I homosexuality is an abomination and if so why?

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy

Miriam.....you missed my point. My point was that the OP did not mention this "second half" of the quote. The "second half" of the quote Miriam, if you have been paying attention, was brought up by PreTribGuy.

no, you point was to trifle on something stupid so as to make pretribguy look less credible.

and thats all you do, you trifle.

you enter a thread that references something biblical and then act astonished when people actually go along with the bible.

yes there are people in this world who believe in the bible.

Miriam...what does sex without marriage have to do with sex with animals? Is it the same in your world? Because if it is, I feel sad for the life you must be living and wonder:
A. Who taught you this? or
B. How you managed to come to this way of thinking on your own?

if you are having sex.... with an animal.... i think chances are your not married to it.

i feel sad for the life that doesnt have the mental comprehension to put that all together.

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Then normally things get a little silly when some of the christians try to explain this problem. Many christians claim they're no longer under old testament law and the requirement of them to put to death offenders of various biblical laws no longer applies.

but why is that not a viable explanation?

the jewish law was a shadow to the messiah. there were several parts to this law. certain parts like the temple and sacrifices where fulfilled when jesus died.

when he died, certain things charged. the standards are still the same, sex outside of marriage is still an "abomination". but what a christian does with that person is not the same.

matt 18:[15] Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
[16] But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
[17] And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

1 corinthians 5:[11] But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
[12] For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
[13] But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

so why the change?

the jewish system was a physical one. jews were born into the arrangement, not called by choice. stricter more immediate forms of discipline were needed to keep the isrealites morally clean (evidence of their history shows that they still went off to do what they wanted).

the christian arrangement is a spiritual one. there is no literal nation of christ. the gentiles are welcome by their choice, not birth.

the standard is still the same, the difference is how, when and by who someone gets the consequences.

I dont particuarly care how christian churches choose to operate, but it strikes me as quite hypocritical to use a bible to dictate how to live but then not only to admit the homosexual into their congregation.....

if the homosexual is not having sex, what sin is he committing?

reply to post by miriam0566

if you are having sex.... with an animal.... i think chances are your not married to it.

i feel sad for the life that doesnt have the mental comprehension to put that all together.

WOW!! So sex without marriage covers animals and people? This is by far the most bizarre and scary way of thinking that any Christian has expressed on this site in my three years here. To think that two adults that decide to have sex and are not married, in YOUR MIND, is no different than if they were having sex with animals is quite simply offensive and psychotic at the same time.

I trifle? I will state the facts once again Miriam, for you and your thumper friends. The OP mentioned NOTHING about sex with animals in his opening post. Nothing. The title of this thread is about homosexuality, not beastiality. You warped thumpers turned it into a discussion of both homosexuality and beastiality. Somehow trying to make the two appear the same.

I trifle? NO.....I understand warped, psychotic ways of thinking when I see them. I would be afraid to have all of you that think this way around small children because there is something very wrong with all of you! You call yourselves Christians? Would Jesus be proud of you? He would be as disgusted if not more disgusted than I am.

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
WOW!! So sex without marriage covers animals and people? This is by far the most bizarre and scary way of thinking that any Christian has expressed on this site in my three years here. To think that two adults that decide to have sex and are not married, in YOUR MIND, is no different than if they were having sex with animals is quite simply offensive and psychotic at the same time.

lol, if the rule is no sex outside of marriage, wouldnt sex with an animal be included with that?

how is that bizarre?

if you have a permit that says you can only hunt deers, that doesnt mean you can shoot at passing cars because they arent animals.

you get offended because you dont think about what im saying. you label me a bible thumper and then associate the usual prejudices.

I trifle? I will state the facts once again Miriam, for you and your thumper friends. The OP mentioned NOTHING about sex with animals in his opening post. Nothing. The title of this thread is about homosexuality, not beastiality. You warped thumpers turned it into a discussion of both homosexuality and beastiality. Somehow trying to make the two appear the same.

because according to the bible they are the same. fornication is the same sin and murder, as stealing, as homosexuality, as eating the bloody fruit.

dont believe it? no biggie, move on with your life instead preoccupying yourself with how anyone can be insane enough to believe the bible.

I trifle? NO.....I understand warped, psychotic ways of thinking when I see them. I would be afraid to have all of you that think this way around small children because there is something very wrong with all of you! You call yourselves Christians? Would Jesus be proud of you? He would be as disgusted if not more disgusted than I am.

you dont know the first thing about jesus because you dont believe in the bible. you disagree with about everything it says, so how can you claim anythign about jesus?

reply to post by moocowman

Originally posted by moocowman
If the law in relating to the killing of the homosexual is no longer valid then the law in relation to the homosexual being an abomination can be no longer valid.

Notice that the first principle of Law is to love God.
If you stumble on the first principle, the next 612 laws are worthless.
Men have doomed the world to remain in darkness because of their love of self and hatred of God.
They sit in the seat of God in the Temple, declaring themselves to be God.
Christianity has been crushed from its very foundation, up.
They take the side of Satan, in opposition to God, and take the adherents to their false religion, down with them.

Matthew 12:2-4
But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, "Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath." But He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions, how he entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone?

Jesus gives an interesting response.
Let’s take a look at what he brings up.

1 Samuel 21
David Takes Consecrated Bread
1Then David came to Nob to Ahimelech the priest; and Ahimelech came trembling to meet David and said to him, "Why are you alone and no one with you?"
2David said to Ahimelech the priest, "The king has commissioned me with a matter and has said to me, ' Let no one know anything about the matter on which I am sending you and with which I have commissioned you; and I have directed the young men to a certain place.'
3"Now therefore, what do you have on hand? Give me five loaves of bread, or whatever can be found."
4The priest answered David and said, "There is no ordinary bread on hand, but there is consecrated bread; if only the young men have kept themselves from women."
5David answered the priest and said to him, "Surely women have been kept from us as previously when I set out and the vessels of the young men were holy, though it was an ordinary journey; how much more then today will their vessels be holy?"

The priest concerned in this story makes an allowance in this situation for a couple of reasons.
The disciples would have fallen under the same jurisdiction as Jesus, just as the young men were under the same jurisdiction as David.
David convinced the priest that they were on a special mission, just as Jesus was on a special mission on the Sabbath and his disciples with him, with Jesus as their Lord.
Paul went on a special mission to the gentiles and his followers were only to keep these restrictions, to maintain their Consecrated status.

Acts 15
28"For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials:
29that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well."…

So we fall under the jurisdiction of Paul, as his followers.

Romans 15:16
to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that [my] offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

We are under a special exemption from the law, but only while we retain our sanctification, including a certain purity, including sexual purity.
Now we were not there, with David, but it could be assumed these young men were most likely to have been unmarried.
So, for them to have been with women would have made them ritually impure, even if they were otherwise entitled to eat of that consecrated bread.
Most of Christianity has fallen under a great error and in their conceit have denied the legitimacy of the Law.

Do I see homosexuality as an abomination? No I don't. It's certainly not my cup of tea, but who am I to judge anyone by whom they find attractive? Am I an abomination due to the fact that I like redheads, and brunettes? Should I be judged because I'm attracted to smart women?

So what if someone is attracted to the same gender. Does that make someone an abomination? Hardly. We all abide by the same laws. Don't speed. Don't steal. Don't kill. Abide by these laws, and don't be a threat to anyone else then what's the big deal what your preference of gender is?

Look, I'm going to be a little politically incorrect here, so I apologize in advance. As far as homosexuality goes, I don't want to see it and I don't want to hear stories about it.

That being said, what homosexuals do in their bedroom are none of my business. Frankly it's NOBODIES business but their own.

reply to post by Excitable_Boy

You warped thumpers turned it into a discussion of both homosexuality and beastiality. Somehow trying to make the two appear the same.

I was trying to point out that homosexual behavior was not being singled out by opponents of it.
There are other things that are detested equally.

reply to post by miriam0566

lol, if the rule is no sex outside of marriage, wouldnt sex with an animal be included with that?

how is that bizarre?

How is it bizarre? Very scary indeed. You also put sex outside of marriage in the same catagory as stealing and murder? This is all quite scary. Again, I wouldn't want you around small children.

So then, you must feel that if a gay couple gets married, then it is okay for them to have sex right? This is your way of thinking correct? Oh wait....you stated earlier that it is okay to be gay but not okay to act on it or something like that, right?

I'm still not sure what any of this has to do with having sex with animals. I think someone on here has a fetish about that maybe....what do you think Miriam? Do you have any pets? Do they like peanut butter?

you dont know the first thing about jesus because you dont believe in the bible. you disagree with about everything it says, so how can you claim anythign about jesus?

I know the story of Jesus Miriam. It doesn't mean I have to believe it. I have studied religion for a long time. It is just confusing for someone like myself that knows what the likes of you and your fellow thumpers are SUPPOSED to be like according to Jesus. You all fall tremendously short.

I can understand if some of you want to use a book like the bible as a guide. But to believe it word for word? Do you all have minds of your own? Sex without marriage the same as murder? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand how pathetic that thinking is. And there is nothing wrong with sex without marriage between two consenting adults Miriam.....give me a break.

Do any of you enjoy life or is it all misery and you all hope the next life will be better?



[edit on 11-8-2008 by Excitable_Boy]

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
what do you think Miriam? Do you have any pets? Do they like peanut butter?

i would never do such a thing, i wouldnt want you scratching at my door.

I know the story of Jesus Miriam. It doesn't mean I have to believe it. I have studied religion for a long time. It is just confusing for someone like myself that knows what the likes of you and your fellow thumpers are SUPPOSED to be like according to Jesus. You all fall tremendously short.

you know whats absolutely hysterical about that statement.... your right.

I can understand if some of you want to use a book like the bible as a guide. But to believe it word for word? Do you all have minds of your own? Sex without marriage the same as murder?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand how pathetic that thinking is. And there is nothing wrong with sex without marriage between two consenting adults Miriam.....give me a break.

i have a mind of my own. i choose not to believe you. does that piss you off?

reply to post by miriam0566

i have a mind of my own. i choose not to believe you. does that piss you off?

Sorry, but no, it doesn't piss me off. Why would it? And...I don't care if anyone on here believes what I believe. My faith is mine

reply to post by lombozo


Very fair, honest and reasonable post lombozo and I'm sure any reasonable homosexual would not take issue with your view.

You have at no point condemned which is a breath of fresh air, am I to assume you're not a christian ?

It would appear to me that, the less religious a society is the less condemnation there is, of acts or people .

If one of my children informed me that they were gay, 50 or so years ago I would have been heavily influence by the religious social mind set.

However, should this happen now, the dilution of religious dogma in my society allows me to think freely and come to my own reasonable conclusions.

The obvious being, who my child chooses to have a relationship with should not have any influence on the love I have for my child.

However what concerns me is that there are influencial elments in society whos way of life is dictated by some ancient mythalogical belief systems.
These elements riddle society and have in the past commited the most atrocious crimes against humanity in the name of their religion.

These people with some of the most barbaric doctrines and beliefs have been kept in check for some time now by secular laws preventing their indoctrinated bigotry having its previous influence on society.

The western world condemns Islam for example (and rightly so in my opinion) for its insane religious laws etc, yet many of the condemers themselves live a life in accordance to ancient text but are prevented by the reasoning mind from heavily influencing society.

One can only hope that the dilution of religious dogma continues and that by developing a reasoning mind the wests' religious can look at Islam and see how they once were .

reply to post by jmdewey60


Thanx for this response, I am still trying to wrap my mind around it, no offence dude but it is very difficult to make sense of.

You have to understand that as a non christian, should lets say, I be an adulterer my prospective christian employer may or may not hold it against me.

I'm sure this would depend on the individuals understanding of the type of scripture you have quoted. Now if it's difficult for me to understand its complexities , one can only wonder at the confusion of someone else who is required to live by these writings and whos soul is damned if they dont.

reply to post by moocowman


You were talking about, in your earlier post, about how silly it gets when Christians try to explain how some of the Old Testament laws are applicable, while others are not.
I was using an argument that would stand up to a serious theological attack.
That might not seem to be the appropriate response, in this situation.
I was giving an answer, maybe, that Christians could take into account before going ahead and throwing around accusations against people who seem to not be following their own favorite laws.
A lot of Christians feel that the old laws were done away with, despite lack of sufficient Biblical evidence for that assumption.
So, when they try to go ahead and apply some of those laws, they leave themselves without a way to support their position.
My view is that the Old Testament Laws are still in affect.
But, does that mean we have to all become Jews?
I think not, because these laws did not even save the Jews, much less the gentiles.
How can Christians hope to be able to live their lives without bringing upon themselves condemnation from all these laws they are not following?
Peter, then Paul were sent out to bring the Gospel to the nations and were given an allowance to not have to keep all the Jewish laws.
Along with Paul, the people with him were given that same allowance and the people they brought in to the Gospel were not required to keep any more than what Paul and his followers were required to.
In my other post, I was trying to explain how this works, exactly, to be living in a world where there were all these strict laws from God, but safely ignoring them.
As long as they remained under the jurisdiction of the Gospel, they retained this same exemption that Paul was given.
Now, all of Christendom is in this system, as long as they believe in the Gospel and follow the demands made of Paul and his followers.
That short list of requirements was to keep a certain degree of ritual purity among the followers.
In a way, this ritual gives us a status as priests in the temple that Christ built.
If we loose our status, by disbelief or rebelliousness against the requirements for purity, we fall back under the jurisdiction of the Old Law, that is still there to put us under condemnation.
So, if we, (meaning Christians) try to apply those same Laws that we are temporarily sheltered from, in order to condemn others, we put ourselves under that same condemnation.
All we can do is to warn our brothers to remain in the Faith.
Anyone who ignores the call of the Gospel, should be considered as a heathen.
One person in History attained the full righteousness under the whole Law, and if we want to put ourselves under it we have about zero chance.


[edit on 13-8-2008 by jmdewey60]

A lot of Christians feel that the old laws were done away with, despite lack of sufficient Biblical evidence for that assumption. reply to post by jmdewey60


Thank you for some clarity on your own position it is refreshing to have this sort of response.

What is most obvious it would seem, is that the volume of internal squabbeling within christianity, in relation to its own doctrines and beliefs is but compounding the christian problem of its own relevence in the current age.

Time and again non religious people have to put up with christians, jumping up on pedastals on TV and radio etc, dictiating to the masses how to live their lives.

I have personally spoken to christians and it never fails me how ignorant many of them are about their own religion.
I have come across christian lesbians and gays working in the same office as christians who believe homosexuality is a total abomination. These people have varying interpretations of the bible and admit only tolerate each other because of the paycheque.

Amazingly these people work alongside muslims and seiks etc and on the face of it, what better example of mixed social harmony can you get. Yet the truth of the matter is that, secular laws prevent these varied people from inflicting their beliefs on others in the workplace.

In this instance it is secular law that holds the moral highground, it is protecting the rights of these individuals to be of any religious or sexual persuasion and not be condemned or discriminated against.
This is the voice of reason, perhaps in this instance it could be argued that the atheist is preventing the religions creating disharmony or disruption amongst themselves.

What I personally find the most noteworthy of situations like this is, when these individuals are asked would they live with marry cohabit etc with each other, they would only agree (if at all) if the others complied or converted to their own belief systems.

This to me is quite staggering, these people tolerate each other, some admitting, contrary to their (interpretation of) religious doctrine, quite simply for money, at the end of the day it is the god of money they bow down to first and foremost.


Do I really want my children exposed to this kind of nonsense ? of course not it's insane, totally illogical and unreasonable.

reply to post by Excitable_Boy



That is the most brilliant thing I have ever heard. My faith is mine. It may mean little to nothing coming from me but I love it.

-Kyo