Religion and Homosexuality

[walksalone11]

 Walksalone,   I wish you would not call Annella and Mackenzie those sarcastic names when you talk to them.

Ok, no problem at all

  especially since they are Christians.

UHHHHH, as opposed to what, exactly?

[amyrouse]

HOWEVER, nowhere in the bible does it say that hatred is acceptable towards people with this particular sin. So using the bible to justify hate is just as wrong as using it to justify getting drunk, bombing abortion clinics, or any other such outrageous nonsense that ignorant hateful people do and justify with God's word.

I'm not a bible scholar either, so I cannot assert that "this is the bottom line" with the interpretation of those words. But I think the focus (for Christians in general) should be on our own relationship with God. We are not authorized to do God's job ,as queen pointed out, are only command is to "love".

I realize that this is a debate about homosexuality, so in this case our thoughts about it are fine. But in our daily lives we should (and I think the represented Christians here do) just love people.

I have to agree with you here.  I don't believe I have ever in RL met anyone as loving as you, Annella, or Jcribb.

I think we all get emotional (or at least I do) and we get heated when discussing our beliefs...and we don't always agree with each other.  But you said something to me a while ago when we were having a scriptural discussion/debate that stuck with me, and I agree with it wholeheartedly.  When we start with love, we're on the right path, or something along those lines.  And I am glad that I've met you.  

[jordandog]

Jordan I'm not sure if you were just using my post to initiate this question?? I actually wasn't referring to anything about homosexuals with this post, just pointing out to the person I was responding to, that the writers did have opinions but they didn't parade it as a commandment by God.

sherna, I have been doing some extensive research as to the origin(s) of and reference to homosexuality in the Bible since this thread started. So the answer is, yes - your post DID just initiate mine and I was not tying the 2 together. When I saw what you wrote, it made me go to my notes on Paul in particular. So, you made me do it you know!

What other people do to abuse God's word, I am not responsible for and I cannot answer for them, they have to answer for themselves.

Knowing you as well as I think I do from months of reading what you write and how you present things, that is a given. I would never say you are one who just plunks down in that 'comfortable chair of religion', never gets up from it, and sits there saying the standard mantra "It's written that way, it's god's, and it's right, so don't bother me with your inane questions." You are clear on where you stand, but you are willing to at least look at other viewpoints.

As for what it says about homosexuality; in the particular scriptures you mention, (arsenokoit‘s, from ars‘n, a male, and keit‘, one who lies with) that describes the sexual act of homosexuals. Paul was referring to prostitution with (malakos)-I see this as being referred to as the active (malakoi) and passive (arsenokitai) aspects of homosexuality. And in other places in the bible it describes homosexuality as a man lying with a man and woman with woman, working that which is unseemly.

I would guess that your definition for arsenokoitai is taken from a Christian oriented site because they all tend to say that same thing. Big surprise there - not really. I have looked extensively through a minimum of 50 sites (most likely more) for a definition of arsenokoitai. They all state there is no clear, concise definition. They all state it is an ambiguous word at best - it is a compund word with multiple definitions and is thought to have been coined by Paul from Leviticus. Leviticus discussed sacred prostitution so if Paul coined the word from that, it is believed that Paul condemned sacred prostitution and not homosexuality. I have looked at things regarding the Bible and this word written by umpteen scholars from every century, and while they all refer to the word, not one of them provides a definition either. What upsets me, actually it angers me, is what I wrote previously. One guy comes along in 1958 who is a translator for the New Amplified Bible.  He alone decides to translate this mysterious Greek word into English and he decides it means 'homosexuals' - even though no such word exists in either Greek or Hebrew and even breaking it down, like you wrote it, does NOT follow any rules of translation. So now it stands, as he first wrote it, in the English-language Bible. To me, that was a very convenient way to insert his and society's homophobia into the Bible where it would be perpetuated throughout the years. That makes me angry!

The passage copied below is from 'The Christian Research Institute'. NOT from any pro-gay activist site or anything that can be construed as biased and/or favoring a homosexual lifestyle:
Theologian John H. Elliott, Professor Emeritus of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of San Francisco, has written one of the most thorough studies of 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 to date. He concludes that “nothing in 1 Corinthians, or for that matter in any other biblical writing, speaks directly of the biological or psychological condition of homosexuality or homosexual ‘orientation’ as this is understood today and as it concerns believing Christian gay persons intent on worshipping and serving God.”
He concludes from his research that the Bible in its entirety, as with 1 Corinthians specifically, offers sparse and ambiguous evidence concerning male-male sexual relationships, and is “conditioned by cultural perceptions and behavioral patterns too alien to those of modern times to provide an adequate basis for a contemporary ethic of homosexuality as homosexuality is currently understood.” If a case is to be made for or against the morality of homosexuality as it is understood in contemporary society, Elliott argues, it will have to be made on evidence other than 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and other similar passages contained in the Bible.

[walksalone11]

 Walksalone,   I wish you would not call Annella and Mackenzie those sarcastic names when you talk to them.

Ok, no problem at all

  especially since they are Christians.

UHHHHH, as opposed to what, exactly?

Youuuuuu, whooooo, JC....***points at my question***

[jcribb16]

 Walksalone,   I wish you would not call Annella and Mackenzie those sarcastic names when you talk to them.

Ok, no problem at all

  especially since they are Christians.

UHHHHH, as opposed to what, exactly?

Thanks, walksalone, for answering!  Re: the 2nd part, "especially since they are Christians," :  I felt like you weren't just calling any kind of names, but mocking the fact they are Christians and so the names had to do with mocking their choice of Christianity.  I don't like malicious name calling of any kind, but we all like to jokingly call our friends and family names within our joking zones.  This, again, I felt was aimed toward their Christianity and that's why I wrote that.
Thank you, again, for your reslponse.  I appreciate that very much!  

[jcribb16]

HOWEVER, nowhere in the bible does it say that hatred is acceptable towards people with this particular sin. So using the bible to justify hate is just as wrong as using it to justify getting drunk, bombing abortion clinics, or any other such outrageous nonsense that ignorant hateful people do and justify with God's word.

I'm not a bible scholar either, so I cannot assert that "this is the bottom line" with the interpretation of those words. But I think the focus (for Christians in general) should be on our own relationship with God. We are not authorized to do God's job ,as queen pointed out, are only command is to "love".

I realize that this is a debate about homosexuality, so in this case our thoughts about it are fine. But in our daily lives we should (and I think the represented Christians here do) just love people.

I have to agree with you here.  I don't believe I have ever in RL met anyone as loving as you, Annella, or Jcribb.

I think we all get emotional (or at least I do) and we get heated when discussing our beliefs...and we don't always agree with each other.  But you said something to me a while ago when we were having a scriptural discussion/debate that stuck with me, and I agree with it wholeheartedly.  When we start with love, we're on the right path, or something along those lines.  And I am glad that I've met you.  

Thanks Amy, for what you said.  The same goes right back to you, too!!!

[jcribb16]

 Walksalone,   I wish you would not call Annella and Mackenzie those sarcastic names when you talk to them.

Ok, no problem at all

  especially since they are Christians.

UHHHHH, as opposed to what, exactly?

Youuuuuu, whooooo, JC....***points at my question***

Hey, Hey Walks!!! LOL!  I just got back home!!!!!! I answered before I saw this!   

[walksalone11]

 Walksalone,   I wish you would not call Annella and Mackenzie those sarcastic names when you talk to them.

Ok, no problem at all

  especially since they are Christians.

UHHHHH, as opposed to what, exactly?

Thanks, walksalone, for answering!  Re: the 2nd part, "especially since they are Christians," :  I felt like you weren't just calling any kind of names, but mocking the fact they are Christians and so the names had to do with mocking their choice of Christianity.  I don't like malicious name calling of any kind, but we all like to jokingly call our friends and family names within our joking zones.  This, again, I felt was aimed toward their Christianity and that's why I wrote that.
Thank you, again, for your reslponse.  I appreciate that very much!  

I see JC, and understand how you might come to that conclusion so I will address where I think the assumption is wrong.

As I have previously stated, I have close, in the real, friends of many different belief systems, so no....I wouldn't call someone names based on  that.
If so, why would you think that I havent addressed Mrs. Sherna as such?
Actually there are a few NDNs who I also see as bigots and often remind them of such.

As for Mack....well, to make a long story short, I see some reflections of myself in her that I abhor, such as trying to project more intelligence then we actually posses,so...... well......I apologize Mack for that.

[jcribb16]

Thanks, walks, for that.  I realized I had mistakenly written Sherna's name instead of Mack's, then Annella, reminded me of it, and I had changed the names a few posts later.  Anyway, thank you!!!

[amyrouse]

HOWEVER, nowhere in the bible does it say that hatred is acceptable towards people with this particular sin. So using the bible to justify hate is just as wrong as using it to justify getting drunk, bombing abortion clinics, or any other such outrageous nonsense that ignorant hateful people do and justify with God's word.

I'm not a bible scholar either, so I cannot assert that "this is the bottom line" with the interpretation of those words. But I think the focus (for Christians in general) should be on our own relationship with God. We are not authorized to do God's job ,as queen pointed out, are only command is to "love".

I realize that this is a debate about homosexuality, so in this case our thoughts about it are fine. But in our daily lives we should (and I think the represented Christians here do) just love people.

I have to agree with you here.  I don't believe I have ever in RL met anyone as loving as you, Annella, or Jcribb.

I think we all get emotional (or at least I do) and we get heated when discussing our beliefs...and we don't always agree with each other.  But you said something to me a while ago when we were having a scriptural discussion/debate that stuck with me, and I agree with it wholeheartedly.  When we start with love, we're on the right path, or something along those lines.  And I am glad that I've met you.  

Thanks Amy, for what you said.  The same goes right back to you, too!!!

Totally realized I forgot to include Sheryl in that.   

It also occurred to me that I included only Christians in that...I want everyone here to know how much I love debating and discussing with you!  I don't want anyone to be offended if I've left your name off the list (right, Falconer? LOL)...

[jordandog]

I don't know why the topic of hate keeps coming up in regard to the object of homosexuals.  No body here has said to hate gays or anything of the like.  Everyone is jumping to the conclusion that this is about hate.  It is not.

I in no way imply that I'm such a Bible scholar.  I've been a Christian for almost 40 years now.  I've studied the
Word extensively, because I'm responsible for what I teach others.  If you were a doctor, you would study the appropriate books according to your profession, a Mechanic would study owners manuals.  Because I'm Clergy, my study manual is the Bible.  Not because I'm better, smarter, or any such thing.

We can take each word in a scripture, and dissect it to its meaning and so forth.  All that is fine.  However, the Bible is very clear, even without intense study, Old or New Testament, that Homosexuality is displeasing to God, and sinful.  If you want to blame me for what the Bible says, then I'll be more than happy to take that blame, because I believe it....completely....every single page.  Believing it does not mean I hate people with that particular sin, neither does God.  God loves humanity, ALL of humanity completely.  While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.  We don't get good to be worthy of God, we go to God to get good and be worthy to serve him.  God takes us as we are.  Every Christian on here is a thankful sinner that got pardoned.  That's all.

I know you can't understand being against something, but loving the person who is the very essence of what you can't accept as ok (sin).   I absolutely cannot fathom what goes on in the mind of a child molester.  Children to me are the very witness and epitome of purity and innocence.  It makes me sick to my stomach to even imagine such a horrendous sin.  However, if that child molester repented, was baptized, and submitted themselves to be filled, and walk by the Spirit, I would call them my brother and sister. I think this is where the misunderstanding comes in.  Just because you can't understand anyone loving humanity completely, but hate the sin, does not mean that that kind of love is not possible or exists.  Because we as Christians have been born again, Christ loves through us to humanity.  That love however cannot gloss over the sin, as acceptable.  

It's who and what I am (a believer).  I don't live one way in church, and then another outside it.  I could no more flip flop on this issue, any more than I could murder, lying, stealing, etc.  How much integrity would that portray? I'm told to pray for the land where I dwell.  For the healing and blessings of God upon it.  If the Bible says the land is polluted by this sin and every other sin, I can't deem it acceptable (in any venue).

If your offended by this, it's not my stance to offend, but to declare what is truth and right.  Since this has caused so much discontent amongst you.  I'm going to withdraw from this thread from this day on, and the subject of it. My stance is crystal clear, and there's nothing more to say to make it more so.  Do I love gays....yes.  Do I love thieves.....yes, etc.  Do I approve of the lifestyle....no

Seems to me that you keep bringing up the subject of hate. You have said it repeatedly and I am starting to wonder who you are trying to convince. I know I haven't used the word as far as any of the Christians, their views, or their replies on here.

I was paying you a well deserved compliment as far as your knowledge of the Bible, but I guess you didn't see it that way. I never said you were better, smarter, or anything else.  You have said before how long and extensively you have studied the Bible, so to me, that implies you are a scholar of it  - who is putting words in someone else's mouth there?

Personally, and I am fairly sure I am speaking for most everyone here, I completely understand the concept of loving someone while not loving their actions. I would also bet I have as deep a love for my fellow human as you do. You don't have a corner on that because you are a Christian. You have no idea what goes through me when I am holding someone who is puking their guts out all over the place from their chemo and radiation. I actually welcome the vomit because at least it means they are still alive. Do you know what it's like to say, "See you tomorrow..." to someone who is 6 or 16 or 26 knowing in every fiber of my being that their bed will NOT be holding them when I enter that room the next time? I see no color, no sexual identity, and no political or religious differences. I see a human being unfortunate enough to be 'stuck' in that singular, lonely world of the dying and have no answers to give them.

It's pointless to bother writing a view about this outside of what is said in the Bible. You are not, it appears, willing to even consider there are reasons, and many of them, for a person being gay that have NOTHING to do with them choosing it. The things I post from a medical standpoint are not born of ignorance, to try and change you, or because I want them 'to be that way'. I am simply trying to show you there are things outside that book that are as real to me as it is to you.

For the record, other than lacking 2 years more internship, I am right behind a doctor and do all the same things they do within the parameters of what the specialty is. I can have my own practice outside a hospital, I have my own patient load, my own RN's under me, I diagnose, treat, and prescribe all classes of meds, so I am a scholar of medicine. Had my sons' father (ex-husband) NOT decided to walk out the door when my youngest had just turned 3, I would most definitely be an MD right now and not a Nurse Practioner. It was too much to handle being a single parent with no help and trying to go any further, so I willingly 'switched trains' and gave it up. My boys were far more important than the more elite letters behind my name.

I have the night off, so I am going to make popcorn, eat ice-cream, and stay up watching movies until dawn - at least that's the plan, so see you all later.

[shernajwine]

I would guess that your definition for arsenokoitai is taken from a Christian oriented site because they all tend to say that same thing. Big surprise there - not really. I have looked extensively through a minimum of 50 sites (most likely more) for a definition of arsenokoitai. They all state there is no clear, concise definition. They all state it is an ambiguous word at best - it is a compund word with multiple definitions and is thought to have been coined by Paul from Leviticus. Leviticus discussed sacred prostitution so if Paul coined the word from that, it is believed that Paul condemned sacred prostitution and not homosexuality. I have looked at things regarding the Bible and this word written by umpteen scholars from every century, and while they all refer to the word, not one of them provides a definition either. What upsets me, actually it angers me, is what I wrote previously. One guy comes along in 1958 who is a translator for the New Amplified Bible.  He alone decides to translate this mysterious Greek word into English and he decides it means 'homosexuals' - even though no such word exists in either Greek or Hebrew and even breaking it down, like you wrote it, does NOT follow any rules of translation. So now it stands, as he first wrote it, in the English-language Bible. To me, that was a very convenient way to insert his and society's homophobia into the Bible where it would be perpetuated throughout the years. That makes me angry!

The passage copied below is from 'The Christian Research Institute'. NOT from any pro-gay activist site or anything that can be construed as biased and/or favoring a homosexual lifestyle:
Theologian John H. Elliott, Professor Emeritus of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of San Francisco, has written one of the most thorough studies of 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 to date. He concludes that “nothing in 1 Corinthians, or for that matter in any other biblical writing, speaks directly of the biological or psychological condition of homosexuality or homosexual ‘orientation’ as this is understood today and as it concerns believing Christian gay persons intent on worshipping and serving God.”
He concludes from his research that the Bible in its entirety, as with 1 Corinthians specifically, offers sparse and ambiguous evidence concerning male-male sexual relationships, and is “conditioned by cultural perceptions and behavioral patterns too alien to those of modern times to provide an adequate basis for a contemporary ethic of homosexuality as homosexuality is currently understood.” If a case is to be made for or against the morality of homosexuality as it is understood in contemporary society, Elliott argues, it will have to be made on evidence other than 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and other similar passages contained in the Bible.

Well, I know the word homosexual didn't exist in the original language. The passage you copied from The Christian Research Institute is interesting. My thoughts are that, in the situation where a particular word is hard to interpret, the main focus should be taken off that individual word and look at it in context of what point the author is trying to make. If that means you can't force it to translate what you want it to, well tough! If Paul wasn't talking about sexual orientation here, and was referring to prostitution with young males, then that's what he was talking about! It is difficult I think for people who WANT to judge other people to take their focus off unimportant things and focus on the point.

I said earlier in this thread, if a homosexual person loves God, who cares what anyone else says about it! I cannot judge them. And although I believe it is a choice, I don't believe it's a choice that they make, like I make a choice to have coffee or tea for breakfast. I think it is psychological, and I won't deny I could be wrong about this being psychological from birth. I think that God can heal anybody of anything (I know you don't believe this, but I'm sharing my thoughts on where I stand in light of your information). I know people who thought they were born gay and are now heterosexual and happy, they say God healed them. But if a person is gay and they feel they were born that way, and they don't even believe they NEED to be healed, ok. What's important is that they choose God and love him, that they love people and show God to them. There is a song, an old song that says "They will know we are Christians by our love" I never heard the song "They will know we are Christians by our sex life"

God can use gay people to save people, God can use any sinner He chooses...He even uses me and I'm horrible! So, do I still think it's sin? Yes. But it really doesn't matter because I'm not better than a gay person, in fact a lot of them are probably better than me, so I really do want to set myself up here as some holier than thou, look down my nose at you cuz you're going to hell kind of person.

Anyhow, I think I have gotten to emotional and started rambling. 

[shernajwine]

I have to agree with you here.  I don't believe I have ever in RL met anyone as loving as you, Annella, or Jcribb.

I think we all get emotional (or at least I do) and we get heated when discussing our beliefs...and we don't always agree with each other.  But you said something to me a while ago when we were having a scriptural discussion/debate that stuck with me, and I agree with it wholeheartedly.  When we start with love, we're on the right path, or something along those lines.  And I am glad that I've met you.  

Thank you so much Amy. 

[jcribb16]

Quote from jordandog:
For the record, other than lacking 2 years more internship, I am right behind a doctor and do all the same things they do within the parameters of what the specialty is. I can have my own practice outside a hospital, I have my own patient load, my own RN's under me, I diagnose, treat, and prescribe all classes of meds, so I am a scholar of medicine. Had my sons' father (ex-husband) NOT decided to walk out the door when my youngest had just turned 3, I would most definitely be an MD right now and not a Nurse Practioner. It was too much to handle being a single parent with no help and trying to go any further, so I willingly 'switched trains' and gave it up. My boys were far more important than the more elite letters behind my name.

I have the night off, so I am going to make popcorn, eat ice-cream, and stay up watching movies until dawn - at least that's the plan, so see you all later. 


  (off topic for a minute...)
First of all, I just want to tell you that you have done wonderful having gone through what you did being a single mom, with your children, and doing the kind of work/school that you have worked on and achieved.  I can relate to that in my own way, for how it took years, starting, stopping, starting, and finally achieving my degree in Education/Bible/Music.  There were some rough roads to go down.  Hang in there!! 


Second of all, I am so glad you get to eat popcorn and ice cream, and watch movies tonight!  Ever since I've come on FC, you are always leaving to go to work, and then you are usually on when I'm at work.  Glad you've got you some down time.  Enjoy!

[SurveyMack10]

 Walksalone,   I wish you would not call Annella and Mackenzie those sarcastic names when you talk to them.

Ok, no problem at all

  especially since they are Christians.

UHHHHH, as opposed to what, exactly?

Thanks, walksalone, for answering!  Re: the 2nd part, "especially since they are Christians," :  I felt like you weren't just calling any kind of names, but mocking the fact they are Christians and so the names had to do with mocking their choice of Christianity.  I don't like malicious name calling of any kind, but we all like to jokingly call our friends and family names within our joking zones.  This, again, I felt was aimed toward their Christianity and that's why I wrote that.
Thank you, again, for your reslponse.  I appreciate that very much!  

I see JC, and understand how you might come to that conclusion so I will address where I think the assumption is wrong.

As I have previously stated, I have close, in the real, friends of many different belief systems, so no....I wouldn't call someone names based on  that.
If so, why would you think that I havent addressed Mrs. Sherna as such?
Actually there are a few NDNs who I also see as bigots and often remind them of such.

As for Mack....well, to make a long story short, I see some reflections of myself in her that I abhor, such as trying to project more intelligence then we actually posses,so...... well......I apologize Mack for that.

Did you just say I'm trying to project more intelligence than I posess?