Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
July 25, 2014, 04:26:23 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Author: What the Bible really says about homosexuality  (Read 8376 times)
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« on: May 15, 2012, 06:07:35 PM »

religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/15/my-take-what-the-bible-really-says-about-homosexuality/?hpt=hp_c1

My Take: What the Bible really says about homosexuality

Editor's note: Daniel A. Helminiak, who was ordained a priest in Rome, is a theologian, psychotherapist and author of “What the Bible Really Says about homosexuality" and books on contemporary spirituality. He is a professor of psychology at the University of West Georgia.

By Daniel A. Helminiak, Special to CNN

President Barack Obama’s support of same-sex marriage, like blood in the water, has conservative sharks circling for a kill. In a nation that touts separation of religion and government, religious-based arguments command this battle. Lurking beneath anti-gay forays, you inevitably find religion and, above all, the Bible.

We now face religious jingoism, the imposition of personal beliefs on the whole pluralistic society. Worse still, these beliefs are irrational, just a fiction of blind conviction. Nowhere does the Bible actually oppose homosexuality.

In the past 60 years, we have learned more about sex, by far, than in preceding millennia. Is it likely that an ancient people, who thought the male was the basic biological model and the world flat, understood homosexuality as we do today? Could they have even addressed the questions about homosexuality that we grapple with today? Of course not.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

Hard evidence supports this commonsensical expectation. Taken on its own terms, read in the original languages, placed back into its historical context, the Bible is ho-hum on homosexuality, unless – as with heterosexuality – injustice and abuse are involved.

That, in fact, was the case among the Sodomites (Genesis 19), whose experience is frequently cited by modern anti-gay critics. The Sodomites wanted to rape the visitors whom Lot, the one just man in the city, welcomed in hospitality for the night.

The Bible itself is lucid on the sin of Sodom: pride, lack of concern for the poor and needy (Ezekiel 16:48-49); hatred of strangers and cruelty to guests (Wisdom 19:13); arrogance (Sirach/Ecclesiaticus 16:Cool; evildoing, injustice, oppression of the widow and orphan (Isaiah 1:17); adultery (in those days, the use of another man’s property), and lying (Jeremiah 23:12).

But nowhere are same-sex acts named as the sin of Sodom. That intended gang rape only expressed the greater sin, condemned in the Bible from cover to cover: hatred, injustice, cruelty, lack of concern for others. Hence, Jesus says “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 19:19; Mark 12:31); and “By this will they know you are my disciples” (John 13:35).

How inverted these values have become! In the name of Jesus, evangelicals and Catholic bishops make sex the Christian litmus test and are willing to sacrifice the social safety net in return.

The longest biblical passage on male-male sex is Romans 1:26-27: "Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another."

The Greek term para physin has been translated unnatural; it should read atypical or unusual. In the technical sense, yes, the Stoic philosophers did use para physin to mean unnatural, but this term also had a widespread popular meaning. It is this latter meaning that informs Paul's writing. It carries no ethical condemnation.

Compare the passage on male-male sex to Romans 11:24. There, Paul applies the term para physin to God. God grafted the Gentiles into the Jewish people, a wild branch into a cultivated vine. Not your standard practice! An unusual thing to do — atypical, nothing more. The anti-gay "unnatural" hullabaloo rests on a mistranslation.

Besides, Paul used two other words to describe male-male sex: dishonorable (1:24, 26) and unseemly (1:27). But for Paul, neither carried ethical weight. In 2 Corinthians 6:8 and 11:21, Paul says that even he was held in dishonor — for preaching Christ. Clearly, these words merely indicate social disrepute, not truly unethical behavior.

In this passage Paul is referring to the ancient Jewish Law: Leviticus 18:22, the “abomination” of a man’s lying with another man. Paul sees male-male sex as an impurity, a taboo, uncleanness — in other words, “abomination.” Introducing this discussion in 1:24, he says so outright: "God gave them up … to impurity."

But Jesus taught lucidly that Jewish requirements for purity — varied cultural traditions — do not matter before God. What matters is purity of heart.

“It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles,” reads Matthew 15. “What comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this is what defiles. For out of the heart come evil intentions, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile.”

Or again, Jesus taught, “Everyone who looks at a women with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Jesus rejected the purity requirements of the Jewish Law.

In calling it unclean, Paul was not condemning male-male sex. He had terms to express condemnation. Before and after his section on sex, he used truly condemnatory terms: godless, evil, wicked or unjust, not to be done. But he never used ethical terms around that issue of sex.

As for marriage, again, the Bible is more liberal than we hear today. The Jewish patriarchs had many wives and concubines. David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, and Daniel and the palace master were probably lovers.

The Bible’s Song of Songs is a paean to romantic love with no mention of children or a married couple. Jesus never mentioned same-sex behaviors, although he did heal the “servant” — pais, a Greek term for male lover — of the Roman Centurion.
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40755


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2012, 06:48:31 PM »


But nowhere are same-sex acts named as the sin of Sodom. That intended gang rape only expressed the greater sin, condemned in the Bible from cover to cover: hatred, injustice, cruelty, lack of concern for others. Hence, Jesus says “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 19:19; Mark 12:31); and “By this will they know you are my disciples” (John 13:35).


Not true.  Second to the last book of the New Testament:  

Jude 1:6-7
New King James Version (NKJV)
6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude+1%3A6-7&version=NKJV
Report to moderator   Logged
abijahmaniaco
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1554


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2012, 06:52:25 PM »

lol at homos trying to justify their lusts with the bible. fucking sad, pathetic, and desperate.
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2012, 07:01:59 PM »

Not true.  Second to the last book of the New Testament:  

Jude 1:6-7
New King James Version (NKJV)
6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude+1%3A6-7&version=NKJV

Perhaps, but kind of indirect and not detailed.  Could have just meant whoring around. 
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15746


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2012, 07:13:22 PM »

Not true.  Second to the last book of the New Testament:  

Jude 1:6-7
New King James Version (NKJV)
6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude+1%3A6-7&version=NKJV

YAWN!!! Gay activists, trying to use Scripture to justify homosexuality, need to invest in "Hooked On Phonics". The text is so plain, it's ridiculous.

NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, from Genesis to Revelation, says that homosexuality is acceptable.

As usual, they're using the old "they didn't understand homosexuality as we do today" routine. What part of, "you shall NOT lie with a man as one lies with a woman" don't they understand. There is no mistranslation here. Old Testament or New Testament, it's as plain as day.

"Abusers of themselves with mankind".....Gee, I wonder to what group of people that refers  Roll Eyes .
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40755


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2012, 07:16:25 PM »

Perhaps, but kind of indirect and not detailed.  Could have just meant whoring around. 

It directly contradicts the author's contention.  The reference to "sexual immorality" could have been talking just about whoring around.  The reference to "strange flesh" was clearly talking about homosexuality. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40755


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2012, 07:17:34 PM »

YAWN!!! Gay activists, trying to use Scripture to justify homosexuality, need to invest in "Hooked On Phonics". The text is so plain, it's ridiculous.

NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, from Genesis to Revelation, says that homosexuality is acceptable.

As usual, they're using the old "they didn't understand homosexuality as we do today" routine. What part of, "you shall NOT lie with a man as one lies with a woman" don't they understand. There is no mistranslation here. Old Testament or New Testament, it's as plain as day.

"Abusers of themselves with mankind".....Gee, I wonder to what group of people that refers  Roll Eyes .

Yeah.  There are some subjects in the Bible that are not entirely clear.  This isn't one of them.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2012, 07:20:38 PM »

even if homosexual sex is against parts of the Bible

does it say anything about homosexuality? I think many people confuse the two.
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15746


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2012, 07:25:24 PM »

Jesus didn't reject the purity laws. On the contrary, He took them one step further. He focused on the heart.

The heart of adultery is lust. Is this author actually stupid enough to suggest that lusting after a woman is wrong but lusting after a MAN is right? How cracked can you be?

Jesus also stated, "Do you not know that, from the beginning, He created them MALE and FEMALE, MALE and FEMALE created He them".

There's a ringing endorsement for homosexuality, right there!!
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2012, 07:27:59 PM »

Jesus didn't reject the purity laws. On the contrary, He took them one step further. He focused on the heart.

The heart of adultery is lust. Is this author actually stupid enough to suggest that lusting after a woman is wrong but lusting after a MAN is right? How cracked can you be?

Jesus also stated, "Do you not know that, from the beginning, He created them MALE and FEMALE, MALE and FEMALE created He them".

There's a ringing endorsement for homosexuality, right there!!

How old are you?  Huh

Just because it doesn't endorse x, doesn't mean it condemns x

I think by using "lust" you are again confusing homosexual sex with homosexuality.

Sex doesn't have to be in the picture.
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15746


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2012, 07:28:30 PM »

even if homosexual sex is against parts of the Bible

does it say anything about homosexuality? I think many people confuse the two.

Romans 1: 26-27 covers that one:

 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. 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.

No matter where you look, anything remotely resembling what we call homosexuality is seen in but one light: SINFUL.
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2012, 07:29:05 PM »

It directly contradicts the author's contention.  The reference to "sexual immorality" could have been talking just about whoring around.  The reference to "strange flesh" was clearly talking about homosexuality. 

How so?  I don't see it.  strange flesh?  Heck, it could have been sex with animals.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2012, 07:31:16 PM »

Romans 1: 26-27 covers that one:

 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. 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.

No matter where you look, anything remotely resembling what we call homosexuality is seen in but one light: SINFUL.

"lust" again.

I've read that 4 times so far. That passage still seems focused on the sex part. Huh
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15746


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2012, 07:32:01 PM »

How old are you?  Huh

Just because it doesn't endorse x, doesn't mean it condemns x

I think by using "lust" you are again confusing homosexual sex with homosexuality.

Sex doesn't have to be in the picture.


SUUUUURE!! Two guys can have the hots for each, as long as they don't Brokeback each other!!

"X" has been condemned multiple times in Scripture. In the Old Testament, it was a capital offense (safe to say, that's a condemnation).

"Vile affections"....Gee, I wonder if that's a condemnation.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2012, 07:34:31 PM »

SUUUUURE!! Two guys can have the hots for each, as long as they don't Brokeback each other!!

"X" has been condemned multiple times in Scripture. In the Old Testament, it was a capital offense (safe to say, that's a condemnation).

"Vile affections"....Gee, I wonder if that's a condemnation.

isn't lust a vile affection?  Huh

All I see here is lust and homosexual sex.

I still see nothing about homosexuality. Is your conception of 'love' really this animalistic?
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15746


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 15, 2012, 07:35:59 PM »

"lust" again.

I've read that 4 times so far. That passage still seems focused on the sex part. Huh

To what do you think lust leads? Didn't this article just mention that Jesus stated that lusting in one's heart was practically committing adultery?

The point of which was that Jesus wanted people's hearts to change, to get to the root of the problem. The root of adultery is lust. No lust, no adultery. A similar thing can be said for homosexuality.

You stop the mindset and desire, BEFORE the physical act takes place. Much the same way, you curb hatred in your heart, BEFORE it leads to murder. You curb envy in your heart, BEFORE you start stealing.
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2012, 07:36:43 PM »

Romans 1: 26-27 covers that one:

 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. 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.

No matter where you look, anything remotely resembling what we call homosexuality is seen in but one light: SINFUL.

I don't know.  just like with strange flesh.  At least this one is more a little more direct, but not much.  Why not just say, sex with the same sex is a sin?  Even put it in the commandments.

I think its safe to say, its not direct, at the very least.  
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2012, 07:38:44 PM »

To what do you think lust leads? Didn't this article just mention that Jesus stated that lusting in one's heart was practically committing adultery?

The point of which was that Jesus wanted people's hearts to change, to get to the root of the problem. The root of adultery is lust. No lust, no adultery. A similar thing can be said for homosexuality.

You stop the mindset and desire, BEFORE the physical act takes place. Much the same way, you curb hatred in your heart, BEFORE it leads to murder. You curb envy in your heart, BEFORE you start stealing.

lol no lust?  Might as well were a blind fold all your life!

Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15746


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2012, 07:39:11 PM »

isn't lust a vile affection?  Huh

All I see here is lust and homosexual sex.

I still see nothing about homosexuality. Is your conception of 'love' really this animalistic?

There's plenty to see about homosexuality, unless your cataracts are in full gear. Anything, remotely resembling homosexuality (in thought or in deed) is clearly stated as being sinful, in as plain a language as you can get.

Trying to parse words to make excuses for homosexuality in Scripture is a foolish exercise, to say the least.
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2012, 07:41:27 PM »

There's plenty to see about homosexuality, unless your cataracts are in full gear. Anything, remotely resembling homosexuality (in thought or in deed) is clearly stated as being sinful, in as plain a language as you can get.

Trying to parse words to make excuses for homosexuality in Scripture is a foolish exercise, to say the least.

Well list it then!

IS there anything DIRECT? 

I haven't seen it, and it looks like this theologian says so too.

Most of it, needs heavy interpretation to stick. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2012, 07:42:43 PM »

There's plenty to see about homosexuality, unless your cataracts are in full gear. Anything, remotely resembling homosexuality (in thought or in deed) is clearly stated as being sinful, in as plain a language as you can get.

Trying to parse words to make excuses for homosexuality in Scripture is a foolish exercise, to say the least.

If it was, I wouldnt have to ask you 3 times. Are you really incapable of defining homosexuality apart from animalistic desires such as lust and sex?  Huh

Do you also think heterosexuality is composed entirely of lust and sex?
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2012, 07:44:05 PM »

You would think.....  it would say:

 For this cause God gave them up unto SIN:   instead of "vile affections".  

I think the "word" needs some writing classes.  

Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40755


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 15, 2012, 07:45:35 PM »

How so?  I don't see it.  strange flesh?  Heck, it could have been sex with animals.

Now you're trying just playing devil's advocate.   Smiley  You think the reference to strange flesh when talking about Sodom and Gomorrah is talking about bestiality?  C'mon.
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40755


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: May 15, 2012, 07:46:49 PM »

If it was, I wouldnt have to ask you 3 times. Are you really incapable of defining homosexuality apart from animalistic desires such as lust and sex?  Huh

Do you also think heterosexuality is composed entirely of lust and sex?

What's the difference between "homosexuality" and "homosexual sex"? 
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20499


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: May 15, 2012, 07:49:47 PM »

Now you're trying just playing devil's advocate.   Smiley  You think the reference to strange flesh when talking about Sodom and Gomorrah is talking about bestiality?  C'mon.

You said it's "clearly" is homosexuality.  that guys article is arguing that's its unclear.

I am asking you to show me how "strange flesh" clearly means homosexuality.  I mean one would think, for a 11-13 year old boy, strange flesh would be a woman, and familiar flesh would be a man.  So, that's just another angle.  All i am doing here is asking you to show me how it clearly means homosexuality.

And, just as coincidence, i am leaving right now to go to SFO to pick up someone who is flying in  Cheesy
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!