An Open Letter to Christians: You’re Hurting Gay People and That Ain’t Right

[Guest]

God says it in HIS Word Homosexuality is an ABOMINATION period! God made Adam and Eve, NOT Adam and Steve, Vilma and Veronica!

Romans 1:26-28  ‎1 Corinthians 6:9-11  ‎Hebrews 13:1-5  ‎Leviticus 20:13

[Willa]

Most people who consider themselves liberal Christians don't believe the Bible is relevant to them or to today.  They don't read the Bible or even understand the Bible.  This lack of understanding what they read in the Bible is a good indication that they are neither born again nor are they children of God, no matter what any church tells them.  It is the the Holy Spirit Who causes them to be born again and Who causes them to understand the Bible.

Knowing about Jesus is different than turning away from being sinful and turning to Christ asking for forgiveness.  Part of being a Christian is trusting in His Word and applying it to our daily lives.  That is called living by faith (in Him and in His Word).  It is accepting the God who reveals Himself in the Bible.  It is not making up our own ideas about who God is and what He is like.  

So I have serious doubts as to whether some liberals are true Christians.  

I am not accusing you;  I am thinking of my best friend and have been praying for her for many years.  And I am thinking of many other liberals I have known in my life time.

[Guest shiloh357]

2 hours ago, gerbilgirl said:

I'm sorry, but what exactly does that have to do with anything?  I don't support prostitutes by the way.

 

I was responding to the author's comments namely his misinterpretation of what Jesus was saying about the sin of hypocrisy in the sermon on the mount.  I was explaining that hypocrisy amounts to justifying in ourselves what we condemn in others.  A person guilty of one form of sexual impurity does not have grounds to condemn someone participating in a different form of sexual impurity.     Therefore it is hypocritical for a person who visits prostitutes and thinks it's okay, to condemn the sin of homosexuality.

Quote

I don't think anyone is saying this is job #1.  I know I'm not.

The author said it was.  Don't you read the articles you post?

[Guest Robert]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

I was responding to the author's comments namely his misinterpretation of what Jesus was saying about the sin of hypocrisy in the sermon on the mount.  I was explaining that hypocrisy amounts to justifying in ourselves what we condemn in others.  A person guilty of one form of sexual impurity does not have grounds to condemn someone participating in a different form of sexual impurity.     Therefore it is hypocritical for a person who visits prostitutes and thinks it's okay, to condemn the sin of homosexuality.

The author said it was.  Don't you read the articles you post?

Apparently not. Don't feel bad: at least she answered you (I guess I'm on ignore or something).

As for hypocrisy, I have another name for it: "The Law of the Grand Exception". Essentially, it means "it's wrong for everyone else but me, because I'm 'me' and they are 'them'" :lol:

[RustyAngeL]

3 minutes ago, RobertS said:

Apparently not. Don't feel bad: at least she answered you (I guess I'm on ignore or something).

As for hypocrisy, I have another name for it: "The Law of the Grand Exception". Essentially, it means "it's wrong for everyone else but me, because I'm 'me' and they are 'them'" :lol:

No your not on the ignore.  When the truth really hit's home, it's hard to have a comeback.  Well done RobertS.

[gerbilwoman]

1 hour ago, RobertS said:

Apparently not. Don't feel bad: at least she answered you (I guess I'm on ignore or something).

As for hypocrisy, I have another name for it: "The Law of the Grand Exception". Essentially, it means "it's wrong for everyone else but me, because I'm 'me' and they are 'them'" :lol:

Not ignoring you, just a bit overwhelmed by how many people are quoting my posts.

[gerbilwoman]

When God calls homosexuality an abomination (Leviticus 18:22) (Leviticus 20:13)

"Yep. We've all heard that Leviticus is where the Bible straight-up says that homosexual behavior is an abomination. And yes, it does. It also says that homosexuals should receive the death penalty (!!!). It also says the same thing about eating pork or shellfish, charging interest on loans, and a whole bunch of other restrictions that were a part of the Old Testament Law Code. But for Christians, the Old Testament doesn't (dare I say "shouldn't?") settle any issue because Romans 10:4 says that Christ is the end of the law. Which is probably why most Christians today eat meat, use credit cards, wear makeup, and support equality for women. Because, as Hebrews 8:13 says, the old law is obsolete and aging."

Source:  http://www.upworthy.com/there-are-6-scriptures-about-homosexuality-in-the-bible-heres-what-they-really-say

[ayin jade]

What about what the new testament says about homosexuality? Verses for that have been posted in this thread.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, gerbilgirl said:

When God calls homosexuality an abomination (Leviticus 18:22) (Leviticus 20:13)

"Yep. We've all heard that Leviticus is where the Bible straight-up says that homosexual behavior is an abomination. And yes, it does. It also says that homosexuals should receive the death penalty (!!!). It also says the same thing about eating pork or shellfish, charging interest on loans, and a whole bunch of other restrictions that were a part of the Old Testament Law Code. But for Christians, the Old Testament doesn't (dare I say "shouldn't?") settle any issue because Romans 10:4 says that Christ is the end of the law. Which is probably why most Christians today eat meat, use credit cards, wear makeup, and support equality for women. Because, as Hebrews 8:13 says, the old law is obsolete and aging."

Source:  http://www.upworthy.com/there-are-6-scriptures-about-homosexuality-in-the-bible-heres-what-they-really-say

You cannot dispute God's word. Homosexuality is a sin period! There are no ands, ifs or buts about it!

[Guest shiloh357]

54 minutes ago, gerbilgirl said:

When God calls homosexuality an abomination (Leviticus 18:22) (Leviticus 20:13)

 

Source:  http://www.upworthy.com/there-are-6-scriptures-about-homosexuality-in-the-bible-heres-what-they-really-say

Quote

Yep. We've all heard that Leviticus is where the Bible straight-up says that homosexual behavior is an abomination. And yes, it does. It also says that homosexuals should receive the death penalty (!!!). It also says the same thing about eating pork or shellfish, charging interest on loans, and a whole bunch of other restrictions that were a part of the Old Testament Law Code. But for Christians, the Old Testament doesn't (dare I say "shouldn't?") settle any issue because Romans 10:4 says that Christ is the end of the law. Which is probably why most Christians today eat meat, use credit cards, wear makeup, and support equality for women. Because, as Hebrews 8:13 says, the old law is obsolete and aging.

Matthew Vines should study the Bible a little better.    The Bible has two words it uses for "abomination" in the Old Testament.   When God refers to something as being ritually impure and thus an "abomination"  He uses the Hebrew word, "sheqets"  which simply a word for what is ritually defiled.  That's the word used in reference to animals like pork and shellfish and it is the word used for other forms of ritual impurity.    However, when God refers to Homosexuality, sorcery, etc.  He calls it an abomination but uses the word "toe-ay-vah" and that word is used to describe what is disgusting and reprehensible or abhorrent to God.

As for Romans 10: 4,  When it says that the Christ is the end of the law,  the word "end" is "telos" in the Greek and in the context of Romans 10, it means that Christ is the focus or the main idea of the law.  Christ was the "end" in the sense that he was the "goal" the law was supposed to point us to.   It doesn't mean that Christ was the termination of the law.

If Christ were the termination of the law, then it would be okay to murder, dishonor parents, covet, steal and worship idols.    So Matthew Vines is quite a bit off in his presentation here.    Hebrew 8:13 says the Old Covenant is obsolete; it DOES NOT say that the old law is obsolete.  The Old Covenant refers to the old administration of the law, not the law itself.   The Writer of Hebrews isn't talking about the abrogation of God's laws at all.  Besides, Hebrews was only talking about the laws pertaining to the sacrifices, not the entire law.   His point is that the law is under a new administration.  We still have a sacrifice, blood, and a high priest just like in the OT.   But all of those things are now met in Christ.

Quote

 

"Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones; in the same way, men committed shameful acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."

 

This is where Vines really digs in on the the cultural context angle. In Biblical times, same-sex behavior was primarily seen as happening between adult men and adolescent boys (masters and servants — yikes), via prostitution, and by men who were married to women. In all of those cases, we can see why it would have been viewed as sinful, excessive, lustful, and against God's law. But he makes no mention of love, commitment, faithfulness, or the type of same-sex relationships that are at question in the debate around marriage. (By the way, Paul also says that men having long hair is "unnatural" and that women shouldn't speak in church, so it's clear Paul himself may have had some issues of his own.)

 

That is only partially true.  In the ancient Greek and Roman cultures homosexuality was rampant.  It was not just confined to the a specific form of relationship.   History records the gross immorality that took place in cities like Corinth.   It was so rampant that if one were called a "Corinthian" they were a person of extreme immorality.  

When Paul was speaking of men having long hair as unnatural, Paul was speaking to the Corinthian church.  Male prostitutes wore their hair long and effeminate to attract other men.  It was a homosexual practice.  It is unnatural for men to purposely dress and adorn themselves as females.

Same sex marriage is an abomination because it perverts God's plan for marriage and human sexuality.   God abhors homosexuality in any shape or form be it in a monogamous relationship or done with several partners.  The specific mode is irrelevant.  God condemns it all.
 

Quote

 

Uses of the Greek works "Malakoi" and "Arsenokoitai" (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) (1 Timothy 1:10)

 

These words are included in the New Testament's lists of people who will not inherit God's kingdom. And there has been much debate over their original meaning. (Translating ancient words is hard, guys.) Some believe them to mean homosexuality and sodomy, whereas others have said that the closest modern translation would be "dirty old men." Ha! Here's how Vines explains it:

 

Many modern translators have rendered these terms as sweeping statements about gay people, but the concept of sexual orientation didn't even exist in the ancient world. Yes, Paul did not take a positive view of same-sex relations (nor did he support women speaking in church...), but the context he was writing in is worlds apart from gay people in committed, monogamous relationships. The Bible never addresses the issues of sexual orientation or same-sex marriage, so there's no reason why faithful Christians can't support their gay brothers and sisters.

 

The word "homosexual"  didn't exist in the Greek vocabulary.   But the lifestyle was discussed in both I Cor. 6:9-10 and I Tim. 1:10.   Those are the Bible's way of referring to homosexuals.   And it stands as the means by which we judge ALL similar homosexual relationships no matter what form they take.

The Bible never mentions same sex marriage.  True.  But it doesn't mention child molestation or spousal abuse, either.  Should we assume those things are okay simply because they are not explicitly mentioned?  

The Bible doesn't mention every sin that can be possibly committed.   What it does do is it provides us with a behavioral paradigm with the sins it does mention that we can use to judge as sin, the things it doesn't explicitly mention.