New Testament on homosexuality

I'm sure it's been noted before.

There is nothing in the New Testament about homosexuality, is there? Not a single word being said
about homosexuality, except for that passage Paul wrote (which more or less quotes the Old
Testament - which in turn contradicts the New Testament repeatedly).

So, basically, Jesus (a man who lived with twelve other men in dresses by the way - not
insinuating, merely commenting on fact), had nothing bad to say about gay people. Makes you
think, doesn't it? How many so called "good Christians" of the past are now burning in Hell for
putting words in the mouth of Jesus?

Originally posted by Jigtie
I'm sure it's been noted before.

There is nothing in the New Testament about homosexuality, is there? Not a single word being said
about homosexuality, except for that passage Paul wrote (which more or less quotes the Old
Testament - which in turn contradicts the New Testament repeatedly).

So, basically, Jesus (a man who lived with twelve other men ...[text shortened]... Christians" of the past are now burning in Hell for
putting words in the mouth of Jesus?

Personally, I doubt Jesus would have been a champion for homosexual rights. Consider Matthew 19:1-12. Jesus discusses the legitimate grounds for divorce, he spells out that marriage is between man and woman. There is no consideration of the possibility that a man may wish to marry a man, or some other alternative pairing. Perhaps the Bible is not a very reliable source of moral wisdom.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Perhaps the Bible is not a very reliable source of moral wisdom.

Amen.

Originally posted by Jigtie
I'm sure it's been noted before.

There is nothing in the New Testament about homosexuality, is there? Not a single word being said
about homosexuality, except for that passage Paul wrote (which more or less quotes the Old
Testament - which in turn contradicts the New Testament repeatedly).

So, basically, Jesus (a man who lived with twelve other men ...[text shortened]... Christians" of the past are now burning in Hell for
putting words in the mouth of Jesus?

There is nothing in the New Testament about homosexuality, is there?
I'm afraid there is, you could start with Romans 1:27.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Personally, I doubt Jesus would have been a champion for homosexual rights. Consider Matthew 19:1-12. Jesus discusses the legitimate grounds for divorce, he spells out that marriage is between man and woman. There is no consideration of the possibility that a man may wish to marry a man, or some other alternative pairing. Perhaps the Bible is not a very reliable source of moral wisdom.

Personally, I doubt Jesus would have been a champion for homosexual rights
-----------conrau---------------------------------

I think he was a champion of human rights and was not in favour of discriminating against people on the basis of race , sexuality , gender etc as far as I can see.

What I doubt is whether he would have treated homosexuals in the same way many Christians do.

Originally posted by Jigtie
I'm sure it's been noted before.

There is nothing in the New Testament about homosexuality, is there? Not a single word being said
about homosexuality, except for that passage Paul wrote (which more or less quotes the Old
Testament - which in turn contradicts the New Testament repeatedly).

So, basically, Jesus (a man who lived with twelve other men Christians" of the past are now burning in Hell for
putting words in the mouth of Jesus?

There is a little on homosexuality but a lot on adultery and fornication.
Adultery is sex outside of marriage and that will clearly cover homosexual sex acts.
Fornication is sex before marriage and that will also clearly cover homosexual sex acts.

If a married man has sex with his gay boyfriend, thats adultery.
If an unmarried woman has sex with her lesbian girlfriend, thats fornication.

Dont try to claim that there is nothing in the NT about homosexuality. Its a stupid argument.

If you like, just ignore the Bible since it does not fit your (not necessaily you) lifestyle and eat drink and be merry. Or live your life as a homosexual and do everything else like be a good samaritan, live unselfishly, help the poor, feed the humgry and let Christ be the judge. Charity and giving can wipe out your sins :

1 Pet 4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

Not a single word being said
about homosexuality, except for that passage Paul wrote
So you are going to discount the passage in Romans because Paul wrote it? That's fine by me, you would want to say that the passage in 1 Corinthians is a bad translation too. Ok. But then I suppose it wouldn't be so punchy if you had said:

Apart from Romans 1:27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, there is nothing in the New Testament about homosexuality, is there? 🙂

So, basically, Jesus (a man who lived with twelve other men in dresses by the way - not
insinuating, merely commenting on fact), had nothing bad to say about gay people.
Jesus was a jew, so it is hardly likely he would have bothered to mention gay people since by default homosexuality was forbidden.

Originally posted by Jigtie
I'm sure it's been noted before.

There is nothing in the New Testament about homosexuality, is there? Not a single word being said
about homosexuality, except for that passage Paul wrote (which more or less quotes the Old
Testament - which in turn contradicts the New Testament repeatedly).

So, basically, Jesus (a man who lived with twelve other men ...[text shortened]... Christians" of the past are now burning in Hell for
putting words in the mouth of Jesus?

There might not have been as many gay folks back then so it wouldn't have been a big issue. As human DNA has degenerated over time, we may have a lot of issues now that are more pronounced than in Jesus' day. Take a look at all the different kinds of disease that come from genetics. As time goes on the more there will be. I don't know about the morality question as I have a gay relative and a gay friend. They do what seems to come natural to them. It is built into them. It is no more their fault than say scoliosis is to others.

Originally posted by joe beyser
There might not have been as many gay folks back then so it wouldn't have been a big issue. As human DNA has degenerated over time, we may have a lot of issues now that are more pronounced than in Jesus' day.
Have you any evidence for this claim, since on the face of it this claim is absurd.

Originally posted by Lord Shark
Originally posted by joe beyser
[b]There might not have been as many gay folks back then so it wouldn't have been a big issue. As human DNA has degenerated over time, we may have a lot of issues now that are more pronounced than in Jesus' day.
Have you any evidence for this claim, since on the face of it this claim is absurd.[/b]

i don't think that it is absurd, its just that the science as far as i know is a little inconclusive. There is in fact no such thing as a gay gene, and its one of these instances in which, something like a preponderance of one type of hormone has been taken as a license for every type of sexual preference, under the guise of 'they just cant help it.'

Originally posted by Lord Shark
Originally posted by joe beyser
[b]There might not have been as many gay folks back then so it wouldn't have been a big issue. As human DNA has degenerated over time, we may have a lot of issues now that are more pronounced than in Jesus' day.
Have you any evidence for this claim, since on the face of it this claim is absurd.[/b]

I can only go by observation as I can't take a poll from folks that lived 2000 years ago.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i don't think that it is absurd, its just that the science as far as i know is a little inconclusive. There is in fact no such thing as a gay gene, and its one of these instances in which, something like a preponderance of one type of hormone has been taken as a license for every type of sexual preference, under the guise of 'they just cant help it.'

I used to think that too, but whatever it is is more than just an alternate lifesyle choice.

Originally posted by joe beyser
I can only go by observation as I can't take a poll from folks that lived 2000 years ago.

Lol .. to go by 'observation' you must have lived 2000 years ago, as well as today. Are you saying that you can 'observe' whats going on in the time of Christ re homexuality, from reading the bible ?

Originally posted by Rajk999
Lol .. to go by 'observation' you must have lived 2000 years ago, as well as today. Are you saying that you can 'observe' whats going on in the time of Christ re homexuality, from reading the bible ?

No dipstick, I go by observation of the folks I have seen now. Lol of course lol you lol knew lol that. lol lol lol