Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Part SEVEN: Christianity and Homosexuality

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Part SEVEN: Christianity and Homosexuality

    Christianity and Homosexuality by Matt Slick



    "The homosexuals and lesbians have gained considerable political and social momentum in America. They have "come out" as the term goes, left their closets, and are knocking on the doors of your homes. Through TV, Radio, Newspapers, and Magazines, they are preaching their doctrine of tolerance, equality, justice, and love. They do not want to be perceived as abnormal or dangerous. They want acceptance and they want you to welcome them with open, loving arms, approving of what they do.

    In numerous states in America several bills have been introduced by the pro homosexual politicians to ensure that the practice of homosexuality is a right protected by law. Included in these bills are statements affecting employers, renters, and schools. Even churches would be required to hire a quota of homosexuals with "sensitivity" training courses to be "strongly urged" in various work places. There is even legislation that would make the state pick up the tab for the defense of homosexuality in lawsuits, while requiring the non homosexual side to pay out of his/her pocket.

    The Christian church has not stood idle. When it has spoken out against this political immorality, the cry of "separation of church and state" is shouted at the "religious big ots." But when the homosexual community uses political power to control the church, no such cry of bigotry is heard. Political correctness says it is okay for the homosexual community to impose its will upon churches, but not the other way around. Apparently, it isn't politically correct to side with Christians.

    What does the Bible say?

    The Bible, as God's word, reveals God's moral character and it shapes the morality of the Christian. There have been those who have used the Bible to support homosexuality, taken verses out of context and read into them interpretations that are not there. Quite simply, the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin. Let's look at what it says.

    Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
    Lev. 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; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them."
    1 Cor. 6:9-10, "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 homosexuals1, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
    Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

    With such clear statements against homosexuality, it is difficult to see how different groups can say the Bible supports homosexuality. But they try by redefining love, marriage, sex, homosexuality, etc. in order to accomplish their goal. But the truth is that God created man and woman, not man and man, or woman and woman. Nevertheless, the Bible is a powerful book, and because it is the homosexuals often try and make the Bible agree with its agenda. But it doesn't work. The Bible does not support homosexuality as we have seen from the scriptures above.

    Unlike other sins, this sexual sin has a judgment administered by God Himself: He gives them over to their passions (Rom. 1:26-28). This means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins. As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing. Without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance. Without repentance, there will be no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation.

    Finally, with their hardened hearts, they seek to promote their lifestyle in society. This is become more real since homosexuals are gaining strength and forcing those with opposing views into confinement and penalty. So much for fairness. It is okay to demand it for themselves, but they balk at allowing it for those who disagree.

    Should homosexuals be allowed to marry one another?

    In this politically correct climate that relinquishes morality to the relativistic whims of society, stating that homosexuals should not marry is becoming unpopular. Should a woman be allowed to marry another woman? Should a man be allowed to marry another man? Should they be given legal protection and special rights to practice their homosexuality? No, they should not.

    The Bible, of course, condemns homosexuality. It takes no leap of logic to discern that homosexual marriage is also condemned. But our society does not rely on the Bible for its moral truth. Instead, it relies on a humanistic and relativistic moral base upon which it builds its ethical structure.

    Homosexuality is not natural. Just look at the male and female bodies. They are obviously designed to couple. The natural design is apparent. It is not natural to couple male with male and female with female. It would be like trying to fit two screws together and to nuts together and then say, "See, its natural for them to go together."

    Homosexuals argue that homosexuality is natural since it occurs in the animal world. But this is problematic. It is true that this behavior occurs in the animal kingdom. But, it is also true that we see animals eating their prey alive. We see savagery, cruelty, and extreme brutality. Yet, we do not condone such behavior in our own society. Proponents of the natural order argument as a basis for homosexuality should not pick-and-choose the situations that best fit their agendas. They should be consistent and not compare us to animals. We are not animals. We are made in God's image. Logic says that if homosexuality is natural and acceptable because it exists in the animal world, then it must also be natural and acceptable to eat people alive. But, this is obviously faulty thinking. Therefore, appeal to the practice in the animal world as support for homosexual practice is equally faulty.

    Political protection of a sexual practice is ludicrous. I do not believe it is proper to pass laws stating that homosexuals have 'rights.' What about pedophilia or bestiality? These are sexual practices. Should they also be protected by law? If homosexuality is protected by law, why not those as well?

    Of course, these brief paragraphs can in no way exhaust the issue of homosexuality's moral equity. But, the family is the basis of our culture. It is the most basic unit. Destroy it and you destroy society and homosexuality is not helping the family.

    What should be the Christian's Response to the Homosexual?

    Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross and repented of.

    Christians should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same they would any other person in sin. They should treat homosexuals with the same dignity as they would anyone else because, like or not, they are made in the image of God. However, this does not mean that Christians should approve of their sin. Not at all. Christians should not compromise their witness for a politically correct opinion that is shaped by guilt and fear.

    In fact the following verses should be kept in mind when dealing with homosexuals.

    "Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. 6 Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned, as it were, with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person," (Col. 4:5-6).
    "But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith," (1 Tim. 1:5).

    You do not win people to the Lord by condemning them and calling them names. This is why God says to speak with wisdom, grace, and love. Let the love of Christ flow through you so that the homosexuals can see true love and turn to Christ instead of away from Him.

    Objections Answered

    1) If you want to say homosexuality is wrong based on the O.T. laws, then you must still uphold all of the laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

    The Old Testament laws are categorized in three groups: the civil, the priestly, and the moral. The civil laws must be understood in the context of a theocracy. Though the Jewish nation in the Old Testament was often headed by a king, it was a theocratic system with the Scriptures as a guide to the nation. Those laws that fall under this category are not applicable today because we are not under a theocracy.

    The priestly laws dealing with the Levitical and Aaronic priesthoods, were representative of the future and true High Priest Jesus who offered Himself as a sacrifice on the cross. Since Jesus fulfilled the priestly laws, they are no longer necessary to be followed and are not now applicable.

    The moral laws, on the other hand, are not abolished. Because the moral laws are based upon the character of God. Since God's holy character does not change, the moral laws do not change either. Therefore, the moral laws are still in effect.

    In the New Testament we do not see a reestablishment of the civil or priestly laws. But we do see a reestablishment of the moral law. This is why we see New Testament condemnation of homosexuality as a sin but not with the associated death penalty.

    2) That homosexuality is a sin if committed outside of a loving, committed, relationship. But a committed homosexual relationship is acceptable to God.This is a fallacious argument.


    Homosexuality is never defined in the Bible in an acceptable behavior if it were practiced by individuals who had a loving relationship with each other. Homosexuality is always condemned. Homosexual acts are not natural acts and they are against God created order. As stated above in the article, male and female are designed to fit together -- in more ways than one. This is how God made us and he made as this way so that we could carry out his command of filling the earth with people. Homosexuality is an aberration from God's created order and makes it impossible to fulfill the command that God has given mankind.

    Whether or not a homosexual couple is committed to each other is irrelevant to the argument since love and feelings do not change moral truths. If a couple, not married to each other but married to someone else, commits adultery yet they are committed to loving each other, their sin is not excused.

    If homosexuality is made acceptable because the homosexual couple "loves" each other and are committed to each other, and by that logic we can say that couples of the same sex or even of different sexes who love each other and are committed to each other in a relationship automatically make that relationship morally correct. The problem is that love is used as an excuse to violate scripture. Second, it would mean that such things as pedophilia would be acceptable if the "couple" had a loving and committed relationship to each other. Third, the subjectivity of what it means to "love" and the "committed" to another person can be used to justify almost any sort of behavior.


    3) That where homosexuality is mentioned in the Bible it is not how we relate to it in the 21st century. It meant something different to the people in Biblical times and has nothing to do with modern day homosexuality.


    The four Scriptures listed above refute this idea. Let's look at what they say and see if there is some misunderstanding? The first scripture in Leviticus says that it is an abomination for a man to lie with another man as he would lie with a woman. Obviously this is referring to sexual relationship and it is condemned. The second scripture in Leviticus says the same thing. The third scripture in 1 Corinthians outright condemns homosexuality. And finally, Romans clearly describes a homosexual act as being indecent.

    There is no mistake about it, the view of homosexuality in the Old Testament as well as the New, is a very negative one. It is consistently condemned as being sinful.

    Whether or not people of the 21st-century think homosexuality is acceptable or not has absolutely no bearing on whether or not it is sinful before God. God exists and he is the standard of righteousness. Whether or not anyone believes this or believes that morality is a flowing and vague system of development over time, has no bearing on truth. God has condemned homosexuality as a sin in the Bible. It is a sin that needs to be repented of the same as any other sense and the only way to receive this forgiveness is through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

    4) That the sin of Sodom was actually the sin of inhospitality.


    This is a common error made by supporters of homosexuality. The problem is this explanation does not account for the offering of Lott's daughter to the men outside the home, a sinful act indeed, but one that was rejected by the men outside who desired to have relations with the two angels in Lot's home. Gen. 19:5 says, "and they called to Lot and said to him, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.' Those men wanted to have sexual relations with the angels who appeared also as males. Does it make sense to claim that God destroyed two cities because the inhabitants weren't nice to visitors? If that were the case, then shouldn't God destroy every household that is rude to guests? Gen. 18:20 says that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was "exceedingly grave." Not being hospitable to someone has never been considered an exceedingly grave sin, especially in the Bible. But, going against God's created order in violation of his command to fill in multiply the earth in the act of homosexuality, is an exceedingly grave sin. In fact, we know that it is exceedingly grave because in Romans we read about the judgment of God upon the homosexuals in that he gives them over to the depravity of their hearts and minds. This is a serious judgment of God upon the sinner because it means thatat the sinner will not become convicted of his or her sins and will not then repent. Without repentance there is no salvation and without salvation there is damnation. Therefore, the argument that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because they were not hospitable, carries no validity." Matt Slick
    http://www.carm.org/issues/homosexuality.htm

    1. The word "homosexual" in the NASB version is the Greek a (arsenokoites). It occurs two times in the New Testament. The KJV translates it as abuser of (ones) self with mankind once, and defile (ones) self with mankind once. 1 one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual. (Strong, J. (1996). The exhaustive concordance of the Bible : Showing every word of the test of the common English version of the canonical books, and every occurence of each word in regular order. (electronic ed.) (G733). Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship.)
    The 1901 ASV, the KJV, translate it as "abusers of themselves." The NASB and NKJV translate it as "homosexuals." The NIV as "homosexual offenders." The RSV as "sexual perverts"

    See Part one pinned to top of forum and part six now closed to posting, can read old post here: http://forums.carm.org/vb5/forum/sec...-homosexuality
    Please post now to this thread Part Seven:
    * "But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith," (1 Tim. 1:5).
    * "Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. 6 Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned, as it were, with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person," (Col. 4:5-6). NASB

  • #2
    Originally posted by brightmorningstar View Post
    The law with Asher's has been criticised as wrong by prominent gay activists as well as most other people. That is the reason your position is extremist and intolerant. You have merely offered your opinion.
    I don't care. The politicians decide on the law, which judges then apply. It is not dependent on the agreement of your notional "prominent gay activists", "most" other people or discriminatory bakers like the Ashers. They broke the law, and have been rightly prosecuted. They appealed and lost. Live with it. Your world view is out of fashion, thank goodness.
    Your belief in Julius Caesar proves the existence of God.
    CARM poster

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Tolpuddlematyr View Post
      Here it is, sunshine.
      Originally posted by brightmorningstar View Post
      That means you don't believe there are two sexes in the species with corresponding genitalia for sexual intercourse. All you do is say no-one denies it and then say its complete rubbish.
      You cant have it both ways.
      My response: "Don't lie, it means nothing of the sort. No answer from you on the rest of my post, so a pretty sorry effort by you."
      So you dont believe believe there are two sexes in the species with corresponding genitalia for sexual intercourse. QED. When you reply you refer to reproduction, which isnt what that says, but the result. You dont even know what you are saying.
      As I said your secular liberalism is a fantasy world.. the emperor's news cloths

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Tolpuddlematyr View Post
        I don't care.
        Which is the sort of intolerance you are supposed to be against.
        The politicians decide on the law, which judges then apply.
        And laws can be disputed, as you have done with those against homosexuality in other countries. So in bondage are you to the concept of homosexuality that everything revolves around it for you.
        your "prominent gay activists",
        Well they are in general recognised as prominent gay activists by most of the public, just not in your fantasy worldview it seems.
        "most" other people
        Sorry, no, most other people arent in your fantasy world.
        They broke the law, and have been rightly prosecuted.
        Yes of course, so gay bakers will have to bake cakes with Leviticus 20:13 on it.... except they wont because the reasons for the ruling wont be upheld. This is where even prominent gay activists are now deceived by the sort or extremist secular liberalism you hold to.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by brightmorningstar View Post
          Your position is what the Bible doesnt say.
          I am gay and I know homosexual practice is error.
          Exactly, since the bible doesn't mention anything about masturbation, including masturbation by female homosexuals nor anything about female homosexuals.

          But were you born gay or did you choose to be gay and are you celibate?

          It describes the error of female with female acts.
          Where, or only in your dreams??? Your position is what the Bible doesnt say, unless you are claiming that female genitalia are "vile" and "unseemly" and "disgusting" or that females have anal sex and receive "in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet" from other women (Romans 1:27). But either way, there is nothing in the rest of the bible about female homosexuality or that female genitalia are "vile" and "unseemly" and "disgusting".
          Last edited by juglans1; 11-06-16, 03:47 PM.
          ... always look on the bright side of life - Idle Cleese

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by juglans1 View Post
            Exactly, since the bible doesn't mention anything about masturbation,
            It does, as I said I will debate that with you when you acknowledge female homosexuality is also condemned. Until then who can say whether you acknowledge what the Bible says about masturbation?

            [quote] Where??? **/quote] Romans 1.

            Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

            You have proposed anal sex for women, how does that occur? I keep asking you these questions and you cant answer. The answer is they dont. The last part of verse 26 outlines the error being same sex. Also, 1 Cor 7 says "But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. " That rules same sex acts as sexual immorality, but you deny that as well. Also Matt 19 affirms man/woman union as God's creation, which rules out female homosexuality, but you dont acknowledge that either.

            This is a fruitless discussion because you are not honest enough to acknowledge what the Bible says.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by brightmorningstar View Post
              It does, as I said I will debate that with you when you acknowledge female homosexuality is also condemned.
              Why are you asking me to sin by telling lies, given the bible doesn't even mention anything about female homosexuality?

              Until then who can say whether you acknowledge what the Bible says about masturbation?
              Where does the bible mention masturbation? And unless you can, then you can't claim that the bible mentions anything about female homosexuality and same-sex acts by female homosexuals..

              Where??? ** Romans 1.

              Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
              But where does that say anything about female homosexuality, or are you claiming that the women were also having anal sex too "and received in themselves the due penalty for their error"?

              You have proposed anal sex for women, how does that occur? I keep asking you these questions and you cant answer. The answer is they dont. The last part of verse 26 outlines the error being same sex.
              Duhr!!! Exactly!!! So why do you keep claiming that the women were "working that which is unseemly" with other women and "receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet" from other women or that female genitalia are "vile" & "unseemly" & "disgusting"?

              Also, 1 Cor 7 says "But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. " That rules same sex acts as sexual immorality, but you deny that as well. Also Matt 19 affirms man/woman union as God's creation, which rules out female homosexuality, but you dont acknowledge that either.
              I am gay and I know homosexual practice is error.
              Nothing, however, in either of those references about female homosexuality, but only about adultery including remarried divorcees (Mark 10:11-12). Indeed Matt 19:12 describes how Jesus asked his followers to accept that some men do not marry because they were so born from their mother's wombs. Similarly, do you believe you were born gay or did you choose to be gay, and are you celibate?

              edit rule violation
              Last edited by CARM Admin; 11-11-16, 01:51 AM.
              ... always look on the bright side of life - Idle Cleese

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by brightmorningstar View Post
                So you dont believe believe there are two sexes in the species with corresponding genitalia for sexual intercourse. QED. When you reply you refer to reproduction, which isnt what that says, but the result. You dont even know what you are saying.
                As I said your secular liberalism is a fantasy world.. the emperor's news cloths
                Can't you read? It is not surprising you are so confused about the world as even your own words leave you bewildered.
                Your belief in Julius Caesar proves the existence of God.
                CARM poster

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by brightmorningstar View Post
                  You didnt address the point. There are two sexes with corresponding genitalia for sexual intercourse, reproduction is the function. It therefore means there are two sexes for sexual intercourse, not one.

                  Unless you can grasp this basic reality you will remain in a secular liberal haze of imagination.
                  It's not a "basic reality", it is your repeated claim despite a complete lack of any evidence.
                  "Everyone else is parroting science"
                  - forum flat-earther

                  "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." - Rev. Ray Mummert, arguing for creationism against evolutionary theory

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Tolpuddlematyr View Post
                    Nope. Morality is a personal judgement based on the instincts, knowledge and experience of the person making the judgement.
                    Your evidence is?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ferengi View Post

                      Your evidence is?
                      Yes.
                      Your belief in Julius Caesar proves the existence of God.
                      CARM poster

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Tolpuddlematyr View Post
                        Yes.
                        Avoiding the request - present evidence for "Morality is a personal judgement based on the instincts, knowledge and experience of the person making the judgement."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ferengi View Post

                          Avoiding the request - present evidence for "Morality is a personal judgement based on the instincts, knowledge and experience of the person making the judgement."
                          Too right I'm avoiding your request. I have seen in the past your feeble attempts at logic and your inability to accept evidence when presented to you. You are free to ask and I am free to ignore you. I have more interesting spots to squeeze.
                          Your belief in Julius Caesar proves the existence of God.
                          CARM poster

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Tolpuddlematyr View Post
                            Too right I'm avoiding your request. I have seen in the past your feeble attempts at logic and your inability to accept evidence when presented to you. You are free to ask and I am free to ignore you. I have more interesting spots to squeeze.
                            IOW you have no evidence - the atheist never does.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Tolpuddlematyr
                              edit.
                              IOW you have no evidence - the atheist never does.

                              You have never acknowledged the existence of any evidence for anything ever,
                              When have you presented any?

                              Last edited by CARM Admin; 11-08-16, 03:03 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X