The bible and gays

[ImmortalFlame]

That might be true but as a Christian I am following what God says to be sin. And sin leads to the road of death.

How do you differentiate that which God claims to be true and that which isn't? Do you agree with stoning adulterers? Do you believe idolatry should be illegal? How do you feel about divorce?

 

[BenTheBeliever]

How do you differentiate that which God claims to be true and that which isn't? Do you agree with stoning adulterers? Do you believe idolatry should be illegal? How do you feel about divorce?

First off we all sin and fall short of the glory of God. When it comes to stoning people even Christ made sure we don't do that anymore when he stated he who does not sin cast the first stone. I had sex before I was married if you want to know my sins. My wife even moved in with me before we got married so we could afford to have a nice wedding. As for divorce my wife was married once before. Her ex abused her. She made a mistake when she married him but that did not stop God from blessing our marriage. Our marriage is built on a rock. When you are saved by Grace you learn no matter what you have done in your past you are free from condemnation.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

First off we all sin and fall short of the glory of God. When it comes to stoning people even Christ made sure we don't do that anymore when he stated he who does not sin cast the first stone.

So, you disagree with the Law's original command to stone adulterers?

I had sex before I was married if you want to know my sins.

Honestly, I'm not remotely interested in that. I am only interested in is the justification behind your reasoning.

My wife even moved in with me before we got married so we could afford to have a nice wedding. As for divorce my wife was married once before. Her ex abused her. She made a mistake when she married him but that did not stop God from blessing our marriage. Our marriage is built on a rock. When you are saved by Grace you learn no matter what you have done in your past you are free from condemnation.

You've not answered my question. The Bible explicitly states that divorce and remarriage is an act of adultery: http://biblehub.com/matthew/5-32.htm

Do you agree?

 

[BenTheBeliever]

So, you disagree with the Law's original command to stone adulterers?


Honestly, I'm not remotely interested in that. I am only interested in is the justification behind your reasoning.


You've not answered my question. The Bible explicitly states that divorce and remarriage is an act of adultery: http://biblehub.com/matthew/5-32.htm

Do you agree?

It depends. In case of abuse it is not a sin. God would not want people to stay in that kind of marriage. As for the law the law of the OT most of us Christians don't follow. We are now living in the time of grace. The laws were mostly made for the Jewish people of that time. Since we are now saved by Grace when we give our life to the Lord we don't have to worry about condonation since as it states in the word there is no condonation in us who are in Christ

 

[BenTheBeliever]

http://www.gotquestions.org/abuse-divorce.html

 

[ether-ore]

1. The problem with saying a sterile person has an excuse is that you are inferring that they are somehow flawed or IOW, need some excuse and that is just so wrong on so many levels. What of those who choose not to have children and there are many who don't. Are they, too, excused? You use the word excuse and its like some child that has an excuse for not having done their homework. It means in some way the person did something that they need this excuse for and it may be that they were born sterile. In that case, would not have God made them sterile and if so, why would they even need this excuse?
2. Being gay has, or rather is, being traced to be genetic. If that is the case, and you believe God made you, would that not mean that God made them gay? Being gay is not about physical desire Ether. Its an attraction to the same sex. You reduce being gay to nothing more than sex and that is just wrong on so many levels. Do you honestly think that all that gay people do is have sex? Its a ridiculous way of seeing being gay. In your relationship with your wife is all you do have sex? If not, why would you think that of a gay couple?

Yes,I am inferring that someone who is sterile is physically flawed in the sense that it is not normal to be sterile. I'm not up on some acronyms, so I don't know what IOW means, but it doesn't matter. Sterile people don't need an excuse... they have an excuse. What levels are you talking about? Those who choose not to have children do not have that or any excuse not to have children.

You use the example of homework. If a child is mentally retarded and is not capable of doing homework, then that child has an excuse.

You talk about God making people sterile or gay because of genetics. I think you are mistaken in believing God is responsible for how people are born. After Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden and started having children, there was no one to marry but one's siblings. It was not a problem genetically back then; in-breeding had not had time to become a problem.
I believe the human genome had not as yet become corrupted by the abuses done to the human body. Genetic traits are developed through behaviors and then passed on to later generations. Ergo, you have all kind of physical aberrations.

I disagree with you that gay desire is not a physical desire or that any mortal desire is not physical. Before we came into mortality, we lived as the spirit children of our Father in Heaven in a state where physical desires did not exist other than the desire to have a physical body.

It is being born into a physical body that gives us any desire or appetite. These desires or appetites manifest themselves according to the genetic predisposition of the body the spirit inhabits,

The task of the spirit is to discipline the physical body unless that body has some handicap which gives a valid excuse for it not being disciplined. Same sex attraction is not a handicap, but it is, I think, a physical (perhaps even a genetic) predisposition to an activity contrary to nature and certainly contrary to God's law. But that is a consequence of man's activity affecting the human genome, not God's creation. God allows man's agency to have its effect even in genetics. All will be judged and corrected after this mortal existence has come to an end.

No, I do not think all gay people do is have sex. There is I am sure, affection and even love for the partner. But I still believe that that love and affection can and ought to be disciplined and restricted to expressions which are not against God's laws. Sexual expression of love between a man and a woman within the bonds of marriage is the only condition God's law provides for that expression.

Sex between heterosexuals outside of marriage is just as forbidden as it is for homosexuals. Homosexuals may get married by mortal, civil authorities, but it is not a marriage that God will recognize because it is against His purposes involving the perpetuation of the human race.

 

[ether-ore]

This presupposes that there is a thing called sin, which I do not believe in at all. We make mistakes in life and we learn from them. The idea of sin is unique to the monotheistic faiths. Those three mainstream faiths have one hopping from one foot to the other to try to live up to an ideal. All based on a book written by men, or rather books. If they were not written and compiled by men, how do you explain the extant books that were written and left out? Or that Enoch is not in the Bible but considered a part of it by many anyway?

Of course you can refuse to believe it, but your disbelief has no bearing on the existence of God or His laws. We do indeed make mistakes in life and hopefully we do learn from them. That is why we are here; to learn how to cope with mortality according to God's laws and to learn to control the desires and appetites of this physical body. Sin is any activity contrary to God's laws, your disbelief notwithstanding. Yes, mainstream faiths understand that God requires us to discipline ourselves according to His laws, that is why we are here.

The books written by men are scripture written by men who are prophets and whom God has chosen because of their exceeding faith and devotion to Him. Their combined testimonies corroborate one another and being coherent and cohesive, they provide valid evidence that there is a God and that His laws objectively apply to us.

Being LDS, I not only believe that there are many books left out of the Bible by the corruption of evil men, but that those volumes left in have been altered. As LDS I believe it is for this reason that God provided for a restoration of His Gospel in the which we have new revelation.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It depends. In case of abuse it is not a sin. God would not want people to stay in that kind of marriage.

Are you the judge of what God wants? Where in the Bible does it say that?

As for the law the law of the OT most of us Christians don't follow.

The book of Matthew is in the New Testament, and the commands expressly forbidding homosexuality are contained in the OT. How do you determine which laws in the OT and NT are worth following?

We are now living in the time of grace. The laws were mostly made for the Jewish people of that time.

Where does the Bible specify that those laws only apply to the Jews of that time?

Since we are now saved by Grace when we give our life to the Lord we don't have to worry about condonation since as it states in the word there is no condonation in us who are in Christ

You're still not answering my questions. How do you reach these conclusions?

 

[Awoon]

That might be true but as a Christian I am following what God says to be sin. And sin leads to the road of death.

Your statement above is for you a believers like you. You are a Christian. You are obligated to follow your Christian teachings that call you SINNER. Non Christians are not sinners because we don't follow your teachings, doctrines or your God.

You are here to convince people that they are Sinners like you.

 

[ether-ore]

ImmortalFlame

I am intrigued by your name as contrasted with some of your posts. Do you believe in immortality and if so, what is your basis for that belief?

 

[JoStories]

Of course you can refuse to believe it, but your disbelief has no bearing on the existence of God or His laws. We do indeed make mistakes in life and hopefully we do learn from them. That is why we are here; to learn how to cope with mortality according to God's laws and to learn to control the desires and appetites of this physical body. Sin is any activity contrary to God's laws, your disbelief notwithstanding. Yes, mainstream faiths understand that God requires us to discipline ourselves according to His laws, that is why we are here. .

How does your belief undermine mine? You state the my disbelief has no bearing on the existence of God or the laws. Until you can prove God or prove those laws are from God, that is simply your opinion..IE: belief. No better or different than mine. The one and only thing I see you repeatedly having an issue with is physical desire. It makes me wonder why you are obsessed with that one topic. In order for any of what you say here to be true, it would need to be proven. I believe in God. Are you willing to tell me my views on God are erroneous? And if so, why and how and what gives you that right?

The books written by men are scripture written by men who are prophets and whom God has chosen because of their exceeding faith and devotion to Him. Their combined testimonies corroborate one another and being coherent and cohesive, they provide valid evidence that there is a God and that His laws objectively apply to us.

What makes those books any better or less valuable or from God than the Vedas or the Teachings of the Buddha. Buddha was said to be a prophet as well. Do you deny that and if you do, why and how can you know? You believe that those books were from God but you have no way of being sure of that. So this, too, is your opinion.

Being LDS, I not only believe that there are many books left out of the Bible by the corruption of evil men, but that those volumes left in have been altered. As LDS I believe it is for this reason that God provided for a restoration of His Gospel in the which we have new revelation.

For you then, I can assume you deny that the Catholic Bible is from God, non? Or the one from Martin Luther, non? What would be acceptable in that case? Do you begin to see how you are personally, or at least, those of your faith, are defining what was and was not written and/or handed down by God?

 

[JoStories]

It depends. In case of abuse it is not a sin. God would not want people to stay in that kind of marriage. As for the law the law of the OT most of us Christians don't follow. We are now living in the time of grace. The laws were mostly made for the Jewish people of that time. Since we are now saved by Grace when we give our life to the Lord we don't have to worry about condonation since as it states in the word there is no condonation in us who are in Christ

Well Ben I can tell you from personal experience I was told by the priest that my ex had us go to told me that I had to put up with Keith beating the snot out of me, to the point of hospitalization, because if I divorced him I would be excommunicated and never be allowed back into church or the graces of God. So saying that God would not want us to stay in that kind of marriage is just your opinion. All well and good but one not held by the RCC. And btw, if those laws were only for the Jews, why do you believe that gay marriage is wrong because I can tell you, Christ never said a word about gay relationships. Paul did but Paul never knew Jesus and Jesus did speak of a man and a woman in marriage but he never spoke about gays. Not once.

 

[JoStories]

Yes,I am inferring that someone who is sterile is physically flawed in the sense that it is not normal to be sterile. I'm not up on some acronyms, so I don't know what IOW means, but it doesn't matter. Sterile people don't need an excuse... they have an excuse. What levels are you talking about? Those who choose not to have children do not have that or any excuse not to have children.

If you believe that a fetus is a child from the moment of conception and that child is conceived of God, then a child that is sterile is indeed that way because God wanted it to be so. No one needs an excuse. No one. You make it seem as though the one and only reason for marriage is procreation. If that is truly what you believe, I honestly find that incredibly sad.

You talk about God making people sterile or gay because of genetics. I think you are mistaken in believing God is responsible for how people are born. After Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden and started having children, there was no one to marry but one's siblings. It was not a problem genetically back then; in-breeding had not had time to become a problem.
I believe the human genome had not as yet become corrupted by the abuses done to the human body. Genetic traits are developed through behaviors and then passed on to later generations. Ergo, you have all kind of physical aberrations.

Inbreeding would have shown up almost immediately. Abel and Cain would have had to have sisters from the same parents and they would have been siblings and so on. Genetics are purely biological and behavior doesn't affect it.

 

[ether-ore]

How does your belief undermine mine? You state the my disbelief has no bearing on the existence of God or the laws. Until you can prove God or prove those laws are from God, that is simply your opinion..IE: belief. No better or different than mine. The one and only thing I see you repeatedly having an issue with is physical desire. It makes me wonder why you are obsessed with that one topic. In order for any of what you say here to be true, it would need to be proven. I believe in God. Are you willing to tell me my views on God are erroneous? And if so, why and how and what gives you that right?

From your perspective, I'm sure my belief does not undermine yours. Nevertheless, yes, I do believe your disbelief has no bearing on the existence of God or His laws. If I didn't believe that then I wouldn't believe that, would I? There is no proof of the existence of God. If you do not believe in God, there is nothing I can do to pursued you otherwise. I am repeatedly talking about the physical issue because that is the topic. The op: "the bible and gays" makes it about the physical.

What makes those books any better or less valuable or from God than the Vedas or the Teachings of the Buddha. Buddha was said to be a prophet as well. Do you deny that and if you do, why and how can you know? You believe that those books were from God but you have no way of being sure of that. So this, too, is your opinion.

The Christian scriptures have corroboration. Many books from different prophets offering mutual support to one another and creating a coherent and cohesive narrative the same subject. The other books you mentioned are single source materials from one author which have no corroboration. Commentaries on those books do not qualify as original source material. That is how I know.

For you then, I can assume you deny that the Catholic Bible is from God, non? Or the one from Martin Luther, non? What would be acceptable in that case? Do you begin to see how you are personally, or at least, those of your faith, are defining what was and was not written and/or handed down by God?

My point of view concerning the Bible (of any version or translation) is that there are omissions, corruptions and errors in them. I believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.

 

[ether-ore]

If you believe that a fetus is a child from the moment of conception and that child is conceived of God, then a child that is sterile is indeed that way because God wanted it to be so. No one needs an excuse. No one. You make it seem as though the one and only reason for marriage is procreation. If that is truly what you believe, I honestly find that incredibly sad.

You are attempting to tell me what I believe. I believe God sends His spirit children to inhabit bodies created for them by their parents. Those bodies have physical characteristics passed down to them by their parents and their genetic history. God allows genetic characteristics to occur but he does not cause or desire them. Marriage is most definitely about more than just procreation. It is also about happiness and emotional well being. Nevertheless, it is the prime reason for God having ordained it. God intends that we perpetuate the human race. And as such, mortals are not privileged to alter the laws set for it by God or its functional process.

Inbreeding would have shown up almost immediately. Abel and Cain would have had to have sisters from the same parents and they would have been siblings and so on. Genetics are purely biological and behavior doesn't affect it.

I disagree that it would have shown up immediately. All of Adam and Eve's children married brothers or sisters since there was no one else to marry. Initially this was very common but the genome and things affecting it had not as yet had time to become corrupted, so inbreeding was not a problem back then. Over time, I believe behavior has indeed been a contributing factor to genetic change. Consider the subject of this video:

 

[ether-ore]

Also, check our this BBC documentary: "The Ghost in Your Genes"

 

[sojourner]

I do not believe that the spirit of man is gay before it reaches the corporeal body. It is my belief that homosexual tendencies occur because of the physical body.

I believe that we are souls that are bodies. Therefore, we are what we are, in god's eyes.

It is the desires of the physical body that the spirit needs to overcome for any sexual activity outside of marriage between a man and a woman whether heterosexual of homosexual

What about the marriage between two men? Or between two women?

 

[sojourner]

That makes no sense. If God calls something an Abomination don't you think he also would call it a sin?

The better question is: "Why does the biblical writer think it's an 'abomination?'"

 

[sojourner]

The Bible teaches us it's a sin like so many other sins. It also teaches us that we are to hate sin but love the sinner like Christ.

The bible also teaches us that the sky is a solid dome covering a disc-shaped earth. Science has taught us otherwise. The bible "teaches us" that homosexuality is a "sin," but science shows us that it's a sexual identity of who one is. A person cannot be "sin."

 

[sojourner]

I'll tell you what I believe. Jesus Christ says that He and the Father are one; meaning one in purpose. If we repent and are baptized and become one with Jesus Christ in the same way by keeping His commandments and doing His work, then He saves us. Jesus Christ is the Bridegroom. Members of His church are the bride. The bride being one with her husband; she goes where He goes. By becoming one with Jesus Christ, He then cane take us home with Him since we have become part of His body (figuratively) and are thus one with Him.

Formulaic and too easy, just as your judgment of the homosexual identity is too clean and easy. "Clean and easy" allows you to too easily sweep people under the theological rug, as it were.