Someone help me, please...

[Paul Hazelwood]

Paul states...

Sure and those who didn't want women to vote, blacks to be free might have and probably did used that argument too.  White supremist think exterminating blacks will make society a more pleasant and safer place to live, perhaps they are on to something after all.

Are you comparing the extermination of blacks to that of people who think homosexuality is a sin? 

Nope.  I was pointing out who might use a specific argument position to help justify something.  In short the argument can be used with just about anything, so it's validity is questionable.

The problem, is the Bible doesn't agree with that stance.  I haven't seen anything scripturally that would make me see otherwise.

Many people say they havven't seen anything scriptural to support it.  Eter's say it about Ur, Ur says it about et,  Anihillationists says it about Ur and Et, so what?

[Molly]

No and that is completely unrelated to homosexuality.

Marital infidelity is related in that it is a sexual practice that God says is wrong.  So what is the difference?  I certainly am physically able to have affairs with married men.  I might even have a proclivity to do it.  I find men attractive.

So why should I refrain from doing it?  Isn't it 'natural'?

Why can't I say that you are discriminating against me by telling me that having affairs with married men is wrong?

You can say whatever you like, homosexuality has nothing to do with the behaviors you brought up.

Why is that?  Because you don't approve of marital infidelity but you do approve of homosexuality?  That makes them different? lol

I can't help myself.  I was born finding men attractive.  Who are you to tell me I can't have affairs with married men?  We are two consenting adults.

[Molly]

I want to briefly cut in for this little update.  Michelle started this thread...would we please remember to keep her in our prayers?  Thanks.

yes.  Keeping you in my prayers, Michelle.

[shawn]

I want to briefly cut in for this little update.  Michelle started this thread...would we please remember to keep her in our prayers?  Thanks.

Yes, we have diverted from Michelle.  We can hijack a thread with the best of em.   :bigGrin:

I will be sure to remember Michelle in my prayers.

[Paul Hazelwood]

No and that is completely unrelated to homosexuality.

Marital infidelity is related in that it is a sexual practice that God says is wrong.  So what is the difference?  I certainly am physically able to have affairs with married men.  I might even have a proclivity to do it.  I find men attractive.

So why should I refrain from doing it?  Isn't it 'natural'?

Why can't I say that you are discriminating against me by telling me that having affairs with married men is wrong?

You can say whatever you like, homosexuality has nothing to do with the behaviors you brought up.

Why is that?  Because you don't approve of marital infidelity but you do approve of homosexuality?  That makes them different? lol

I can't help myself.  I was born finding men attractive.  Who are you to tell me I can't have affairs with married men?  We are two consenting adults.

None of that has anything to do with the points I have proposed.

[jabcat]

I want to briefly cut in for this little update.  Michelle started this thread...would we please remember to keep her in our prayers?  Thanks.

Yes, we have diverted from Michelle.  We can hijack a thread with the best of em.   :bigGrin:

I will be sure to remember Michelle in my prayers.

Yes we can!  Thanks everyone that's remembering to pray.  (Also remember Lomorah and Cardinal).

[Paul Hazelwood]

I want to briefly cut in for this little update.  Michelle started this thread...would we please remember to keep her in our prayers?  Thanks.

Yes, we have diverted from Michelle.  We can hijack a thread with the best of em.   :bigGrin:

I will be sure to remember Michelle in my prayers.

I'm not sure there was ever anything to hijack.

[shawn]

I want to briefly cut in for this little update.  Michelle started this thread...would we please remember to keep her in our prayers?  Thanks.

Yes, we have diverted from Michelle.  We can hijack a thread with the best of em.   :bigGrin:

I will be sure to remember Michelle in my prayers.

I'm not sure there was ever anything to hijack.

Sometimes witnessing someone living in their own hell is not pleasant to watch.  Sometimes people in this kind of pain can step on toes and bruise egos.  But, Christ didn't come for the healthy, he came for the sick.  What we witnessed was someone unable to accept God's telling of their story.  In there lies opportunity to be the hands and feet of Christ.  This thread took a divergent path from that opportunity.

[Paul Hazelwood]

I encourage michelle to continue her path,  I see a resemblence in my path,  I question and I challenge and at the same time retain beliefs that I have been taught all my life.

Tradition has nothing to do with truth it neither makes it true, nor does it mean it is not true.  What I challenge is indeed the idea that because a majority thinks something then that gives it validity.   It does not, it does make it harder in a sense to carry a belief that defies tradition.

The specifics of homosexuality are irrelevant in terms of what michelle is going through, I only brought it up because as we can see it makes a very good illustration of what everyone has to deal with. 

You bring up the old testament,  a person should be prepared to justify why part of it still is wrong today, but not other parts.   When the new testament is involved we see that Jesus often clarified old traditions to a deeper level.

Murder is a good illustration and I do not mind using myself as an example.  I murder all the time in my heart,  but I have never physically murdered anyone,  I can say with confidence that it would be unlikely that I will murder in the future.  I say that because what I think in my mind never manifests to the thought of carrying it out physically the idea in fact scares me.   However that does not change when I think in my mind.  The majority of people likely think that because they have not physically murdered anyone that they are better than someone who has, maybe that is true maybe it is not, but Jesus showed us that what we believe is written may not necessarily be what it is.

Michelle likely sees the problem of hearing that the whole bible is true, while wrestling with all the justifications used to explain why God did this or that.  The problem is while we can believe the whole bible is true,  there is a reality to the manner in which it is true.

Like I pointed out, unrelated to the hot topic I was raised in a household that taught and believed that the whole bible is true and that it is the inerrant word of God.  Then that same bible was used to say that it was against God for a white person to marry a black person,  so,  in what manner then is the whole bible true.  Is that true?  Why is it true or why is it not?

I do not believe it is true, however those who do, use the "inerrant" word of God to say so.   That is the larger picture here,  we can assert  "The bible is clear"  Well I was told the "bible is clear" in what I just mentioned.   Two opposite view points can say "IT IS CLEAR" rendering the point useless.   I say some things that appear offensive, and I have thought so too, people have said things to me that I believed were offensive.  However I look back and those things sometimes were what made me dig and dig and dig.  It has also humbled me, realizing that, someone I did not like and did not want to be right, was right, and what I thought of them was irrelevant when I came to something I changed my mind on.

So at what point are we submitting to "God" as opposed to just following superstition, tradition or simply those who are decieved themselves and have made a great case for what they think is wrong that looks like it makes sense?

Never stop questioning Michelle, dig for the truth, no matter what.

[Paul Hazelwood]

I want to briefly cut in for this little update.  Michelle started this thread...would we please remember to keep her in our prayers?  Thanks.

Yes, we have diverted from Michelle.  We can hijack a thread with the best of em.   :bigGrin:

I will be sure to remember Michelle in my prayers.

I'm not sure there was ever anything to hijack.

Sometimes witnessing someone living in their own hell is not pleasant to watch.  Sometimes people in this kind of pain can step on toes and bruise egos.  But, Christ didn't come for the healthy, he came for the sick.  What we witnessed was someone unable to accept God's telling of their story.  In there lies opportunity to be the hands and feet of Christ.  This thread took a divergent path from that opportunity.

Nothing is out of Gods hands to be used to carry someone where he needs them to be.

[reFORMer]

Actually those words are not inherently about homosexuality,  a male prostitute is a very specific act, rather than a sexual orientations.

In the new testament is the closest you get and you do not have to be gay to be a male prostitute.

It's talk like this that reminds me of the apostle Paul's speaking of, "Alleging themselves to be wise, they are made stupid..." (Rm 1²², CLT)  With many details, whether by description, euphemism, or words like arsenokoites (CLT:  MALE-LIer) in 1 Co 6⁹  and 1 Ti 1¹⁰, it is abundantly clear that The Holy Scripture calls homosexual behavior sin.  This has been the followers of Jesus' understanding from Greek Scriptures for 2,000 years and for an additional 1,000 years previous to the coming of Jesus the same teaching, even to the extent of such being worthy of the death penalty, has been accepted by the Jews even unto this present day.  These sins are repented of everyday in this world.  People are cleansed of homosexuality, made holy and, "... justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and by the spirit of our God." (1 Co 6¹¹, CLT)

Attempts to interpret Scripture otherwise, only in the last 25 years or so, focus on explaining away the evidence.  However, they never cite any passage from Scripture that approves or promotes homosexual behavior.  As well, there is no need to wait for the unveiling of such quotations in the future because they simply do not exist!

While marriage is honorable, all around the world homosexual passions are held in dishonor.  This will never change.

Romans 1^{24-28, 32} (Concordant Literal Translation)
24 Wherefore God gives them over, in the lusts of their hearts, to the uncleanness of dishonoring their bodies among themselves,
25 those who alter the truth of God into the lie, and are venerated, and offer divine service to the creature rather than the Creator, Who is blessed for the eons! Amen!
26 Therefore God gives them over to dishonorable passions. For their females, besides, alter the natural use into that which is beside nature.
27 Likewise also the males, besides, leaving the natural use of the female, were inflamed in their craving for one another, males with males effecting indecency, and getting back in themselves the retribution of their deception which must be.
28 And according as they do not test God, to have Him in recognition, God gives them over to a disqualified mind, to do that which is not befitting...
... 32 those who, recognizing the just statute of God, that those committing such things are deserving of death, not only are doing them, but are endorsing, also, those who are committing them.

Notice vss. 26 and 27 exactingly describe behavior without ever labeling the participants with a name like "homosexual."

1 Corinthians 6^9-11(Concordant Literal Translation)
9 Or are you not aware that the unjust shall not be enjoying the allotment of God's kingdom? Be not deceived. Neither paramours, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor catamites, nor sodomites,
10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards; no revilers, no extortioners shall be enjoying the allotment of God's kingdom.
11 And some of you were these, but you are bathed off, but you are hallowed, but you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and by the spirit of our God.

"Paramours" means "prostitutioners."  "Catamites" are from a word that means "soft," able to be translated as "effeminate."  "Sodomites", arsenokoitus, is MALE-LIers, or, "male coitus."

1 Timothy 1^8-11 (Concordant Literal Translation)
8 Now we are aware that the law is ideal if ever anyone is using it lawfully,
9 being aware of this, that law is not laid down for the just, yet it is for the lawless and insubordinate, the irreverent and sinners, the malign and profane, thrashers of fathers and thrashers of mothers, homicides,
10 paramours, sodomites, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and if any other thing is opposing sound teaching,
11 in accord with the evangel of the glory of the happy God, with which I was entrusted.

[WhiteWings]

What exactly is unnatural use? Just homosexuality and/or beastality?
Or also use contraceptives, sodomy, etc?

[Molly]

God gives them over to a disqualified mind, to do that which is not befitting...

All these behaviors lead to the same place:

'a disqualified mind.'



"disqualified"

G96
ἀδόκιμος
adokimos
ad-ok'-ee-mos
From G1 (as a negative particle) and G1384; unapproved, that is, rejected; by implication worthless (literally or morally): - castaway, rejected, reprobate.


"mind"

G3563
νοῦς
nous
nooce
Probably from the base of G1097; the intellect, that is, mind (divine or human; in thought, feeling, or will); by implication meaning: - mind, understanding. Compare G5590.

2 Timothy 1:7
For God hath... given us the spirit... of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.


"a sound mind"

G4995
σωφρονισμός
sōphronismos
so-fron-is-mos'
From G4994; discipline, that is, self control: - sound mind.


It's all about changing how people think, and therefore, how they act.

[jabcat]

What exactly is unnatural use? Just homosexuality and/or beastality?
Or also use contraceptives, sodomy, etc?

I've been thinking about your question.  I personally understand natural use (and and other related context) to primarily mean sexual/romantic relations with the opposite sex, within the the bounds of God's will - i.e., within marriage.  Bestiality is addressed specifically elsewhere.  Secondary issues such as contraception, etc., I believe to be more a matter of conscience, the Holy Spirit's conviction and leading for each person, as the Bible seems silent (explicitly) in some areas.   :2c: 

[Molly]

So, yes, I can have my affair with my married man, but it will give me a disqualified mind.  Disqualified for what?  The kingdom.

Cha-chung.  That's some heavy stuff.  No wonder the enemy tempts us
constantly with movies and ads and lifestyles and peer pressure.  It's a war.


1 Peter 1:13
Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;

[jabcat]

Exactly.  That's why Apostle Paul, when describing the sins of homosexuality (and other sins that we're all predisposed to) says "don't be led astray".  It's satan's job to deceive (lie about the truth), steal (keep people out of the kingdom), and kill (reap the consequences of sin).  And it's the ecclesia's job to be salt and light - as we look to Him and He works through us.  It's really clearly spelled out in Paul's epistles. 


"all who do these things will not inherit the kingdom...consciences seared with a hot iron...wolves in sheep's clothing...don't be led astray...men with men/women with women receive the compensense (payment, consequence) of their sin" 

"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap."  Gal. 6:7

I agree with reFORMer and Gary Amirault, who both state the denial of the scriptures in this area has mostly been in the past 25 or so years.  This from catalystonline - "The most vociferous critic of taking arsenokoitai as a reference to homoerotic practice is the late, gay scholar J. Boswell (Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality [University of Chicago, 1980] 335-53). He [contends] that arsenokoitai refers to male prostitutes without specifying the gender of their partners. Boswell's theory has been popularized by the widely known work of gay Catholic J.J. McNeil, who confesses his dependence on Boswell even though his work appeared earlier (The Church and the Homosexual [Sheed, Andrews & McMeel, 1976]."     The error has been accepted by some within the ecclesia (as Shawn said, it does appeal to our natural, carnal mind) and passed off as truth.

I Cor. 6:9  "...be not deceived..."

If there are not things to overcome [looking to Him, Him working through us - His strength] what then is an overcomer? 

The kingdom of God is righteousness [His, in us] peace, and joy.

[CHB]

If I may add?  Even creation itself teaches us that Homosexuality is not natural, it is not in tune with the way creation was designed to operate. For example, we have positive and negative in all things. Try connecting the negative with the negative, or the positive with the positive, it just doesn't work, in fact it might cause something to ignite or go hay wire.

Sure the word homosexual is not in the Bible but if man lying with man isn't an homosexual act I don't know what else you would call it?  That is in the Bible.

I do not condemn homosexuals because homosexuality is just like any other sin that God will cleanse from the earth. I think it is wrong the way some homosexuals have been treated because of the way they are, they are human and their sin is no greater than any one else's. We should love the sinner not the sins.

CHB

[WhiteWings]

What is natural use?
If natural use is "go forth and multiply" then hetrosexual couples that choose to stay childless are also going against the natural use.

Every relation that's not man/woman can't create offspring. Maybe that's the unnatural use?
Man/man, woman/woman, human/beast are just examples.... :dontknow:

btw for me it's hard to imagine the people in Gen 5 get children at a late age. For example Seth was married 80 years before his son was born? I guess he had a lot of self control :icon_jokercolor:

[Molly]

If you're living for 1000 years, you're still a kid at 80. :winkgrin:

[Nathan]

Sorry Paul, but that's not an excuse.  We've all been born in to sin, but that doesn't make sin acceptable . . . just because one is prone to a certain lifestyle, regardless of their physical make-up, that shouldn't be the jutification that it must be okay because they wre like that for a long time or from birth or whathaveyou.

If I said something you agree with but you didn't like how I said it, will you then agree with someone that uses how I said something as a reason not to believe something?

You can disagree with me, but if what I have said is true, how I say it is irrelevant.   

A lot of people who do not want to go to believe in God use that argument.    This has no bearing upon whether what they reject is true or untrue.

Once again Paul, your understanding of things just isn't fitting with Spiritual patterns at all . . . you say that if what you say is truth, then who cares HOW you say it . . . that's just crazy (to me) because truth isn't just facts, it's also nature . . . truth isn't rude, curt, carless or even unemotional toward it's recipients.  If we are children to you in these matters then suffer us, humor us and give us more than just your opinion of it . . . it would be one thing if your opinion lined up with spiritual truths that aren't black and white in Scripture but this whole subject matter has a bit of a stinch to it that most other topics don't have.

There is a reason why people are a bit resistant to your take on these things, I think it goes beyond personal taste as to whether we accept or reject your words . . .I think it's more of a spiritual disconnect that takes place when someone makes a statement that's a bit tainted and calls it truth . . .and yet you won't give us the slightest respect by explaining to us how you came to these conclusions you apparently believe Scripture supports . .. so again, instead of expecting us to take your word for it, at least give us some of the passages of Scripture that affirm what you're saying.

As for me, I believe God loves all the people regardless of their life-choices . . .these things have no affect on the final destination so at least we can embrace that.  However, should their choices be contradictive to his nature, there are consequences in THIS realm that those choices create . . .then to lead us down a road where a person born of both sexes is something you would use to prove your point to bring about uncertainty in others, with which you use that uncertainty as your evidence that because you are confident, you are the one with the only truth on this . . .it's just twisted.  I would rather have a fraction of the real truth and feel unconfident about it than have a greater portion of a nontruth and rely on my own confidence be the only evidence necessary to carry the subject "as" truth . . .

Even though there is a great freedom in pursuing Christ, there is still an order that we are to experience in which we can release his power and engage in his kingdom in our lives . . .there is a reason why many have ears but can't hear . . . it's because even though they have the equipment, because of their life-choices, they are disabled from hearing truth.  This isn't an "everything goes" life we live . . .men carrying the seed of life are not to marry other men . . .it's not about contraception or a woman with a disability to reproduce, it's about following order at it's core.  At least a man who sleeps with a whore is giving his seed a chance to take it's NATUAL course . . .

I think one thing we're just not able to grasp with our culture and how common we've looked at certain aspects with sexuality is that the covenant that God gave Abraham as not just something he promised to Abraham . . .but the covenant itself was the "seed" IN Abraham . . .the covenant follows the seed . . .the covenant is IN the seed.  But when we take that seed and do whatever feels good to us, we are basically defacating on the covenant of God himself . .. that would even include masterbating . . .the seed has no chance of doing what it was created to do . .which is not to give us a rush, but it's to be reproductive  . . . should a family not want to have anymore children and take contraceptives or even go so far as to get "fixed" it isn't what "we" do to control the seed, it's where we plant it.  God can always reverse what we try to control . ..I know that one first hand . ..I have twin sons to prove it.

It goes beyond homosexuality . . it'snot about rejectig people who choose that, it's about not accepting it as a normaly and acceptable lifestyle.  You can still love the person with no condemnation and not have to accept their choices.  But to try to say God is okay with it . . .it's a bit too much for me to swallow

[Quaesitor]

Just wanted to say, which may be dangerous, that I support Paul.
I too believed that homosexuals were sinners in need of healing (like all of us...just them worst... :laughing7:) but, I now see what it was then, judgement, condamnation.
You guys can call sins and sinners all you want but the truth of the matter is that there is no condamnation for those in Jesus Christ and since we are all universal salvation believers, that means EVERYONE.
Should you rather live in condamnation of yourself or of others is to your own hurting but I pray that we can all be liberated of that condamnation and just learn to live in love.

What we should fight are not people and their orientations, we should fight destructive behaviors which are present in ALL relations and situations, especially where christians are judgemental to human beings.

There are, in this world, very healthy homosexual mariages and very unhealthy heterosexual marriages, our part is to love them all.

May peace reign in this forum.
:HeartThrob:

[thinktank]

Are hermaphrodites created, designed to be that way by God? Or is it a condition caused by a fallen world?

They are human beings who had no control over their physical attributes and gender specific scriptures apply to them as well.   The person emotionally will be who they are if they are allowed that freedom.

So, what gender must a hermaphrodite be,  even if you use that argument, are you then going to make tyhem an outcast while excusing yourself from the condition of sin?

Well of course you might because you need homosexuality to be wrong.

Your the one who brough the issue of hermaphrodite up, thus bringing further parameters into the equation, somehow deducing that homosexuality = gender mixture. We are not discussing less than men, or wimpy men or anything people might call them, Jesus might refer to them as eunuchs, I am talking about men being with men. To say that one man is a bit feminine, therefore is gay, I sense that some of this is nothing more than the arrogancy of male machoism, that sees himself/themselves as superior male, therefore reduce and and look down upon those, who they deem less than men and refer to them as being gay and conclude that they don't deserve women or cannot possibly compete against other men to win women. Many such men grow up questionning whether the taunts and riducule from these men are true, also there is the factor of abuse, where men are abused in such a way to make them think they are gay. The world offers no help, in the past it would lock them up, now it simply says, your a gay weirdo get used to it and enjoy it and also since we the world hate homosexuals so much we will attack the christian church through media propoganda, so that their views of grace and overcoming are perceived as draconian principles, the only real org left to offer any real help.

But I believe the christian stance is for men to grow up with healthy ideals of being a man and not a perverted worldly form of what being a man is, which is mainly drinking, physical size, strength, "winning" woman, etc etc

The man who grows up who rejects the worldly form of being a man, is taunted as being gay. Since the world could not care less about these type of issues, where one minute calls them insane, needing to be locked up, then next minute celebrating them as equals, yet the vast majority of men still see, being called gay an insult.

Also I'd like to add, you automatically assume that hermphrodite is gay, therefore concluding that it's gender is basically less than a man, not able to have a women. A hermphadrotite is both genders therefore who concluded that they would choose being gay? Sounds like that macho privelage type thinking, where one eliminates all potential mates from that person, so to increase the available percentage of woman available to the man. I have learned this information from psychology, it is based upon primitive survival instincts.

The question I am interested to know is not about the perceived tendencies and motivation of the effeminate flamboyant, breasted male down the road, but whether it is sinful, or against morality or something to be celebrated for a man to lie with another man.

After this is established then we can talk about, the biblical guidlines for those who are deemed eunuchs.

[Miriam]

I think that the common ground here, is that any relationship that is essentially, or elementally poor, and on a negative or detrimental trend (and will continue that trend indefinitely) is harmful.

Yes, I believe we are all saying that. It seems to me, however, that a number of people think homosexual relationships are always, by nature, poor and on a negative or detrimental trend. I don't think I agree with that.

Miriam, did you come to that conclusion scripturally or through revelation.  If it's scriptural, please help me out.  Why do you believe homosexuality isn't a sin.

Shawn, the discussion has gone a long way since you asked me this and I can see that many people here have gone into the subject in much more detail than I have. I am still trying to get my head round UR.  :winkgrin:

All I can add is my personal position. I've accepted a number of things - such as ET - for the majority of my Christian life, without really questioning them. I believe it is Brian McLaren who said in one of his books that what he once thought were fundamental rocks under his feet turned out to be ice, and global warming had come and the ice was cracking and the footholds becoming smaller and unstable. This describes me and for a long time it felt a frightening place to be. I believe with the exploration of UR I'm currently doing a healthy faith is being rebuilt.

In the course of this I feel challenged about a number of other things I've just accepted up to now. One is attitudes to homosexuality. I am unconvinced that the word used for it, meaning the use of young boys by older men in the Greek culture, also refers to a loving relationship between two consenting adults; but I have yet to do a thorough study as aion, aionios, sheol, Hades, Tartarus and Gehenna are keeping me fully occupied just now.  :bigGrin:

I do wonder, if it's the huge deal we often make of it, why Jesus didn't speak out specifically about it. He says specifically that those who are divorced may not remarry, yet the Christian circles I move in are perfectly fine with this; so how did that happen?  :dontknow: There may be something here of the letter kills but the Spirit gives life.

[Quaesitor]

What is natural use?
If natural use is "go forth and multiply" then hetrosexual couples that choose to stay childless are also going against the natural use.

Every relation that's not man/woman can't create offspring. Maybe that's the unnatural use?
Man/man, woman/woman, human/beast are just examples.... :dontknow:

btw for me it's hard to imagine the people in Gen 5 get children at a late age. For example Seth was married 80 years before his son was born? I guess he had a lot of self control :icon_jokercolor:

Thing is that it'd be "natural" in that case to have a child with one's own mother. (sorry for the image)
We have to have discernment and not just follow patterns.

Jesus said that in the Kingdom there is no gender and no mariage, these will come to an end and had a purpose.

[CHB]

Jesus said that in the Kingdom there is no gender and no mariage, these will come to an end and had a purpose.

Where does Jesus say that there will be no gender in the kingdom? I know he said there would be no marriage but I don't see anything about the gender.

There won't be any marriages as we know them today. One reason is, no one will die. Todays marriages are like laws and there will be no laws when we are immortal. I think we will still be male and female though.

CHB