Is Homosexuality Wrong? A Biblical Perspective

[Chad]

Watch YouTube Testimonials of Ex-Gays:
ex-gay testimony - YouTube

PLEASE READ FIRST

The Bible tells us to be at peace with all men. As Christians, we can do this with everyone, including homosexuals. Yes, we know there are those who claim to be Christians who advocate hatred and violence towards homosexuals, and we stand in opposition to those who would promote such things. However, homosexuality is an aggressive movement that will not leave Christians, and society, alone. It is a movement that is intruding into the media, schools, religious institutions, society, and politics that has resulted in great division, debate, and anger. Of course, homosexuals are not the only ones guilty of this. Fault lies with everyone. But, with an aggressive agenda comes conflict.

Nevertheless, again we must say that we are not advocating any violence against any homosexuals ( . . . saying that our biblical position promotes violence doesn't make it so). Again, we stand in opposition to such violence. Personally, I would step in to physically defend a homosexual if he/she were being assaulted. However, CARM's position, which is consistent with its statement of faith, holds to the biblical position that recognizes homosexuality as a sin and is ultimately harmful to society, families, and to one's eternal salvation.

Therefore, the purpose of these articles is to

• defend the right of Christians to say that homosexuality is a sin and not be intimidated by homosexuals or the liberal media into remaining silent
• counter the arguments in support of homosexuality
• answer objections to the Christian's denunciation of homosexuality
• provide statistical information to both Christians and non-Christians regarding homosexuality, its practices, and its health risks
• provide Christians with biblical responses to homosexuals, namely, to love them and pray for them

Note: The term homosexual will be used in these articles to designate both males and females who are attracted to people of the same sex and participate in sexual relations with people of the same sex.

Answering Objections and Questions

Condemning Homosexuality is practicing discrimination and this is wrong

Discrimination is not automatically bad. I discriminate on the kinds of foods I eat, on the programs I watch, and what movies I let my kids see. In fact, we all discriminate. We all have criteria by which we judge what is and is not acceptable. I discriminate against child molesters, and I will not let them be with my children unattended. I discriminate against various theological teachings that contradict the Bible. I discriminate all the time and so do you.

When it comes to homosexuality, I believe that God has condemned it as a sin (Rom. 1:18ff). But my agreeing with God that homosexuality is a sin is not the same as discriminating against homosexuals. I have no problem working with homosexuals in a secular environment. I have no problem with homosexuals being my neighbors. I have no problem with working out at the gym with homosexuals. In things like these, I don't discriminate.

Likewise, I would agree that someone should not be fired from a job (in the secular realm) because he or she is homosexual. I think that is wrong not because it is based on sexual orientation but because we should treat everyone as equally as possible.

Furthermore, because of my religious beliefs and my right to express them, I would not promote homosexuality, nor would I change my preaching and teaching so as not to "offend" those who think that having sex with people of the same gender is perfectly normal and morally acceptable. The fact of the matter is I'm offended by their lack of moral sensibilities. But no one seems to be concerned about how I'm offended or how I feel about the intrusion of homosexuality into society, TV, the movies, etc. But, I digress.

To say that condemning homosexuality is wrong is a statement dealing with morality--not with legality. There might be various laws for and/or against homosexuality, but saying that condemning homosexuality is wrong is a moral issue. My question then would be by whose standard is something right or wrong, and what justifies that standard as being valid? Yes, I know, a homosexual can ask me the same question; and we could debate it, but that is another conversation.

If an atheist were to say that condemning homosexuality as a sin is morally wrong, then on what basis does such a statement gain its moral objectivity by which a blanket condemnation can be made? If someone says that the majority of society determines what is morally right and wrong, that is called the fallacy of Argumentum ad populum. Just because a majority of people think something is right or wrong doesn't make it right or wrong.

So, when a person objects on moral grounds to my objections or other Christians condemning homosexuality as a sin, he has no objective moral basis by which he can make such an assertion. At best, all he is doing is giving his opinion; and it would be arrogant to think that his opinion is the standard of morality for everyone else.

Condemning homosexual practice as a sin is not discriminatory in a legal sense; but it is one in a spiritual sense, and that is alright.

Homosexuality is normal so it should not be considered wrong

This objection is commonly raised in support of homosexuality. Of course, what is normal is rarely ever defined but instead is bantered about and offered as a reason for justifying homosexual activity.

First of all, "normal" is defined as . . .

• dictionary.reference.com
  • "conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural."
  • "approximately average in any psychological trait, as intelligence, personality, or emotional adjustment." b. free from any mental disorder; sane.
• thefreedictionary.com
  • "Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard, pattern, level, or type; typical"
  • "Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies."
  • the usual, average, or typical state, degree, form
• websters-onlinline-dictionary.org
  • "Conforming with or constituting a norm or standard or level or type or social norm; not abnormal"
  • "Being approximately average or within certain limits in e.g., intelligence and development; "a perfectly normal child."
  • "Something regarded as a normative example"

Statistical Normality

We can see from the definitions above that homosexuality does not fit in the norm because it is statistically practiced by less than 5% of the population. (See Statistics on the percentage of the population that are homosexual and lesbian). So, in that sense, homosexuality is not normal.

Biological Normality

If homosexuality is considered normal because it occasionally occurs in the animal kingdom, then this does not support it being normal since it is practiced by a small percent of animal populations which is below the norm.

If, however, an appeal is made to the fact that homosexuality occurs within animals regardless of the percentage of the occurrence, then this has problems because it implies that whatever occurs in the animal kingdom is normal for us. Then wouldn't this mean that it is normal to eat your young, to eat other creatures alive, to lie in wait to ambush and kill, sniff other human being's rear ends, eat placentas, barf up food to give to your young, and eat your own feces? But, since people will differentiate between a sexual conduct and eating poop, they apply the it-is-done-in-the-animal-kingdom standard of morality to themselves in a selective fashion--particularly when it centers around their fleshly desires.

Evolution

What about it being normal regarding evolutionary theory? If evolution is how humankind got here, then how did the tendency for homosexuality survive genetically since it does not produce offspring? It would seem that what is normal, evolutionarily speaking, would be that which produces offspring--not that which does not. After all, haven't we evolved over millions of years and billions of generations of biological life forms such that genes that produce survivability are removed from the population? So, from this perspective how could homosexuality be considered normal? In fact, evolutionarily speaking, homosexuality would be abnormal; and it would have to be a learned behavior.

So, whenever anyone says that homosexuality is normal, it becomes obvious that the standard of normality either doesn't exist or when they try and cite one, it works against them. Is homosexuality a normal practice? I certainly don't see how it could be.

Homosexuals are born that way. Therefore it is natural and good.

One of the arguments offered by those in support of homosexuality is that homosexuality is an orientation that people are born with, and it has the same moral value as the hair color someone has at birth. The implication is that since they are said to be born gay, then it is normal and morally acceptable. The media seems to support this idea, and it is a common position held to justify the behavior. But there are two problems with this position.

First of all, there are a plethora of studies with conflicting results and conclusions on both sides of the argument. Nevertheless, we could quickly consider studies that deal with identical twins. If genetics determines sexual orientation, then it should be manifested when studying twins who share the exact same genetic information. However, that isn't the case. Consider this . . .

" . . . If genetic influence were expressed in these data, MZ twins1 should have the highest concordance for same-sex erotic preference, and unrelated and half-siblings the lowest. Table 5 is based on pairs in which at least one respondent reports a same-sex romantic attraction (N=527 pairs) . . . there is no evidence for strong genetic influence on same-sex preference in this sample. Among MZ twins, 6.7 % are concordant. DZ twin 2 pairs are 7.2% concordant. Full-siblings are 5.5 % concordant. Clearly, the observed concordance rates do not correspond to degrees of genetic similarity. None of the comparisons between MZ twins and others in table 5 are even remotely significant17. If same-sex romantic attraction has a genetic component, it is massively overwhelmed by other factors. As argued above, it is more likely that any genetic influence, if present, can only be expressed in specific and circumscribed social structures."3 [underline added]

In addition, genetic information that supports heterosexual attraction is more likely to be passed to offspring than would homosexual genetic information since homosexual practice does not produce offspring. It would seem, as the study states, that homosexuality is not genetically based. Therefore, homosexuality is a learned behavior and should be called a preference and not an orientation.

Born this way and morality

Second, if being born gay means that homosexuality is morally acceptable because it is natural to them, then it must also be morally acceptable for those who are born with a tendency to oppose homosexuality. It would mean that "heteros" should not be urged to change their "orientation," nor should they be ridiculed for opposing homosexuality--since they are born that way. To be consistent, the homosexual community should support homophobia as a natural sexual orientation that they are born with. After all, it would seem more likely that heterosexuality is genetically based since heterosexual behavior produces offspring where homosexual behavior does not. So, heterosexual orientation must be genetically natural, should be supported as a normal behavior, should not be ridiculed, should have civil rights protection, and be promoted in schools and the media. And, homosexuals who accuse heteros of being homophobic should be labeled as heterphobes. Otherwise, the obvious double-standard offered by the homosexual community will once again rear its ugly head.

Another problem

Furthermore, to carry the excuse that homosexuality is genetically based to its logical conclusion, then men born with a natural attraction to young boys should also be considered as having a legitimate sexual orientation with its accompanying moral propriety. Or, are we to say that only homosexual attraction is genetic and morally good where pedophilia is not? If so, why the double standard? And, to step further into the abyss, what do we do with those who are born with the tendency to lie, covet, hate, and steal? Shouldn't they all be morally acceptable as well since that is how we are born? If not, why not?

Conclusion

The problem with using genetics as an excuse to justify behavior is that whatever tendency we might be born with must be considered normal. This includes lying, pedophilia, homosexuality, and rape. But, such a logical inference will not be acceptable to the pro-homosexual community because selective statistics and discriminatory reasoning are offered to justify their behavior.

Homosexual activity harms no one

Saying that homosexual behavior harms no one is not true. The very lifestyle of homosexuality is highly promiscuous and brimming with disease although pro-homosexuals will try to separate the behavior from related illnesses in their attempt to demonstrate that homosexual behavior doesn't harm anyone. But the evidence doesn't support that notion.

• Homosexuals more likely to suffer from depression: "A new study in the United Kingdom has revealed that homosexuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population, reports Health24.com . . . the risk of suicide jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homosexual lifestyle . . . the lifespan of a homosexual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heterosexual . . . While the Health 24 article suggested that homosexuals may be pushed to substance abuse and suicide because of anti-homosexual cultural and family pressures, empirical tests have shown that there is no difference in homosexual health risk depending on the level of tolerance in a particular environment. Homosexuals in the United States and Denmark - the latter of which is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homosexuality - both die on average in their early 50's, or in their 40's if AIDS is the cause of death. The average age for all residents in either country ranges from the mid-to-upper-70s."(onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=255614)
• Breast Cancer higher among Lesbians: "Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed among women and is the leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, following cancers of the skin and lung. Recent research has identified risk factors for breast cancer that may differentially affect lesbian and bisexual women, including nulliparity and higher rates of alcohol consumption and overweight, that may place this population at geater [sic] risk than heterosexual women of developing breast cancer." (Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, glma.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=feature.showFeature&FeatureID=319&E:\ColdFusion9\verity\Data\dummy.txt)

Promiscuity

While it could be argued that two men (or two women) having sexual intercourse with each other and only each other can't harm anyone else, the fact is that homosexuality is not a "monogomous affair." The homosexual lifestyle is by nature promiscuous--as the facts demonstrate.

• "In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354." (See more statistics on Promiscuity at 301 Moved Permanently)

To ignore the facts of incredible sexual promiscuity among homosexuals is the admission that the problem exists, and by ignoring it they hope it goes away. Also, to ignore the facts of such promiscuity is dangerous in itself since policies and arguments are made based on facts. To ignore the facts means the policies and arguments are not sound when used to promote the homosexual lifestyle.

Context determines meaning
In defining words, context determines the meaning. Likewise, the context of homosexual acts is equally important. The pro-homosexual community wants to separate the act from the deleterious effects. It is like saying that the behavior of jumping doesn't harm anyone. Well, that depends. Jumping in your living room shouldn't harm you, but jumping near the edge of a cliff can. Behaviors always have contexts, and homosexual activity is in the context of 1) a redefinition of sexual morals, and 2) its accompanying promiscuity. When you redefine sexual morals in a far more loose manner, consequences follow--such as an increase in promiscuity and disease.

AIDS and Homosexuality

• 2% of U.S. population is gay yet it accounts for 61% of HIV infection: "Men who have sex with men remain the group most heavily affected by new HIV infections. While CDC estimates that MSM represent only 2 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for the majority (61 percent; 29,300) of all new HIV infections in 2009. Young MSM (ages 13 to 29) were most severely affected, representing more than one quarter of all new HIV infections nationally (27 percent; 12,900 in 2009)." (Center for Disease Control, cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/HIVIncidencePressRelease.html)
• "Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s . . . ” (Center for Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm)

If homosexual sexuality does not harm anyone, then why are the statistics for homosexual AIDS percentages so much higher than the heterosexual population? Again, there is a connection between the redefinition of sexual morals, the increase of promiscuity due to that redefinition, and the proliferation of disease due to the promiscuous behavior. As I said earlier, actions always have contexts.

Homosexuality and reduced Lifespan

• Gay men lifespan shorter than non gay men: "The life expectancy for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for men in general. Robert S. Hogg et al., "Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men," International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657." (Exodus Global Alliance, exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)
• "In 2007, MSM [Men Sex with Men] were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women." (Center for Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm)
• Domestic Violence higher among homosexuals: "'the incidence of domestic violence among gay men is nearly double that in the heterosexual population.'(Gwat Yong Lie and Sabrina Gentlewarrier, "Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications," Journal of Social Service Research 15 (1991): 41–59." (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)
• Sex of women with women at greater health risk than women with men: "For women, a history of sex with women may be a marker for increased risk of adverse sexual, reproductive, and general health outcomes compared with women who reported sex exclusively with men." (American Journal of Public Health, ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/97/6/1126)

If mere homosexual activity harms no one, then why do gay men have a lifespan that is significantly less than heterosexual men (1 above)? Why is the homosexual man 44 to 86 times more likely to be diagnosed with HIV than heterosexual men (2)? Why is the incidence of domestic violence double that of heterosexual men (3)? Why do lesbian women have greater health risks than heterosexual women (4)?

Conclusion

Since behaviors always have contexts and rarely have no effect upon anyone else, it is obvious that homosexual behavior is indeed harmful. It is full of promiscuity and its related health risks. The facts speak contrary to the idea that mere homosexual activity harms no one.

articles taken from: http://carm.org/homosexuality

MORE RELATED ARTICLES:

Homosexuality and Bible Verses

• The Queen James Bible, the Gay Bible
• Genesis 2:18, and having a suitable helper
• Genesis 18:20; 19:1-12, 24 and Sodom and Gomorrah
• Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, and a "man who lies with a man"
• Leviticus18:22, 20:13, homosexuality and not being under Old Testament Law
• Matthew 19:12, is being born as a eunuch a support for homosexuality?
• Romans 1:26-27 and Homosexuality
• Does Romans 1 Condemn Homosexuality?
• Did Jesus talk about homosexuality?

Homosexuality and the Church

• Christianity and homosexuality
• What does the Bible say about homosexuality?
• Can practicing homosexuals be saved?
• The ELCA, homosexuality, and apostasy
• If the church can change its view on things, why not homosexuality?
• Is saying homosexuality is a sin being homophobic?
• The Spiritual side of homosexuality
• Desmond Tutu would says he would rather go to hell than be with a homophobic God

Homosexuality, Gay Marriage, and Society

• How does homosexual marriage affect me personally?
• How would gay marriage harm anyone?
• What benefit does homosexuality provide in society?
• Proposition 8 and the new standard of no standards

 

[Ray Martin]

This is an interesting article, the information it contains does not seem to be available in the public domain. It is a subject which will cause the church great problems in the future, especially as the issue of Gay Marraige becomes more established in the traditional churches. I see that the URC is coming out in favour and I think that Anglican and Methodists will follow suit. Frankly if and when they do, they may as well throw away the Bible and remove the term Christian from their literature. I know fundamentalism is a much demonised term, however I cannot see an alternative for a Christian believer, you either believe (or know) that Jesus is the Son of God or not and if you do then when He tells us He is The Way, The Truth, and The Light you believe Him. What we are told in he Bible must be true, other opinions are just opinions which vary with which way the wind b.

 

[DosiaSP]

Thank you for explaining the topic and standing by what you believe, without giving in to the beliefs of others when we know that is not what the bible teaches as being pleasing to Him. There are so few who have remained strong and not bowed or conformed to other's belief. As a Christian and a family member of a Gay sibling, as nice as I go about explaining, and telling them that I love them and respect them, I do not agree with their lifestyle, It seems all that needs to be said is that you do not agree. Many do not take this lightly, they take offense and have called me a hater, but it's not that way at all. In fact I can't say anything without offence being taken, so lately I say little to nothing. After hearing it enough times that they are haters, many have fallen to the views of homosexuals, I think many, even the churches have given in to homosexual issues such as gay marriage in fears that they will be labelled haters or discriminators or false teachers going against the love of God.. Gays say, "Christ loved everyone"! and yes, Christ did, but He hated the sin, all kinds of sins. He wants us to be whole and at peace I think to grow up with homosexual tendencies is not a sin, it's practicing it that makes it sinful. All of us are tempted to sin, until we act on it, does it become sin. Just as Adam and Eve in the garden were tempted, it was not until they acted on it and took a bite of the apple when they were forbidden, did it become a sin.

 

[gismapper]

Well thought out, Chad. I have been experiencing unwanted same gender attractions for as long as I can remember. I came to Jesus at 13 (some 30 years ago) and I can tell you that I understand why people would claim to be "born that way." The underlying damage that leads to homosexual attractions can begin at such an early age that specific memories of its origin are vague, if present at all.

One objection to the biblical view that is often raised is: "I never chose to be gay, just like you never chose to be straight. Why would anyone choose to be gay if they had a choice?" This is a bit of a straw man. Behavior is chosen, even if attractions are not. Attractions are not chosen, but responses to emotional deficits are. I'll speak for myself here.

My father was not a safe person to be around. And yet, I deeply desired his love, affection, and affirmation. Because he was an abusive man, i distanced myself from him and i generalized that fear to every other male in my life. Boys and men were scary to me, so I avoided interacting with them as much as possible. I never found the acceptance I needed from my father and my peers, but that desire doesn't just go away. It turned into a mysterious fascination, and the dream of acceptance and affection ultimately became erotic.

This is why I say that I can understand why it feels like I was born this way. I WAS, in fact, born with a desire to connect with my father and male peers. The origins of my condition began to grow long before I knew what sexuality was.

I never consciously chose to have these desires, but that doesn't mean I was born with them. And it certainly doesn't mean I have to act on them. But I did choose a pattern of withdrawal and defensive detachment that set me up for them. It would seem to me that the right thing to do would be to address the deeper issues of forgiveness, healing, and renewing of the mind.

 

[DosiaSP]

gismapper, I think you were born to crave what we all crave, love and affection, first from parents, and then from those in the world outside the family home. We all crave and need to feel loved and accepted. That is part of human nature. When you say you've been experiencing homosexual attractions for as long as you can remember, those are not sins, unless you act on them. .I think you have made big strides towards your healing when you say that the deeper issues of forgiveness, renewing of the mind, and healing need to take place. What you crave is the love of your father, you need to be recognized and received by him.. Man, I sincerely pray that everything works out for the best... Peace.be with you.

 

[Nkeze]

I just made a tweet, and i mean it: if you still need proof to understand that homosexuality and or lesbianism is bad, then you need to be broken again, not just born again, friend!

 

[gismapper]

Thank you for your prayers and kind words. The bottom line is, I didn't come to Jesus for my life to work out the way I wanted it to. I came to Jesus because I had a sin problem that was leading to the lake of fire, and only Jesus could save me from it. So, regardless of whether or not I ever see complete change, I am committed to doing things God's way. Choosing holiness is not always easy...never is for any of us. But I am happily married with children and a great job. So, in spite of the struggle, I see God's blessing every single day.

 

[gismapper]

I just made a tweet, and i mean it: if you still need proof to understand that homosexuality and or lesbianism is bad, then you need to be broken again, not just born again, friend!

Here's the point where I sound like I'm going soft on sin. I'm not. Every word of God is true and inspired. The Bible does not merely contain truth, it IS truth.

However, imagine a person (a prostitute, perhaps) who grew up in a culture that said it was required to stone anyone caught in adultery. Imagine being caught in such a lifestyle, not realizing or caring that God (if He really existed) cared about you at all. All you know is that, there's a segment of society that thinks you're worse than a dog, and there's a segment of society that wants you around for what you have to "offer".

One day, right in the middle of a sinful act (which may have even been a set-up), you are caught by the self righteous legalists, who only care about what's "right", and they have a deep personal problem with your behavior. They bring you before this guy, who is supposed to be some up and coming religious authority and the next thing you know, when everyone is about to put you to death by stoning, Jesus uses the moment to show both you AND them that there is no one who has a right to point fingers out of hatred or hypocrisy.

Wow...A religious leader who really cares about me??? Friend, THAT'S the Jesus I follow. Yes, homosexuality is bad, but please don't crank it up to be the worst thing in the world and everyone who practices it should be stoned to death. All sin is deserving of being stoned to death. From the "smallest white lie" to murder.

The facts Chad presented are true and dispassionate. Many people have a visceral reaction to the idea of homosexuality because they don't understand how someone could be attracted to the same gender. It disgusts them at a gut level. But I'm telling you that, as strange as it may sound, and for reasons that most people can't understand, there are some people for whom it feels very natural. I'm not saying it's good or right. I'm just saying it happens. Those people will not be won over by simply saying, "it's bad." A reasoned approach to explaining the problems associated with a homosexual lifestyle could really be helpful, especially to those who may be teetering over the edge, trying to decide the course of their young lives.

This, coupled with the message of forgiveness, repentance, new life, and healing in Christ, is what will win over those who will listen. Should it be enough to just say that God calls it sin? Of course! But not everyone responds to God's call the same way. Some come, knowing they are guilty before God. Some come, just feeling completely empty inside and need to know why they exist. Everyone must deal with their own sin, but it's not always the first thing that God uses to get our attention.

 

[Brighthouse]

Interesting mindsets on this topic! To me there is a large difference as to what is in the Church itself,and what is outside of it. Outside,i judge not,for many who have, or do,practice another form of sin as well,fornication adultery etc..a fine example of paying no mind to what we know is sin is found in Acts 8:9-22) Philip was aware,and could of gone to Simon to rebuke him, or judge him,but why did he not? Because he already knew that Simon was not part of the Body of Christ to start with. So what do you expect??

Philip went and preached the good news to others,for his concern was not to ever give what is holy to dogs!!( matt 7:6) In the body of Christ itself is a far different story! For if a person becomes a member who you know is leaven,then the whole body will suffer!Hence the need for judgement in the Church!!( 1 peter 4:17-19) So there is no need for judgement outside of the church!( rom 2:1-4) There are many in the church today who are very busy condemning sin,as if they themselves have no fault.And you know these people,by there fruit as well. For if I tell you that a person has bad fruit,am I willing to have you taste my fruit?? hehe So you can judge the difference?

First let me take the log out of my own eye, so then i may see the speck in your eye. But!!! In the Church it is not just a log or a speck,it is rather a LARGE stumbling block!( matt 18:1-7) Which affects more then one person! Then this discipline should take effect.( matt 18:15-18) Without delay! For in each day we do delay, the enemy can gain an opportunity!( eph 4:27)

The problem for some in the church is that they become a stumbling block both in the church and outside of it!! They have become a double curse!( gal 1:6-10) verse 8-9 only place a double curse is seen in the Word. Once is enough to!! Something also to consider is all. blessing.

 

[RJ]

I just made a tweet, and i mean it: if you still need proof to understand that homosexuality and or lesbianism is bad, then you need to be broken again, not just born again, friend!

To be a practicing homosexual with a non- repentant heart for this sin, then you are broken and can not possibly be born again! The key words here are practicing and non-repentant.

 

[gismapper]

To be a practicing homosexual with a non- repentant heart for this sin, then you are broken and can not possibly be born again! The key words here are practicing and non-repentant.

Well said!

 

[james1523]

Homosexuality is wrong however Jesus indicates that not receiving one of His messengers and their Gospel message is worse than homosexuality (Luke 10:10-12).