[Adam K]

Originally Posted by Travis

I must really ask why you Christians care so much about who other people have sex with. How in the world does that effect you?

It's not a matter of "Can I find a way in which homosexuality directly affects my individual life?" But rather "Does homosexuality go against God's Law (which is Love)?" Homosexuality as a whole is a "love" that seeks its own good (or just pleasure) and does not seek the good, nor the sustenance of the community. Love for God's truth and for others should shape the way we live our lives, not the "inclinations" of our hearts (which are evil).

[Travis]

Originally Posted by Adam K

It's not a matter of "Can I find a way in which homosexuality directly affects my individual life?" But rather "Does homosexuality go against God's Law (which is Love)?" Homosexuality as a whole is a "love" that seeks its own good (or just pleasure) and does not seek the good, nor the sustenance of the community. Love for God's truth and for others should shape the way we live our lives, not the "inclinations" of our hearts (which are evil).

Why does not homosexuality "serve the community"? Please tell me that it's not because it is not procreative. If so, my parents--my mother was unable to conceive--might as well have been homosexuals. Is that what you allege?

Please tell me precisely what is evil about homosexuality.

[The wirerat]

Originally Posted by Travis

I must really ask why you Christians care so much about who other people have sex with. How in the world does that effect you?

It doesn't affect us. However, is not our calling as Christians to reach those around us in the world with the good news of Christ? With the faith and beliefs of a Christian comes a way of living, and part of that, as clearly stated in the Scriptures, is not engaging in homosexual activity.
If we were to live our life, as if no one's choices affected us, and therefore we need not do anything about it, the world would be a worse place for it.
Your attitude, is unchristian, thats all I'll say of the matter

As many people have said, a man's sexual desire for another man, is just that, a desire. I think the act of engaging in homosexuality is the sin. One can have many desires, inclinations, or lusts. It is however, what one does with those thought/feelings/desires that makes it sin or not. That being said, there could be those, who have homosexual desires, but, knowing that it is wrong, and an abomination before God's eyes, have chosen to give those desires over to God, so that He may help them through those trials.

That said, why do people feel homosexual desires? I think it is the same reason one might feel the desire to engage in sexual acts out of wedlock, or to watch pornography, or to steal a car, or do so many other things. Those desires/thoughts/temptations are works of the Devil. He is constantly tempting us to fall in sin.
Before anyone says it, I am not saying homosexuals are demon-possessed, or devil worshipers, or even condemned to hell for the very act of homosexuality. Homosexuals are people who have given into a fleshly desire to sin. Its that simple people. They are humans, just like us, who sin, just like we do, tho their sin may be viewed more harshly in God's eyes, but I don't know that for a fact, nor can I prove it.

I strongly believe homosexuality is a choice, just like I choose to drink a cup of coffee in the morning. I have friends who are homosexual, and I've known some of them for a very long time. One in particular told me he decided he was gay. Just one day decided to be gay. That clinches it for me. Homosexuality is a choice, not a gene.

[MtlMom]

Originally Posted by Travis

I must really ask why you Christians care so much about who other people have sex with. How in the world does that effect you?

Travis, please read the rules for posting in Theology.

[Guitarman121319]

Originally Posted by Travis

Have you ever cursed at your parents (Ex 21:17, Lev 20:9)? Or ben a stubborn and rebellious child (Deut 21:18-21)?

Uh oh.

I have, but what does that have to do with homosexuality?

[Guitarman121319]

Originally Posted by Travis

I must really ask why you Christians care so much about who other people have sex with. How in the world does that effect you?

Because it hurts God! Me as a christian I love God.

Also (reffering to the other verse) I want to see you in heaven and if your a homo you will not inherrit the kingdom of God. Bottom line: because I care. I care about God, I care about you, and I care where you spend eternity.

[S.B.Nichols]

Originally Posted by kent|

I have, but what does that have to do with homosexuality?

I think the point is that sin is sin, no matter the form. It all separates you from God equally. Stealing a cookie from your mother is similar to homosexuality in that both are sin, and all sin leads to death

The problem with a person using that to excuse homosexuality is that it doesn't change what the word says about homosexuality, or stealing, or disrespecting your parents, or any sin. Its still wrong. Christians should speak boldly about all those things.

Originally Posted by kent|

Also (reffering to the other verse) I want to see you in heaven and if your a homo you will not inherrit the kingdom of God.

That's not necessarily true.

[Guitarman121319]

Originally Posted by S.B.Nichols

I think the point is that sin is sin, no matter the form. It all separates you from God equally. Stealing a cookie from your mother is similar to homosexuality in that both are sin, and all sin leads to death

The problem with a person using that to excuse homosexuality is that it doesn't change what the word says about homosexuality, or stealing, or disrespecting your parents, or any sin. Its still wrong. Christians should speak boldly about all those things.

True, but the key is to repent and turn a way from from your sins.

That's not necessarily true.

Acording to the bible it is. (Corithians 6:9-11)

[Bryan]

well, I guess it is time for the resident homo to weigh in. Being gay, for most gays and lesbians, is not a choice. It is a natural desire that exists. I didn't choose to be gay, I just am. Most people, will not choose to be a certain way that would make them an outcast (I am sure there are exceptions to that rule).

As far as 1 Cor 6:9 goes, I find it interesting that Paul, when he writes that verses, doesn't use the common word for homosexual in the Greek at the time. Instead, he makes up a completely new word that was never before seen in any greek texts. And when considered in the context of the word next to it often translated "effiminate" or "Male Prostitute" leads one to believe he is talking about those who hired temple prostitutes during pagan rituals.

So if Paul is truly laying out a prohibition against two men who love each other engaging in consensual sex, why does he not use the greek word for homosexual and instead point to pagan sex ritual?

[rock_show_host]

Originally Posted by S.B.Nichols

I think the point is that sin is sin, no matter the form. It all separates you from God equally. Stealing a cookie from your mother is similar to homosexuality in that both are sin, and all sin leads to death

The problem with a person using that to excuse homosexuality is that it doesn't change what the word says about homosexuality, or stealing, or disrespecting your parents, or any sin. Its still wrong. Christians should speak boldly about all those things.

Bingo.

Originally Posted by kent|

Also (reffering to the other verse) I want to see you in heaven and if your a homo you will not inherrit the kingdom of God.

I think you missed the point of Travis's and S.B.Nichol's posts. Here, for the record, is the entire passage you referenced:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. 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.

Paul is NOT simply saying that anyone who commits any of these sins (homosexual sex, idolatry, drunkenness, slander, etc.) will not inherit the kingdom of God. If he was, who among us would still stand to inherit anything? We're all guilty of the sins Paul mentions in some form. But look at the bolded segment of the passage -- those of us who put our faith in Christ were once defined by the sins Paul mentions, but through Christ, we have been sanctified and can now find our identity in Jesus, not in our sins. Someone guilty of homosexual sex/lust is no less able to inherit the kingdom of God than someone guilty of lying or drinking too much. The important thing is that we repent and go to God with our sins, whatever they may be, and recognize that He has forgiven us not because of our own efforts, but because of Jesus's sacrifice.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by Bryan

well, I guess it is time for the resident homo to weigh in. Being gay, for most gays and lesbians, is not a choice. It is a natural desire that exists. I didn't choose to be gay, I just am. Most people, will not choose to be a certain way that would make them an outcast (I am sure there are exceptions to that rule).

As far as 1 Cor 6:9 goes, I find it interesting that Paul, when he writes that verses, doesn't use the common word for homosexual in the Greek at the time. Instead, he makes up a completely new word that was never before seen in any greek texts. And when considered in the context of the word next to it often translated "effiminate" or "Male Prostitute" leads one to believe he is talking about those who hired temple prostitutes during pagan rituals.

So if Paul is truly laying out a prohibition against two men who love each other engaging in consensual sex, why does he not use the greek word for homosexual and instead point to pagan sex ritual?

Bryan.

1) Where does scripture ever imply that consensual sex between two people who love each other is okay?
2) There is no typical word for homosexual as I understand it in the ancient world that is analogous to orientation. As I have heard it, and mostly from gays or those defending homosexuals, but I have never had good reason to question it, is that the words out there are for the acts.
3) This passage does not stand alone. Romans 1 clear condemns homosexual acts as sin.
4)The word does not ever mean ritual gay sex. Thats just made up crap. It means soft. It is used twice by Jesus to refer to clothing in one verse, once in a second occurrence in the gospels, and then a fourth time by Paul. To make the jump from soft to ritual gay sex is quite a leap.

[Guitarman121319]

Originally Posted by rock_show_host

Bingo.

I think you missed the point of Travis's and S.B.Nichol's posts. Here, for the record, is the entire passage you referenced:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. 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.

Paul is NOT simply saying that anyone who commits any of these sins (homosexual sex, idolatry, drunkenness, slander, etc.) will not inherit the kingdom of God. If he was, who among us would still stand to inherit anything? We're all guilty of the sins Paul mentions in some form. But look at the bolded segment of the passage -- those of us who put our faith in Christ were once defined by the sins Paul mentions, but through Christ, we have been sanctified and can now find our identity in Jesus, not in our sins. Someone guilty of homosexual sex/lust is no less able to inherit the kingdom of God than someone guilty of lying or drinking too much. The important thing is that we repent and go to God with our sins, whatever they may be, and recognize that He has forgiven us not because of our own efforts, but because of Jesus's sacrifice.

I forgot to quote this sorry

My pont is that it is a sin. I never said the sin could not be covered. Like all sins it can be covered under the blood of Christ. [/the good news of the gosple]

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

Bryan.

1) Where does scripture ever imply that consensual sex between two people who love each other is okay?

where does it condemn it?

3) This passage does not stand alone. Romans 1 clear condemns homosexual acts as sin.

does it? It starts with the premise that Paul sees men who are not honoring God and exchanging the glory of God for idols. This was very prevalent in ancient rome. Paul on his misisonary journey no doubt saw countless Romans who worshipped false Gods and performed ritual sex acts as part of their idol worship. There are no doubt, homosexuals who do this. But what about those that do worship God and don't give in to drugs, multiple partners, etc? What about those who are married (though it probably isn't recognized by the state) that worship God and love him? It is natural for most gays to be attracted to their same sex. It isn't an exchange of what their natural inclination is (to the opposite sex) for something they aren't naturally inclined to. From their earliest of sexual urges, most gays are attracted to the same sex. They didn't wake up one day and decide to be attracted to the same sex. Dr Louis Smedes writes:

The people Paul had in mind refused to acknowledge and worship God, and for this reason were abandoned by God. And being abandoned by God, they sank into sexual depravity.

The homosexuals I know have not rejected God at all; they love God and they thank God for his grace and his gifts. How, then, could they have been abandoned to homosexuality as a punishment for refusing to acknowledge God?

Nor have the homosexuals that I know given up heterosexual passions for homosexual lusts. They have been homosexual from the moment of their earliest sexual stirrings. They did not change from one orientation to another; they just discovered that they were homosexual. It would be unnatural for most homosexuals to have heterosexual sex.

And the homosexual people I know do not lust after each other any more than heterosexual people do... their love for one another is likely to be just as spiritual and personal as any heterosexual love can be.

Are there people who fail to acknowledge God and fall deep into sin? Yes of course. But there is and will continue to be same-sex couples who are devoted to each other in a committed relationship that acknowledge and worship God as they should.

4)The word does not ever mean ritual gay sex. Thats just made up crap.

I'm glad to have a discussion on this, but if you are going to be abrasive, rude and unloving, I'll pass.

It means soft. It is used twice by Jesus to refer to clothing in one verse, once in a second occurrence in the gospels, and then a fourth time by Paul. To make the jump from soft to ritual gay sex is quite a leap.

Malakos, according to strongs, does mean soft or fine but also means catamite. A catamite is a male prostitute and it was very common during Ancient Rome. Male prostitutes were often used in ritual temple practices.

[Thrash]

Originally Posted by Bryan

It is natural for most gays to be attracted to their same sex. It isn't an exchange of what their natural inclination is (to the opposite sex) for something they aren't naturally inclined to. From their earliest of sexual urges, most gays are attracted to the same sex. They didn't wake up one day and decide to be attracted to the same sex. Dr Louis Smedes writes.

Natural? In what? A fallen world?
Just because it is "natural" doesn't necessarily mean it is as God desired it to be. One of the main beliefs which sets Christianity apart from many of the other world's religions is the fact that Christianity acknowledges that fact that world is distorted from how creation was meant to be.

[Thrash]

Originally Posted by Bryan

Malakos, according to strongs, does mean soft or fine but also means catamite. A catamite is a male prostitute and it was very common during Ancient Rome. Male prostitutes were often used in ritual temple practices.

I wouldn't ever use the Strong's concordance alone...