Homosexuality and the Torah -and- the Christian NT

[Chuckt]

Because it's not true. Jeshua was so very specific about many, many, many things in your New Testament, but in terms of Homosexual acts, he was totally silent. And then for you to lump all of that into one carte blanche statement is, well, cheap and taudry, and I think it doesn't do Jeshuah justice.

What a shame.

Matthew 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Matthew 5 (Blue Letter Bible: KJV - King James Version)

1.of bodies given up to criminal intercourse, because they are as it were members belonging to the harlot's body

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

They'll just keep denying unfortunately, even though it's right in front of them. They have eyes that do not see.

They'll focus on the law or Jesus but they won't focus on Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:21 or Paul (as if Paul isn't part of the Christian faith or authoritative). They sort of pick and choose and forget that that they are trying to appeal to a Christian audience that isn't going to go along with their interpretation. I have other Bible studies where I found ways to condemn the behavior. They are trying to change the culture and public policy and no one elected them to be pastor and they aren't qualified or called by God.

 

[Newby]

Matthew 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Matthew 5 (Blue Letter Bible: KJV - King James Version)

1.of bodies given up to criminal intercourse, because they are as it were members belonging to the harlot's body

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

They'll just keep denying unfortunately, even though it's right in front of them. They have eyes that do not see.

They'll focus on the law or Jesus but they won't focus on Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:21 or Paul (as if Paul isn't part of the Christian faith or authoritative). They sort of pick and choose and forget that that they are trying to appeal to a Christian audience that isn't going to go along with their interpretation. I have other Bible studies where I found ways to condemn the behavior. They are trying to change the culture and public policy and no one elected them to be pastor and they aren't qualified or called by God.

The argument that you presented regarding Christ's words on marriage and sex acts outside of marriage says it all, you need nothing else. They know it, they will just never concede it because they are cowards. Let the world do what the world will do, just so your feet are pointed in the right direction, you can be at peace.

 

[DriftingSand]

You beat me to it, I've brought this up several times in other threads, and it always seems to get ignored. Imagine that??

Because it's not true. Jeshua was so very specific about many, many, many things in your New Testament, but in terms of Homosexual acts, he was totally silent. And then for you to lump all of that into one carte blanche statement is, well, cheap and taudry, and I think it doesn't do Jeshuah justice.

What a shame.

Matthew 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Matthew 5 (Blue Letter Bible: KJV - King James Version)

1.of bodies given up to criminal intercourse, because they are as it were members belonging to the harlot's body

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

I see you use the KJV. My favorite and hard to beat.

 

[Chuckt]

They'll just keep denying unfortunately, even though it's right in front of them. They have eyes that do not see.

They'll focus on the law or Jesus but they won't focus on Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:21 or Paul (as if Paul isn't part of the Christian faith or authoritative). They sort of pick and choose and forget that that they are trying to appeal to a Christian audience that isn't going to go along with their interpretation. I have other Bible studies where I found ways to condemn the behavior. They are trying to change the culture and public policy and no one elected them to be pastor and they aren't qualified or called by God.

The argument that you presented regarding Christ's words on marriage and sex acts outside of marriage says it all, you need nothing else. They know it, they will just never concede it because they are cowards. Let the world do what the world will do, just so your feet are pointed in the right direction, you can be at peace.

What ever made them of God?

John 8:47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye (they) therefore hear them not, because ye (they) are not of God.

 

[Gracie]

Fascinating thread. No input from me, but I will continue to read it.

Meanwhile, ol Bruce just can't see the irony of his own posts:

continued rudeness and coarseness

That's all I have seen from him since he began posting in this thread. Oh, and commenting on avies alluding to gayness of the poster he disagrees with.

 

[GISMYS]

The Lord can rescue you and me from the temptations that surround us, and continue to punish the ungodly until the day of final judgment comes. 10 He is especially hard on those who follow their own evil, lustful thoughts. 2 PETER 2:9-10==God let go of them and let them do all these evil things, so that even their women turned against God’s natural plan for them and indulged in sex sin with each other. 27 And the men, instead of having normal sex relationships with women, burned with lust for each other, men doing shameful things with other men and, as a result, getting paid within their own souls with the penalty they so richly deserved.

28 So it was that when they gave God up and would not even acknowledge him, God gave them up to doing everything their evil minds could think of. 29 Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness and sin, of greed and hate, envy, murder, fighting, lying, bitterness, and gossip.

30 They were backbiters, haters of God, insolent, proud, braggarts, always thinking of new ways of sinning and continually being disobedient to their parents. 31 They tried to misunderstand, broke their promises, and were heartless—without pity. 32 They were fully aware of God’s death penalty for these crimes, yet they went right ahead and did them anyway and encouraged others to do them, too.
Romans 1:26-32== Don’t you know that those doing such things have no share in the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who live immoral lives, who are idol worshipers, adulterers or homosexuals—will have no share in his Kingdom.
1 corinthians 6:9

 

[thebrucebeat]

Fascinating thread. No input from me, but I will continue to read it.

Meanwhile, ol Bruce just can't see the irony of his own posts:

continued rudeness and coarseness

That's all I have seen from him since he began posting in this thread. Oh, and commenting on avies alluding to gayness of the poster he disagrees with.

By rude and coarse I was referring to the swearing and name calling and playground stuff. I don't do that. Glad to see you give that a pass.
I think the avatar is hilarious. You don't see the irony?
Oh well.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Matthew 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Matthew 5 (Blue Letter Bible: KJV - King James Version)

1.of bodies given up to criminal intercourse, because they are as it were members belonging to the harlot's body

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

They'll just keep denying unfortunately, even though it's right in front of them. They have eyes that do not see.

They'll focus on the law or Jesus but they won't focus on Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:21 or Paul (as if Paul isn't part of the Christian faith or authoritative). They sort of pick and choose and forget that that they are trying to appeal to a Christian audience that isn't going to go along with their interpretation. I have other Bible studies where I found ways to condemn the behavior. They are trying to change the culture and public policy and no one elected them to be pastor and they aren't qualified or called by God.

There is an entire wing of the Christian faith called "Red Letter Christians" that do take their marching orders from Christ's words alone and de-emphasize the teachings of Paul and others. It is quite strong.
Christian isn't one thing.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Fascinating thread. No input from me, but I will continue to read it.

Meanwhile, ol Bruce just can't see the irony of his own posts:

continued rudeness and coarseness

That's all I have seen from him since he began posting in this thread. Oh, and commenting on avies alluding to gayness of the poster he disagrees with.

Fascinating. But as usual, pertaining to the actual hard information in the OP, no one has much of anything to say.

It's like children throwing pudding at each other here.

Oh, well, tomorrow may be a different day.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Fascinating thread. No input from me, but I will continue to read it.

Meanwhile, ol Bruce just can't see the irony of his own posts:

continued rudeness and coarseness

That's all I have seen from him since he began posting in this thread. Oh, and commenting on avies alluding to gayness of the poster he disagrees with.

Fascinating. But as usual, pertaining to the actual hard information in the OP, no one has much of anything to say.
.

actually, I'm a bit disappointed you didn't respond to my post....I was expecting better of you......

 

[Chuckt]

They'll just keep denying unfortunately, even though it's right in front of them. They have eyes that do not see.

They'll focus on the law or Jesus but they won't focus on Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:21 or Paul (as if Paul isn't part of the Christian faith or authoritative). They sort of pick and choose and forget that that they are trying to appeal to a Christian audience that isn't going to go along with their interpretation. I have other Bible studies where I found ways to condemn the behavior. They are trying to change the culture and public policy and no one elected them to be pastor and they aren't qualified or called by God.

There is an entire wing of the Christian faith called "Red Letter Christians" that do take their marching orders from Christ's words alone and de-emphasize the teachings of Paul and others. It is quite strong.
Christian isn't one thing.

All politics aside, there are some problems associated with the Red Letter Christian movement. The first concerns the group’s open theology. Bringing together various faith backgrounds is very tolerant and progressive, but theologically untenable. Founders of the movement include those who believe that we must earn our way to heaven and those who distrust the inspiration of the Word of God.

The second problem involves the group’s piecemeal approach to Scripture. To concentrate on certain parts of the Bible to the exclusion of others is unbalanced and dangerous. “All Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Epistles, for example, were written to instruct us on the practical outworking of Jesus’ teaching and are just as inspired as Jesus’ own words. Paul’s words should not be considered inferior, as the term “Red Letter Christians” implies.

A third problem relates to their interpretation of Jesus’ words. In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus was not trying to write national government policy. He was presenting Himself as the fulfillment of the Old Testament Law (Matthew 5:17) and the Savior from sin for all who would believe in Him. He clearly separated Himself from all political movements and paradigms when He said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36).

What are Red-Letter Christians?

 

[PostmodernProph]

What are Red-Letter Christians?

my how things change...back in the day when we said "red letter Christians" we were referring to fundamentalist Baptists with their red letter editions of the Bible who insisted on a purely literal Baptist translation of every word spoken by Christ......

You found part of the Emergent Church which I don't call Christian

bear in mind that the emergent church is in fact just emerging....and likely dispersing in various directions.....a reversing reaction to the "politification" of religion is natural and likely healthy for the church as a whole......

 

[guno]

The difference between Judaism and...

 

[PostmodernProph]

Chuck, how far would you take this?....

Bringing together various faith backgrounds is very tolerant and progressive, but theologically untenable.

is it theologically untenable to bring together Catholics and Baptists?.....or just Buddhists and Christians?.....

 

[Chuckt]

Chuck, how far would you take this?....

Bringing together various faith backgrounds is very tolerant and progressive, but theologically untenable.

is it theologically untenable to bring together Catholics and Baptists?.....or just Buddhists and Christians?.....

This is a technical question and I hope not a "Gotcha" question because there are many ways at looking at this.

I'm not willing to move away from sound doctrine in order to have unity but there are secondary issues that Christians can have with some people in order to do the greater good where primary issues are less important. The problem is maturity and some Christians can and some Christians can't. It may be against the weaker brother's conscience or it may not. You do have to be an adult Christian or be protected by God in this world.

I believe I can go and talk to anyone but there are Christians that believe they will lose their testimony if they go out into the world and talk to just anyone.

It is hard to bring anybody together. Imagine unity as a triangle. God is at the top of the triangle and I'm at the bottom on one end and you are at the other end of the triangle. Can we be brought together?

There are two types of unity. One is harmful and the other one is helpful. On the other hand, you can be unequally yoked in unity and that may be good or bad because some people help the weaker or they can also be hindered. It is something to doctrinally think about and also pray about. Ask God for wisdom and understanding.

With Christians and I'm using this term in the broader sense, we can be brought together on some secondary issues.

What I do find today is that some Christians are so far doctrinally gone that I can't work together with them on some levels but maybe on lower levels. In other words, they are so full of pride and it is so hard for them to be wrong that I have to be operating at 110 % and have God helping me or I miss my opportunities because they refuse to be corrected and they want to be wrong.

I just corrected some on another board and they stopped talking to me but they refuse to be wrong. I was able to formulate the arguments from what I know about the Bible but afterwards, I found two Kindle books with plenty of arguments against their position but they just refuse to be wrong.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Roman-Catholics-Evangelicals-Agreements-Differences/dp/0801038758/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1396412499&sr=8-1-fkmr1&keywords=christians+and+catholics+together+dr.+norman+geisler]Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences: Norman L. Geisler, Ralph E. MacKenzie: 9780801038754: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

 

[thebrucebeat]

They'll focus on the law or Jesus but they won't focus on Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:21 or Paul (as if Paul isn't part of the Christian faith or authoritative). They sort of pick and choose and forget that that they are trying to appeal to a Christian audience that isn't going to go along with their interpretation. I have other Bible studies where I found ways to condemn the behavior. They are trying to change the culture and public policy and no one elected them to be pastor and they aren't qualified or called by God.

There is an entire wing of the Christian faith called "Red Letter Christians" that do take their marching orders from Christ's words alone and de-emphasize the teachings of Paul and others. It is quite strong.
Christian isn't one thing.

All politics aside, there are some problems associated with the Red Letter Christian movement. The first concerns the group’s open theology. Bringing together various faith backgrounds is very tolerant and progressive, but theologically untenable. Founders of the movement include those who believe that we must earn our way to heaven and those who distrust the inspiration of the Word of God.

The second problem involves the group’s piecemeal approach to Scripture. To concentrate on certain parts of the Bible to the exclusion of others is unbalanced and dangerous. “All Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Epistles, for example, were written to instruct us on the practical outworking of Jesus’ teaching and are just as inspired as Jesus’ own words. Paul’s words should not be considered inferior, as the term “Red Letter Christians” implies.

A third problem relates to their interpretation of Jesus’ words. In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus was not trying to write national government policy. He was presenting Himself as the fulfillment of the Old Testament Law (Matthew 5:17) and the Savior from sin for all who would believe in Him. He clearly separated Himself from all political movements and paradigms when He said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36).

What are Red-Letter Christians?

Why are you posting the commentary from a sect that doesn't like the Red Letter Christian theology? To show what I already stated? That "Christian" doesn't simply mean one thing?
I know!
That was my point!
We agree!

 

[thebrucebeat]

Chuck, how far would you take this?....

Bringing together various faith backgrounds is very tolerant and progressive, but theologically untenable.

is it theologically untenable to bring together Catholics and Baptists?.....or just Buddhists and Christians?.....

This is a technical question and I hope not a "Gotcha" question because there are many ways at looking at this.

I'm not willing to move away from sound doctrine in order to have unity but there are secondary issues that Christians can have with some people in order to do the greater good where primary issues are less important. The problem is maturity and some Christians can and some Christians can't. It may be against the weaker brother's conscience or it may not. You do have to be an adult Christian or be protected by God in this world.

I believe I can go and talk to anyone but there are Christians that believe they will lose their testimony if they go out into the world and talk to just anyone.

It is hard to bring anybody together. Imagine unity as a triangle. God is at the top of the triangle and I'm at the bottom on one end and you are at the other end of the triangle. Can we be brought together?

There are two types of unity. One is harmful and the other one is helpful. On the other hand, you can be unequally yoked in unity and that may be good or bad because some people help the weaker or they can also be hindered. It is something to doctrinally think about and also pray about. Ask God for wisdom and understanding.

With Christians and I'm using this term in the broader sense, we can be brought together on some secondary issues.

What I do find today is that some Christians are so far doctrinally gone that I can't work together with them on some levels but maybe on lower levels. In other words, they are so full of pride and it is so hard for them to be wrong that I have to be operating at 110 % and have God helping me or I miss my opportunities because they refuse to be corrected and they want to be wrong.

I just corrected some on another board and they stopped talking to me but they refuse to be wrong. I was able to formulate the arguments from what I know about the Bible but afterwards, I found two Kindle books with plenty of arguments against their position but they just refuse to be wrong.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Roman-Catholics-Evangelicals-Agreements-Differences/dp/0801038758/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1396412499&sr=8-1-fkmr1&keywords=christians+and+catholics+together+dr.+norman+geisler]Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences: Norman L. Geisler, Ralph E. MacKenzie: 9780801038754: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

They would probably feel the same way about you and your theology. You refuse to be wrong, as your whole post assumes that it is a given that you are right and your view of god is inerrant.
Reading your post actually made me giggle.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The difference between Judaism and...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZW-NKGXFGg

Excellent discussion between those two gentlemen, and very civil. That was an interesting discourse.

Not exactly the topic of the OP, but a good corollary. Thanks for the information, [MENTION=48060]guno[/MENTION].

 

[Statistikhengst]

If you all don't mind casting another look at the OP, some things to consider.

The OP mentions that Homosexuality has been mentioned on a number of threads in USMB, and invariably, religion is justified for the condemnation of Homosexuality.

So, I went to the Tanakh and found exactly two, and no more than two, verses that deal very directly with homosexual acts, not necessarily with Homosexuality itself. That's two verses, out of 5,888 verses in the Torah alone and out of around 27,250 in the entire Tanakh, depending on how you count some verses.

That is just 0.03% of the Torah (Pentateuch, 5 books of "Moses") and a microscopic 0.007% of the entire Tanakh that concerns itself with homosexual acts.

That's it.

In the Christian New Testament, I pointed out that Yeshua himself never addressed Homosexuality or any homosexual acts in specific at all.

Now, I saw some very evasive arguments that Yeshuah, by clearly outlining marriage as between one man and one woman, had automatically spoke against Homosexuality. Really? That's the best argument to be made? I think that is very, very weak sauce. Yeshuah was so blazingly clear and detailed on so many things. Why not on this topic?

Anyone done the statistics yet on how many verses in the New Testament deal specifically with homosexual acts at all?

Hint: there are 7,956 verses in the NT.

 

[DriftingSand]

If you all don't mind casting another look at the OP, some things to consider.

The OP mentions that Homosexuality has been mentioned on a number of threads in USMB, and invariably, religion is justified for the condemnation of Homosexuality.

So, I went to the Tanakh and found exactly two, and no more than two, verses that deal very directly with homosexual acts, not necessarily with Homosexuality itself. That's two verses, out of 5,888 verses in the Torah alone and out of around 27,250 in the entire Tanakh, depending on how you count some verses.

That is just 0.03% of the Torah (Pentateuch, 5 books of "Moses") and a microscopic 0.007% of the entire Tanakh that concerns itself with homosexual acts.

That's it.

In the Christian New Testament, I pointed out that Yeshua himself never addressed Homosexuality or any homosexual acts in specific at all.

Now, I saw some very evasive arguments that Yeshuah, by clearly outlining marriage as between one man and one woman, had automatically spoke against Homosexuality. Really? That's the best argument to be made? I think that is very, very weak sauce. Yeshuah was so blazingly clear and detailed on so many things. Why not on this topic?

Anyone done the statistics yet on how many verses in the New Testament deal specifically with homosexual acts at all?

Hint: there are 7,956 verses in the NT.

In my opinion how a person "acts" defines the person. People who steal all the time are habitual thieves. People who often lie are liars. So ... people who commit homosexual acts are homosexuals. That means that if God speaks out against a particular act even once then He's speaking out against the mindset that leads to the act.

I was reading a portion of the New Testament this morning and came across this:

Jude 1:7, "Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."

The city of Sodom has become the root word for "sodomy." But an in-depth study of Sodom and Gomorrah will reveal that they were cities of unbridled sexual license and debauchery (including rampant homosexuality). Some of the men of that region sought the angels that Lot sought to protect by offering his daughters instead. There's lots more to the story but I have to get ready for work.