September 3, 2011
-
What Jesus Said About Homosexuality
I see Jesus much the same way I see Justin Bieber – no direct impact on my life, basically a good person but with many annoying followers. In the same way, I don’t care too much what he did or didn’t say, except insofar as it influences his followers to impact the world around me. For those people, I thought that this was an interesting take on interpreting homosexuality in light of what Jesus said:
The only place Jesus really addressed or even hinted at sexuality is found in Matthew chapter 19. Here you find Jesus, the disciples and the Pharisees discussing this very topic of marriage between males and females. It is true that God created males and females and instituted marriage. But in Matthew 19 Jesus adds another thing that many ignore or overlook because it doesn’t apply to them:
Matthew 19:11-12
Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”
Typically a eunuch is defined as a castrated male. This is incorrect. Castration means to remove the testicles (that were already there) or emasculate. If all eunuchs were castrated males then why would Jesus say that “some were born that way?” A eunuch is a man who has no desire or ability to have sexual relations with a woman. These men were commonly used to protect the harems. Since the Word of God is for everyone we can apply the spiritual concept found in Galatians 3:28 where the Apostle Paul says: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Therefore, a eunuch can be male or female in this passage.
Jesus addressed three types of eunuchs.
1. Those born that way. (That’s people like me who are born gay.)
2. Those made that way by men. (Those castrated or those sexually abused people who choose to be gay as a result of this abuse rather than because it is their natural sexual affinity.)
3. Those who elect not to have a sexual relationship for the sake of the kingdom. (For example a priest or nun. This group makes the decision on their own.)
So here, our Lord Jesus states that not everyone will marry according to the custom as in male and female. He also said that not everyone can accept this. He says that those that can accept it should accept it. Can you accept what Jesus said? I can.
Taken from here
Comments (148)
Excellent. Now if everyone would pull their heads out of their colons, they might be able to see this plain and simple. Unlikely though.
This is so fitting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLKk00OYKhU
This is similar to what I have been trying to tell people about OT vs NT views on the subject and Jesus’ own words. If he didn’t think it was a big enough deal to say more about it than that, why should christians be so completely obsessed with it?
He was a man of peace and tolerance surrounding Himself with what the Pharisees called the unclean, filthy, dirty, gentiles, and so forth.
Looks like He’s the ultimate man of acceptance, to me.
@stupid_systemus - :: laughing hysterically :: That is just so wrong.
many Christians have long since replaced Jesus with Archie Bunker.
Christians over-do the emphasis on homosexuality. That it never appears in the teachings of Jesus tells me that the strange obsession of evangelicals with homosexuality is misplaced. “Look at the beam in your own eye, [you self-righteous punk].”
Your interpretation of Matt. 19 is precluded by Jesus’ prior statements: “at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh”
Read the following verses in the light of the the assumption that marriage is one authorized between men and women for life, for that’s the assumption Jesus explicitly makes. In reply to this, someone said to Jesus, essentially “Shit, that’s hard. I may as well not marry, then.”
Then Jesus was like, “Hey, then maybe marriage ain’t for you. The oath of fidelity is for people to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born to be single, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others (perhaps through death, through adultery committed by their spouses, or other abuse) —and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.
Interesting perspective. I’m going to have to ponder this for awhile.
Agreed!
God is in the business of restoration and reconciliation, to which the verse I lean to when it comes to sexuality and how Jesus lived and how we should as well is found in Romans 8:38-39 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,
39
neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be
able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our
Lord.
NOTHING will be able to separate us from the Love of God, and that includes our sexual orientation.
There are two different concepts here that you’ve mixed for some reason that I can’t discern. I agree with your interpretation of both of them (Jesus never said anything about being homosexual – and its subtext that it obviously can’t be all THAT important to him – and marriage and sexual relationships are optional and it shouldn’t matter to you why someone would not marry or have sex), but I’m not sure why you lumped them together like that. ”Eunuch” doesn’t equal “homosexual.”
http://www.godmademegay.com/Letter.htm
Actually, if you believe the Bible, the first African Christian was gay.
Don’t let that Bible fool you. Jesus Christ is a proud member of the NRA, a conservative, and a Republican. He did hate the tax men after all.
The eunuch – homosexuality analogy doesn’t work because the bible doesn’t say being a eunuch is a sin but does say homosexuality is.
@haloed - : —> (o_o)
Slightly literal, but hope it makes sense XD
@musterion99 - In the OT, where the 10 commandments and other laws were meant for Jews, not gentiles. Jesus’ sacrifice rendered OT laws void and forged a new covenant, and it no longer matters who they originally applied to. If people continue to live according to OT laws, Christs’ sacrifice was for nothing.
I wonder how many Evangelicals spend as much energy harassing the idolaters, adulterers, drunkards, etc. that are also listed by Paul as being among those who would not “inherit the kingdom”? Probably a few too many among their own ranks to take that risk.
@RazielV - hahahahahahahaha, I bet that’s what their eyes would look like too. “OH I CAN FINALLY SEE”
This is the usual attempt by a non-believer to redefine the Bible and also call upon the authority of Jesus, Son of God, to lend credence to falsehood.
Here’s why:
1. The meaning of the Bible can be stated in one sentence: “Love thy neighbor”. Consequently, homosexuals, like all people are to be treated with dignity and respect.
2. Jesus attended the Wedding Feast of Cana where he performed his first public miracle, changing water into wine. This elevated marriage, the union between man and woman, to the level of a sacrament and affirmed heterosexual marriage as normative for all of mankind.
3. Jesus actually said that he came not to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Consequently, the Levitical prohibition against homosexual copulation stands.
Consequently, this post is yet another example of torturing holy Scripture until it says anything you want it to say.
Aren’t civilized people supposed to be against torture?
@JessicaFleur - Nah, they harass me plenty. They just never picket me.
@ZombieMom_Speaks - That simply isn’t true. The Bible is the written Word of God. Jesus is the Word made flesh. How then can he render himself null and void?
What Jesus did do was explain the meaning of Scripture to his disciples, and especially to his Apostles who were with him 24/7 for three years.
The Church knows what the Bible means.
And it does not mean what you said in your comment. And it certainly has nothing to do with the meaning of this particular post.
this is really great!!
@LoBornlytesThoughtPalace - [Jesus attended the Wedding Feast of Cana
where he performed his first public miracle, changing water into wine.
This elevated marriage, the union between man and woman, to the level of
a sacrament and affirmed heterosexual marriage as normative for all of
mankind.]
I’m pretty sure this just elevated wine above water. You’re absolutely stretching to say that this was a condemnation of homosexuality just because it happened at a heterosexual marriage. It also happened at the marriage of two people of Mediterranean descent, does that mean it’s condemning all non-Mediterranean weddings?
[Jesus actually said that he came not to
destroy the law but to fulfill it. Consequently, the Levitical
prohibition against homosexual copulation stands.]
Which is why we’re still not allowed to eat pork or shellfish or wear polyfiber blends.
@NVPhotography - Our sin separates us from God. The verse you quoted glorifies God, it does not release us from the consequences of our actions or mean that there is no difference between good and evil acts.
@LoBornlytesThoughtPalace - ROMANS 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under Law but under grace. (NKJV)
ROMANS 7:6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter. (NASU)
GALATIANS 2:21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if justification were through the Law, then Christ died for no purpose. (ESV)
GALATIANS 3:10 All who rely on observing the Law are under a curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” 11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the Law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.” 12 The Law is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.” (NIV)
GALATIANS 3:23 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the Law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 So then, the Law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. (ESV)
GALATIANS 5:4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by Law; you have fallen from grace. (NKJV)
@ZombieMom_Speaks - Sin separates us from grace. Copulation outside of marriage is a sin.
@GodlessLiberal - Again, it doesn’t make any difference how sure or unsure you are about things. You don’t get to redefine Christianity.
What I wrote is authentic Christian doctrine. It was not my opinion.
The bottom line is that your post has nothing to do with authentic Christian doctrine.
What is problematic is your use of Scripture to say something about Christianity that isn’t true.
@stupid_systemus - LMAO you should post that on your blog you’d have tons of recs and allot of drama there…
@CorvyusMorte - I just checked if I have posted it before because I saw it back in 2007. I guess not. I’m posting it.
@stupid_systemus - I’ll rec it for sure.
I had never read this passage before. It conveys its meaning loud & clear, without the typical confusing biblical jargon. I wish more people were aware of this. I feel like we’re so often bombarded with the bajillion, over-used [and typically miquoted] passages that conservatives use to justify their narrow-minded prejudices.
@ZombieMom_Speaks - So, honor your mother and father, don’t bear false witness in court, etc., no longer are required of Christians?
It’s not Jesus, it’s man that has made Christianity so intolerable to so many. I love Jesus, he has been love since the day he was born. There are bullies everywhere even in religion. I don’t know where this drive is for you to expose all the hypocrisies and distortions Christians have but, you obviously have reasons and you have my blessings. I might not agree with all you have written or are going to write but, you are accepted by me, considered an equal, and a pretty good person from what I’ve read in comments, and the communication I’ve had with you on facebook ever so often. I haven’t your writing express the feeling of hate once. Commendable, for there is a lot that have expressed it with you.
I read somewhere, I read a post where a person was talking about homosexuality as being something that would lean towards genes as reasoning (inherited from birth), I looked that up, well, it turns out that although homosexuality is not a genotype (inherited), which deals with all the programming within us that makes us who we are physically, Homosexuality is a phenotype, what you can physically see with your eyes (influences, environment) which makes things heritable (after birth).
This is the sum up of how genotypes correlate with phenotypes:
The
genotype
is the
genetic programming
that provides the
phenotype.
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_Genotype_and_Phenotype#ixzz1WoyvJs7x
So, how someone turns out in his/her sexuality, behavior, mannerisms, etc. are determined by environment, environment is huge in the phenotype part of our identity and what we will become as men and women.
Here’s a link of the article I read: http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html.
Just thought I would put that out there. I got this info from someone who based his writing on science, not researchers and people in publicity that didn’t use science in their said findings. I guess you could say that, I’m attracted to women largely because of environment and experience (I wasn’t born that way), no one knows what sexuality they are until a certain age anyway, kids are mostly asexual until their minds have developed enough to feel attraction.
But, this is all science, the beliefs in Jesus as lord is supernatural
and comes down to faith, belief, and spiritual experience.
Good post.
@ctaretz - I’m a tad confused as to what you’re saying about genotype vs. phenotype. Your phenotype is something physical that is observable by the eyes, which is based on how your genotype expresses itself along with its interaction with the environment. That definition doesn’t necessitate that homosexuality is purely environmental, given that homosexuality is a phenotype, because phenotype is your actual DNA coding blended with environmental factors.
@ivarahBharavi - That’s not the meaning or what I said… I’m saying that homosexuality is not inheritable it’s heritable, and it’s based on other factors with an environmental influence. Click on the links, the articles and definitions will explain better than me.
@ivarahBharavi - LOL, yeah, I just scratched the surface, it’s more to it, but remember, Genotypes and Phenotypes are related just take on different job descriptions.
@ctaretz - Lol okay, maybe I was just confused. I’ll read the links!
@ctaretz - Mmkay. Although, I’m pretty sure that my definition of phenotype was accurate. It’s what I remember from my classes and I looked it up after your last comment.
I absolutely love this! Marry me!
@GodlessLiberal – My second line in my first comment to you was: “I don’t know where this drive is for you to
expose all the hypocrisies and distortions Christians have but, you
obviously have reasons”,
What I meant to say was:I don’t know where this drive is coming from to
expose all the hypocrisies and distortions Christians have but, you
obviously have reasons…”
I wanted to correct that it’s more clear in what I meant this way.
@ivarahBharavi - Yeah, did you read the article too? I mean that will explain more of what I said in my comment.
@LoBornlytesThoughtPalace - I know I will regret asking this but…
3. Jesus actually said that he came not to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Consequently, the Levitical prohibition against homosexual copulation stands.
GL asked but you ignored….why do we now eat Bacon, Shell Fish and wear Cotton/Polyester shirts in Church?
If you answer these were Laws for the Jews, then really only Jews cannot be Gay.
@ctaretz - Yep I did. It was really interesting. Thanks for the link
@ivarahBharavi - No problem. I hope I wasn’t too confusing in my comments.
Lovely!! Love is LOVE. We, as true children of God, have it within our hearts to love everyone. It’s what comes natural. Everything else, we’ve created ourselves, man-made rules and hatred. Never, never ever let anyone make you feel badly about loving, regardless of who it is that you love.
@ZombieMom_Speaks - Romans 1 says it’s a sin. And Jesus not pointing out that particular sin doesn’t mean it wasn’t.
1. -The bible is all of scripture, not just Jesus’ words.
2. – There are other sins Jesus didn’t speak of, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t sins.
(A little response I left to a another thread of the same subject http://bit.ly/7j7Deu)
Scripture condemns homosexuality as it condemns all
other sin. It’s amusing how you glaze over passages that blatantly
state this. 1 Timothy 1:10 lists homosexuals along with murders,
1 Cor. 6 says “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not
inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually
immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice
homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers,
nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. ” this is followed by
“And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified,
you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the
Spirit of our God.”
Christians can struggle with homosexuality, but they cannot embrace
it. If they embrace their sin, they are not embracing Christ. Christ
calls us to die to self, and to live for him – not for our own sinful
desires. As this passage shows, when the Holy Spirit opens our eyes we
begin a continual process of letting go of what we _were_, we do not
embrace _our identity_, but find our identity _in Christ_.
We are called to love those who are homosexuals, but in no way are we to nod in approval of their life style.
What you say of Romans 1 is off. Because of their idolatry, God gives
them over to their sin. It is NOT addressing these sins as idolatry,
but again, states that they are committing them because God himself
“gave them up” – He pushed them away from himself. If we switch this
verse around, and men were to worship God as they should worship Him –
then God wouldn’t be giving them up to these sins. That is, Iff we are
worshipping God as we should (If we are saved by Christ’s blood and
living _through_ Him), Then we will not embrace homosexuality.
Romans 1 is very clear about homosexuality – i fail to see how you pass it up without hitting a brick wall.
I have nothing against homosexuals. And I am Christian. You made a good point. It is frustrating how people can take words literally. Like one church I went to when I was a child, follows this one chapter in the book about women not allowed to speak in church but they don’t believe in speaking in tongue. Yet, it is all in the SAME book.
It is one example I remember about how people can be.
I don’t necessarily like the lifestyle of homosexual but I love the people themselves. They are the most amazing awesome sweetest people I have ever met. One of the things people seems to overlook as well is when Jesus explained about love. The most important of them all, Jesus said is to love each other and ourselves.
the bible doesn’t say homosexuality is a sin, or wrong, or anything like that.the bible doesn’t acknowledge love as an emotion for that matter at all.the bible DOES say that sex should only be performed when one is trying to reproduce.two men and two women cannot reproduce together.if a man and a woman have sex, and either one is infertile, it’s just as much of a sin.if a man and woman have sex with a condom, using birth control, or the pull and pray method [pun intended], it’s just as much of a sin.
i feel like if people realized this, all christians and athiests, heterosexuals and homosexuals, could get along… smh
@Tout_nestpas_parfait - Even if one of them is infertile through no fault of their own (accident/illness/medication)?
Also a lot of couple are married before they figure out that one of them is infertile. Are they sinning?
Older couples who can no longer have children are living in sin by having sex with their spouses?
It always has to be about procreation?
No wonder so many people turn away from christianity. It penalizes them for things they can not help or change. If we’re all going to hell anyway, might as well enjoy the time we have here.
@ZombieMom_Speaks - if somebody is accidentally infertile, or born that way, they no they’re not sinning. if they have sex they are. sex isn’t supposed to be an act of pleasure, very few animals in this world have sex for pleasure. humans and dolphins are among the few.
if they don’t know they’re infertile, they obviously not sinning. that’s a ridiculous question. if you drive through a stop sign, and you get a ticket, that’s your fault. if you didn’t see the stop sign because it’s hidden behind an overgrown bush, you can fight that ticket and it’ll be taken off your criminal record.no, older couples who can’t reproduce aren’t supposed to still have sex. they’re not trying to have children.
when basically any other animal other than dolphins and maybe a few others become infertile, they stop trying to reproduce, what’s the difference here? yeah sure, we enjoy it, but i mean, i’d enjoy physically hurting a couple people when they piss me off sometimes too. does that make it right? no.
i’m not a die hard christian, [i more affiliate with another religion who does not recognize Christ as the messiah] and i acknowledge that there are holes throughout the entire bible. but what i don’t understand is people like you who are actually trying to get me upset instead of just asking questions or debating what i have to say. i’m well educated in the bible though and Jesus at one point says that everything is permissible, but its up to you to decide what you’re willing to do against god’s rules and what you’re not. if you want to have sex, i’m not stopping you. i’m not saying that nobody in this world should have protected sex or anything like that. i’m simply stating the texts in the bible, so stop making a debate seem like a personal attack smh.
@Tout_nestpas_parfait - That wasn’t a personal attack. It was an onservation. The rules in christianity are so impossible to follow they go against human nature. People are getting tired of it and leaving christianity behind in favor of religion in which they feel loved and accepted by the deities they’ve embraced, or leave religion entirely. That’s not an attack on you, it’s a commentary upon how difficult the ridiculously strict rules of christianity are to live with.
Also, the bible never says sex is never to be had for pleasure. There is a scripture about one spouse being able to ‘put away’ his wife if she refuses him sex, though, so I have doubts about it being strictly for procreation, even among the devout.
@TheSutraDude - Oh damn! There goes my “J.C.” tattoo.
“Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”
Clearly, what Jesus meant to say by this, was that gays should not be allowed to get married, nor should they be allowed in the US military and that they should go to Marcus Bachmann, for he shall cure their gayness, through prayers to the Lord.
@ZombieMom_Speaks - it does. i can’t quote the exact scripture, but it’s around the same chapter that it says you’re not supposed to have sex until marriage, but if you can’t wait to have sex, then go ahead and get married. i know, it’s ridiculous, but it makes sense at the same time. the bible says you’re supposed to pray during the act so you and your spouse do not lose your control and let lust and sinful desire take the best of you.
i keep bringing up this analogy, but it’s also human nature to get physically violent in certain circumstances, but we also found that that was wrong..
i think the bible is hard to live by, but a christian would see that as waiting and being patient before they get a major reward. think about it. as a child, you’d want lots of little things, but if your parents told you that if you got those little things, it would take away from your christmas gifts. same concept in a way.
there are always going to be things that the bible says is wrong, whether you have faith in it or not, there were no verbal documents until after the followers of Jesus passed down their stories, and then it was only what people either remembered, what they wanted to say, or they could have outright put something in there. there are certain parts of the bible that makes the woman seem incredibly subservent, but in most of those, it later adds that the woman can do the same to the man. for example there’s a verse about how after marriage, a woman does not have complete control over herself as her husband owns her body. but two lines below that is says and the same goes for men about their women.
there will always be things though, such as “women should remain silent in churches. they are not allowed to speak, but in submission as the law says. if they want to inquire about something, they should ask their husbands at home; for it is a disgrace for women to speak in church.” – corinthians 14:34-35
but i’m saying that every part of the bible like that is fucked up. and the point of what my first post said was actually to say that the bible doesn’t condemn being gay. any heterosexual person who has sex with a condom should face the same consequences as a homosexual having sex.
@Tout_nestpas_parfait- Wow! I’ve read the Bible cover to cover and haven’t seen that part. I think you’ll have to reference the actual part of scripture that makes that command in order to make your argument stand. Some people may make that claim, but is it really founded in scripture or is it something you just heard someone say?
Hmm. I had always heard these verses referenced in passing, but that actually made sense to me. Kudos.
@tendollar4ways - Gods, Chosen People, the Hebrews, were heathens after spending 350 years in Egypt.
So God did what the Democrat Party does when it wants to get rid of something. He instituted regulations. So just like the Democrat Party drives all the high paying jobs oversees with taxes and regulations, God put regulations on slavery, eating, sexuality, worship and all sorts of things in order to burn the heathen out of the Hebrew.
Are you with me so far? I didn’t think so, but I’m going to continue anyway.
What is needed when trying to understand the Bible is the descerning the difference between all of those rules and regulations that were aimed specifically at Hebrew heathenness and those that are normative for all of mankind.
My rule of thumb is this: Things like eating are cultural so who cares? Things like sex, morality and ethics are common among all people everywhere. Except you maybe… When was the last time you had sex?
I hope that helps.
@FrenzElectric - haha. leaves me in a quandary about what to do with my Homer Simpson tattoo.
@lightnindan - well i have a cousin who has recently come out about not only being gay, but also transgender. my aunt, his mother, is completely against it, so one day i sat down and googled things that could help me, and then later looked up the scriptures. i’ve read the bible completely, but not all the way through in one sitting, you know?
but i did find things in the bible:
In Romans 13:8-14, it mostly talks about Love. But loving neighbors etc. And the love that is written here, is a command, which means it’s more like respect than the emotion love. And I can’t find the part of the bible that doesn’t mention love as an emotion..because well… it doesn’t exist…. otherwise it wouldn’t be my defense.. haha
The part about everything being permissable is in Corinthians 6:12-20. I believe he says something along the lines of it’s up to you to decide what you want, don’t judge others, you’ll be forgiven, but just know that if you do everything wrong you’ll go to hellblahblahblah. [That was probably the worst, and most unreliable paraphrase ever, so you can just ignore that part really...]
In 1 Corinthians 6:9-12, it does acknowledge homosexuality as not being welcome in the kingdom of God in a list among other things such as fornicators [those who have premarital sex], but the word homosexual wasn’t included until after 1970. But here’s the verse nontheless Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”
But in this verse it says that fornicators are on the same level as homosexuals.
There are parts of the bible that say two people of the same gender cannot “lie” with each other, meaning sex, but it doesn’t say they can’t fall in the emotional love, or have an emotional relationship.Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abominationLeviticus 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act;
1 Corinthians 7:9, I won’t quote, because it has SO MANY translations, but it speaks along the lines of, if they cannot control their desires, let them get married because it’s better to have sex in wedlock than have to suffer with these sexual desires and sinful thoughts. That doesn’t have to do with the whole gay thing, but I did mention that too somewhere, so I thought I’d back that up as well.
did i miss anything?
@LoBornlytesThoughtPalace - That is such convoluted nonsense. As far as your question…go ask your mother.
I knew I would regret asking you a question.
@tendollar4ways - I knew that giving you a little Bible study was iffy from the very start.
P.S. My mother is dead you horny bastard!
Very interesting comments to read:)
@Tout_nestpas_parfait - Sorry, I was specifically referring to the part about not having sex except to procreate.
@Grannys_Place - God bless you sister, always good to see ya…
I don’t understand why people continue to say that homosexuality is like the laws about pork and shellfish, etc. The New Testament says that all foods are now made clean, and it says homosexuality is still wrong. The end. (lol). It just makes me do this —–> o__0 when someone says that.They’re clearly not doing their research, or they’re just refusing to accept it because it makes their argument seem valid.
I think, I am an abomination. Can I please be euthanized?
@tendollar4ways - I agree… i’m a Christian and what it answered was convoluted nonsense. That is NOTHING like what REAL Christians believe…
@Tout_nestpas_parfait - Good to see someone actually look stuff up! lol.
Your logic is utterly ridiculous. Of COURSE some can be born as eunuchs. Did you NEVER take a biology class????
This AGAIN?!
Jesus says stop flogging the dead horse.
You raise some interesting points.
first of all, the people who wish to rail against gay men and women have forgotten one of the (in my mind at least) cornerstones that Jesus spoke of: “Judge not lest ye shall be judged” My interpretation of that is that it’s God’s job to pass moral judgment – NOT man’s. Some people want to say how bad homosexuality is but is it any different than a man who commits adultery>? I don’t think so.
However, the main thing that drew me to this blog was your opening statement. I never thought that I would see Jesus and Justin Bieber compared in the same sentence. I was kind of down tonight and that made me smile. =]
i find the Christian obsession with homosexuality to be absolutely homophobic. and what about divorce? where’s the great Christian movement to make that illegal? my parents split when i was little, and i can guarantee you it was NOT because a couple of dudes wanted to get hitched.
I have an idea. Perhaps eunuchs who are “born that way” means males born with no testicles. And I’m confused how you conclude that females can be eunuchs. Something about the Word of God being for everyone?
fantastic post!
For all of whom are quoting the bible for its “homosexuality is a sin” blah blah blah stuff; That is fantastic that you are religious and what not, I’m sure Jesus was a great guy. I just don’t understand how you can structure every single little aspect of your life, including what you believe in, be determined by a BOOK. Think for yourself – its good for you.
please read this in context.
Actually, Christians don’t overemphasize homosexuality. It’s the politicians that overemphasize homosexuality, right around election time. It’s the media that plays a large role in the overemphasizing also. My mother is a devout christian, she worked in as a hair stylist and I’ am not stereotyping, there were a lot of gay men who she worked many years with. She has had lasting friendships with more than one, spanning decades. Never once, from the age of 5 to the age of 37 did I hear her say a derogatory word about their sexual preference.
Instead of trying to target Christians, why not target the groups politicians and the media that make the gay rights issue into a voting platform?
Or I got another idea, since you just basically said, homosexuality, according to Jesus is not a sin. Why don’t you go attack the religion that considers homosexuality a sin? There is no doubt that in Islam
homosexuality is considered ‘sinful’.
Do some research on that one buddy.
Romans 1:22-32
22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Jesus never said anything specifically about gays/lesbians. It was Paul who condemned them. If I were to be asked who to follow I would say Jesus and not Paul. Paul also spoke against marriage but the Bible implies that he was married. Jesus had a lot to say about loving people….all people! He had a lot to say against the rich and for the poor. But Christians today ignore what they want to ignore and follow what they want to follow
I am sure that you wrote a very interesting post (and I intend on reading it through), but I am still laughing my head off at the first line! Bahahahaha!
Interesting take on the bible and homosexuality. God loves all
@ctaretz - There have been studies to show that something can go differently in the womb for some and it causes the person to later be homosexual. It’s been a long time since I’ve thought of this study. But it would be an environmental change before birth. A large number of homosexuals have brains that react to sexual hormones the way the sex opposite of them does… men reacting to female hormones as females do & women reacting to male hormones as males do. I don’t know what the latest studies are, but this study clearly showed that it wasn’t just something someone chose and it wasn’t exactly inherited either.
@TiredSoVeryTired - I believe that their has been a study and a finding. I just wanted to expose the separation between a genotype and a phenotype, genotypes are chromosomes and such, phenotypes have a lot to do with environmental influences — “The basketball gene” and the “homosexual gene” are in fact phenotypes.
@ctaretz - Right and in this study I had learned about the environmental factor was some change in the womb, possibly caused by maternal stress. So, just an example of an environmental factor that can still result in the person being “born gay”.
Time and time again, it seems to me that the Bible has rules geared towards a certain community… Moses and his people. Paul writing communities and telling them everything they are doing wrong. The problem, IMO, is that the rules are so strange and yet geared directly toward the community. One rule was women are supposed to do nothing, touch nothing, be nothing when on their menstrual cycle. As far as I recall, and 20 people will correct me if I’m wrong, Jesus says nothing about a woman’s menstrual cycle. So, either all the rules and such from the OT are now void or they aren’t. (Who’s gonna cook for me once a month???)
The bottom line for me is that the concept of Biblical homosexuality and current homosexuality are probably very, very different things. I think the majority of people and thus the majority of homosexual people want to follow the rules, even during Biblical times. So, probably most homosexuals kept it to themselves and lived “normal” lives in Biblical times. And those that were immoral (Sodom as one example) ignored a lot of rules back then and did whatever they wanted. Now, imagine a heterosexual man raping other men for his own pleasure (Sodom) or heterosexual women sleeping with each other to forgo men (not because they preferred women, but because they wanted to break every rule they could) and it seems wrong, does it not? To do something, just to break rules… I think some ancient cults did things like worshiped other gods and had wanton sex to be bad… not because they were all homosexual. I just don’t think the concept of homosexuality was the same back then as it is now.
@TiredSoVeryTired - born gay, yet not inherited, still herited. not arguing the baby might have been born to be gay, I’m arguing that it’s still not a genotype. were these findings scientifically proven? May I see the proof of stress and babies being born gay? I mean I don’t doubt researchers have decided, but how? unless born with both reproductive organs like a hermaphrodite/transgendered baby, with one gender being a bit more dominant, how could anybody say? Aside from those rare occasions, babies are born with xx or xy. Male or female and all the physical traits males and females have, internally and externally.
@warinthepocket - So you’re basically saying that gays aren’t praying hard enough? That they’re too sinful to have God embrace them and “cure” them?
@Tout_nestpas_parfait - I think the Song of Solomon is very counter intuitive to your argument.
@ctaretz - I think the “maternal stress” was a guess as to why the gay adults’ brains were reacting like the opposite gender. I don’t think they had any clue as to why. (And I’m sure you understand the whole environmental factor thing, but others won’t that’s why I put the “born gay” thing in there.)
@TiredSoVeryTired - I understand, it’s a very complicated study. I think it can be made more complicated than it should be, we are who were are it’s as simple as that. Acceptance without over researching, or analyzing is the best way. It takes all kinds to make the world go around. I like the opposite, someone else likes the same, someone else likes both, all that doesn’t really matter. We can coexist regardless…
… The reason I even put that comment on this blog is because people try to be so scientific in their proof of an existence, non-existence, etc. I wanted to kind of show that It can get kind of taxing when everything is put under a microscope. If we lived and let live more, there wouldn’t be any disagreements about things that are really no one elses business but our own and God’s (if you believe in God that is, if not then just your own).
I find it an extreme stretch of what Jesus was saying about eunuchs to assert that he meant gays. The Roman empire was full of blatant and open homosexuality. Why would he allude to it? He wasn’t talking about gays, he was talking about eunuchs…men who did not or could not have sex.
Did you read WHY Jesus says this about eunuchs? The disciples had just said “if this is the case, it is better not to marry”. Jesus says “Not everyone can receive this statement, but only those to whom it was given”…THEN he talks about eunuchs. Why? Because he’s talking about people who do not have sex at all…who do not marry. Why does he bring this up at all? Because He’s talking about advancing the kingdom of God, and the Pharisees are trying to ensnare Him. The statement about those who don’t marry is for the advancement of the kingdom of God.
Are you trying to say that you being gay advances the kingdom of God? Stop using Jesus’ words as an excuse for your sin.
Dude this is where i draw the line i dont care who you think you are you dont manipulate Gods Word…..thats just offensive and i dont appreciate it. How would you feel if i copied and paste your blog and mocked you?
AHEM 1st Timothy 1: 8-10 NIV version (I dont joke around)
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly.
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
dude do your homework and read the bible before you try to intentionally insult anyone if you had a case i would take you seriously but you didnt do your homework and for that i cant take your seriously because this is a joke…..not funny……
Well. I have more important things to think about.
“I see Jesus much the same way I see Justin Bieber – no direct impact
on my life, basically a good person but with many annoying followers” -
If there isn’t any direct impact on your life – then why all the rhetoric about him? Logically speaking, a blog and a hobby sharing your opinion about God – in my opinion – does reflect a direct impact. Unless I’m way off base.
I also disagree with the scripture you used, as I believe it was taken out of context. But, that’s just my opinion as well.
You provide interesting points of view, but yet not convincing enough to sway my opinion.
This is all rhetoric anyways…
The jump from eunuch meaning castrated male to gay person was a pretty drastic one without much explanation or support. If a eunuch is not a castrated male but rather someone who has no desire or ability to have sexual relations with a woman that doesn’t immediately imply the male is a homosexual. Perhaps he merely lacks a desire or he practices serious celibacy. The second was not at all uncommon. There seems to be the assumption that we have to take this route that eunuch means gay because if a eunuch can only be a castrated male then Jesus was wrong when he stated some were born in the way of the eunuch. I’m not so sure that’s the best approach. Even with the author’s approach we can say males have been born without (working) testicles or a lack of testosterone and they aren’t homosexuals.
Even if Jesus is referring to homosexual men here it isn’t a teaching which justifies or encourages homosexual activity. Sexual activity, according to scripture, is not meant to occur outside the marriage covenant. Thus, the unmarried are not to be having sexual relations. Throughout Christian history marriage has been seen as one man and one woman. Clement of Alexandria wrote, “Some men by birth have a nature to turn away from women, and those who are subject to this natural constitution do well not to marry. These, they say, are the eunuchs by birth.” There are lots of reasons for eunuchs not to marry. However, this doesn’t also mean “feel free to have sex outside of marriage” or “engage in homosexual activity” which scripture speaks against.
There are better cases for what this author is trying to get at.
Wow. You’re reading more into a bible verse than some Christians do.
Another Wonderful Xanga post that won’t mean Jack to anyone who disagrees. Hey, if stirring the pot is your thing than I hope you had a great time.
All along I have sad that everyone has a choice whether to live by God’s rules or not. Stating that not all will marry in the way that God hath joined together, (as He stated earlier) doesn’t mean that they will still be in God’s will. As would be made clear by the statement, “and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” Sin has never been about how you were born, it is about what you do. So when you refer to there being neither Jew nor Greek, there is nothing in there about ACTIONS. It doesn’t say, “There is neither liar nor honest…”
You really should be careful when you quote the Word of God. Trying to twist it into something you like better is very dangerous because you can cause others to stumble.
Amen lol
I think this is a fabulous way to read scripture. The truth is too many Christians take things literally from the Bible. Whatever it says is law. But for me, I still constantly question the Bible. There is something that has never sat right with me because God didn’t write the Bible. Men did. And if since men have always written books in order to reflect their views, I have no doubt that plenty of the Bible is false, or was falsely interpreted and then written down. We see it in history books all the time. And as a Christian, you’re supposed to take the Bible as our history, therefore I treat it like every other thing we’ve learned in history, aka not always what it really seems.
@NightCometh - I don’t understand why being gay can’t advance the kingdom of God. Just because gay people can’t procreate is a bullshit answer. I know so very great gay people who are better Christians then many, so yes, I’d say they can advance the kingdom of God.
@SexyGamerGirl - Another thing people tend to forget when interpreting the bible, be it for religious fervour or to find “holes” to prove it wrong, is that the bible itself was translated… how many times? To say that it’s been perfectly translated would be a stretch at best. I’ve always treated the bible as a storybook rather than a blanket historical text
@GodlessLiberal - No, not at all. Election isn’t based on works. Christ’s death and ressurection is able to atone for anyone person, and if a person is elected they WILL be sanctified. If no sanctification is evident, then there was obviously no salvation.
@Garistotle - For me, as a fairly liberal Christian, I believe that some is historical, some is storybook. But either way, as much as I want to believe in it, the fact of the matter is that people wrote the Bible. People have been known to twist the truth etc. So you can’t believe everything you believe, even when it comes to history. Am i making sense? It’s hard to put my beliefs into words sometimes.
THANK YOU. I knew Jesus wasn’t the evil man that Christians tend to make him out to be by saying that you can’t be homosexual! I always questioned why Jesus said to love everyone around you & respect them, yet apparently you aren’t allowed to be homosexual & that those people don’t deserve respect. You made a very valid point there.
People just read between the lines too much & make assumptions that really shouldn’t be made!
the first sentence….THIS!!!!!
I actually like Jesus. I think he makes a good role model. If only more of those who claim to follow him, were more like him.
@tjeffray - And why do you think these politicians are anti-homosexual? Because a large part of their voting base is Christian, conservative, and homophobic. In America, Canada, and the UK the problem with politicians trying to pass bigoted laws targeting homosexuals doesn’t come from any influence that Islam has, it comes from the influence fundamentalist Christians have. Just read through the comment section here if you think “Christians don’t overemphasize homosexuality.” I’ve dealt with a LOT of Christians in my day, and while yes, many are completely cool with it, there is still a large percentage that think it’s very important. Hell, one of the presidential candidates, Michele Bachmann, has stated that homosexuality is the most important cause of our lifetimes.
@Shipmatefrank - [Paul also spoke against marriage but the Bible implies that he was married.]
Sounds like a stand up comic.
@NightCometh - A) I’m not Christian. B) I’m not gay. C) As I clearly stated in my post, I didn’t write this. I found it and thought it would make for some interesting debate.
@Jeremy_Sheer - You’re right, it’s much more offensive for me to post someone’s interpretation of the Bible to defend people than it is to use the Bible to justify being homophobic.
@edlives - Jesus doesn’t directly impact me, but his followers do. Just like I don’t listen to Justin Bieber, but his fans do, and I have to deal with THEM.
@GodlessLiberal - You are so freaking ignorant. You also are offended? read what you write you post that offended me! Ask Jimmy Mallory JESUS LOVES GAYS. But its a sin. My best friend i grew up in the church is Gay I dont hate gays how dare you put that label on me. You judge people by their statement you arent open minded you dont CARE WHAT JOE OR EVEN SALLY thinks you post things to piss people off. If you want to have a sound mature arguement then fine. Ask Jmallory. He will tell you the same thing. What i posted was a legit arguement and then you tell Me IM WRONG. come on buddy argue sufficiently Jesus isnt a homophob some christians give christians bad names INTERPRETATIONS? Biblegateway.com was used for term papers in school. if you are going to continue to tell me im a highly conservative homophobe who hates gays you dont know me at all. I love everyone Jesus loves Gays and I love Gays. stop labeling and argue correctly if you went into a university for a theological debate you would fail horribly you would be kicked out and you would piss off college students do it properly man. Dont post something that pisses people off and not argue sufficently
@GodlessLiberal - REPEAT KRISKO I HAVE GAY FRIENDS your so freaking judgemental this is why i get along better with elle than you.
@Jeremy_Sheer - Irony: Judging someone then calling them judgmental. Labeling somebody and getting angry at them labeling you. Asking for a mature argument then trying to make me feel inferior by namedropping Elle.
Jeremy, all I did was post one person’s interpretation of scripture. If Jesus truly loves gays, as you claim he does, you should get much more upset by the people who use scripture to try to repress the rights of homosexuals. Believe me, there are FAR more of those.
If you are so offended by this, then you can’t be terribly strong in your beliefs. If your convictions can’t stand a little scrutiny, then I feel sorry for you. And if you can’t stand to hear a differing interpretation of the Bible (yes Jeremy, an INTERPRETATION, because most of the Bible is interpreted one way or another) then you can’t have a mature discussion about it.
Oh, and namedropping Elle like that? That’s not what friends do. Don’t use your friends as a technique to score points in a debate. Don’t hide behind your friends when you feel attacked. That’s not fair to them.
@GodlessLiberal - ok that wasnt fiar sorry elle but krisko think for one you wrote “this is what Jesus said about homosexuals” thats controversal which is your nature. people then come on here and say, “i see it another way here is my view” you then say “I dont care what you think you are wrong. You tend to have a lot of “The Car is Red because I said so” debates. i am strong in my faith but i dont put up with people who went to have theological debates and then say to the person “what ever you say is absolutely wrong im right” you have never agreed to anything i have said or others You have agreed or gently passed on what Jmallory has said. there is this scripture called John 1:1 thats a allegory of Jesus and the bible in general i believe people have the right to believe what they want to believe but what i dont like is when people say “Hey here is something it must be true because i said so and the article said so and therefore what ever you say is dead to me i dont care what you think” there are some good atheists who have kicked My @$$ and have good awesome debates. then there are those who are Mickey Mouse Athiests and argue very ignorantly. I dont know what style you are going for, I also dont like that you are judging by telling me im a homophobe and Jesus is a Homophobe. if you would actually read and study the bible you know what God created the universe there was a natural order. Eve chose her own selfish desires rather than follow God. That order then went out of whack. thats called Sin But My God i believe in gave us free will. and because of that choice the whole universal order is out of whack. God did not intend for lesbian to be with lesbians or gays to be with gays thats sin but He loves them anyway and thats why Jesus came to the cross. if you actually where open to that i would enjoy discussing things with you. instead you are also bible pointing and saying “THIS IS WHAT JESUS SAID BECAUSE I SAID SO” their are christians who love badly and arent good ath their faith. I have a lot work to do. I guess you can say your post just threw me off in black in white it said “THIS IS TRUE I DONT CARE WHAT YOU SAY” i am interested to see what @jmallory says on this topic. If you dont care to listen to what i believe then i respect but dont post one sided arguements without open thoughts thats not the way of the Athiest or a proper theological debate.
@Jeremy_Sheer - Man you’re a douche.
@Jeremy_Sheer - [you wrote "this is what Jesus said about homosexuals" thats controversal which is your nature.]
There’s nothing wrong with controversy if it is meant to make people think.
[people then come on here and say, "i see it
another way here is my view" you then say "I dont care what you think
you are wrong. You tend to have a lot of "The Car is Red because I said
so" debates.]
Please, give examples.
[I also dont like that you are judging by telling me im a homophobe and Jesus is a Homophobe.]
I never ever said Jesus was a homophobe. And I don’t believe I ever called you a homophobe. I do know I said that a lot of people use the Bible to justify their homophobia. Are you inferring what I’m not implying?
[instead you are also bible pointing and saying "THIS IS WHAT JESUS SAID BECAUSE I SAID SO"]
I never said anything of the sort. I personally think the Bible is a work of fiction, and don’t care much what it says other than a purely academic interest in mythology and, more so, in what the readers of the Bible do with the information they glean from within. Even in the introduction to this post, I say I don’t really care what Jesus said because it doesn’t affect me directly.
[you have never agreed to anything i have said]
Could this be because you only come to my site to bitch about me and my writing style, or to disagree with me? If all you’re doing is insulting me, lobbing accusations at me, and directly disagreeing with my beliefs, OF COURSE I won’t agree with you. I’d think that’d be obvious to everyone. I’m not disagreeing with you out of stubbornness, hatred, bigotry, intolerance, a personal vendetta, or whatever you think my reasoning may be. I’m disagreeing with you because I disagree with you.
@GodlessLiberal - ok good points could you do it in a better tone cause it sounds bitter and hateful and i take it the wrong way.
@Jeremy_Sheer - No, you’re just an idiot with no reading comprehension.
@SexyGamerGirl - Jesus said “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” (John 14:15)
He also said “I and the Father are One” (John 10:30)
God commands us to not engage in sexuality outside of marriage (Hebrews 13:4) , and specifically forbids homosexuality. (Lev. 18:22, 1st Cor 6:9-11).
Jesus’ commands and His Father’s commands are the same. If we don’t keep God’s commandments, we don’t love Jesus.
How could you possibly think that someone openly doing the exact opposite of God’s commandments can be advance the kingdom of God? That is complete insanity.
@bloggicus_maximus - PWNT
@bloggicus_maximus - wow nice insult I never caled you or krisko idiots your the idiot for butting in. im so burned man. Im so sorry this isnt your blog?
@RazielV - do you know me? please stop harassing me this is between me and krisko
@Jeremy_Sheer - Next time you try a witty comeback, make sure you can spell properly.
@bloggicus_maximus - next time come up with a better screen name.
@Jeremy_Sheer - That’s the best you’ve got? Really?
No? you came out of nowhere starting something with me and jumping in something that really has nothing to do with you. Please dont start something when I have no intentions of starting something. Please leave me alone.
@Jeremy_Sheer - No it isn’t. You keep trying to bring other people up in your arguments to validate a really pissy attitude. Whenever someone doesn’t immediately take your side, you throw the world’s most exaggerated fits and stamp your feet. The second you posted in a PUBLIC FORUM is the second that it became a non-private discussion, mate. So get used to other people weighing in on this. And yes, I do know you. You claim to work for Disney, have a creepy obsession with Elle, and have bigger temper tantrums than a 3 year-old. That’s pretty much you to a “T”.
Stop harassing other people with your endless barrage of insults, tantrums, and whinging posts and maybe people will be more inclined to be nice to you. It’s pretty simple.
@Jeremy_Sheer - AWH SNAP! HYPERBURN ON @bloggicus_maximus! He’s gonna need to scour the African mountains for some major aloe deposits now!
@RazielV - @bloggicus_maximus - Let’s not resort to insults, guys.
@Jeremy_Sheer - You never called us idiots, but you did malign me and make false statements about me (I believe there’s a commandment about that?), and as far as I’m concerned, that’s worse.
You also can’t claim to want to have an open, honest, critical debate on an open forum then get upset when someone responds to you.
@RazielV - HE FOUND MY WEAKNESS.
@GodlessLiberal - Right, sorry.
@RazielV - dude dont judge my friendship with elle and you dont know me at all. Good day.
@GodlessLiberal - I wont do this anymore… but enough with the name calling im sorry i have a hissing fit lets just end this immature rattle. Sometimes i dont think clearly I apoligize. The End I will stop coming in your blog with nonsense and pooping instead if its sound i will think before i write please tell Blogg Maximus or whatever and Razel IV to please leave me alone. there both insulting me and judging me.
@Jeremy_Sheer - You’re judging everyone else. You can’t have it both ways. When you show people respect then they will respect you. That’s how the world works. So you can either hide and act like you’re being bullied, which you aren’t, or you can engage us in a mature, adult dialogue like we’re expecting you to do. Your choice.
@GodlessLiberal - No worries, mate. Just hoping the message gets across that losing one’s shit over trivialities is really in-conducive to critical debate.
Getting on topic, it’s hard for me to really add onto this discussion since I pretty much agree with your viewpoint of the issue.
@NightCometh - I feel my biggest problem with both Lev and Cor are the fact that there’s no other proof that these books contain the actual professions of God’s “laws”. The Bible itself is but one source of information and unfortunately one source cannot stand on its own merits. In any issue, there needs to be multiple sources used (and the book being an anthology, essentially, does not count) to back up the material presented in the book. For example, the actual tablets, or perhaps the spear/cross Jesus was executed on. Things like that, that prove the existence of these people, and further, proof of the actual existence of the entity in question.
After that’s all been proven, there needs to be a clear definition of what “rules/laws” the entity wants us to live by. The Bible presents dichotomous examples of how we should be living between the OT and NT, as well as who and what is “good” or “bad”. Again, if we are to assume the Bible is 100% accurate, we would be having to stone women for practically everything they do today. I’m pretty sure you’d be hard pressed to find someone who supports that, yet Deuteronomy highly supports the submission and degradation of women, as well as supporting murder of them.
@Jeremy_Sheer - For the record, I’m not judging you. Sheesh.
@RazielV - [When you show people respect then they will respect you.]
Well, for the most part. It’s the way I try to operate at least. Which is why I tend to get along very well with some Christians on this site, and very poorly with others… often regardless of their particular beliefs.
I get the point you were trying to make, I just felt like it was counterproductive.
@GodlessLiberal - No worries. I don’t always get my point across in the most appropriate ways. Thanks for redirecting me respectfully, cos’ I do appreciate it.
@Jeremy_Sheer - So much for not badmouthing people anymore eh Sheer? You haven’t changed a bit. I strongly suggest – again – that you take my advice; work on your own problems first before telling other people how they should behave towards you.
@SexyGamerGirl - Totally makes sense!
@NightCometh - And you can confirm, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that through every translation of the scriptures those words were exactly as they appear now? That no POLITICAL system used the translations to further their own agenda?
@QuantumStorm - you are right Quantum thanks for the help
@GodlessLiberal - And its because the media has played the American for the politicians benefit. The media has turned homosexuality into a bigger issue than it really is. Let me ask you this. During presidential elections in the 1800s was homosexuality an big issue? Do you think candidates in the 1800s included homosexuality as a major part of their campaign? I doubt it was a major issue or not part of campaign platforms. Maybe it was, maybe you can research that for me, I say that because you seem to have made gay rights your “cause”. If I am right then you need to ask yourself what has changed to make gay rights into an issue.
1. I believe christian beliefs in America are weaker today compared to the 1800′s. So how could anti-gay rights be the fault of Christians if anti-gay beliefs have increase at the same time as christian beliefs have decreased?
2. The media is much more able to effect or influence an individuals thinking today than back in the 1800′s.
from 1800 to the present day in America
A decrease in christian beliefs.
Anti-gay is a politic platform in 2011. (as christian beliefs are at their lowest).
An increase in media reach.
It’s the media that polarizes the population to benefit political campaigns.
@GodlessLiberal - so really, your issues are with people who call themselves christians rather than the christian faith? or am I not understanding correctly?
@edlives - I have a few issues with the Christian faith, but I feel these are very academic when compared to my issues with the people that use (or misuse) the faith. I have issues with the Jain religion, but since Jainists are extraordinarily pacifistic, these issues are very easy to discuss in a calm, reasonable manner where we’re both just fine agreeing to disagree. I hope that makes sense.
@GodlessLiberal - I understand. Thanks for clarifying.
The alternate interpretation is (extreme) conjecture, you can argue semantics on that, but every
fundy minister will conclude this was abstinence from sex, the subject matter
was to marry or not. The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” 11 But He said to them,) Not all men can accept this statement, but) only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this let him accept it” Matthew 19
The actual word eunuch is εὐνοῦχος
εὐνοῦχο
can also be used in this context
1)
a bed keeper, bed guard, superintendent of the bedchamber, chamberlain
a)
in the palace of oriental monarchs who support numerous wives the superintendent of the women’s apartment or harem, an office held by eunuchs
b)
an emasculated man, a eunuch (Emasculation is the removal of the genitalia (castration) of a male, notably the penis and/or the testicles).
1)
eunuchs in oriental courts held by other offices of greater, held by the Ethiopian eunuch mentioned in Ac. 8:27-39.
But in the context of Matt. 19 it is about abstinence from sex:
c)
one naturally incapacitated
1)
for marriage
2)
begetting children
d)
one who voluntarily abstains from marriage
Dude, my man, I been a born again Christian for 30 something years, I’ll call a spade a spade, I like you, don’t believe in the bible other than there are some truths in a historical setting, like Jesus may have been here, but Matthew tried to make him fit prophecies that had nothing to do with him, or if a plague hit, yea I believe a plague may have hit, but they needed a reason to explain why since god was supposed to be incontrol. So they, like they inquirer, said god did so because David took the census. See 2 Samuel 24
Now
as far as Jesus not saying anything against homosexuals, not directly, but yes
he did by blanketing it with the following….
First you have to see it was condemned in the law, “If
a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for
their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”
Leviticus 20:13
And
what did Jesus say about the law
“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish
but to fulfill.
18
For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the
Law until all is accomplished.
So there you have it, he didn’t except the one in Leviticus 20:13.
Matt 5:17-19
Also we see here;
24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness
through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between
themselves:
25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and
worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for
ever. Amen.
26For this cause God gave them up unto vile
affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is
against nature:
27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural
use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working
that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their
error which was meet.
28And even as they did not like to retain God in
their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things
which are not convenient
Romans 1
I may not know science like you, but I know the scriptures better than anyone, so
much that I realized it was bullshit, but I call a spade a spade.
I don’t know of anywhere in the Bible where a natural bent is taken as an acceptable excuse for sin. Christians are both called and empowered to rise above these types of challenges whether they come from The Enemy, the World, or our own Flesh. I am fairly convinced that homosexuality is a perversion of the gift of singleness.
@l_ORE -
Disagree, I kown homosexuals since childhood, and later in life when you find out they are gay, you recall the diverse flamboyance they displayed as a kid. These people are not sinners, thet were kids playing with crayons. The body forms differently in the womb, the genatalia formed one way when it shuold have gone the other way. Why do people have both male and female genatalia?
Sin..lol…according to christians, I’m would be the worst, love strippers, porn stars, drinking, and blowing my load in a girls mouth, why is it that I am not tempted with the sin of homosexuality? Genetics, plain and simple.
I LOVE this! I have a friend, Who is Christian, who is going through some turmoil with his religion because he is Gay and trying to figure out his place. I’ve just emailed this to him for some perspective and enlightenment. I am neither Gay or Religious, So I know having someone to which he can relate… It will help.
@GodlessLiberal - With you on the @Jeremy_Sheer - issue. He lies about what was said then keeps an argument going until you’re ready to curbstomp the shit out of him. Then he’ll block you. I’ve had it happen and seen it with so many other people. Best to just ignore him, like any other jackass.
Jesus said, ‘I did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill’. Jesus upheld the Law, and the Law in Leviticus speaks clearly of the abomination of men who lust after men and women who lust after women… and Jesus said, ‘to lust in your heart is to commit adultery’. The Law says though shalt not commit adultery. Jesus did not need to speak specifically about the act of homosexuality… it was written in the Law which He upheld. Leviticus 20:13, Leviticus 18:22
I believe in loving all people. I believe Jesus brought a message of Love, but He also brought a message of obedience. Love of God IS obedience to His Word. It is how we know that we belong to Him. We are all given crosses to bear in this life… being attracted to the wrong sex is only one of those crosses. It is acting on a wrong attraction that is wrong… the same as it is wrong for a pedophile to act on his wrong attraction… or for a married person to act on their attraction to another person other than their spouse. It is the act that is wrong. It is in our actions that we prove ourselves and who we belong to. There are those who refuse to bear their crosses, and flout the Law of God, the Creator, the Planner, the Designer of all things…
and ‘in their wisdom they become fools’, choosing their own way instead of God’s, led as sheep astray by the one who rules this world… the father of lies.