Christian Views on Homosexuality

iagainsti

Member
Jun 10, 2009
93
21
6
Yes, yet another gay marriage thread! If you're not interested, by all means pass this one up.

These are some questions I have for any Christian really, but specifically any Christian who is against gay marriage (which is many, I would assume).

I understand that the Bible has a few passages which condemn homosexuality as a sin, one in particular describing it as an "abomination." There can be no debate that in the Christian religion, homosexuality is considered a sin. There CAN be debate as to whether the fact that something is considered a sin in a particular religion should be cause to make it illegal, but that's not what I want to focus on in this thread.

What I DO want to focus on here are the specific verses in the Bible which condemn homosexuality. These verses are found in the Old Testament.

I have heard conflicting opinions from Christians on how important the books of the Old Testament are to Christianity. There are obvious differences between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament, and I have heard many Christians account for this by saying something to the effect that God's word changed with the coming of Jesus. It was no longer so much about the practices and strict behavioral outlines put forth in the Old Testament as it was about accepting Jesus' sacrifice and believing in him, as stressed in the New Testament.

So, it seems that to many Christians the New Testament is much more important than the Old. However, I'm sure there would be many (and I would be inclined to agree with them) who would say that whether or not the New Testament is more important to Christians, the Old Testament cannot be disregarded completely. It contains countless important and fascinating stories and accounts that Christians still cherish, and countless laws and commandments that Christians still abide by.

So, it does make sense to me that, even to Christians, the Old Testament should still have authority. So verses such as these...

Leviticus 18:22 - "You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination."

Leviticus 20:13 - "If there is a man who lies with a man as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death."


...should not be forgotten by Christians just because they are found in the Old Testament.

Of course, as we all know, these two verses most definitely have NOT been forgotten by Christians.

If Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 carry as much weight as they do in the Christian community, the Old Testament obviously cannot and should not be disregarded. So why are verses such as these...

Leviticus 18:19 - "Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness during her menstrual impurity."

Leviticus 20:18 - "If there is a man who lies with a menstrous woman and uncovers her nakedness, he has laid bare her flow, and she has exposed the flow of her blood; thus both of them shall be cut off from among their people."


...not regarded as highly as the ones forbidding homosexual sex? These two verses are both within just a few verses as the two which forbid homosexuality, and yet you don't often hear Christians preaching about the evils of having sex with a woman while she's on her period. But shouldn't the fact that sex with a menstruating woman is right next to same-sex relations on God's list of immoral sexual acts make doing so just as immoral as homosexuality?

Here are several more Old Testament verses...

Leviticus 20:10 - "If there is a man who commits adultery with another man's wife...the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death."

Deuteronomy 13:6-10 - "If your brother, your mother's son, or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, 'Let us go and serve other gods'...you shall not yield to him or listen to him; and your eye shall not pity him, nor shall you spare or conceal him. But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people."

Deuteronomy 14:8 - "And the pig, because it divides the hoof but does not chew the cud, it is unclean for you. You shall not eat any of their flesh nor touch their carcasses."

Deuteronomy 14:22 - "You shall surely tithe all the produce from what you sow, whic comes out of the field every year."

Deuteronomy 22:11 - "You shall not wear a material mixed of wool and linen together."

Deuteronomy 22:22 - "If a man is found lying with a married woman, then both of them shall die; the man who lay with the woman, and the woman."

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - "If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days."

Deuteronomy 23:1 - "No one who is emasculated, or has his male organ cut off, shall enter the assembly of the Lord."

Deuteronomy 23:2 - "No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord."

Deuteronomy 23:19-20 - "You shall not charge interest to your countrymen; interest on money, food, or anything that may be loaned at interest. You may charge interest to a foreigner, but to your countryman you shall not charge interest."


...that you don't often see Christians abiding by or seeming to give much thought to at all.

So my question is this: the verses in Leviticus which condemn homosexuality are no more holy than the other Levitical laws against immoral sexual acts, or any of the other Levitical laws for that matter...or any of the other verses throughout the Old Testament.

So why is the fact that homosexuality is considered a sin clung to so fervently by so many Christians, when the fact that having sex with a woman on her period, wearing clothes made of both linen and wool, charging interest to your countrymen, eating pork, and being an illegitimate child are all considered sins of the same caliber by the same Biblical standards? Are these of God's laws not as important as the one that forbids homosexuality?

I'd appreciate if there is anyone here who would be able to clarify to me what it is about the Biblical laws forbidding same-sex relations that elevate them above other Biblical laws put forth in the same books of the Bible by the same God.
 
Who cares what hole it goes in, or what hole takes it?

Not me, any imaginary God can condem it, not my problem. I do not think God cares.

I know I don't.

I have no need to peep in your bedroom. Have fun, love and make love however well meaning loving people can.

Darwin on the other hand would say, "Gays we have a problem." All sex is about propagation, gene mail. You got to pass it on.

Still, I think love has its own nature beyond survival of the fittest.

I am just trying to be true to it all.

Why do we love?

I bold the question mark.

You would not have me tell sweet lies, would you?
 
I think you have more questions about the Bible than about how Christians feel about it. You clearly need to do some Bible study, though, because there is a very large number of verses that can address homosexuality, from various perspectives. For example, The Bible is very clear on what marriage is according to God. Marriage is between one man and one woman. (Clearest in the NT) It is clear that sex outside of marriage is sin. Therefore, when a person has sex outside of marriage, they are in sin. This would clearly mean that since gay marriage is not God's plan, it is outside of marriage, according to God. Thus it is sin.

One must study the Bible in more ways than just topical. one has to look at various angles of an issue.

There is not a difference in the God of the OT and of the NT. Because of what God was doing in the OT, establishing a kingdom, and designing the boundaries, He worked in some really radical ways. In the NT, The kingdom was established by definition, and design, and Jesus was the King of that Kingdom. God began to work in a different way. However, God did not change in character. In the NT God became more personal with the people of the Kingdom, because He designed the Kingdom as a body who has a real and personal relationship with Him through the Holy Spirit.

The OT was elementary school, and now we are in high school. We can take in more, but, by design, the reason we can is because the Holy Spirit enables us to do so. God gave the laws of the OT to show mankind that they were not able to abide by a righteous standard. We would violate His laws. Once He established that, He made a way, because of His awesome love, to be forgiven. He showed that all through the OT, but in the NT He gave the true Lamb for the eternal, once needed sacrifice for all who will accept it.

The OT is as significant as the NT. One must learn to walk before they can learn to run. In the NT it is like this, as babies in Christ we need the milk of the word, but when we mature it is the meat that will be our strength. The OT is the milk, and the NT is the meat.
 
I have heard conflicting opinions from Christians on how important the books of the Old Testament are to Christianity.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...ods-law-in-new-testament-moral-judgments.html
There are obvious differences between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament,

It's called contradiction ;)

and I have heard many Christians account for this by saying something to the effect that God's word changed with the coming of Jesus.

Impossible. THE OT calls the law perfect and eternal

So why is the fact that homosexuality is considered a sin clung to so fervently by so many Christians, when the fact that having sex with a woman on her period, wearing clothes made of both linen and wool, charging interest to your countrymen, eating pork, and being an illegitimate child are all considered sins of the same caliber by the same Biblical standards? Are these of God's laws not as important as the one that forbids homosexuality?


Because they're homophobes and/or closet cases



Remember, these same retards think marriage is 'onw man, one woman', when God himself said otherwise
 
I dont see why this view is so difficult to understand.

We believe in chastity before marriage and fidelity afterwards.

This is a universal standard. Held to everyone. It be nice if you stopped pretending that we are targeting gay sex when we encourage everyone to live the same standard.
 
I don't think Christians are opposed to homosexual marriage so much because we pass judgment on homosexuals, but because we're afraid the state will attempt to dictate to us what we are allowed to preach in our own churches, and what ceremonies we "must" perform to maintain a tax-free existence.
 
I don't think Christians are opposed to homosexual marriage so much because we pass judgment on homosexuals, but because we're afraid the state will attempt to dictate to us what we are allowed to preach in our own churches, and what ceremonies we "must" perform to maintain a tax-free existence.





Actually that issue was taken up by Canada and has wording that a preacher would NOT have to perform rituals that he was morally opposed to.
 
I don't think Christians are opposed to homosexual marriage so much because we pass judgment on homosexuals, but because we're afraid the state will attempt to dictate to us what we are allowed to preach in our own churches, and what ceremonies we "must" perform to maintain a tax-free existence.





Actually that issue was taken up by Canada and has wording that a preacher would NOT have to perform rituals that he was morally opposed to.

We don't live in Canada.
 
Why haven't gays made their own church? Why must they try to infiltrate other religions?

Some gay person should start the "1st Butt Fucking and Carpet Cleaning Church of our gods". (God would be intentionally spelled all lower case to diminish His influence).

And yes, sex should be in the title of your church because let's face it, sex is what you are all about.

This way you could make your own Commandments as well. "Thall shalt not suck an enfudgened penor". Or "A Butch shall not lay with the Lipstick".

Why haven't gays done this yet?
 
I strongly suspect 'Paul' was a closet homosexual


it explains everything- never having a woman, his misogyny and hatred of gays...

OK, lets travel that highway for a minute. Lets say Paul was gay. Now, I want you to go beyond speculation here, tell me where the Bible says that he married a man. Tell me where the Bible says he had sex with another man.

You see, I don't believe it is a sin to "be" gay. The sin is in the sexual behavior. Paul would be saying to abstain, just as he said about being with a woman, if you could do that without violating the sin of sex. Since marriage in the Bible is always between a man and a woman, when Paul said getting married was a good thing if you could not abstain from sex. However, marriage ad the Bible teaches would not allow for him to marry a man. So, if he was gay, he did abstain from gay sex. As a matter of fact, he abstained from sex with anyone.

So, what does Paul being gay have to do with anything.
 
Christians are fixated on gays and considering how few there are as a percentage of the population, there just doesn't seem to be enough to go around.
 
Christians are fixated on gays and considering how few there are as a percentage of the population, there just doesn't seem to be enough to go around.
Odd. I'm a Christian and I don't give a shit what gays do as long as we are all treated equally under the law.
 
Christians are fixated on gays and considering how few there are as a percentage of the population, there just doesn't seem to be enough to go around.
Odd. I'm a Christian and I don't give a shit what gays do as long as we are all treated equally under the law.

You care enough to write on this thread.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top