@bigdoggproblem saidHi. So isn't an homosexual act an homosexual act no matter what the age of anyone involved in it is participating? And if you look at any scriptures in the bible it never mentions anything about young men specifically. The scriptures clearly mentions men with men and women with women
Well, I'm an atheist, so I don't think there are any "God's eyes" to consider.
However, as a Spiritual truth-seeker, I would exercise a bit more caution making sweeping pronouncements straight out of modern English Bibles, if I were you.
For example - are you sure that the typical homosexuality practiced in Moses' time [which would be the kind probably condemned ...[text shortened]... leg up on them as far as being free of sinning. That, too, ought to give a sober truth-seeker pause.
Yes we all sin. This is why Jesus gave his life so that it would cover our sins that we unintentionally make daily. But when one intentionally sins as the bible states in black and white, these are the sins he does not forgive unless it is stopped by the person committing them.
God has made it very clear what he would consider a willful sinful act and homosexuality is more then mentioned as one.
Thanks for your concern about making statements from the bible. But if one believes the bible they will understand God's view and it is very exact in what it says. It also groups up various sins in the same scriptures. I'm only repeating what the bible so clearly says.
@rajk999 saidOf course hypocrisy will not be rewarded, and of course there will be those that never professed Christ due to never having Known Him nor having been able to develop a good relationship with Him due to circumstnaces entering the Kingdom of God through the power of Grace and what God Wills...
Jesus said let the wheat and the tares grow together and in the end the angels will sever the wicked from the just. It is going to be a surprise for some, who are the wheat and who are the tares. The greatest of sins is not sexual immorality, neither is it failure to profess faith in God or Christ. The greatest sin is demonstrated by the priest and Levite in the Good Samaritan story.
But to actively reject Christ makes it impossible to enter the Kingdom of GOd as far as I see it:
but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.
Matthew 10:33
To actively deny Christ, and to deny the truth of Christ, would seem to be the most obvious way to deny Him.
Of course, one can deny Him through deed, and through pursuing a negative path that actively counters Him, and thus living faithlessly, but to deny Him with your words, and to deny the truth of the path actively...
That seems like a pretty big do not pass go. But I am no theologian.
Do you have an argument for this?
Here are some bonus passages that I also came across:
“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
John 14:6
He died so that people who believe in Him would have eternal life:
14 And das Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man ebe lifted up, 15 that whoever believes fin him gmay have eternal life.8 John 3-14-15
“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12
the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. Romans 3:22
@galveston75 saidAbsolutely not! Let's say one of the "participants" is 6 years old. Would you say that's mutual consent?
So isn't an homosexual act an homosexual act no matter what the age of anyone involved in it is participating?
As to the rest of your post, the typical ENGLISH version of the scripture [KJV] says "men with men" but only say that women had "unnatural relations" without getting any more specific. English is a context-dependent language, and writers often leave out things that everybody of that time knows. For example, people of today would write "left-wingers are typically pro-choice, while right-wingers are typically pro-life" without explaining what the wings, or the life/choice positions, mean. In 2,000 more years, only a fool would read these as literal terms without looking into their historical context. They are simply unlikely to mean anything close to the same thing 2,000 years later.
@suzianne saidAlright, so if someone has committed a murder, we should likewise just say: their murder is a sin, but we cannot judge their soul, and we love them.
I would say, rather, "Judge not, for your judgement clouds your love for your fellow man."
We are not told to judge, yet we are told to love.
And yet, it seems that humans would rather judge than love.
We are the ones at fault, not those we judge.
If someone is a Nazi and hates Jews and black people: their ideological beliefs in this regard are a sin, but we cannot judge Nazis, we cannot judge their souls, and we love them.
And if someone is a drunkard, a fornicator, or an adutlerer, or some other thing, we give the same answer.
Likewise, homosexuality is stated to be a sin in the Bible.
So you stand by that, right?
You could never call a Trump supporter or even an outright Nazi somoene who is evil, because you cannot judge them, right? This is the standard?
I am OK with that. There is a solid theological basis for this attitude. In fact, it appears to be commanded.
Yet, what is also important to remember is that sin is still sin, and the sinful act can be appraised as sin. For it is appraised as sin in the good book itself.
We should not judge people, but we can and should judge the actions of people, and through that we can actually help people.
@bigdoggproblem saidIt's a good thing, then, that the Church fathers who were closest to these writings preserved their meanings very clearly in the norms and contexts that they set out.
Absolutely not! Let's say one of the "participants" is 6 years old. Would you say that's mutual consent?
As to the rest of your post, the typical ENGLISH version of the scripture [KJV] says "men with men" but only say that women had "unnatural relations" without getting any more specific. English is a context-dependent language, and writers often leave out things th ...[text shortened]... orical context. They are simply unlikely to mean anything close to the same thing 2,000 years later.
And even though they lived in a time when homosexuality was accepted and practiced in many circles, the Bible clearly condemned it, and the early Church also clearly condemned it.
The teaching is clear.
Your point about the separation of time between then and now would only theoretically be relevant if no one had come in between now and then, and we just didn't have people who were familiar with the context and the Greek way back when, but that simply isn't the case.
This is one of the things that Protestantism has sadly given us: the idea that we have just as good of a shot of knowing the intention of the Bible as those who were there, and this concept that so much time has passed that the interpretation can just be up in the air.
@philokalia saidYou need to understand what Jesus said about professions of faith or belief. Here is one example:
Of course hypocrisy will not be rewarded, and of course there will be those that never professed Christ due to never having Known Him nor having been able to develop a good relationship with Him due to circumstnaces entering the Kingdom of God through the power of Grace and what God Wills...
But to actively reject Christ makes it impossible to enter the Kingdom of GOd a ...[text shortened]... uote]the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. Romans 3:22[/quote]
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: (Matthew 7:21-24 KJV)
Here we have a group of people obviously of faith, professing belief, obviously with the Holy Spirit, doing miracles in the name of Christ, who are condemned.
Compare that with the story of the Good Samaritan. The Samaritan knew nothing of Christ in those days. But Christ used him as an example of a man who would enter the Kingdom of God.
Good works trumps professions of faith. Its all over the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. Denial of Christ with action is worse than denial of Christ by words.
Action beats talk.
@rajk999 saidOK, so the denial of Christ by action is worse than the denial of Christ with words. I understand that, and that is not even a bad way to think. In fact, it could be quite true in many ways. Hypocrisy is a great crime.
You need to understand what Jesus said about professions of faith or belief. Here is one example:
[i]Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in th ...[text shortened]... ostles. Denial of Christ with action is worse than denial of Christ by words.
Action beats talk.
But, let us say that someone is generally a good person yet actively denies the truth of God, and even believes that some of the aspects of Christ's teachings are rooted solely in prejudice and sexism, which I do not think is an uncommon belief at all among atheists.
Let's take someone who is openly affirming of homoseoxuality and gay marriage (as would be normal for someone on the Left), and is someone who is highly critical of sexism (as would also be quite common). Now, let's say that they also openly mock the religious, call them hypocrites, etc., and, in addition to this, openly say that religion is a myth that has held us back, and it goes against logic...
In their personal life, they do not mind fornicating or viewing smut, nor do they mind others who do or speak out against as much. They believe that these are natural and perfectly ethical acts.
AGain, this would seem pretty typical.
Now, will such a person, who denies God and denies some of the teachings of Christ, enter the Kingdom of God merely because they have otherwise done OK things and maintaiend a good sense of morality? Or, would it be true that their very active denial of Christ, and their willingness to condone things which are what some would consider "minor" sins (and what the Bible plainly calls sin) would count greatly against them..?
Obviously, you aren't God, but you seem quite excited at the perspective that you can deny God and enter the Kingdom of God.
What's the Biblical basis for that?
The passage which you brought up perhaps makes a good argument that Christians must have higher standards for themselves, but where is this great lowering of standards for everyone else that you seem to be hinting at in this last post htat you made?
@bigdoggproblem saidWell now your just getting silly. Of course not. That would be called child abuse/ rape as you should know.
Absolutely not! Let's say one of the "participants" is 6 years old. Would you say that's mutual consent?
As to the rest of your post, the typical ENGLISH version of the scripture [KJV] says "men with men" but only say that women had "unnatural relations" without getting any more specific. English is a context-dependent language, and writers often leave out things th ...[text shortened]... orical context. They are simply unlikely to mean anything close to the same thing 2,000 years later.
Come on you know what the subject is here and it's consenting adults having sex with the same sex. God condemns it and that is that.
And that's all you can come up with about lesbianism?
Here you go, Romans 1:26 "That is why God gave them over to disgraceful sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature."
For a women to be with another woman is not natural just as is a man with another man.
Nothing has changed with God and his rules and commands to us. Just because society now says it's OK and acceptable does not mean God has changed his standards. He has not all of a sudden changed his mind. He is still who he was billions of years ago, and he has not given us some new downloads on him changing his mind on morals.
And in any language the definition homosexuality still means exactly what it says. No need to call in the left wingers or right this or that. There is no confusion in the Bible about homosexuality.
@galveston75 saidDo you not believe that your God figure created heterosexuality and homosexuality?
For a women to be with another woman is not natural just as is a man with another man.
@philokalia saidThe point was that Galveston had not bothered to do any such historical and linguistic exploration. Nothing in your post changes the truth of that fact.
It's a good thing, then, that the Church fathers who were closest to these writings preserved their meanings very clearly in the norms and contexts that they set out.
And even though they lived in a time when homosexuality was accepted and practiced in many circles, the Bible clearly condemned it, and the early Church also clearly condemned it.
The teaching is clea ...[text shortened]... this concept that so much time has passed that the interpretation can just be up in the air.
@galveston75 saidYour statement is the source of the silliness. You were the one who stated that the age of the participants doesn't matter.
Well now your just getting silly. Of course not. That would be called child abuse/ rape as you should know.
Come on you know what the subject is here and it's consenting adults having sex with the same sex. God condemns it and that is that.
And that's all you can come up with about lesbianism?
Here you go, Romans 1:26 "That is why God gave them over to disgracefu ...[text shortened]... l in the left wingers or right this or that. There is no confusion in the Bible about homosexuality.
And Romans 1:26 never specifically says the women engaged in lesbianism. It only uses the vague phrase "contrary to nature". How hard would it be to simply state that women slept with other women, especially in a book that, according to followers such as yourself, is soooo crystal-clear on its meaning?
@fmf saidIt's generally believed that the fall is a co-author of our existence.
Do you not believe that your God figure created heterosexuality and homosexuality?
Some people say that all diseases are byproducts of living in a fallen world, right, and this applies to all forms of disorders and addictions as well.
For instance... God gave us grapes, and wine, but alcoholism is not something God is the author of: the fallen state of man is the author of that.
Did God create the people that are physically inclined to alcoholism? Of course, but is He the author of their physical inclination to alcoholism? There's a debate. Likewise, it would be a big debate about whether God is the author of the urge to homosexuality.
And, regardless of the answer, there are very coherent responses as to "Yes' or "No," but the conclusion would always be the same: our alcoholism and our disordered urges are ours to overcome.
All straight men are equipped with an urge to procreation because it is a wonderful thing, but it is not the willing of God that you choose to become addicted to smut, right.
@galveston75 saidYour god created all the animals ? He created their nature and inclinations ?
Well now your just getting silly. Of course not. That would be called child abuse/ rape as you should know.
Come on you know what the subject is here and it's consenting adults having sex with the same sex. God condemns it and that is that.
And that's all you can come up with about lesbianism?
Here you go, Romans 1:26 "That is why God gave them over to disgracefu ...[text shortened]... l in the left wingers or right this or that. There is no confusion in the Bible about homosexuality.
And about half of all sex in the animal kingdom is homosexual. Fact !
Your god shows a large discrepancy between what he says and what he does.
When your god created animals, he created homosexuality.
How did that happen ?