was God, or even if they only believe Jesus just spoke for God as a prophet, to say that what Jesus said about the sin of Sodom or about homosexuals (eunuchs by birth) was not the most authoritative word of God and can be dismissed. If you dismiss what Jesus said the scriptures meant, how can you possibly call yourself Christian?

Jesus is God and our teacher. You have clearly twisted several scriptures to suit your belief and suggesting Sodom was destroyed for "inhospitality " makes this obvious.

Jud_1:7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

 

[judgement]

the sin list

THESE PEOPLE WILL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD.
Sin List of People Who Will Not inherit Eternal Life
Mark 7:20-23 Jesus says, "It is the Thought-Life that defiles you. For from within, out of a person's heart, come Evil Thoughts, Sexual Immorality, Theft, Murder, Adultery, Greed, Wickedness, Deceit, Eagerness for Lustful Pleasure, Envy, Slander, Pride, and Foolishness. All these Vile things come from within; they are what DEFILE YOU and make you UNACCEPTABLE TO GOD."Rom 1:28-32 When they refused to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their evil minds and let them do things that should never be done. 29 Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, fighting, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. 30 They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They are forever inventing new ways of sinning and are disobedient to their parents. 31 They refuse to understand, break their promises, and are heartless and unforgiving. 32 They are fully aware of God's death penalty for those who do these things, yet they go right ahead and do them anyway. And, worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too.


Rom 8:6 "To be CARNALLY (Worldly) MINDED is Death.."

1 Cor 6:9-10 “Don't you know that those who do wrong will have NO share in the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who Indulge in Sexual Sin, who are Idol Worshipers, Adulterers, Male Prostitutes, Homosexuals, Thieves, Greedy people, Drunkards, Abusers, and Swindlers—NONE OF THESE will have a share in the KINGDOM OF GOD.”

Gal 5:19-21 “When you follow the desires of your Sinful Nature, your lives will produce these Evil results: Sexual Immorality, Impure Thoughts, Eagerness for Lustful Pleasure, Idolatry, Participation in Demonic Activities, Hostility, Quarreling, Jealousy, Outbursts of Anger, Selfish Ambition, Divisions, the feeling that everyone is wrong except those in your own little group, Envy, Drunkenness, Wild Parties, and other kinds of sin. Let me tell you again, as I have before, that anyone living that sort of life will NOT inherit the KINGDOM OF GOD.“

Eph 5:3-7 “Let there be No Sexual Immorality, Impurity, or Greed among you. Such sins have no place among God's people. Obscene stories, Foolish Talk, and Coarse Jokes—these are not for you. Instead, let there be thankfulness to God. You can be sure that No Immoral, Impure, or Greedy Person will inherit the Kingdom of Christ and of God. For a Greedy Person is really an Idolater who worships the things of this world. Don't be fooled by those who try to excuse these sins, for the TERRIBLE ANGER OF GOD (WRATH OF GOD) comes upon all those who DISOBEY HIM. Don't participate in the things these people do.“

Col 3:5-10 “So put to death the sinful, earthly things lurking within you. Have nothing to do with Sexual Sin, Impurity, Lust, and Shameful Desires. Don't be Greedy for the good things of this life, for that is Idolatry. GOD'S TERRIBLE ANGER WILL COME UPON THOSE WHO DO SUCH THINGS. You used to do them when your life was still part of this world. But now is the time to get rid of Anger, Rage, Malicious behavior, Slander, and Dirty Language. Don't lie to each other, for you have stripped off your old evil nature and all its wicked deeds. In its place you have clothed yourselves with a brand-new Nature that is continually being renewed as you learn more and more about Christ, who created this new nature within you.“

Rev 21:7-8 “But Cowards who turn away from me, and Unbelievers, and the Corrupt, and Murderers, and the Immoral, and those who practice Witchcraft, and Idol Worshipers, and all Liars—their DOOM is in the LAKE THAT BURNS WITH FIRE & SULFUR.” (Lake of Fire)

John 3:3 Jesus replied, "I assure you, unless you are Born Again, you can NEVER see the Kingdom of God."
I have talked to many christians who fornicate and get drunk they still have hate in their hearts, bi christians and i have met many who think they are saved and it is okay to do what they are doing.
Satan has lied to them and told them surly God said you shall not die if you do such things, but scripture says something different. unless they repent and believe in what God has said about what they are doing is sinful they and any christian that lives in sin will perish if they dont repent, and no wicked person will enter the kingdom of God. Love is telling them the truth and many christians who practice the sins above think they are going to enter the kingdom of God, but that is a lie from satan himself. Repentance needs to be explained through Gods word and what that means so often it is not even talked about. I will pray for all people here who are lost are searching that God would open your eyes to the gospel which is repentance toward God and faith in the lord Jesus Christ and what that means according to Gods holy word.

 

[Konquistador]

@ AUQA: Well, to acknowledge that rape is one of the sins of Sodom is good, but to equate this with a condemnation of loving stable homosexual relationships is sick logic. That's like saying if God condemns heterosexual rape, he is condemning all heterosexual relationships. Sick!! And your reference to Jude is equally bizarre, it is such a last ditch effort to condemn homosexual relationships that even most anti-gay nutcakes dismiss this reference as having relevance, and think "strange flesh" might more legitimately apply to having sex with aliens to another planet. Please quote any legitimate scholar who applies Jude to committed homosexual relationships. Give me a reference, I will read it and consider it.

As for your statement about Sodom, I agree. But the admonition to accept Jesus' statements have zero to do with any supposed fantasy about God's condemnation of homosexuality. Are you saying that the Gospels say that any rejection of Jesus and the Gospels mean a person is a homosexual pervert? That's the height of crazy illogical thinking. I know straight people who are atheists and reject the Gospel, your statement is crazy talk.

If you would happen to be open minded enough to read Roman law, and rabbinical writings at the time of Jesus, which Jesus knew intimately or He would not be considered a "rabbi", "eunuchs by birth" referred to men who would not procreate because they had no interest in women, but had only interest in men. "Eunuchs made by man" referred to castrated men. "Eunuchs by choice" meant asthetics such as the Essenes (John the Baptist, many theologians point out the similarity between Jesus' teachings and Essene teachings) who chose a life of celibacy. Both Roman law and rabbinical writings very clearly describe the behaviors of "eunuchs by birth" as what we would call homosexuals today. Read references in Daniel Helminiak's book about homosexuality, or actually read translations of the rabbinical writings, or read the Code of Justinian (compilation of all Roman law, with commentary by the ancient Romans themselves) about "eunuchs by birth". I have read all these translations, as well as writings about them. I challenge you to read them, and point out one single sentence where the term Jesus uses does not match either the Roman or rabbinical writings, and where what is described is not identical to what we today call a homosexual in a long-standing monogamous homosexual relationship.

I'm sorry, but you simply do not understand what Jesus understood "eunichs by birth" meant. If you can find any scholarly text which contradicts what I have found that scholars say this text means, please inform me and I will recondsider, but I have reached my conclusions based upon what I have read and not upon my preconceived opinion. If I am wrong based upon actually evidence I am more than willing to reconsider the conclusions of scholarly translations and assumptions that as a rabbi Jesus was aware of rabbinical writings.

Furthermore, as I have pointed out in other threads, rabbinical writings discuss "sporting with boys" as a euphamism for having sex with younger males, and rabbis conclude this is not a violation of Leviticus 18:22 as long as this activity is not part of a pagan temple ceremony and as long as there is not anal penetration. These writings begin 100 yrs before Jesus, there's zero chance he could study rabbinical writings and not be aware of this information when he spoke of "euncuhs by birth" (sometimes referred to as "eunuchs of the sun" in rabbinical writings, borrowing the Egyptian term).

Point out any text which offers alternative explanations, and I will most certainly consider them. Unless you can do so, the evidence is that Jesus offered "eunuchs by birth" as part of God's creation and an alternative to heterosexual marriage. Your fantasy about what the text means does not match historical fact. Point out where I am wrong, other than your imagination, and I will gladly consider it. What the Bible says is what the Bible says, and it has zero to do with your preconceived imagination.

 

[Konquistador]

@judgement --

Once again, crazy talk. You assign a committed homosexual relationship to "immorality" or "wicked", and then because you can find a Bible verse about immorality or wickedness, say it is about a committed monogamous homosexual relationship. This kind of logic (illogic) meets one of the psychiatric standards for psychotic thought disorder. You can continue to do this all you want, but it has zero to do with what the Bible says, or with any kind of normal logic. It is simply crazy talk.

Point out a single verse of the Bible that condemns a committed, loving, long-term passionate relationship with a person of the same sex. I'm not talking about Leviticus, where the prohibition is against homosexual pagan rites, or about 1 Corinthians where Paul talks about doing things against one's sexual nature (so, would Paul condemn a homosexual who had heterosexual sex 'against his nature'?). I'm talking about any verse you can find that condemns a loving committed homosexual relationship. For instance, Jonathan and David. Or even against the occasional sexual encounters between David and Saul (look at translations of the original Hebrew by Hebrew scholars, you'll see the fairly explicit sexual actual words, rather than the euphemisms of English translations). Please point out things from elsewhere other than your imagination where I am mistaken, so that I can reconsider.

 

[agua]

@ AUQA: Well, to acknowledge that rape is one of the sins of Sodom is good, but to equate this with a condemnation of loving stable homosexual relationships is sick logic. That's like saying if God condemns heterosexual rape, he is condemning all heterosexual relationships. Sick!!

Sodom was renown for all kinds of sexual sin which included same sex rape as seen is Genesis 19.

Gen 19:5 And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally."

God condemns all sexual activity outside marriage and the residents of Sodom were known for sexual immorality. We can clearly see the sin that is being described here is sexual immorality and the specific type includes sodomy.

G

And your reference to Jude is equally bizarre, it is such a last ditch effort to condemn homosexual relationships that even most anti-gay nutcakes dismiss this reference as having relevance, and think "strange flesh" might more legitimately apply to having sex with aliens to another planet. Please quote any legitimate scholar who applies Jude to committed homosexual relationships. Give me a reference, I will read it and consider it.

Jude 1:7 leaves no doubt about the reason Sodom was destroyed.

Jud 1:7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.


The disagreement about the meaning of "strange flesh" doesn't change the fact that the sin was sexual immorality that caused Sodom's destruction and not "inhospitality" as you wrongly claim. "Going after strange flesh" obviously refers to some kind of sexual perversion. A comparison with Romans 1:27 may be helpful here.

Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

As for your statement about Sodom, I agree. But the admonition to accept Jesus' statements have zero to do with any supposed fantasy about God's condemnation of homosexuality. Are you saying that the Gospels say that any rejection of Jesus and the Gospels mean a person is a homosexual pervert? That's the height of crazy illogical thinking. I know straight people who are atheists and reject the Gospel, your statement is crazy talk.

Mark 6:11 Jesus tells how the places that reject the disciples message will be destroyed in the same manner Sodom was.It does not mention, nor is it comparing with, the type of Sodom's sin. The message here is that rejecting Jesus leads to destruction in the same manner as Sodom was destroyed. Do you understand this ?

Mar 6:6-11 And He marveled because of their unbelief. Then He went about the villages in a circuit, teaching. (7) And He called the twelve to Himself, and began to send them out two by two, and gave them power over unclean spirits. (8) He commanded them to take nothing for the journey except a staff—no bag, no bread, no copper in their money belts— (9) but to wear sandals, and not to put on two tunics. (10) Also He said to them, "In whatever place you enter a house, stay there till you depart from that place. (11) And whoever will not receive you nor hear you, when you depart from there, shake off the dust under your feet as a testimony against them. Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city!"

If you would happen to be open minded enough to read Roman law, and rabbinical writings at the time of Jesus, which Jesus knew intimately or He would not be considered a "rabbi", "eunuchs by birth" referred to men who would not procreate because they had no interest in women, but had only interest in men. "Eunuchs made by man" referred to castrated men. "Eunuchs by choice" meant asthetics such as the Essenes (John the Baptist, many theologians point out the similarity between Jesus' teachings and Essene teachings) who chose a life of celibacy. Both Roman law and rabbinical writings very clearly describe the behaviors of "eunuchs by birth" as what we would call homosexuals today. Read references in Daniel Helminiak's book about homosexuality, or actually read translations of the rabbinical writings, or read the Code of Justinian (compilation of all Roman law, with commentary by the ancient Romans themselves) about "eunuchs by birth". I have read all these translations, as well as writings about them. I challenge you to read them, and point out one single sentence where the term Jesus uses does not match either the Roman or rabbinical writings, and where what is described is not identical to what we today call a homosexual in a long-standing monogamous homosexual relationship.

A literal eunuch is a man who has no sexual organs. We can also use the name for a man who has been born this way or has been castrated. Jesus also used it as an analogy of a man that chose to remain sexually inactive.

G2135
εὐνοῦχος
eunouchos
yoo-noo'-khos
From εὐνή eunē (a bed) and G2192; a castrated person (such being employed in Oriental bed chambers); by extension an impotent or unmarried man; by implication a chamberlain (state officer): - eunuch.

Here is what I posted earlier to explain this to you.

In Matthew 19:3-12 , Jesus was teaching about marraige and divorce, and firstly repeats the teachings from God in Genesis 1:27
and Genesis 2:24 about the creation of man and woman and their union in marriage. He then goes on to answer the disciples question on if it is better to not marry than run the risk of being unhappily married and divorcing. Jesus replied showing it is possible to stay unmarried and used the example of being a "eunich" in different ways. Some men were born sexually disfunctional, some were catstrated by men, and some made the choice to abstain sexually for " the Kingdom of Heavens sake".You can compare this with Pauls words in 1 Corinthians 7:7-9 where he states it is good to remain unmarried as long as you do not burn with desire. The whole context is about honouring marriage and being sexually pure. The use of "eunich" has nothing to do with homosexuality but describes those who abstain from sexual activity by choice or because of anatomy.

I'm sorry, but you simply do not understand what Jesus understood "eunichs by birth" meant. If you can find any scholarly text which contradicts what I have found that scholars say this text means, please inform me and I will recondsider, but I have reached my conclusions based upon what I have read and not upon my preconceived opinion. If I am wrong based upon actually evidence I am more than willing to reconsider the conclusions of scholarly translations and assumptions that as a rabbi Jesus was aware of rabbinical writings.

My reliable text is the scriptures. You would be well served not to hunt for evidence to suit your belief in the writings of men.

Furthermore, as I have pointed out in other threads, rabbinical writings discuss "sporting with boys" as a euphamism for having sex with younger males, and rabbis conclude this is not a violation of Leviticus 18:22 as long as this activity is not part of a pagan temple ceremony and as long as there is not anal penetration. These writings begin 100 yrs before Jesus, there's zero chance he could study rabbinical writings and not be aware of this information when he spoke of "euncuhs by birth" (sometimes referred to as "eunuchs of the sun" in rabbinical writings, borrowing the Egyptian term).

Point out any text which offers alternative explanations, and I will most certainly consider them. Unless you can do so, the evidence is that Jesus offered "eunuchs by birth" as part of God's creation and an alternative to heterosexual marriage. Your fantasy about what the text means does not match historical fact. Point out where I am wrong, other than your imagination, and I will gladly consider it. What the Bible says is what the Bible says, and it has zero to do with your preconceived imagination.

Eunuch does not mean homosexual. It literally pertains to sexual emasculation and allegorically to sexual abstinance.

You are choosing this interpretation for you own benefit.

 

[Chad]

@judgement --

Once again, crazy talk. You assign a committed homosexual relationship to "immorality" or "wicked", and then because you can find a Bible verse about immorality or wickedness, say it is about a committed monogamous homosexual relationship. This kind of logic (illogic) meets one of the psychiatric standards for psychotic thought disorder. You can continue to do this all you want, but it has zero to do with what the Bible says, or with any kind of normal logic. It is simply crazy talk.

Point out a single verse of the Bible that condemns a committed, loving, long-term passionate relationship with a person of the same sex. I'm not talking about Leviticus, where the prohibition is against homosexual pagan rites, or about 1 Corinthians where Paul talks about doing things against one's sexual nature (so, would Paul condemn a homosexual who had heterosexual sex 'against his nature'?). I'm talking about any verse you can find that condemns a loving committed homosexual relationship. For instance, Jonathan and David. Or even against the occasional sexual encounters between David and Saul (look at translations of the original Hebrew by Hebrew scholars, you'll see the fairly explicit sexual actual words, rather than the euphemisms of English translations). Please point out things from elsewhere other than your imagination where I am mistaken, so that I can reconsider.

You think too highly of your intellect, clearly by your tone towards others here in your several pro-same-sex posts.

Same sex is an abomination. GOD says so, your opinion does not matter whatsoever, neither does your comprehension of Greek/Hebrew texts. You're twisting things yourself for even daring to say none of the English translations properly translate the verses about homosexuality.

1 Timothy 1:9-11


9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

 

[Chad]

Some helpful resources:

What does the Bible say about homosexuality? Is homosexuality a sin?
Christianity and Homosexuality | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

Anyone professing that homosexuality is not a sin is condemning themselves and will be judged for their false doctrine. If you know you are one of them, you had better be careful what you teach. False teaching is serious and from the devil.

 

[Fraction]

I believe that Hebrew and Greek texts do matter. They matter maybe as much if not more than our english translation bibles. It is the closest to the original text as we are going to get. That and MAYBE the 1st edition king james.

Why would they matter?

God spoke directly to the physical writers of the bible so that they could..well...write it down lol. He did so himself, through Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Spirit. They all had a direct link to God when writing. The translators were inventors, scholars, and scientists. Did these people have a direct link as well? POSSIBLE! They also sadly could have added or removed things based on their personal beliefs or of mainstream beliefs. (don't forget that the bible was used to manipulate people and for power at one time by the roman catholic church)

Where are you getting this information from?

Mostly from personal experience with rumors. You tell someone something, and by the end of the day the story has changed. Things have been added and taken away from it. You tell someone in the morning you took a trip to Maryland, and at the end of the day you rode a moose to Canada. I also base it off something that we can all relate to. In most bibles (my NIV does this) the definition of repent is to feel sorry for, to promise to never do it again. As we all know repent replaces words of the Greek and Hebrew language that mean "To change your mind". So when we repent and turn to Jesus Christ. We change from being a non-believer TO a believer. What happens when we repent of sin? Think back and try to remember before you were saved. Sin was just normal everyday actions that you thought were just actions and daily life. Things that weren't important to even that harmful. So when we repent of sin, we gain knowledge. We change our minds of sin. We stop thinking its not a bad thing. We then know in our hearts that God hates it. We believe in our hearts that it is WRONG. Our hearts no longer want to sin. Our hearts no longer CAN sin.


I am not saying that homosexuality isn't a sin. I am not saying that our English translation is 100% wrong. I am not saying anyone on this forum is wrong in what they believe. I am only stating simple facts. These facts point directly in one direction. It says that there is still more learning out there. Everyone should pray and ask God to keep our eyes, ears, and our hearts open still! Never stop asking for that. We all know that the more knowledge we have the happier we actually get.

Please take none of this offensively, I do not mean to be offensive about it. I just think that the Hebrew and Greek text is worth investigation and study. There might be more information there. More understanding. :embarasse

 

[agua]

Leviticus 18:22

I think it is important to clear the understanding of Leviticus 18:22.
The following is from Shilo357.

As for Leviticus 18:22... The sentence is very plain in Hebrew. In fact, it is almost redundant.

The word for "lie" is a common Hebrew word for sexual relations (shakhav) and interestingly the phrase "as with" from the phrase "as with womankind" is the word "mishkhav" and also means sexual relations."

It would read in Hebrew, "You are not to have sexual relations with males in the same manner as sexual relations with females, it is an abomination."

Now in Hebrew, there are three words that refer to abomination. Lev. 18:22 uses the Hebrew word "toevah" (pronounced "to-ay-vah") It is the strongest word in Hebrew for abomination. It is the highest form of abomination, possible. It is a word that communicates absolute disgust. Toevah is something that God hates and has nothing but pure contempt for.

The second word is "shaquetz" and it refers to that which is ritually impure (Lev. 11:10-13, Lev. 11:20, Lev. 11:23, Lev. 11:41, and Lev. 11:42).

The third word is "piggah" and is used only of the flesh of sacrificial animals that had become putrid or tainted in some way and was unfit for the sacrifices.

The acts of idolatry, divination/occultist activities, sexual immorality (homosexuality/incest), are all referred to by the word toevah.

Now, while God does sometimes use the word toevah to refer ritual impurity, He NEVER directly refers to homosexual activity by any other word than toevah.

 

[happyharold4]

Agua---I've gone back and read your previous posts and they are excellent and crystal clear and informative---thanks for posting them.

Happy

 

[Thiscrosshurts]

Jesus said:
Matt 7:18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
Matt 7:19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

We don't want fire so we should see how Jesus will judge the trees.

Matt 7:20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Matt 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
Matt 7:22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
Matt 7:23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

He's going to judge us by our fruit,so what kind of fruit is he looking for?I don't think God Judges fruits the way we do.

Matt. 25:32 the nations will be assembled before him, and he will separate people one from another like a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
25:33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 25:34 Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
25:35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 25:36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’
25:37 Then the righteous will answer him,
‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?
25:38 When
did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or naked and clothe you? 25:39 When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
25:40 And the king will answer them,‘I tell you the truth,
just as you did it for one of the least of these brothers or sisters of mine, you did it for me.’

Good fruit "is"actions of love for God and one another.
The bad fruit is the high power movers and shakers who don't have a clue how to love without judging.

BTW:Konquistador has a historical point about Centurions and the customs of the day.History is pretty messy and the even Talmud contained some VERY controversial allowances.

 

[Fraction]

Jesus said:
Matt 7:18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
Matt 7:19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

We don't want fire so we should see how Jesus will judge the trees.

Matt 7:20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Matt 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
Matt 7:22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
Matt 7:23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

He's going to judge us by our fruit,so what kind of fruit is he looking for?I don't think God Judges fruits the way we do.

Matt. 25:32 the nations will be assembled before him, and he will separate people one from another like a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
25:33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 25:34 Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
25:35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 25:36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’
25:37 Then the righteous will answer him,
‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?
25:38 When
did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or naked and clothe you? 25:39 When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
25:40 And the king will answer them,‘I tell you the truth,
just as you did it for one of the least of these brothers or sisters of mine, you did it for me.’

Good fruit "is"actions of love for God and one another.
The bad fruit is the high power movers and shakers who don't have a clue how to love without judging.

BTW:Konquistador has a historical point about Centurions and the customs of the day.History is pretty messy and the even Talmud contained some VERY controversial allowances.

I like this!