is homosexuality OK according to christianity?
-
The word [Homosexuality] was not used to explain what sin it's catergorised in.Originally posted by shade343:When did God say that he disapprove of homosexuality? Since when was homosexuality a sin?
It all depends if the bible is interpreted liberally or thru traditional interpretation.
And if the Christian's belief background.
We need to study in the hebrew context of this issue.
cheers -
Nono...its just that you need to think deeper when you read the bible...Originally posted by M©+square:The word [Homosexuality] was not used to explain what sin it's catergorised in.
It all depends if the bible is interpreted liberally or thru traditional interpretation.
And if the Christian's belief background.
We need to study in the hebrew context of this issue.
cheers
-
i just hope u can read the bible bro.....Originally posted by shade343:Nono...its just that you need to think deeper when you read the bible...
-
haha...good...then we hold similiar views...Originally posted by M©+square:Just to prove if we are reading the same bible or not.
Maybe i'm the unorthodox one.
___
laoda99: My faith is similiar to panicTheory's.
___
I choose to say i'm a believer.
ur views sound orthodox to me...mebbe i the unorthodox one.... -
Me read the Good News Bible.Originally posted by laoda99:i just hope u can read the bible bro..... -
Good good...that was my first bible too...when i was in sec...Originally posted by shade343:Me read the Good News Bible.
perhaps it will be good u read again...if u want verses/references regarding this issue i can always PM u...
-
hey .. got any insights to share? I'm always interested in alternate interpretations.Originally posted by shade343:Nono...its just that you need to think deeper when you read the bible... -
ah.. this is for the moderate christians.. if u r not considered as moderate, the attachment i've sent will raise your blood pressure by at least 20 points..Originally posted by Icemoon:hey .. got any insights to share? I'm always interested in alternate interpretations.
alternative interpretation..
http://www.oursafehaven.com/articles/whatthebiblesays.pdf
i will not defend this position though.. just sharing.. -
I think the below is pretty funny
I am not gonna defend them too
Deuteronomy 22:13-21
If a bride is found not to be a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed on the spot by stoning.
Deuteronomy 22:22
If a married person has sex with someone elseÂ’s husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
Mark 10:1-12
Divorce is strictly forbidden by the Bible in both testaments as is remarriage by divorcees.
Leviticus 18:19
The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a womanÂ’s period. If they disobey, both man and wife shall be executed.
Mark 12:18-27
When a man died childless, his widow is ordered by Biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
Deuteronomy 25:11f.
If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife intervenes to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemyÂ’s genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.
I’m certain that you don’t agree with the Bible on a lot of its teaching about sex. And you shouldn’t. The Bible says clearly that sex with a prostitute for the husband is acceptable but not acceptable for the wife; polygamy (more than one wife) is acceptable; concubines for the king (acceptable), in Solomon’s case, the wisest king of all, 1,000 concubines (acceptable); slavery and sex with slaves (acceptable); marriage for girls, ages 11–13 (acceptable); treatment of women as property (acceptable); inter-racial marriage (not acceptable); birth control (not acceptable); discussing or even naming a sexual organ (not acceptable); seeing your parents nude (definitely not acceptable).
The one in italic is the funniest -
haiz .. the Torah cannot be interpreted without the Oral Law one. You all dun read the Oral Law, that's why some parts are so funny.
Christian commentators mostly explain away those funny verses as ancient prejudice and extinct traditions. Rabbinic commentators will show you what those verses really mean and how the message is still applicable today.
-
and this i have to agree with you... the Torah has to be read in conjunction with Jewish Oral Tradition... for that matter, the whole bible has to be read with knowledge of the OT before the NT is made clear.Originally posted by Icemoon:haiz .. the Torah cannot be interpreted without the Oral Law one. You all dun read the Oral Law, that's why some parts are so funny.
Christian commentators mostly explain away those funny verses as ancient prejudice and extinct traditions. Rabbinic commentators will show you what those verses really mean and how the message is still applicable today. -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
SIS, if you want to debate something that is not on topic, please post a new topic and we all can discuss it there... ok? lets keep the posts on topic from now on
I think the below is pretty funny I am not gonna defend them too
[b]Deuteronomy 22:13-21
If a bride is found not to be a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed on the spot by stoning.
Deuteronomy 22:22
If a married person has sex with someone elseÂ’s husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
Mark 10:1-12
Divorce is strictly forbidden by the Bible in both testaments as is remarriage by divorcees.
Leviticus 18:19
The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a womanÂ’s period. If they disobey, both man and wife shall be executed.
Mark 12:18-27
When a man died childless, his widow is ordered by Biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
Deuteronomy 25:11f.
If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife intervenes to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemyÂ’s genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.
I’m certain that you don’t agree with the Bible on a lot of its teaching about sex. And you shouldn’t. The Bible says clearly that sex with a prostitute for the husband is acceptable but not acceptable for the wife; polygamy (more than one wife) is acceptable; concubines for the king (acceptable), in Solomon’s case, the wisest king of all, 1,000 concubines (acceptable); slavery and sex with slaves (acceptable); marriage for girls, ages 11–13 (acceptable); treatment of women as property (acceptable); inter-racial marriage (not acceptable); birth control (not acceptable); discussing or even naming a sexual organ (not acceptable); seeing your parents nude (definitely not acceptable).
The one in italic is the funniest [/b] -
tAT IS FUNNY. WHy is tat off topic ? I pasted it from the website given by earthlings. It stated tat since the bible is so wrong about sexual issues, why lump in homo and say it is wrong without really looking at the other wrong rules. Or everything I write in your opinion is off topic ?
-
ah.. maybe he heed my advice of not reading my attachment..Originally posted by stupidissmart:tAT IS FUNNY. WHy is tat off topic ? I pasted it from the website given by earthlings. It stated tat since the bible is so wrong about sexual issues, why lump in homo and say it is wrong without really looking at the other wrong rules. Or everything I write in your opinion is off topic ? -
look at the thread... we are talking about homosexuality from a christian standpoint, not everthing else, if you want to discuss everything else, start a new topic and call it what you want... we can discuss it there.Originally posted by stupidissmart:tAT IS FUNNY. WHy is tat off topic ? I pasted it from the website given by earthlings. It stated tat since the bible is so wrong about sexual issues, why lump in homo and say it is wrong without really looking at the other wrong rules. Or everything I write in your opinion is off topic ? -
look at the thread... we are talking about homosexuality from a christian standpoint, not everthing else, if you want to discuss everything else, start a new topic and call it what you want... we can discuss it there.
Then it really should be in the thread because it tells the laws stated by the bible ! I didn't even add in anythign orginal from me, but cutand paste from an article tat reads "What the bible says-and doesn'tsay-about homosexuality"
OR r u gonna say the bible is not relevant to christian ? If the bible is not mentioned in tis discussion, may I enquire on wat ground should homo be sinful to god ? In fact it seems to be complementary to your coments about bible stating tis and tat yet conveniently forget rules such as the ones written by the author of the attachment. -
ah... to understand why he said those things, then u have to read the attachment, at the expense of heightening blood pressure...Originally posted by breytonhartge:look at the thread... we are talking about homosexuality from a christian standpoint, not everthing else, if you want to discuss everything else, start a new topic and call it what you want... we can discuss it there.
SIS wrote only the first and last sentences.. the rest can be found in the attachment.. -
BTW is every post in this thread strictly following the title ? Is all the other replies in the other threads following the title strictly ?
if people are all paying off their karmic debt... then the world should be getting better and better, so how is it that it is going the other way round?
which two verses do you think could be applied in daily walk and teachingwise?
Is these relevant to the thread ? U written it on 9th july and 10th july. By your standard they should be written in a new thread isn't it ? no wonder I see so many threads around but actually, the content seems to be a little... empty... In fact some evern have 0 replies -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
The author did not state that the bible is so wrong about sexual issues. He is only attempting to state the irrelevancy of such verses in today's society context. This shows yet another sweeping statement u have made.
tAT IS FUNNY. WHy is tat off topic ? I pasted it from the website given by earthlings. [b]It stated tat since the bible is so wrong about sexual issues, why lump in homo and say it is wrong without really looking at the other wrong rules. Or everything I write in your opinion is off topic ? [/b]
Earthling merely wanted to share the piece of info as it provided an alternative set of rules. Ur intepretation, as negative always, make it looks like the bible is so wrong about sexual issues.
Again, this is your intepretation from ur own perspective, not as Christians/Bible.
Many 'moderate' christians??? (can they be real christians) have tried digging into other issues to prove their point abt the issue of homosexuality. By claiming the bible preaches something that lacks today's relevancy, they make the faith look silly in non-believer's eyes and they themselves look silly as they, calling themselves christians, doubted the inerrancy of the bible.
If they believed parts of the bible can be irrelevant in today's context, probably they won't believe in the others too.
I do not have a 20 degrees raise in blood level. This text is another attempt to push thru the homosexual issue on the homosexual's favour. Its intepretation becoz of its 'alternative' nature, served as only relevant to homosexuals who want to believe it is ok to be a homosexual, not to Christians who firmly believed in the word of GOD. -
The author did not state that the bible is so wrong about sexual issues. He is only attempting to state the irrelevancy of such verses in today's society context. This shows yet another sweeping statement u have made.
Tat is very strange... if it is not wrong so is it right ? If it is irrelevant, it means it is wrong to practise on soceity now isn't it ? They say the OT laws is forever and yet when u look at these laws, u admit they r laughable. I don't really see it as a sweeping statement, they r correct. U r just really repharsing it in a different way.Earthling merely wanted to share the piece of info as it provided an alternative set of rules. Ur intepretation, as negative always, make it looks like the bible is so wrong about sexual issues.
If u tell me is wrong, u should clarify which part. Am I at fault to say tat stoning women if they r not virgins wrong ? Am I showing errors by laughing tat women hand have to be cut off if they grab a men penis when your husband is fighting with him is totally wrong ? Not wrong, so they r correct ? In fact in tis issue it couldn't even be classified as grey regionAgain, this is your intepretation from ur own perspective, not as Christians/Bible.
Then please read the laws and tell me wat the bible means at the stated referenceMany 'moderate' christians??? (can they be real christians) have tried digging into other issues to prove their point abt the issue of homosexuality. By claiming the bible preaches something that lacks today's relevancy, they make the faith look silly in non-believer's eyes and they themselves look silly as they, calling themselves christians, doubted the inerrancy of the bible.
Then tat comes to a point. The rules against homo is found next to the rules tat is laughable. U say tat we shouldn't doubt the inerrancy of the bible, then tis mean all christians have to follow ALL the laws, not follow SOME. If u have to follow ALL the laws, then u have to be prepared to cut off hands for a women to grab an enemies sexual organ. Since u can't follow them all, then according to u yourself, u aren't really chritian and shouldn't believe in the others section of the bible too. SO which path do u choose ?
If they believed parts of the bible can be irrelevant in today's context, probably they won't believe in the others too.I do not have a 20 degrees raise in blood level. This text is another attempt to push thru the homosexual issue on the homosexual's favour. Its intepretation becoz of its 'alternative' nature, served as only relevant to homosexuals who want to believe it is ok to be a homosexual, not to Christians who firmly believed in the word of GOD.
Firmly believe in the word of the god means all the laws r to be followed. However IMO, u only follow the laws u think is right and reject the rest. If not, u should really start to kill people of other religion now because god ask u to do tat. U should also burn their houses and town down as well. Is is simple really. Either u r a "faithful" christian or follow ALL the rules, or u DON'T follow any rules or u CHOOSE to follow the rules u like. Wat r u ?
Why can't homo also practise the same manner as wat u do by following the laws tat make sense and rejecting the ones tat don't
Dt 13
If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you to live in 13 that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it completely, [a] both its people and its livestock. 16 Gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the LORD your God. It is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt. -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I bet to differ. Since when did i say the laws are laughable. The only person whom are laughing all the while is u.
Tat is very strange... if it is not wrong so is it right ? If it is irrelevant, it means it is wrong to practise on soceity now isn't it ? They say the OT laws is forever and yet when u look at these laws, [b]u admit they r laughable. I don't really see it as a sweeping statement, they r correct. U r just really repharsing it in a different way.
Firmly believe in the word of the god means all the laws r to be followed. However IMO, u only follow the laws u think is right and reject the rest. If not, u should really start to kill people of other religion now because god ask u to do tat. U should also burn their houses and town down as well. Is is simple really. Either u r a "faithful" christian or follow ALL the rules, or u DON'T follow any rules or u CHOOSE to follow the rules u like. Wat r u ?
Why can't homo also practise the same manner as wat u do by following the laws tat make sense and rejecting the ones tat don't
[/b]
The only persons that fitted under the category u said are those 'christians' who chose to believe selectively are those trying to say it is ok to be a homosexual while ignoring GOD's laws. Yes GOD is forgiving. But GOD is also a JUST GOD and he couldn't stand the sight of sin. By believing it is ok to sin, they are taking GOD's grace in vain. -
I bet to differ. Since when did i say the laws are laughable. The only person whom are laughing all the while is u.
Not laughable ? THEN FOLLOW THEM. I challenge u to follow every single law stated in the passage AND Bible.
Deuteronomy 22:13-21
If a bride is found not to be a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed on the spot by stoning.
KILL ALL PEOPLE WHO R REMARRIED. KILL ALL PEOPLE WHO R NOT VIRGINS ONTHE WEDDING. U CAN ALMOST KILL AT LEAST 4% OF THE POPULATION
Deuteronomy 22:22
If a married person has sex with someone elseÂ’s husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
KILL ALL MEN WHO HAD COMMITTED ADULTERY. U CAN SEE THE NEWSPAPER AND READ MANY PEOPLE WHO HAD COMMITTED ADULTERY. KILL ALL OF THEM
Mark 10:1-12
Divorce is strictly forbidden by the Bible in both testaments as is remarriage by divorcees.
KILL ALL DIVORCEES. SINGAPORE HAS A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO DIVORCE. KILL THEM
Leviticus 18:19
The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a womanÂ’s period. If they disobey, both man and wife shall be executed.
Err.. ahem.. well...
KILL THEM IF U KNOW ANYONE WHO HAS SEX WHEN THE GIRL IS HAVING HER PERIOD ! KILL THEM
Dt 13
If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you to live in 13 that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it completely, [a] both its people and its livestock. 16 Gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the LORD your God. It is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt.
BURN ! KILL ALL THE INFIDELS ! KILL ALL THE MUSLIM AND JEWS AND BUDDHIST FOR THEY WORSHIP OTHER GOD ! BECOME A SUICIDE BOMBER, THEN YOUR PLACE ON HEAVEN IS EARNED !The only persons that fitted under the category u said are those 'christians' who chose to believe selectively are those trying to say it is ok to be a homosexual while ignoring GOD's laws. Yes GOD is forgiving. But GOD is also a JUST GOD and he couldn't stand the sight of sin. By believing it is ok to sin, they are taking GOD's grace in vain.
and wat is the point ? follow the rules above then ! God can't stand the sight of sin and so u should be the one tat eliminate them as he ordered. U r sinning by refusing his orders, u r taking god grace in vain -
Originally posted by laoda99:
ah.. let me try to clarify what i think the authors were trying to point out..
The author did not state that the bible is so wrong about sexual issues. He is only attempting to state the irrelevancy of such verses in today's society context. This shows yet another sweeping statement u have made.
Earthling merely wanted to share the piece of info as it provided an alternative set of rules. Ur intepretation, as negative always, make it looks like the bible is so wrong about sexual issues.
Again, this is your intepretation [b]from ur own perspective, not as Christians/Bible.
Many 'moderate' christians??? (can they be real christians) have tried digging into other issues to prove their point abt the issue of homosexuality. By claiming the bible preaches something that lacks today's relevancy, they make the faith look silly in non-believer's eyes and they themselves look silly as they, calling themselves christians, doubted the inerrancy of the bible.
If they believed parts of the bible can be irrelevant in today's context, probably they won't believe in the others too.
I do not have a 20 degrees raise in blood level. This text is another attempt to push thru the homosexual issue on the homosexual's favour. Its intepretation becoz of its 'alternative' nature, served as only relevant to homosexuals who want to believe it is ok to be a homosexual, not to Christians who firmly believed in the word of GOD.[/b]
bible (especially those from the OT) contains materials that need to be interpreted by men.. even if the bible is the word of god, how sure are you the men can always interpret the bible correctly? -
When God gave the Written Law to the Israelites, He also gave them the Oral Law. The Oral Law, by right, is not supposed to be written down. But the rabbis finally broke this law and codified it so today the Jews can interpret the Hebrew Bible in the proper context.Originally posted by earthlings73:bible (especially those from the OT) contains materials that need to be interpreted by men.. even if the bible is the word of god, how sure are you the men can always interpret the bible correctly?
This is a Jewish answer, not sure how the Christians here will answer your question though.