Does the bible condemn homosexuality?, page 1


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 15-5-2008 @ 12:38 PM by Neo Christian Mystic
No. It condemns pagan Ba'al worship including ritual sexual acts between two men at the altar of Ba'al. According to Leviticus 20:13 men committing this act shall be put to death.

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (KJV)

The Torah speeks of two kinds of sins, ritual sins and moral sins. If you study the text you will understand that this particular law concerns a ritual sin, not a moral sin:

The Hebrew word "to'ebah" means literally "ritually unclean". The Greek Septuagint LXX (3rd century BC) translated "to'ebah " into Gr. "bdelygma," which meant ritual impurity. Had the acts written about in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 been a moral sin, "zimah" would have been used which translates into Abomination. However both verses use a word which talks about a sin committed to the way religion should be practiced. The verses cite a Ba'al rite where men had sex with other men ritually to honor the Ba'als.

Leviticus does thereby not talk about homosexuality in general as a sin, but the act where men would have sex with other men in pagan religious practices.

And then we have Paul's version:

Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. (KJV)

This verse speeks of similar acts as Leviticus, but here Paul explicitly talk about married Christian men in Rome leaving their women (wives) to commit adulterous acts with people of the same sex. Not homosexuality, but adultary.

Conclusion: The bible doesnot condemn homosexuality, but rather ignorance. Read the verses in their original languages and remove the blindfold of false preachers claiming biblical fundament for hate against 10% of the world's population. The words used cite ritual impurity and religious sins in the OT and extreme adultary in NT.


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 01:31 PM by TheRedneck
reply to post by pause4thought
Perhaps it has been discussed previously, and I can see the importance of trying to not re-hash the same old arguments again and again. But for myself, I must say that this is first time my eyes have seen this interpretation and I am glad I did. Kudos for the OP for pointing it out, and I will look into this for my own peace of mind.

TheRedneck


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 01:38 PM by pause4thought
reply to post by TheRedneck



Hey, I'm not one for stifling debate. (Just reference the serious to-ing and fro-ing in those threads.)

This ground was covered in those threads, though. Big style. The arguments put forward in the OP were refuted from a variety of angles.

If people wish to rerun the debates, that's their prerogative!


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 01:56 PM by TheRedneck
reply to post by pause4thought
Oh, I had no intention of accusing you of stifling debate. Please don't take it that way. I was simply intrigued by the premise, having never seen it before.

I know the old ways were brutal, but I could never completely figure out why the verses on homosexuality were there. Now I have another train of thought to explore. this one appears to have some merit, since I know idolatry (false worship) is considered an abomination in the Bible... I would argue, the worst type of abomination even.

As I said, this will take some research and time on my part to completely research and digest, but any such endeavor that brings me closer to a true understanding of things is worth it.

My apologies if I offended you.

TheRedneck


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 02:21 PM by pause4thought
reply to post by TheRedneck



I wasn't in the slightest offended! I was trying to use one of those American "Hey there, nice to speak with you" - type 'Heys'. It seems I haven't got the hang of it yet. I'd better stick to my own lingo...

I'll just add that although I believe homosexual practice is described as immorality throughout the Bible, so is sex before marriage and adultery. The point is that the true church looks down on no-one: we are all in need of God's mercy, even if we may have only committed such things in thought (according to Christ's teaching).

I am totally opposed to singling out any section of society for self-righteous condemnation. This post should leave the issue in no doubt: www.abovetopsecret.com...


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 03:41 PM by pause4thought
reply to post by The time lord



The death penalty only applied when the Jewish nation was a theocracy - i.e. in Old Testament times when they regarded the eternal God as their Law-maker, Ruler and Judge. The same penalty was also prescribed for adultery and for fornication; it was not, as some people assume, something peculiar to homosexual practice.

Although the penalty is no longer relevant, the same moral law still stands today - i.e. it is the standard by which all of us will be judged on the day of judgement, unless we have found forgiveness through the Cross. Jesus stated in no uncertain terms that he had not come to abolish the law:

"Don't assume that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill... whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches people to do so will be called least in the kingdom of Heaven...

Gospel of Matthew 5:17&19

Jesus actually revealed that the law is far stricter than many had realised. Even looking at a woman to lust after her breaks the commandment not to commit adultery, in God's eyes (Matthew 5:27).

When people quote certain laws from the the Old Testament in an effort to say it would be ridiculous to apply O.T. laws today they fail to understand that there were 2 codes: the moral law, and the ceremonial law. The latter pertained to things such as food and clothing, to set the Jewish nation apart as uniquely belonging to God. The moral laws, however, were not abolished by Christ. This is clear both in the Gospels and from the N.T. book of Romans.

It is therefore not possible to follow Christ and continue to practice immorality of any description, whether homosexual or heterosexual. Christians, however, are no better than anyone else - they have simply accepted God's forgiveness for past wrongdoing and covenanted with God that they will seek to no longer live that way.

This is, in many ways, the key to understanding the New Testament stance on this issue:

Do not be deceived: no sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals [i.e. practising], thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, or swindlers will inherit God's kingdom. Some of you were like this; but you were washed, you were sanctified [=set apart to live God's way], you were justified [=made acceptable to God] in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

1 Corinthians 6:9b-11


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 04:25 PM by ravenflt
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic



The Torah *does* prohibit homosexuality, adultery, incest and sexual intercourse with animals in Leviticus 20.

What you may have not given much thought over, is that your interpretations would also mean that incest, adultery and sexual intercourse with animals is also permitted if homosexuality is. As all are written in the same context in chapter 20. What you claim makes no sense, nor is it logical, and the jews definately do not interperete these texts as you do (they wrote it, so if anyone knows how to understand it, they should).



reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 04:43 PM by darkelf
reply to post by menguard



Were you trying to add something to this discussion? I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 04:52 PM by menguard
reply to post by darkelf



If you don't that means your sin is bigger then my sin, I just sinned by placing you in sin, so it does't matter. Your thoughts are sin, your body is sin, so sin away sinner.

Lol.


reply posted on 15-5-2008 @ 04:54 PM by Neo Christian Mystic
Originally posted by menguard
reply to
post by darkelf



If you don't that means your sin is bigger then my sin, I just sinned by placing you in sin, so it does't matter. Your thoughts are sin, your body is sin, so sin away sinner.

Lol.


This is something of the more hateful things I've seen here. Apologise or claim gnosticism...
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



New Testament Fairy Tales
  Posted 7 days ago with 25 member flags
A Brief Rant On Religion
  Posted 2 days ago with 24 member flags
Obama has declared himself the messiah?
  Posted 3 days ago with 13 member flags