It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Did Jesus say anything about gay folk?.

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 09:34 AM
a reply to: Jobeycool

Christians did not invent morals so don't lay claim to them.
I think it is immoral to tell others what to do in their private bedroom, it is immoral to not let two people whom love each other show that love in front of their god.
I think it is immoral to follow laws written down by MEN (prove me wrong please) which were written in a different time.
I think it is immoral to cherry pick what you want in a holy book and choosing to pick a couple of verses to disguise your bigotry and hate.

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 09:37 AM
a reply to: Jobeycool

Well, 'the church' attacks and always has attacked everyone else's freedom, so it can take some of it's own medicine.

I would think that under no circumstances should anyone kill anyone, but certainly in this day and age if chtristians were going to try to kill homosexuals, homosexuals and their friends and families - numbering a few billion I would imagine - might have something to say about it.

That might be the perfect way for the church to try to end itself.

I have to disagree that Jesus said anything specifically about homosexuality. I still agree that in the context of the bible it can be argued that he maybe, maybe touched on the subject, but I've said it before and I'll keep saying it - Jesus wasn't specific and if he thought it was important, I'd say he would have been.

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:00 AM

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Jobeycool

Christians did not invent morals so don't lay claim to them.
I think it is immoral to tell others what to do in their private bedroom, it is immoral to not let two people whom love each other show that love in front of their god.
I think it is immoral to follow laws written down by MEN (prove me wrong please) which were written in a different time.
I think it is immoral to cherry pick what you want in a holy book and choosing to pick a couple of verses to disguise your bigotry and hate.

Recent man defined rejection of homosexuality as hate and bigotry.
Not a few decades ago, the vast majority would never have believed that the avoidance of and rejection of such sexual proclivities could ever have been deemed as hate and as bigoted. Therefore, the only thing that has been changed is our perception of it as those two things. Crafty fellows....simply invent terms such as racism and bigotry, define under those terms what you want the populace to believe, and voila - a few decades later and the newest generation is none the wiser to the indoctrination having taken place. In fact, they eagerly claim that they are now "enlightened and modern", perceiving what their same pulpit (media and education) taught them to think.

It's no different than a population not fifty years ago seeing a baby in a womb and today the population seeing a clump of cells, non-life and not murder. The baby never changed. So what happened? A group of people came along and changed the beliefs in society, so much so that many of its citizens brazenly and wantonly commit genocide through child sacrifice.

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:22 AM

originally posted by: boymonkey74
Oops forgot about this thread lol.

The thing is people choose to follow 2000+ year old rules written by men not God.
Times have changed and If they still choose to hate feck em.
The world has evolved and they will be left behind.
In a couple of generations people will look back at these folk the same as we look back at the racists who hated black people.
Oh and no one has proved Jesus said anything...just very vague things especially with the new translations which were obviosly translated that way to back up the hate they have in their hearts.

"I don't hate gays but"......Pfft lies you are homophobes it is that simple at least admit it.

But you have not evolved. You have moved back in time.Populations are marching their women straight back to the alters of child sacrifice and straight back into sexual worship practices such as temple prostitution. This is not evolution, it's de-evolution as that Phoenix and pyramid rises with its steady beat demanding sacrifice.
Like a hypnotist can get a person to see a fully clothed audience as naked, so too you are perceiving things in the exact same way. The hypnotist said you WILL SEE acceptance of abortion and homosexuality as 'enlightenment'...and so you do. Now, if a whole populace can be swayed to perceive things contrary to what their eyes actually see, can anyone not understand how it is that man is overcome? His thoughts. He perceives what is placed in his mind. He cannot see abortion as the murder of a child because somebody gave him the belief that 1) the baby is a clump of cells and 2) a baby is not a life. Therefore, he only perceives a clump of cells and abortion as a medical practice, not as a baby being butchered to death. Wonder why any who try to bring the truth to groups by displaying real photos of dismembered aborted babies gets instantly # down? The REALITY is there to see, and those accepting of the lies cannot, and will not, allow the truth to be shown.

It is no different with your stance. A group has literally convinced you that same sex rekationships are equal to gender and race. You bought it and it is now your belief. And, you cannot see the slow and steady removal of gender either, making everything asexual and gender less. Follow the trail man...look whose religions honour an androgynous god and exalt sexuality, and you will find the one who overcame the minds.

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:50 PM
a reply to: Year1

I do not agree with all your points and bringing abortion into this is absurd, but I do understand your logic just do not agree with you.

In my opinion, it is religion that has devolved and held humanity back. As a species we should be a thousand years ahead in Scientific discovery but we were held back because of religion.

Religion is a personal thing and should be treated in the same as male genitalia, we all know men have them but don't need to see them out in public.

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:56 PM

originally posted by: boymonkey74
A question for the Christians who are anti gay here.
Considering you all say the new testament is the true book of the bible the one that Christians actually follow well I can't find any quotes to do with gay folk from Jesus.
So If he didn't say anything but love each other etc why do you point out Leviticus all the time when it is from the old testament?.
When people say God is a bit of a dick you always point out that "That is in the old testament not the new one".
So why is it you choose to cherry pick what is right and wrong from the old testament? when to be a Christian you follow Jesus words not the old testament?.
Genuine question I may have gotten it wrong and I hope someone helps me understand it all.

To the OP,

Jesus never directly addresses homosexuality (as a sexual orientation) or homosexual behavior (in general). There are those who would argue on both sides, saying that Jesus mentioned homosexuality in an allegory or by way of metaphors and parables (either in a positive or negative light). Frankly, I don't see that in Scripture.

I believe that homosexuality is a sin based on Romans 1:26-27. I do not immediately use passages from Leviticus in building my case for homosexuality as a sin. However, I do believe that passages from the Old Testament help to bolster the case.

When people say God is a bit of a dick you always point out that "That is in the old testament not the new one".

I can't speak for all Christians, but I wouldn't respond in this manner. If you think God is a dick then let's talk about it. Why is he a dick? Let's go from there.

So why is it you choose to cherry pick what is right and wrong from the old testament?

I don't think I cherry pick from the Old Testament like you're talking about. Some nonbelievers like to point out that Christians violate the dietary code of the Old Testament (by eating pork and shrimp, for example) and they call that "cherry picking." However, what most fail to realize is that the New Testament explicitly says that Jesus declared all foods clean (see Mark 7:19). We don't have any such verse in regard to sexual activity.

In general, there is a great lack of understanding among non-Christians regarding progressive revelation (what it means and how it works). This often leads to misunderstandings. i.e. "Do Christians follow the Old Testament or the New?" In general, the answer is that we follow both the Old and New Testaments, but that the word of the New Testament supersedes the word of the Old Testament on certain points. (Please understand that Christianity is a diverse religion and not everyone agrees on this point. Nevertheless, I think it is the correct—and majority—view.)

If you want to delve a little deeper into soteriology (the branch of Christian theology specifically concerned with how a person is saved), then I would say that the New Testament supersedes the Old Testament in terms of Salvation. In other words, the Old Testament (the Old Covenant) is no longer in effect; it has become obsolete. The New Covenant (through Jesus) has done away with the Old (see Hebrews 8:13).

I hope I have answered your original questions. Feel free to ask more. I like talking about my beliefs on here.


posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 03:46 PM

originally posted by: boymonkey74
So If he didn't say anything but love each other etc why do you point out Leviticus all the time when it is from the old testament?.

Not only is Leviticus a set of ceremonial laws for priests, which is much stricter than the law for commoners, the people who quote from this book to exercise judgement over homosexuals, ALWAYS quote Paul in the same move. The same Paul who renders the Torah depleted and abolished. In fact. And this IS fact, homosexuality isn't mentioned in the Bible at all. All that is said is that (gay) priests are not allowed to sleep with their male lovers while at Temple campus or at work in the Temple, which would be around five weeks a year.

AND. Paul doesn't speak of homosexuality either. He condemns married men and women who followed local Greek and Roman law and customs which allowed married men to have same-sex lovers without it being considered adultery. Paul meant that Christians should abstain from all extramarital sexual activities.

So, not only didn't Jesus mention homosexuality, neither did anyone else in the Bible. But try telling these "Christian" homophobe hate-trolls that. So much for loving your neighbour and not condemning others. They are so narrow-minded and closed up I am amazed they manage to tie their shoelaces and feed themselves.
edit on 9-9-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: ...

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 06:07 PM
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

So, not only didn't Jesus mention homosexuality, neither did anyone else in the Bible

Jesus was an observant Jew. What does your understanding of Judaism at the time tell you with regard to Jesus' standpoint on the Torah (the GOD given law to Moses.

What was GOD's great issue with the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and their sin that He wrought judgement upon them? Do you think when GOD told Moses that 'A man was not to lie with another man as he would with a woman' was telling homosexuals not to practice missionary positions? The book of Leviticus was there to convey to the priests how to behave, how to minister to their GOD, how to be ritually clean and pure, how to construct altars/wear garments, because many of the cultures around them were observing rituals in a VERY SIMILAR way. GOD called the Hebrews out to be a distinct, particular and unique people from amongst the nations, through which He would reveal Himself.

You can argue that the laws and commandments in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy were GOD's specific commands to the Israelites to show themselves distinct and unique from among the nations, but you will find common laws and common themes shared to the gentile nations to display what GOD considers righteous and unrighteous behaviour. Whether you choose to observe or practice/obey/consent to that ideology is up to you. Such is the nature of freewill. But don't put your theological/social/cultural hangups in GOD's mouth just because they don't agree with the life you pursue. The fact is, ADULTERY came with a death sentence to those who chose to subject themselves to the covenant of 'the law'.
GOD is hardly singling out homosexuals in terms of 'aberrant behaviour'.

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 08:47 PM
a reply to: DarkATi

A great post, but I'm only going to address your question "why is god a dick?"


originally posted by: blupblup

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:44 PM
a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

Just curious, how is anyone born gay or straight?

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:47 PM
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Dunno, it's not important to me. What's important to me is that's how we end up and how we deal with it as adults.

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:48 PM
a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

Fair enough!

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:56 PM
a reply to: Year1


You are still stuck in a book, written by those who first thought a solid dome separated waters above (blue sky), from the waters below. The Moon, also doesn't produce its own light.

Later, through redaction and editing, the book later became geocentric to match the prevailing scientific view. Again, false. The universe is probably infinite. God made just humans right?

The rest of the inhabitants are spooky demons, wanting to drag you into hell. They know who God is better than you do.

He is a God of love, not hate.

Its pitiful you read the worst of the book, to defend your bigoted, hateful view of your fellow humans. Without your book, you would be outcasts. Haters, without cause.

NO one, has answered if gay people being treated as they are, is loving thy neighbor as thyself, not casting stones, treating each other even when in jail, like they are Jesus himself, or turning the other cheek. No, you hide behind shadows of morality, saying sex is bad because of abortion, as you smugly ignore mass genocide carried out in your religions name multiple times. Hypocrit. What about the babies then? The silence of even modern events like Rwanda speaks volumes.

Clearly, we must focus on protecting hymen's, and preventing gay sex. That is the most important thing Jesus has tasked you to do.

You are a new form of modern religious oppressor. Exactly the type of person Jesus told everyone to avoid.

If Jesus came back today, he clearly would stay at Pat Robertson's house, and lead the charge to stone all the sinners. Right?

You'll dive into a tribal war God's words, who, was just one of 70 God's, with El Elyon the highest. Or, "Paul", whose law was the Talmud, and on top of it, fit John's warnings about false apostles to a tee. But Jesus and the Golden Rule? What's that.

In my view, delegating most of modern Christianity to the garbage bin of humanities worst philosophical mistakes, can not come fast enough.

Very few in this thread get it. You are not one of them.

It is a long long long way down that tunnel of light. And the person at the end of it, is not who you think he is.
edit on 9-9-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-9-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-9-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-9-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-9-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 05:20 AM
a reply to: boymonkey74

Jesus did say that a man should not take place of a woman in sex and vice versa

posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 05:25 AM

originally posted by: BettyHill400
a reply to: boymonkey74

Jesus did say that a man should not take place of a woman in sex and vice versa

Where is this bible verse where Jesus is talking about sex and talking about a "man's" place and a "woman's" place in sex?

posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 06:38 AM
a reply to: BettyHill400

When in gay sex do the two engaging take 'the place' of one or the other?

If you mean pitcher and catcher, I'd been quite keen to read exactly the words that Jesus spoke on that subject.

Edit: Is Jesus watching me when I play 'catcher'? Or is God watching me? Does it make a difference if I'm 'pitcher'?


Is it just sex, or does it also include women wearing pants?
edit on 10-9-2014 by BasementWarriorKryptonite because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 06:49 AM
Wow!! This is a fairly fast moving thread..Get occupied...and three or four pages go by!!


What does any of that have to do with the deep disrespect for and the buying and selling of women for sexual and reproductive desires?

You need some practice here...seriously. I am well aware of how competitive women are ..from pubescent ages olde ages...and how they will disrespect each other even sexually
to gain advantage. Not all women do this mind you ..but it is more common than anyone wants to make public.

Don't bother with this tack with me..I have no use for High Maintenance women whos only skill is their sex and sexuality to control a man or get him to come off his skills and run touchdowns for them or their offspring.

I am not impressed with this type of outrage on the part of women.

Wow wow, you ladies man you! Your inability to form healthy relationships has everything to do with YOU and is no reflection of the intelligence and virtue of women, in general.

This is not worthy of your debate skills here.

As I stated to other posters....Peace is the real intrinsic and valuable commodity a woman brings to a man children or not.

Peace ..not Piece. What I have observed is that so few women know this do few men...The men having been raised to run touchdowns..without thinking about the nature of what is going on out here.

Here...try this

So why then are you defining women ( and men) by their gender and cubby holing them into in gender roles, like promoting the idea of selling women into arranged marriages when the SHTF?

LOL LOL LOL!!!! Zooooooommmm Way over your head. Sex and in reproduction...only!!

I think you are to easily lost in your emotional needs to be right and in the moral high ground. No problem...Noted!!

My point about SHTF is that they will sell themselves..for "Options" when the SHTF. Many are doing it order to beat the biological clock...before it strikes midnight Cinderella and it becomes pumpkin time. Until then working the system will do. But remember...they are all "Victims."

And by the are doing a poor job of cubbyholing men ...and doing it in textbook fashion..with predictability.
I think you are accustomed to getting away with this...and the default through on boards like this.

It does not work with me...I don't respond to such guilt programming and guilt politics.

The Race baiters and race well as the womens groups, and now also the homosexual groups have long overused this tack and been getting away with it. Now politicians are getting on the bandwagon with it because they sense it will get them votes.

Once I sensed this carefully crafted outrage and whoredom for votes...I no longer respond with such predictability or control when presented with this "Drama." After awhile and enough of it you can see it coming.

I was very pleased to see in Ferguson, Mo. that Jesse Jackson nor Al Sharpton were as well received as they hoped. Some people are catching on to the fact that these two are pimping them out for votes and power.

Now if they can just catch on to the women's movements...they are using the same Drama, Guilt, and Victim Politics as Al and Jesse. It gets predictable after awhile.

As a matter of fact...I am strongly suspecting that by the very pattern of operation...that the race baiters/race haters, as well as the women's groups, and the homosexual groups are all run at a certain level at the top by the same people ..or control groups. They are all..."Victims" and use/misuse...guilt manipulation and guilt programming. Thus indicating a common origin in their controllers. the way...getting back on topic...

I don't have to approve of Heterosexuals as well...and don't with certain ones...particularly if I sense that all they have is their sex and sexuality. And I know some of these and do not in fact approve and have told them so.

Homosexuals are the same way..nothing special about them if all they have is their sex and sexuality. They get nothing special from me.

What are you going on and on and on about public education for? You sound as if you've been home schooled by your myopic, creationist, Bible thumping mom!


Once thanks to you for clearly demonstrating my point about Public Education. An Education in Emotions and emotional self justification. I think this too is.... Zooooooommmm!!! Right over your head. ..I too went to public schools...I have spent a lifetime getting past it.

But thank you for making for me my point...for illustrating it much better than could I.

Thanks again,

posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 07:36 AM
a reply to: arpgme

From back on page 13 of this thread. I found this to be very interesting...and telling

Since normal means "usual" or "ordinary", yes, it is "normal" that a person attracted to their own gender would call themselves 'homosexual' and that a person attracted to the opposite gender would call themselves 'heterosexual'.

One needs be careful of what one thinks is the meaning of words. Even particularly words used in the Bible.

For example ...the word "Let." In older times..the word Let..meant to hold back or Hinder. Whereas today it implys condoning or permitting or facilitating something.

This is why at times I find etymology to be an interesting study.

"Normal" is often a word used or misused to default through without people doing any individual thinking.

For people who can think for themselves..there is nothing normal about a person defining themselves by their sex or sexuality/the flesh and then glorifying this in public..and then furthermore demanding respect or at least the silence or censorship of those who do not approve of this glorifying one by their sex or sexuality.

Once again..intelligent thinking people do not define themselves by their sex and sexuality and then expect people to approve of this or at least be silent and their silence ..even if gained by censorship....allow others to default through.

I don't like to do this because the woman just passed away..but I was never particularly a fan of hers...Joan Rivers.

I was very put to her trying to be 20 years olde constant surgery...artificially. I was also very put off by her antics as a Hollywood groupie/pimp...and hanging out at the red carpet describing who was hot and who was a 20 year olde.
I do not look at Hollywood as a good example or template to follow. It has become the same thing with sports and the gods of sports..not for me thanks. Music industry ..same thing.

I never liked this kind of boasting or self promotion...and I always thought that person with this kind of vintage could do better than that ...trying to be 20 years olde...forever.

But this is the kind of thing and investment that people do and make when they are heavily invested in the flesh.

I hope she finds some Peace out there.


edit on 10-9-2014 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 07:53 AM
a reply to: Lucius Driftwood

Again. Leviticus are laws for the Levites in particular, not laws for the general populace.

Jesus didn't mention homosexuality. In regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, Adma and Zeboyim, they were destroyed because of unsound religious ceremonies, including rape of animals and same-sex sex magic on the altar of God. Even i would call that disgusting and if I lived back then I might have wanted to torch the gasses underneath those cities and blown them to smitherines.

Paul doesn't refer to homosexuality, but adultary.

posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 08:00 AM
a reply to: orangetom1999

It does seem to me as though you're focused on the flaunting of homosexuality in public. If we can agree that the majority of homosexuals are not doing this, can we also agree that we can put it to rest?

I'm here assuring you that the majority of homosexuals are living room and garden types, but I'm also going to say that there is going to come a tipping point where christians are going to find out exactly what the end of things is like if they keep pressing the issue.

There is far more homos out there than you'd probably be comfortable imagining and I'm getting tired of this conversation. That doesn't mean I'm going away, that means I'm about to get pretty damn pissy.

new topics

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in