Agreed. I, too, am ordained and have studied multiple religions and spirituality for years, I would perform SSM's but I would never be forced to do so. If I felt the couple, whomever they might be, were not vested in the commitment, I would refuse.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christians, why do you hate Gays?
- Thread starter R34L1TY
- Start date
Agreed. I, too, am ordained and have studied multiple religions and spirituality for years, I would perform SSM's but I would never be forced to do so. If I felt the couple, whomever they might be, were not vested in the commitment, I would refuse.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Gen 2:24 does not say that is the only acceptable arrangement. It is the baby making arrangement.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Not so! First - it is addressing a specific question concerning ONLY MARRIED men with wives.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I believe the "eunuchs" in these verses are "homosexual" men. He told them they couldn't just put away their wives for any reason. Then added a CLAUSE for "eunuchs." The only possible MARRIED EUNUCHS would be gay men. Marriages were arranged early. I think he was giving gay men a way out of those marriages. No other EUNUCHS were allowed to marry by LAW.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
First - it changes to MOLOCH worship at Lev 18:21-to at least 23 - Sacred Sex with Sacred Prostitutes. So even if with males were correct it would be referring to Qadesh - Sacred Prostitutes.
However, it does not have to be translated that way.
Lev 18:21 as for Thy seed/semen don't give in sex/copulation to Molech (abar is also to cover, copulate,) don't profane the name of Elohiym; I am YHVH.
The next line is usually started - and with man don't - however the word also means - and for man, don't. And there is NO - "as with a."
Lev 18:22 and for man, don't lie down (for sex) in the beds of the women, Idolatrous is he.
The next line continues on with the things we know they did in Molech worship.
Lev 18:23 And you shall not give your semen with any animal, for uncleanness with it. And a woman shall not stand before an animal to lie down with it; it is a shameful mixing.
With either translation of 22 - it is still talking about the Qadesh - Sacred Prostitutes of Molech.
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
And I believe after looking at the Hebrew and Greek - that there is NO condemnation of homosexuals! There is only condemnation of Sacred Sex with the Qadesh and Qadeshah - as it is IDOLATRY.
*
starlite
Texasgirl
If your line of reasoning is correct, why did God destroy Sodom and Gomorrah?
opcorn:
That isn't an arrangement just for marriage, though; it's an arrangement for several stages of life.
It suggests that a man only has two options or stages for his living arrangement:
- living with his parents.
- living with his wife.
Yes, "living with a husband" isn't an option there, but something else is missing: "living as a bachelor".
Do you honestly think that this verse provides a model of how we are to live? Because if you do, then you have to concede that a man violates it just as much by living alone as a single bachelor as he does by entering into a same-sex marriage.
Do you think it should be illegal for men to live alone?
Do you realize the horrible implications for your own moral sense that you would even ask this question?
Do you really think the problem with same-sex gang rape is the "same-sex" part and not the "gang rape" part?
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Seems people are largely unaware of the historical significance of hospitality...
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Pride, inhospitality, neglecting those in need.
[FONT=arial, geneva]Ezekiel 16:49-50:[/FONT]
Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.
[FONT=arial, geneva]Isaiah 1:9-11:[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, geneva]Isaiah 1:9-11:[/FONT]
Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah. Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.[FONT=arial, geneva]
Jeremiah 23:14:[/FONT]
Jeremiah 23:14:[/FONT]
I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness; they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
FOR STARLITE
This has already been answered by Tumbleweed 41.
Also it doesn't actually say just the MEN surround the house.
"Enosh" is also PEOPLE - It uses "aner" when the people ask "where are the men..."
Gen 19:4 Before bedtime the people of the city, the people of Sodom, surrounded about the house, young and old together as a human wall.
So it is males AND females, young and old!
And the word translated "know/sex" - send them out so we can "know" them - is "YADA"
God uses a form of the same word in Gen 18 and he didn't mean he want sex with them!
God used it in the ascertain and pass judgment sense in 18:21 - and the "people" use it the same way - translate out Gen 19:9!
Gen 18:21 Descend now to discern (if the) cry (that has) come before me is altogether of a truth or not, (and) if not (I will) ascertain and Judge.
Again - the people use it in the same sense.
Gen 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we mayknow them.
Gen 19:5 And they called unto Lot and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out that we may JUDGE/PUNISH them.
so they surrounded the house and demanded that the angels/messengers be sent out so they could judge and punish THEM INSTEAD!
Gen19:9 (But) they said, "nagash" (to adduce an argument, Dictionary - adduce - to cite an example or means of PROOF in an argument!) stand aback, and said, united they came here to JUDGE/punish; so (we) JUDGE/punish henceforth as wicked them. (Then) Pressed the people against Lot mightily to approach and break the door.
In other words; they knew the angels/messengers had come to judge and punish them - so they tried to turn that around - to judging and punishing the angels.
*
This has already been answered by Tumbleweed 41.
Also it doesn't actually say just the MEN surround the house.
"Enosh" is also PEOPLE - It uses "aner" when the people ask "where are the men..."
Gen 19:4 Before bedtime the people of the city, the people of Sodom, surrounded about the house, young and old together as a human wall.
So it is males AND females, young and old!
And the word translated "know/sex" - send them out so we can "know" them - is "YADA"
God uses a form of the same word in Gen 18 and he didn't mean he want sex with them!
God used it in the ascertain and pass judgment sense in 18:21 - and the "people" use it the same way - translate out Gen 19:9!
Gen 18:21 Descend now to discern (if the) cry (that has) come before me is altogether of a truth or not, (and) if not (I will) ascertain and Judge.
Again - the people use it in the same sense.
Gen 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we mayknow them.
Gen 19:5 And they called unto Lot and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out that we may JUDGE/PUNISH them.
so they surrounded the house and demanded that the angels/messengers be sent out so they could judge and punish THEM INSTEAD!
Gen19:9 (But) they said, "nagash" (to adduce an argument, Dictionary - adduce - to cite an example or means of PROOF in an argument!) stand aback, and said, united they came here to JUDGE/punish; so (we) JUDGE/punish henceforth as wicked them. (Then) Pressed the people against Lot mightily to approach and break the door.
In other words; they knew the angels/messengers had come to judge and punish them - so they tried to turn that around - to judging and punishing the angels.
*
Last edited:
Shermana
Heretic
For what it's worth, 2 Peter 2:6-7 says that among their sins was indeed "Laviciousness"
Strong's Greek: 766.
We can see that it is rendered as "Sensuality" in many places. In Mark 7:22 it's defacto referring to "sexual immorality" or "lewdness".
Ezekiel characterizes the sins of Sodom as:
Strong's Greek: 766.
We can see that it is rendered as "Sensuality" in many places. In Mark 7:22 it's defacto referring to "sexual immorality" or "lewdness".
Ezekiel characterizes the sins of Sodom as:
However, keep in mind that "Abomination" and "Destestable" things are often used for sexual practices that offend God, whatever they may be. It may not necessarily refer to them exclusively seeking males but in committing all the offenses outlined in Leviticus 18. Other than sexual sins, idolatry is about the only other "detestable" thing used with that word done before God (as opposed to an abominable thing before the people like eating shellfish, the word's usage is another issue). So while it's agreed that the sins of Sodom included inhospitality (if not downright cruelty to strangers as extracanonical Jewish writings suggest), it would be fair to say that the author of 2 Peter recognized that the "Detestable" thing was in the "Lavisciousness" category. Whether it was regarding mere orientation or forced-relations is another story, but I'd say there's little room for doubt that the early NT authors did regard the sin of Sodom as at least including such "Wantonness"/"Lewdness".
Last edited:
starlite
Texasgirl
Origin of SODOMY
Middle English, from Anglo-French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Genesis 19:111
First Known Use: 13th century
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Merriam-Webster online dictionary
[/FONT]
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Important to note;
First Known Use: 13 Century.
So, are we talking Anlo-French, or what the Bible says the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were?
Right thats why Lot said I have two daughters who have not known a man, take my daughters instead and do to them as you wish
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
So Lot, whos two daughters were engaged to, we can assume, heterosexual men in the city, offered up his daughters to be raped? Living in that city, he must have assumed that his offer would be taken up to even offer them. One has to wonder why Lot would do this for a mob of rabid homosexuals.
For the record, rape, either male/male or male/female is a form of degradation and humiliation. Not an act of amorous desire.
As has been pointed out, other references to Sodom and Gomorrah in the OT show that the sin's that God destroyed these cities for were pride, greed, neglecting those in need, and inhospitably to strangers.
So Lot, whos two daughters were engaged to, we can assume, heterosexual men in the city, offered up his daughters to be raped? Living in that city, he must have assumed that his offer would be taken up to even offer them. One has to wonder why Lot would do this for a mob of rabid homosexuals.
For the record, rape, either male/male or male/female is a form of degradation and humiliation. Not an act of amorous desire.
As has been pointed out, other references to Sodom and Gomorrah in the OT show that the sin's that God destroyed these cities for were pride, greed, neglecting those in need, and inhospitably to strangers.
The point is Lot knew what the men of sodom wanted the messengers for sex. Offering his daughters was a sinful and desperate act to protect them. Youll notiice the men didnt want them, in fact they became enraged even more and demamded the men
In Ezekiel God is referring to Judah as sodom. The sins listed are those of Judah, not the origjnal sodom's. Hes telling them their sin is as bad in his eyes as the sexual sin of sodom.In 17:12 he says as punishment Judah went into exile
The orignal Sodom he destroyed because a of sexual immorality and going after strange flesh Jude 7
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Jude is not OT, is it?
Hebrew texts reveal the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. I have already listed them.
(Funny how male on male sex is never mentioned in any of them)
Funny how you left out Leviticus 20:13
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Leviticus 20:13 does not mention Sodom and/or Gomorrah.
But since you bring it up;
- Do you advocate the death penalty for engaging in homosexual sex?
- Do you advocate the death penalty for children who curse either one of their parents?
- Do you advocate the death penalty for adultery?
- Do you advocate the death penalty for incest?
- Do you advocate the death penalty for bigamy with a mother/daughter?
- Do you advocate the death penalty for bestiality?
- Do you advocate the death penalty for palm readers/psychics?
- Do you consume pork, catfish, clams, lobster, prawns, shrimp, scallops, etc.
- Do you ritually bath after sexual relations?
- Do you advocate death for a woman raped in the city who does not cry out loud enough?
Of course, there are many more Leviticus Laws and admonitions, but lets just start with these.
BTW, a word-for-word reading of the verse in question is;
And a man who will lie down with a male in beds of a woman, both of them have made an abomination; dying they will die. Their blood is on them.