The bible and gays

[sojourner]

You take sin as a joke. Cars don't sin. Humans sin

One doesn't sin by one's identity.

 

[sojourner]

Nevertheless, it is the prime reason for God having ordained it.

No it isn't. Not biblically.

 

[sojourner]

Sin is not a virtue though Christians recognize that they do sin. It is not a badge of honor but it does serve to keep us humble in terms of recognizing that we need the atonement of Jesus Christ to save us from our sins.

We don't need an atonement to save us from who we are.

 

[sojourner]

The rocket engine is your life and the direction you are going when you die is what is important.

Not buying it.

 

[ether-ore]

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

I don't think you paid close attention to what I said. I said: "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 or homosexual".

 

[sojourner]

You see, only Christians need to hear what you preach.

We don't need to hear that claptrap!

 

[sojourner]

That fact that one has ever sinned at all at any time makes the atonement of Jesus Christ necessary.

Substitutionary atonement is not the only valid theological model. I, for one, don't buy it.

 

[sojourner]

Yet you are sinning. The only way not to sin anymore is through Christ.

No, the only way to be forgiven sin is through the reconciling work of God in Jesus.

 

[sojourner]

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.

Do you also, as a Christian, "follow what God says" in matters of cosmology? If so, space flight isn't biblically possible. Or do you embrace science on the matter? What's the difference between that and embracing science on the issue of homosexuality as a normal and healthy sexual identity?

 

[sojourner]

I don't think you paid close attention to what I said. I said: "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 or homosexual".

I don't think you paid close attention to what I said. You specified marriage between a man and a woman. I'd like to know the details of marriage between two men or two women. What if two men are married? Do they have to "overcome their desires?" Or two women?

 

[ether-ore]

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

If one thinks in terms of an eternal perspective rather than a temporal one then the answer to this question become clear. God want us to return to Him. We can only do this by repenting of our sins and relying on the merits of Jesus Christ to be able to gain admittance back to our Heavenly Father. There are other places we can go to, but that is not what our Father wants. He wants us to return to Him and obtain our inheritance which is to become like Him and do what He does. Men and women cannot do those things unless they have proven that they can be trusted with the procreative powers in mortality.

For men and women to go against the nature of things ordained of God; that is an abomination. For men and women to thwart the will of God is an abomination.

 

[sojourner]

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.

Yet... there seems to be no grace for the homosexual. Many Christians still follow that "law" with a vengeance. WHY?

 

[sojourner]

Yes,I am inferring that someone who is sterile is physically flawed in the sense that it is not normal to be sterile.

It is for some people.

. 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.

Bollocks!

 

[sojourner]

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.

There's a whole buttload of unfounded supposition here that you use as "fact" in order to perpetuate the systemic violence of dehumanization.

 

[sojourner]

but your disbelief has no bearing on the existence of God or His laws.

Your belief has no bearing on the existence of God or God's laws.

 

[ether-ore]

I don't think you paid close attention to what I said. You specified marriage between a man and a woman. I'd like to know the details of marriage between two men or two women. What if two men are married? Do they have to "overcome their desires?" Or two women?

Good grief. I don't know how to make it any plainer. The only place where God's law allows a sexual expression of love is between one man and one woman who are married. God's law does not recognize marriage between same sex couples. They may have civil marriages while in mortality until death do they part. But that is not recognized by God and forcing people of faith to perform such marriages will not make it any more acceptable to God. So yes, same sex couples would have to control their sexual desires if they wish to repent and be accepted by God.

So, go ahead and disagree; just remember, attempting to use the government force of mortal men will not have any affect on God and the eternal nature of things.

 

[ether-ore]

Your belief has no bearing on the existence of God or God's laws.

I am content to wait and see who is right when Christ returns.

 

[sojourner]

Yes, mainstream faiths understand that God requires us to discipline ourselves according to His laws, that is why we are here.

According to the New Covenant, that law is love. Period.

 

[sojourner]

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.

Your belief doesn't make it so. What's your evidence? Evidence is what makes it so.

 

[sojourner]

If one thinks in terms of an eternal perspective rather than a temporal one then the answer to this question become clear. God want us to return to Him. We can only do this by repenting of our sins and relying on the merits of Jesus Christ to be able to gain admittance back to our Heavenly Father. There are other places we can go to, but that is not what our Father wants. He wants us to return to Him and obtain our inheritance which is to become like Him and do what He does. Men and women cannot do those things unless they have proven that they can be trusted with the procreative powers in mortality.

For men and women to go against the nature of things ordained of God; that is an abomination. For men and women to thwart the will of God is an abomination.

None of that pontification was cogent to my question of why the writer thought it was an abomination. Perhaps (if you can) you'd like to actually answer the question?