Bible Discussion: Why Homosexuality Should Be Illegal

Why Homosexuality Should Be Illegal
Posts: 49

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)

CGH1966
2003-08-14 07:11:21 EST
I have been reading these posts for days now. Some claim that God's
word has no place in American law. And although the Bible speaks against
homosexuality, just for a minute, lets put the Bible aside. Lets just
look at pure nature. Lets look at how our bodies were created. Our
bodies were created......no matter how or where you think they came from
.........to have sexual intercourse with a man and a woman. That is why
the Vaginal wall is so thick, and made the way it is......to except the
Penis. The rectal wall is very thin, and also takes in and absorbs many
germs more easily.......which makes it much more easily for gay men to
get many different kind of diseases. The same disease can affect woman
as well, but not as easily as gay men. The rectum wall is full of germs
and other bad bacteria. Most gay men DO practice rectum sex. Most gay
men even lick the rectum of there partner. Almost all gay men take the
Penis of another man in there mouth and allow him to squirt Sperm into
his mouth and then they swallow it. Sperm surpresses the imune system,
that is so, in Normal sex, the mothers body does not destroy the fathers
Sperm. But when a mans sperm is put into the body of another man, his
imune system gets surpressed. That is why gay men develope A.I.D.S.
Our bodies our set up by nature itself for women and men to be together
sexually, and reproduce. And there are some serious health risks to
doing things differently. Also, gay people would never admit this, but
gay men have a much higher rate to molest children, reading pornography
to stimulate there sex arousal and fantasize about having sex with young
boys......proven fact. There are even web sites trying to promote it,
and most gay men in the church have been convicted of molesting young
boys. It goes against God, Nature, or anyway you want to look at it.
Now you have gay Christians???? How can you be a gay person and call
yourself a Christian? I mean they are actually trying to fight to get
into the Churches. What should we do? Throw out all the passages in
the Holy Bible that speaks against homosexuality? Anyway you look at it
is wrong. Naturally, our bodies were created for a woman and a man to
be together. That is why gay people cannot bear children. It is not
natural.

Marie C. Bennett
2003-08-14 08:09:24 EST
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 11:11:21 GMT, CGH1966 <CGH1966@aol.com> wrote:

>I have been reading these posts for days now. Some claim that God's
>word has no place in American law. And although the Bible speaks against
>homosexuality, just for a minute, lets put the Bible aside. Lets just
>look at pure nature. Lets look at how our bodies were created. Our
>bodies were created......no matter how or where you think they came from
>.........to have sexual intercourse with a man and a woman. That is why
>the Vaginal wall is so thick, and made the way it is......to except the
>Penis.

Hey "Tyronerie" (aka Pedo-Pete etc.)! You just don't cut it as a
bible-thumping fundie. Better stick to your usual stuff --- you're
just not believable as a born-again Christian.

>The rectal wall is very thin, and also takes in and absorbs many
>germs more easily.......which makes it much more easily for gay men to
>get many different kind of diseases. The same disease can affect woman
>as well, but not as easily as gay men. The rectum wall is full of germs
>and other bad bacteria. Most gay men DO practice rectum sex. Most gay
>men even lick the rectum of there partner. Almost all gay men take the
>Penis of another man in there mouth and allow him to squirt Sperm into
>his mouth and then they swallow it. Sperm surpresses the imune system,
>that is so, in Normal sex, the mothers body does not destroy the fathers
>Sperm. But when a mans sperm is put into the body of another man, his
>imune system gets surpressed. That is why gay men develope A.I.D.S.
>Our bodies our set up by nature itself for women and men to be together
>sexually, and reproduce. And there are some serious health risks to
>doing things differently. Also, gay people would never admit this, but
>gay men have a much higher rate to molest children, reading pornography
>to stimulate there sex arousal and fantasize about having sex with young
>boys......proven fact. There are even web sites trying to promote it,
>and most gay men in the church have been convicted of molesting young
>boys. It goes against God, Nature, or anyway you want to look at it.
>Now you have gay Christians???? How can you be a gay person and call
>yourself a Christian? I mean they are actually trying to fight to get
>into the Churches. What should we do? Throw out all the passages in
>the Holy Bible that speaks against homosexuality? Anyway you look at it
>is wrong. Naturally, our bodies were created for a woman and a man to
>be together. That is why gay people cannot bear children. It is not
>natural.


David Davis.
2003-08-14 09:07:08 EST


CGH1966 wrote:

> I have been reading these posts for days now.� Some claim that God's
> word has no place in American law. And although the Bible speaks against
> homosexuality,

The bible cannot say one word about homosexuality because
they did not have a word or concept for it back then. How can
there be a sin for that which did not exist in their minds?

You and your lot (you Trent Lott) see two heterosexuals giving
the seed to Molech as two homosexuals having sex. You see
what you want to see, and take the verses out of context to say
what you want them to say.

"It is hard to imagine but true that at one time there was no such
thing as the concept of a gay identity. It was the 1860s and
political activity by Ulrichs and Kertbeny to remove criminal
stigma from such behavior that was the impetus for the invention
of the homosexual".
By Warren Throckmorton, PhD, July 2, 2003

http://www.gcc.edu/news/faculty/editorials/throckmorton_ulrich_7_2_03.htm




Elisha
2003-08-14 11:29:12 EST


CGH1966 wrote:

> I have been reading these posts for days now. Some claim that God's
> word has no place in American law. And although the Bible speaks against
> homosexuality, just for a minute, lets put the Bible aside. Lets just
> look at pure nature. Lets look at how our bodies were created. Our
> bodies were created......no matter how or where you think they came from
> .........to have sexual intercourse with a man and a woman. That is why
> the Vaginal wall is so thick, and made the way it is......to except the
> Penis. The rectal wall is very thin, and also takes in and absorbs many
> germs more easily.......which makes it much more easily for gay men to
> get many different kind of diseases. The same disease can affect woman
> as well, but not as easily as gay men. The rectum wall is full of germs
> and other bad bacteria. Most gay men DO practice rectum sex. Most gay
> men even lick the rectum of there partner. Almost all gay men take the
> Penis of another man in there mouth and allow him to squirt Sperm into
> his mouth and then they swallow it. Sperm surpresses the imune system,
> that is so, in Normal sex, the mothers body does not destroy the fathers
> Sperm. But when a mans sperm is put into the body of another man, his
> imune system gets surpressed. That is why gay men develope A.I.D.S.
> Our bodies our set up by nature itself for women and men to be together
> sexually, and reproduce. And there are some serious health risks to
> doing things differently. Also, gay people would never admit this, but
> gay men have a much higher rate to molest children, reading pornography
> to stimulate there sex arousal and fantasize about having sex with young
> boys......proven fact. There are even web sites trying to promote it,
> and most gay men in the church have been convicted of molesting young
> boys. It goes against God, Nature, or anyway you want to look at it.
> Now you have gay Christians???? How can you be a gay person and call
> yourself a Christian? I mean they are actually trying to fight to get
> into the Churches. What should we do? Throw out all the passages in
> the Holy Bible that speaks against homosexuality? Anyway you look at it
> is wrong. Naturally, our bodies were created for a woman and a man to
> be together. That is why gay people cannot bear children. It is not
> natural.




Well said.




Ninure Saunders
2003-08-14 12:43:03 EST
In article <Tv6dnSo7ELBgMqaiU-KYgw@comcast.com>, "JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com>
wrote:

-"John Vogel" <jvogel2000@hotmail.com> wrote
-
-> Paul wrote in no uncertain terms about homosexuality when he
-> said "also men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned
-> in their lust one toward another; men with men working that
-> which is unseemly".(Romans 1:27) How can you say this sin
-> "did not exist in their minds"?
-
-Because he wasn't calling "it" a sin, he was calling idolatry a
-sin.
-
-You're misrepresenting Romans:1
-
-> What about the word "arsenokoites"?
-
-What about it? If you think you have something to offer us, then
-give us some real-world examples of this word, in context, as
-it exist outside of the bible.

I hardly doubt he'll be able to that....

Most of these folks usually just "parrot" what they have been told, when
they are able to do that much.

So let us elp oyt a bit, shall we?

All known references to arsenokoit*
http://www.jeramyt.org/gay/arsenok.html

Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk

The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk

My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk

My Online Diary
http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org

To send e-mail, remove nohate from address

John Vogel
2003-08-14 14:36:44 EST

"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tv6dnSo7ELBgMqaiU-KYgw@comcast.com...
>
> "John Vogel" <jvogel2000@hotmail.com> wrote
>
> > Paul wrote in no uncertain terms about homosexuality when he
> > said "also men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned
> > in their lust one toward another; men with men working that
> > which is unseemly".(Romans 1:27) How can you say this sin
> > "did not exist in their minds"?
>
> Because he wasn't calling "it" a sin, he was calling idolatry a
> sin.

"men leaving the natural use of the woman, burning in their lust one toward
another" is talking about idolatry? I don't understand how you arrive at
this conclusion. I do agree that Romans 1:23 is speaking of idolatry
("changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to
corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.")
but what Paul says AFTER speaking of idolatru is this:

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 recompense of their error which was meet.
(Rom 1:26-27 KJV)

Notice how Paul sayd that God "gave them up unto vile affections"?
Afterward, he gives an example of such vile affections. I cannot see how
this could NOT be talking about homosexuality, I mean "men leaving the
natural use of the woman... burning in lust one toward another... men with
men working that which is unseemly" what sort of understanding do you get
from this?

> You're misrepresenting Romans:1

If I am misrepresneting Romans 1, then I apologize. I don't believe I am
misrepresenting Pauls words, but I do admit I am not perfect in my
understanding and often things I THINK I understand are not in reality what
is meant. I do admit I could very well be in error and appreciate it if you
can explain where I am in error (if this is the case) that I might not
continue in error.

> > What about the word "arsenokoites"?
>
> What about it? If you think you have something to offer us, then
> give us some real-world examples of this word, in context, as
> it exist outside of the bible.

I don't have any "real-world" examples, off hand. Again, I am asking why
this wouldn't be considered a term of homo-sexuality. If you have a good
reason for believing there is some other use for the word, then I'd
appreciate your sharing it with me. All I have to "offer you" is my
observations (for what they are worth) and intelligent conversations
concerning the issue of homosexuality. I'm really not interesting in
accusations or condemnation or judging anyone, nor am I interested in being
accused, condemned or judged BY anyone. I am interested in a compassionate,
open dialogue on our differences in understanding what the bible says about
these things. Is it possible we could discuss these things without hate and
animosity?




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Dennis Kemmerer
2003-08-14 17:45:00 EST
"CGH1966" <CGH1966@aol.com> wrote in message news:3F3B6E6C.3B1A@aol.com...
> I have been reading these posts for days now. Some claim that God's
> word has no place in American law. And although the Bible speaks against
> homosexuality, just for a minute, lets put the Bible aside. Lets just
> look at pure nature. Lets look at how our bodies were created. Our
> bodies were created......no matter how or where you think they came from
> .........to have sexual intercourse with a man and a woman. That is why
> the Vaginal wall is so thick, and made the way it is......to except the
> Penis. The rectal wall is very thin, and also takes in and absorbs many

Another tiny mind from the penis-vagina crowd speaks!

> germs more easily.......which makes it much more easily for gay men to
> get many different kind of diseases. The same disease can affect woman
> as well, but not as easily as gay men.

Of course not. You'd have to get rid of all of your lesbian porn.

> The rectum wall is full of germs
> and other bad bacteria. Most gay men DO practice rectum sex.

As do a hell of a lot of straight men. Oh, wait, I guess women's assholes
don't have any germs.

> Most gay
> men even lick the rectum of there partner.

Just like straight people.

> Almost all gay men take the
> Penis of another man in there mouth and allow him to squirt Sperm into
> his mouth and then they swallow it.

Just like a lot of women I know.

> Sperm surpresses the imune system,
> that is so, in Normal sex, the mothers body does not destroy the fathers
> Sperm. But when a mans sperm is put into the body of another man, his
> imune system gets surpressed.

You're amusingly stupid.

[snip remainder of idiotic assertions]

[plonk]



David Davis.
2003-08-14 19:09:10 EST


John Vogel wrote:

> "David Davis." <Davist@neutralc.com> wrote in message
> news:3F3B863F.ED674214@neutralc.com...
> >
> >
> > CGH1966 wrote:
> >
> > > I have been reading these posts for days now. Some claim that God's
> > > word has no place in American law. And although the Bible speaks against
> > > homosexuality,
> >
> > The bible cannot say one word about homosexuality because
> > they did not have a word or concept for it back then. How can
> > there be a sin for that which did not exist in their minds.
>
> Paul wrote in no uncertain terms about homosexuality when he said "also men,
> leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
> another; men with men working that which is unseemly".(Romans 1:27)
> How can you say this sin "did not exist in their minds"?

Adam Clarke's Commentary:
Romans, 1
Verse 23. They changed the glory,] The finest representation of
their deities was in the human figure; and on such representative
figures the sculptors spent all their skill; hence the HERCULES of
Farnese, the VENUS of Medicis, and the APOLLO of Belvidere.
And when they had formed their gods according to the human shape,
they endowed them with human passions; and as they clothed them
with attributes of extraordinary strength, beauty, wisdom, &c., not
having the true principles of morality, they represented them as
slaves to the most disorderly and disgraceful passions; excelling in
irregularities the most profligate of men, as possessing unlimited
powers of sensual gratification.

Verse 26.�� For this cause God gave them up]. Their system
of idolatry necessarily produced all kinds of impurity.
How could it be otherwise, when the highest objects of
their worship were adulterers, fornicators, and prostitutes
of the most infamous kind, such as Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, Venus.

Verse 27. Receiving in themselves that recompense,] Both
the women and men, by their unnatural prostitutions, enervated
their bodies, so that barrenness prevailed, and those disorders
which are necessarily attendant on prostitution and sodomitical
practices.

"It is hard to imagine but true that at one time there was no such
thing as the concept of a gay identity. "
By Warren Throckmorton, PhD, July 2, 2003

http://www.gcc.edu/news/faculty/editorials/throckmorton_ulrich_7_2_03.htm



> �
>
> You claim they did not have a word or concept for it back then. What about
> the word "arsenokoites"? This word is used in 1 Tim 1:9

The word does not appear in 1:9

> and is translated
> "them that defile themselves with mankind" in the KJV and it is translated
> "abusers of themselves with mankind" in 1 Cor 6:9.

The word translates to a Sodomite = qadesh which means a male
temple prostitute.

http://www.khouse.org/cgi-bin.blb/strongs.pl?book=Deu&chapter=23&verse=17&strongs=06945


> �
>
> > You and your lot (you Trent Lott) see two heterosexuals giving
> > the seed to Molech as two homosexuals having sex. You see
> > what you want to see, and take the verses out of context to say
> > what you want them to say.
>
> "Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbor's wife, to defile
> thyself with her. And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the
> fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the
> LORD. Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
> Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither
> shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
> Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the
> nations are defiled which I cast out before you: And the land is defiled:
> therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself
> vomiteth out her inhabitants."� (Lev 18:20-25 KJV)
>
> In context, God is speaking, first, about incense, then he speaks about
> adultury... After God commands that "Thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass
> through the fire of molech", he says "neither shalt thou profane the name of
> thy God: I AM YHWH". THEN the scripture GOES ON to say "thou shalt not lie
> with mankind as with womankind, it is an abomination, then it speaks of
> bestiality.
>
> There is NOTHING in this context to suggest that these scriptures are
> referring to this one verse about Molech, neither the scripture before nor
> the scripture after the verse is speaking of Molech, as far as I can tell.

Then why is Moilech in that chapter at all? What earthy reason
would Molech be in there if not for temple prostution.

Baal and Molech are the same religion;

The rituals performed in Ugaritic worship involved a great deal
of alcohol and sexual promiscuity. Worship at Ugarit was
essentially a drunken orgy in which priests and worshippers
indulged in excessive drinking and excessive sexuality. This
because the worshippers were attempting to convince Baal
to send rain on their crops. Since rain and semen were seen
in the ancient world as the same thing (as both produced fruit),
it simply makes sense that participants in fertility religion
behaved this way.

http://www.theology.edu/ugarbib.htm


> �
>
> Leviticus 20:1-5 also condemns those who "give any of his seed to Molech"
> but there is no mention of lying with man as with woman.

Lev 20:13 the chapter is devoted to the worship of Molech.

> In 1 King 11:7 we
> have a reference to Solomon building "a high place" for Chemosh and Molech,
> but in the context of this chapter, there is NOTHING about any homosexual
> activity, nothing about man lying with man as he lies with woman.

The word High Place bamah {bam-maw'}high places (as places of worship)
which is well known to be ramah {raw-maw'}as place of illicit worship.

Ezek 16:
21� That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them
to cause them to pass through the fire for them? (Molech)
...
24� That thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place,
and hast made thee an high place in every street.

Adam Clarke's Commentary
Ezek 16:
Verse 24. Thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place a
stew or brothel, a bordel house. "Thou hast builded thy
stewes and bordell houses in every place."

> �
>
> In 2 Kings 23:10, we find Molech again... it says "he defiled Topheth, which
> is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son
> or his daughter to pass through the fire to Molech. ", compare this with the
> previous instances, and we begin to understand what it means to "let thy
> seed pass through the fire of Moech".

And passing through fire was (usually) like a hot baptism to
Baal-Molech. Seed is also your semen.


> There is nothing in 2 Kings 23:10 that
> speak of any sodomistic activity, however. Nothing about man lying with man
> as he lies with woman. The� last instance of Molech also says "sons and
> daughters to pass through"

2 Kings 23:
7� And he brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by
the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove.

Temple prostitutes, for the Chemarim priests

2 Kings 23:
5� And he put down the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah
had ordained to burn incense in the high places in the cities of Judah,
and in the places round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense
unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all
the host of heaven.


> �
>
> Here it is: Jer 32:35 "And they built the high places of Baal, which are in
> the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to
> pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came
> it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to
> sin.", and again, there is no mention of actual sodomy or homosexual
> behaviour. No indication at all. So, explain to me how the context of
> Leviticus 18:22 is referring to Molech?

The rituals performed in Ugaritic worship involved a great deal
of alcohol and sexual promiscuity. Worship at Ugarit was
essentially a drunken orgy in which priests and worshippers
indulged in excessive drinking and excessive sexuality. This
because the worshippers were attempting to convince Baal
to send rain on their crops. Since rain and semen were seen
in the ancient world as the same thing (as both produced fruit),
it simply makes sense that participants in fertility religion
behaved this way.

http://www.theology.edu/ugarbib.htm

Ezek 16:
21� That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them
to cause them to pass through the fire for them? (Molech)
...
24� That thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place,
and hast made thee an high place in every street.

Adam Clarke's Commentary
Ezek 16:
Verse 24. Thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place a
stew or brothel, a bordel house.

> �
>
> Now, let's examine the other place that speak of "man lying with man as with
> woman".
>
> In Leviticus 20:13 we have the commandment repeated, but note the context,
> this time. Let me quote Leviticus 20:10-15 so that we might get it in
> context:

Leviticus 18 and 20 have nothing to do with a sin of homosexuality,
only idolatry, using your body which is the temple of God against
God to worship the�fertility gods as Baal-Molech and Venus. The
context is:

Lev 20:
2� Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever
he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that
sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech;
he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall
stone him with stones.
...
5� Then I will set my face against that man, and against his
family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after
him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people.


Leviticus 18:
21� And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the
fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy
God: I am the LORD. (give no seed to Molech)
22� Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it
is abomination.(give no seed to male Chemarim priests to Molech)
23� Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself
therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie
down thereto: it is confusion.(give no seed to beasts to Molech)
24� Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in
all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:
(Give no seed to Molech it does not build the nation it defiles
the nation, it is idolatry an abomination.)

Lev 20:
3� And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him
off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed
unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.
...
13� If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both
of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put
to death; their blood shall be upon them. (give no seed to male
Chemarim priests to Molech, it is idolatry, which is treason,
which carried the death penalty)
...
15� And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death:
and ye shall slay the beast. (give no seed to beasts to Molech)
16� And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto,
thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to
death; their blood shall be upon them. (give no seed to beasts to
Molech in temple idolatrous worship)

Adam Clarke's Commentary
Ezek 16:
Verse 24. Thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place a
stew or brothel, a bordel house.

Matthew Henry Commentary
2 Kings 23:4-7
Those that dishonoured their God were justly left thus to
dishonour themselves in prostitution, Rom. 1:24. There were
women that wove hangings for the grove (v. 7), tents which
encompassed the image of Venus, where the worshippers committed
all manner of lewdness, and this in the house of the Lord.


Septuagint Greek translation of about 250BC reads: "And thou
shalt not give of thy seed to serve a ruler; and thou shalt not
profane my holy name; I [am] the Lord."� 'Do not dedicate any
of your seed or offspring to Molech.'


> �
>
> And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that
> committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the
> adulteress shall surely be put to death. And the man that lieth with his
> father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall
> surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. And if a man lie
> with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they
> have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them. *If a man also lie
> with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an
> abomination*: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon
> them. And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall
> be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.
> And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall
> slay the beast. (Lev 20:10-15 KJV)
>
> Do you notice, there is no mention of Molech? Is it your conention that
> because "Molech" was mentioned in ONE INSTANCE where homosexual activity is
> mentioned that ANY instance of this activity is talking about the
> abomination of the Ammonites, Molech?

All was the context in the worship of Baal-Molech, and the larger
context is property rights violations.

This cannot be done in a sound bite read here:

http://www.angelfire.com/oh5/bibhom/

http://www.angelfire.com/oh2/bibhom/mythsin.html




Bob
2003-08-14 19:13:05 EST
In article <3f3bd707_4@corp.newsgroups.com>, John Vogel
<*0@hotmail.com> wrote:

> For this cause God gave them up

Yes and the word being translated as 'gave them up' used in the context
of there being no choice, "as a jailer gives up his prisoners" usual
illustration.

The idolaters had no choice - God inflicted this behavior as a
punishment, it wasn't a choice.

Has nothing to do with gay men and women.

David Davis.
2003-08-14 19:21:16 EST


John Vogel wrote:

> "JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Tv6dnSo7ELBgMqaiU-KYgw@comcast.com...
> >
> > "John Vogel" <jvogel2000@hotmail.com> wrote
> >
> > > Paul wrote in no uncertain terms about homosexuality when he
> > > said "also men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned
> > > in their lust one toward another; men with men working that
> > > which is unseemly".(Romans 1:27) How can you say this sin
> > > "did not exist in their minds"?
> >
> > Because he wasn't calling "it" a sin, he was calling idolatry a
> > sin.
>
> "men leaving the natural use of the woman, burning in their lust one toward
> another" is talking about idolatry? I don't understand how you arrive at
> this conclusion. I do agree that Romans 1:23 is speaking of idolatry
> ("changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to
> corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.")
> but what Paul says AFTER speaking of idolatru is this:

Adam Clarke's Commentary:
Romans, 1
Verse 23. They changed the glory,] The finest representation of
their deities was in the human figure; and on such representative
figures the sculptors spent all their skill; hence the HERCULES of
Farnese, the VENUS of Medicis, and the APOLLO of Belvidere.
And when they had formed their gods according to the human shape,
they endowed them with human passions; and as they clothed them
with attributes of extraordinary strength, beauty, wisdom, &c., not
having the true principles of morality, they represented them as
slaves to the most disorderly and disgraceful passions; excelling in
irregularities the most profligate of men, as possessing unlimited
powers of sensual gratification.

Verse 26.�� For this cause God gave them up]. Their system
of idolatry necessarily produced all kinds of impurity.
How could it be otherwise, when the highest objects of
their worship were adulterers, fornicators, and prostitutes
of the most infamous kind, such as Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, Venus.

Verse 27. Receiving in themselves that recompense,] Both
the women and men, by their unnatural prostitutions, enervated
their bodies, so that barrenness prevailed, and those disorders
which are necessarily attendant on prostitution and sodomitical
practices.


> �
>
> �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 recompense of their error which was meet.
> (Rom 1:26-27 KJV)

The letter to the Romans was written in Corinth, a notorious city of
temple prostitution, Paul wrote the letter to warn them not to
do as he was seeing in Corinth where he lived for a year and a half,
and knew was the case also in Rome.

Adam Clarke's Commentary
1 Cor 5:
Verse 1. There is fornication among you] The word porneia, which
we translate fornication in this place, must be understood in its
utmost latitude of meaning, as implying all kinds of impurity; for, that
the Corinthians were notoriously guilty of every species of irregularity
and debauch, we have already seen; and it is not likely that in speaking
on this subject, in reference to a people so very notorious, he would
refer to only one species of impurity, and that not the most flagitious.





> �
>
> Notice how Paul sayd that God "gave them up unto vile affections"?

And giving seed to the fertility gods, in using your body which
is God's property against God himself, is not a vile affection
to the fertility gods?

1 Cor 6:
13� Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy
both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord;
and the Lord for the body.
14� And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by
his own power.
15� Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I
then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot?
God forbid.
16� What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body?
for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
17� But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
18� Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body;
but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
19� What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost
which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
20� For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body,
and in your spirit, which are God's.

And by the way shows 1 Cor 6:9 in context is temple prostitution.
Where Paul had lived for a year and a half, the the most notorious
city to temple prostitution there was.


> Afterward, he gives an example of such vile affections. I cannot see how
> this could NOT be talking about homosexuality,

Hey bigots are like that, they see in the bible what they want to see.

> I mean "men leaving the
> natural use of the woman... burning in lust one toward another... men with
> men working that which is unseemly" what sort of understanding do you get
> from this?
>
> > You're misrepresenting Romans:1
>
> If I am misrepresneting Romans 1, then I apologize. I don't believe I am
> misrepresenting Pauls words, but I do admit I am not perfect in my
> understanding and often things I THINK I understand are not in reality what
> is meant. I do admit I could very well be in error and appreciate it if you
> can explain where I am in error (if this is the case) that I might not
> continue in error.
>
> > > What about the word "arsenokoites"?
> >
> > What about it? If you think you have something to offer us, then
> > give us some real-world examples of this word, in context, as
> > it exist outside of the bible.
>
> I don't have any "real-world" examples, off hand. Again, I am asking why
> this wouldn't be considered a term of homo-sexuality. If you have a good
> reason for believing there is some other use for the word, then I'd
> appreciate your sharing it with me. All I have to "offer you" is my
> observations (for what they are worth) and intelligent conversations
> concerning the issue of homosexuality. I'm really not interesting in
> accusations or condemnation or judging anyone, nor am I interested in being
> accused, condemned or judged BY anyone. I am interested in a compassionate,
> open dialogue on our differences in understanding what the bible says about
> these things. Is it possible we could discuss these things without hate and
> animosity?
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----==� Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----



Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron