What Would Jesus Say About Gay Marriage?

Divorce, not homosexuality, was the deviation that preoccupied him.

liampalacio

08/22/2013 03:06:34 AM

HI Mr. Miles, I read your bio and it's pretty impressive. By reading it, anyone can see that you have a lot of head knowledge. One could ask, "what haven't you been involved with or what classes haven't you taken?". The one thing that pops into my limited mind is Rev. 3:14-22. I'm sure you know it forwards and backwards. From one Christian to another, I would like to remind you that Jesus is omniscience (which means all knowing) and when He returns, today or 10,000 years from now, He won't need a young man to explain current events. You are correct when you wrote that Jesus didn't mention homosexuality when He was addressing His disciples on marriage, it wasn't needed, but where do you suppose that Jesus was when GOD gave instruction to Moses in Leviticus 18:22? He - Jesus, was present with the Father and I'm sure that Jesus was in agreement (that homosexuality is an abomination) with the Father, John 1:1. I do see your point regarding divorce, it's wrong and the Scriptures say that GOD hates divorce, Malachi 2:16. I have to correct your thesis statement of "Divorce, not homosexuality, was the deviation that preoccupied him." This is an incorrect statement. Jesus was "preoccupied" with the salvation of the world and not the condemnation of it, in other words, He came to save. I feel that you are preoccupied with being accepted by your peers. I feel that you have lost your first love, which is Jesus. You have one foot in Christianity (which it appears that you are attempting to wipe off as if it was soiling your shoe) and the other in the world, didn't Jesus say, "you can't serve two masters", Matt. 6:24. I'll close by reminding you what Romans 13:11 states, And [do] this, knowing the time, that now [it is] high time to awake out of sleep; for now our salvation [is] nearer than when we [first] believed. It's time that all Christians wake up out of the stupor that we are in and stand up for righteousness. This is my humble opinion, thanks.

dkeith45

07/11/2011 05:48:22 AM

Well put Jack. Excellent! BTW, LOVED your book, God, a biography. You are a GREAT bible scholar.

warroom

07/10/2011 11:33:06 AM

This article expresses your lack of scriptural knowledge, and understanding. Many do not come to realization that scripture was written by Hebrews, for Hebrews, with folks with a Hebrew backround and understanding.They were the "chosen". So, to attempt to understand with platonic thinking will literally get you with very little understanding of exactly what the text is telling you. Yeshua, which is the correct name of The Messiah, time, and time again, told us that He only did, or said what The Father said, or told Him to do. Scripture is very clear on the topic of homosexuality, and also adultery, in both the Old and New Testement. For those who say there's no New T. mention, reread 1 Corinthians 6, with emphasis on 18;, and Romans 1, with emphasis on 27;, and Jude 7. Christianity , once one studies out truth, are the "luke-warm" in Revelation. If one is actually serious of spending eternity with The Father, I would suggest they study out the "deeds" of the Nicolaitans, and articles from secular history that show us the orders given directly to the Council of Nicea by Constantine. Remove the "Hebrew", and insert the "Roman". And you have a hard time with the "Rule Book now"! I, myself ,have been on both sides of the fence, so to speak. I have seen demonstrations of the demonic power, and once waking up to truth, now know the ONLY way for that to occur, is they copied something else, much more powerful. There is nothing more powerful than The Almighty One True Living God of Avraham, Issac, and Jacob. It's amazing the information that is in the books which the "Holy Roman Empire" had removed, the enemy works so sly and stealthy, if you don't seek out the face of The Creator, one will never know truth.Just like nations going to war, you need to not underestimate your enemy to insure victory, which, once one has truth, is already done. Without truth, we are all just pawns that the enemy uses to "steal, kill, and destroy". The liberal media is one of the devils favorite tools, "can't we all just get along???" Since Bill Clinton, immoral sexual activity has exploded. The Almighty will use our enemies to destroy this nation. Look at the ridiculous cost of medical care just on this one issue alone, HELLO, if your a taxpayer, YOUR paying the tab for this immoral behavior!!! Then, our intellegent president speaks out on taking covenant land from Israel, and the USA has had nothing but one natural disaster after another, like we have never had before, purely coincidental, I'm sure. Never mind that it's in scripture, and has been validated by modern historians since the 1930s. Even with some of the text messed with, The Bible is STILL the ONLY book written with a prophetic 100% track record.What hasn't happened yet- simply just hasn't happened. Modern science VALIDATES The Bible at every encounter, which, is of no surprise, since it was written there, BEFORE man had a clue. Where do you think all these "brilliant" ideas came from for man to puzzle out? Wake up folks, history and science prove out that YaHoVeH is very real, and Yeshua the Messiah has been here, and still is among us. Your eternal home depends on YOU, seeking, and finding the truth, for YOURSELF!!!

wogmin

07/09/2011 05:16:31 PM

Jack, nice article. You should really excel in fairy-tales[no pun intended], because that is exactly what this article is. Your story, is so full of holes, it borders on, absolute ignorance. You must be reading one of those new contemporary, politically correct bibles that essentially has eliminated the notion that God, who changes not, has suddenly changed His whole view on the issue of homosexuality, and now, accepts, what He destroyed the city of Sodom, for. This city, was named after the main characteristic of the people in that city, and that was sodomy. Even when the Angels, in th eform of men, went in to Lot's house, the men of the city tried to get them to come out, so they could have sex with them. Jesus did not address the issue of homosexuality during His time on the earth, because, it was a non-issue. Those that were guilty of it, were killed. If were were any gays in the area, they were deep in the closet. And, as far as gay marriage is concerned, as far as God is concerned, there is no such thing.

jimmyw1

07/09/2011 09:01:46 AM

the communities of gays and homosexuals could try reading thier bibles.it compares a man who wolld lie down with another man as one who would lie down with a beast in the fieldstyhey are searching for something god opposes and has scorned sodom and gomorrah should be a lesson to new york and san fransisco of what they could expect.most of them do not believe in god anyway or they would be surely changing thier way of life.

debbie60435

09/29/2010 01:09:50 AM

Jesus would not say anything about same-sex marriages because Jesus never existed.

truthbetold2012

10/27/2009 04:11:54 PM

I'm amazed how commentators quote passages from the Bible to justify their hate for gay and lesbian minorities. If God abhors homosexuality, it would have never existed from pre-Biblical to modern times today. Jesus would have preached against and call it as it is. His apostles would have made homosexuality a hot topic in the New Testament, instead of divorce. Alas, the only direct reference to "homosexuality" as interpreted by Christian zealots are all in the Old Testament. The book of Leviticus also talks about not eating shrimp, clothing with two different fabrics, etc. as basis for condemnation. Where's the moral fervor? Should we stone Carrie Perjean who wore a dress of different fabrics at a pageant? Today, the "Christian" followers cherry-pick the verses to fuel their hatred and justify their ivory-tower superiority and morality. Talk about deja-vu -- the moral majority spewing religious spit when Jesus went to trial. I hope you can all readily quote the same Biblical verses when you die, face your God at judgment day, and answer his question: "What have you done to the least of your brethren?" You are not your God. Don't act like one.

livingvote.org

01/12/2009 06:18:17 PM

Interested in voicing your side about same sex marriages? Everyone who's posted here has raised some very good points, and they should be preserved for anyone in the future who needs to learn the arguments on both sides. The best place to do that is at http://www.livingvote.org/.

derrickw41

01/07/2009 05:22:22 PM

1 Corinthians 6:9---- States that homosexuality is among the wiked Genesis 13 and 19------- talk about the city of sodom, and how the lord destroyed it and its evil people who were participating in homosexual acts.... also, this is were the word sodomy comes from!!! Jude 1:7-------- same story about sodom Romans 1----God defines marriage as a sacred act between a man and a woman. Also, God condemns approving of those who take part in homosexual acts----- that is why christians have the saying "hate the sin not the sinner" Mathew 19:4-5---- God again defining marriage as between a man and a woman The Lord God makes his stance on homosexuality very clear

justfact4u

11/29/2008 07:29:23 AM

Christ Understood This from the Beginning John 1 1IN THE beginning [before all time] was the Word ([a]Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God [b]Himself.(A) 2He was present originally with God. 3All things were made and came into existence through Him; and without Him was not even one thing made that has come into being. 4In Him was Life, and the Life was the Light of men. 5And the Light shines on in the darkness, for the darkness has never overpowered it [put it out or absorbed it or appropriated it, and is unreceptive to it]. Genesis 2 20And Adam gave names to all the livestock and to the birds of the air and to every [wild] beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found a helper meet (suitable, adapted, complementary) for him. 21And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam; and while he slept, He took one of his ribs or a part of his side and closed up the [place with] flesh. 22And the rib or part of his side which the Lord God had taken from the man He built up and made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. 23Then Adam said, This [creature] is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of a man. 24Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall become united and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.(E) 25And the man and his wife were both naked and were not embarrassed or ashamed in each other's presence.

justfact4u

11/29/2008 06:59:16 AM

Jesus has a worldview on Marriage & Divorce Note it's"Male & Female" Christ's words not mine Genesis 1:27-28 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." Mark 10 5"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6"But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.'[a] 7'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,[b] 8and the two will become one flesh.'[c] So they are no longer two, but one. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." Matthew 19 4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Dragonslament

02/10/2008 06:19:18 PM

OK,WHETHER OR NOT U GO FOR IT IS NOT THE ISSUE! I BELIEVE THE ISSUE IS RESOLVED BIBLICALLY BY MATTHEW 22:36-40.lOVE THE LORD GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART,SOUL AND MIND AND BODY IS THE GREAT COMMANDMENT,THE SECOND IS LIKE IT YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. that about sums it up gay and married or not if your neighbor( we are all neighbors globally and spiritually) then ya gots to love them and take care of them and accept them as yourself! so not really a matter of government issue its a people issue and the two are mutually exclusive!Whether a man or woman is haveing sex with Steve or Eve is not our concern.Our concern is their sprititual,emotional ,and physical well being.the new testament if you are a christian put away a lot of the Levitical laws due to its in ability to meet all spiritual needs! such as Peters vision of eating all that he was taught unpure.But,Gentiles ate regularly! Hmmm! ok off my soap box now! Just thought i would pipe in!

joleesa

09/22/2007 12:40:08 AM

I would like to point out that this is the only valid legal contract (and make no mistake, it is a contract) in which legal adults in sound mind are prohibited on basis of gender. I find this a frightening precedent. Also, if you want to discuss marriage from a biblical perspective, then you cannot seriously say that marriage is "God-ordained" as one man and one woman. Ummmm...No. Abraham. David. Solomon. These are examples of God's chosen and they all possessed more than one wife. And concubines. Didn't Moses the Lawgiver also possess more than one wife?

Allronix1

03/18/2007 02:42:37 AM

Now, logically, if marriage has changed to be two adults in equal, loving partnership, why can't two men or two women enjoy the same privledge? How can the existance of their partnership threaten hetrosexual marriage, unless one is somehow afraid their wife will become tired of them and shack up with another woman? Why is it that the man and woman who get liquored up and race to Vegas any more sanctified than the gentlemen who have been partnered for more than twenty years? The church you follow doesn't have to see their marriage as valid (after all, the local priest refused to marry my Mom and Dad when she said "no dice" to converting to Catholicism), but the state's got no business in religion and vice versa.

Allronix1

03/18/2007 02:39:45 AM

Marriage was, for most of its history, an economic arrangement. In theory, women got a breadwinner and men got sex, heirs, and domestic services. Sorry, folks, but romance wasn't coming into the picture until later in the game - and in some places STILL isn't part of the deal. That's why the idea of wealthier men keeping mistresses and concubines, patronizing geishas and courtesans, was considered perfectly normal. (Of course, a WIFE that engaged in extramarital sex could be put to death) With feminism and the concept of romantic love, straights revolutionized marriage as not about heirs and property, but for love and companionship.

Do_unto_others

07/05/2005 05:06:15 PM

btw, heterosexual vaginal sex can be very UN-healthy, explicitly so in the case of rape.

Do_unto_others

07/05/2005 05:05:36 PM

And, of course, it is only "natural" for heterosexuals. Shurely it would be UN-natural for homosexuals to engage in heterosexual sex, no? "Maybe some few people prefer their own gender" - Hon', where DO you get these ideas? It ain't a preference, it's an orientation - like left-handedness. They don't 'prefer' to use their left hands - it is their natural orientation. Oh, and p.s. it's more than "some few"; try 25 million - and that's just Americans. "but that's not to be ... even allowed" Are you saying consenting sex between adults ought to be outlawed? Or are you saying, as in Leviticus, that the persons who "prefer their own gender" ought to be outlawed? It IS people we're discussing here, don't let's forget. "since it's not good for anybody" Gee, it was pretty good for me ANd for my husband last time we made love. "but an abomination" (IYNSHO) Like the "abomination" of eating shellfish? (Hint: it's just a few verses earlier in Leviticus)

Do_unto_others

07/05/2005 05:03:57 PM

Furienna - some scary post!!! "The first time I heard about homosexuality, I thought "But that's unnatural!" Gee, that's odd; the first time I heard about prejudice, I thought, "But that's unnatural!" 'No one had taught me that prejudice was wrong. I just felt right away, at my young age, that it was against the ways of nature, an abomination. It's a wrong thing to do, no matter who you are, where you are or when you are.' BTW, "man and woman are created to be together" - IF THEY'RE HETEROSEXUAL. Well, DUH! "Just compare a man's body and a woman's body. The man is created to get into a woman and the woman is created to have man get into her." I never knew B'net allowed such graphic descriptions. Oh my! Guess you've never witnessed real, live, actual gay people have sex. They seem to fit pretty well. Your insistence in limiting heterosexual sex to vaginal is pretty restrictive. You're sure to get an argument from some practising, admitted heterosexuals.

kerouac

02/03/2005 01:45:46 PM

Bible literalists lack of historical awareness is cause for alarm. It wasn't until the 17th that the bible was seen as always literally and factually true. The literalists were reation against the enlightement which seemed to be demystifying everything around them. There were those who needed to hang on to the metaphyisics of yesterday and decided that the Bible was the way to do it. Sadly, a great book has been rendered less meaningful by those who would strip it of its spiritual meaning in favor of its factual meaning which it simply cannot be counted on to be factually accurate. However, the stories have meaning and for those who are able to discern the meaning, the bible can be a reliable source of truth.

RealityGuy

10/04/2004 03:39:41 PM

Furienna- First, the first time I ate candy I just knew it was great and that eating as much as I could was the best thing. Well, I was wrong on candy eating and you are wrong on homosexuality. Second, homosexuality runs through out the "natural" world humans, dogs, swans, etd.....so, natual it is. Third, in some people's lives it is man and man or woman and woman who were created to be together. Fourth, I suggest you study sexaul acts a little more thoroughly. Vaginal sex is hardly always healthy and, masturbation and anal sex is not always unhealthy. Fifth, own gender sexuality may not be good for you...but it is for others. Sixth, who are you to say that someone else's life is an abomination? Peace!

Furienna

09/27/2004 05:25:00 AM

Hey Ebon! You're lucky I've watched "The nanny", so I can tell you that "meshuggana" is jiddish (Northen and eastern european jewish) for idiot or fool.

Furienna

09/27/2004 05:21:00 AM

The first time I heard about homosexuality, I thought "But that's unnatural!" No one had taught me that homosexuality was wrong. I just felt right away, at my young age, that it was against the ways of nature, an abomination. It's a wrong thing to do, no matter who you are, where you are or when you are. It's man and woman who are created to be together, not man and man or woman and woman. Just compare a man's body and a woman's body. The man is created to get into a woman and the woman is created to have man get into her. If you can't have vaginal sex with each other, which is the only healthy kind of sex and the original natural one to booth, you should just be good friends and not lovers. Maybe some few people prefer their own gender to the opposite sexually, but that's not to be encouraged or even allowed, since it's not good for anybody, but an abomination.

barblee

09/24/2004 09:34:49 AM

God's Word tells exactly how to live our lives and why we should. He would not tolerate gay marriage. He specifically tells us what is sin in the Bible. It leaves no doubt in your mind...it is perfectly clear.

Hunterkirk

06/24/2004 01:33:18 AM

Nice to know that you can speak for Jesus. So when do we open a new church in your name?

Ebon

05/18/2004 09:30:14 PM

bigred: On the one hand, LOL. On the other, what does "meshuganah" mean?

bigredone

05/18/2004 04:55:37 PM

[b]What would Jesus Say About Gay Marriage [/b] Same thing as what Seneca, Gamaliel, or any other contemporary would have said: [b]"WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?!?!? MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN!!! ARE YOU MESHUGANAH!?!?!?!" [/b]

michaelbea

03/28/2004 06:54:02 PM

Hi JohnQ, I went on a bit didn't I? But I felt compelled to write it all. God bless.

JohnQ

03/25/2004 08:21:45 PM

michaelbea- Curiously, I have not even looked at this thread in the last couple of days. And, I have no particular reason why about 30 minutes ago I decided to come here. What a coincidence. I have read your postsssss. I will go back and re-read Lev 18 - 24 tonight. Thanks!

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:57:26 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 10 (P.P.S. cont'd) The Law then is still a valid guide, when viewed in conjunction with Christ’s teachings, remembering that He did overturn or supersede some specific Laws but not all. P.P.P.S. Please also note that I’m not even remotely suggesting that the death penalty mentioned in Lev 20 is still valid. Jesus Christ overturned that by His example in John 8:1-12; “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” (Remember adultery is one of the offences listed in Lev 20 that attracts the death penalty.) Jesus didn’t condemn the adulteress, but told her to “go and sin no more”. Similarly if we know of someone who is sinning we are not to ignore it. In Matt 18:15 and Luke 17:3&4 Jesus tells us to reprove, rebuke or correct that person (His example in John 8 shows us we should do so without condemning them) and if they repent to forgive them. God bless.

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:56:13 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 9 (P.S. cont'd) Then the following few verses expand on the list with other prohibited relationships to include relatives who are not necessarily “blood relatives”. But I’m not really sure that this is directly relevant to the discussion here. Could it be one of those red herrings that Satan seems to inject into our thoughts trying to shake our faith (in this case, in the Bible), sidetrack us or cause dissention among Christians? P.P.S. Before anybody takes me to task about “the old passing away”, yes Christians are justified by faith, not by the law. But that doesn’t give us a licence to do whatever we want. Jesus Himself said that He didn’t come to destroy the Law. There are plenty of references where Christ preaches against sin and tells His followers to repent and sin no more, along with many post-resurrection references about it from Paul’s letters too. So, Christ’s expectation is for us to not sin, and surely true faith would result in a desire to follow this path. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:50:28 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 8 But even if that’s not a significant factor in Lev 18:21&22, we know there are other examples that show us proximity does not necessarily mean the verses are directly related. Basically, I think there are plenty of reasons to think the interpretation you’ve heard and embraced is at least a little flawed. I urge you to prayerfully read & think about it again. (If you’re a speed-reader, try reading it without those techniques.) May God bless you. P.S. As an aside, John, father/daughter incest may not be mentioned in Lev 20, but I believe it is covered in Lev 18:6, which cites “near of kin”, also translated as “blood relative”. It seems to me that this is the first of a list of prohibited sexual relationships, and would have to include father/daughter as well as father/son, and probably even mother/daughter and mother/son – unless I’m sadly mistaken, last time I checked they all qualified as “blood relatives”. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:49:08 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 7 Yet another factor that we should consider is that throughout Lev 18 & 19 and to a lesser degree, Ch 20, the text is punctuated by “I am the Lord” or “I am the Lord your God” at various places. Interestingly, this includes Lev 18:21 about sacrificing children to Molech, which ends with “I am the Lord”, and is then followed by v22; “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.” In every other case the text that follows these phrases is on a different tack or a different issue. Why would v21 be an exception? This may or may not be significant, but if we look at the other instances around it, this suggests that there is a change of tack between v21 & v22. So, even though v21 does refer to a Molech ritual, v22 is just as likely, if not more likely, to be a new thought not related to the previous verse, and therefore not about Molech rituals. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:47:51 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 6 I’d rather read what IS said objectively, because trying to “interpret” what might be meant but isn’t said can be very subjective and indeed misleading. And if I’m unsure or wrong, I’ll err on the side of caution. Also, if we look at other “lists” of Laws we see that each verse isn’t necessarily directly related to the previous one(s). For example, the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20. Here we see verses containing Laws about worship (ritual) immediately followed by verses clearly giving ethical and moral Laws. Their proximity here obviously doesn’t mean they’re all about worship or ritual. This doesn’t necessarily mean the same applies in Leviticus, but it’s a pretty substantial clue. I believe this should be taken into account when reading the passages in Leviticus. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:46:36 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 5 I’m sorry, but this also makes me doubt the validity of the “ritual” argument. Please think & pray about that, John (and anyone else who may be “listening in”). Next, I agree that Lev 20:23, “You must not live according to the customs of the nations I am going to drive out before you”, is an appeal for purity. There are similar verses in Chapter 18. And in both chapters the Lord has just finished listing a range of activities that He considers “impure”, some of which He explicitly identifies with Molech rituals, but most He does not. Why would He be any less explicit with the other verses if He did mean them to refer only to “ritual” situations? If the fact that they’re adjacent sways you, I’ll discuss that further down. And considering that the experts seem to attribute the Hebrew word for “customs” (20:23, also chuqqah) with more than just ritual connotations, it seems a bit of a stretch to use that to infer the whole chapter refers only to “ritual” practices. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:44:41 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 4 So new ideas should be welcomed and encouraged, but analysed as objectively as possible, not just adopted because they are new or because they conveniently fit with what we want. Fourth, from a purely logical point of view, if the “ritual” argument were totally valid, wouldn’t it apply to the entire chapter? (I think some of your earlier posts seemed to suggest that.) Does that mean that the lists of other prohibited relationships and activities in Lev 18 & 20 also refer only to “ritual” practices? Is there any evidence that these were practised in either Canaanite or Egyptian rituals? Don’t you think it’s a little strange that the people who dismiss the verses in Leviticus about homosexuality on the grounds that they refer only to “ritual” practices don’t seem to be so adamant about dismissing the other relationships and practices listed in those chapters? Or are incest, etc. only wrong if practised in rituals? That doesn’t seem to be very logical to me. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:43:21 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 3 On the other hand, those writers who support homosexuality for Christians seem to only acknowledge the ritual sense, ignoring the ethical sense of the word. Is it because that allows them to argue that this passage refers only to “ritual” practices not moral, whereas acknowledging the ethical sense might cast some doubt on their argument? It certainly makes me doubt the validity of the “ritual” argument. Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not against this view just because it differs from what some people call “conventional wisdom”. History is full of examples of people who went against “conventional wisdom” and were ultimately proven correct. But I’m sure there were even more who were ultimately proven incorrect. It’s not quite the same, but consider Thomas Edison and his invention of the incandescent light globe for a moment. How many of his ideas were proven incorrect before he came up with one that was proven correct? But history really only records the successful ones. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:41:56 PM

Hi JohnQ, part 2 . Verse 3 does mention statutes or ordinances, which could easily refer to “the law of the land” or civil law, instead of ritual practices. The original Hebrew word (chuqqah) seems to have both connotations. Secondly, verses 1-5 mentions Egyptian activities individually as well as Canaanite that your discussion seems to focus on. Thirdly, most of the references I’ve found so far define “to’evah” (or “to’ebah”, “tow’ebah”) differently from what you’ve quoted. For example, to summarise Strong’s concordance (ref# 08441) it’s: a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable; a. in ritual sense, b. in ethical sense. In other words, it can be either a ritual or an ethical thing or wrongdoing. cont'd

michaelbea

03/25/2004 07:39:22 PM

Hi JohnQ, I’m sorry it's taken me a while to respond to your last message. I’m certainly not an expert in O.T. Hebrew, so I had to do some research and rely on those who are more learned and more qualified than I am. (I almost said “smarter than I am”, but some people might say that it’s not hard to be smarter than me. J) Yes, the “ritual” view does sound logical and pretty valid if you look at Lev 18 & 20 in isolation. But that may not be a good idea, it can be misleading. Let me explain … Firstly, I think it’s relevant to remember that Lev 18:1-5 doesn’t actually mention rituals, but “doings” or “deeds” which could easily refer to normal life rather than rituals. The original Hebrew words (‘asah & ma’aseh) appear repeatedly in the O.T. and translate almost exclusively as ordinary rather than ritual activities. cont'd

JohnQ

03/20/2004 11:41:41 AM

michaelbea- part #3 And then lists a bunch of forbidden relationships, which include every form of incest except curiously the most common - father/daughter. And it lists homosexuality, cursing ones' parents, sex during menstruation, etc. and ends with: 23 You must not live according to the customs of the nations I am going to drive out before you, which is an appeal for purity. So I think that it is addressed to cultic and cultural practises of the pagan Canaanites. Peace!

JohnQ

03/20/2004 11:40:37 AM

michaelbea- part #2 Also the passage calls homosexuality “to’evah” which either means “ritually unclean” in Deut 14:3 or “detestable because foreigners do it" in Gen 43. (Genesis 43 refers to "toevah ha-goyim" which means “the uncleaniness of the foreigners”.) And while homosexual acts are called “to’evah”, female bestiality is called “tebel” which is “a perversion”. In Lev 20 the chapter starts out with: 1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him. 3 I will set my face against that man and I will cut him off from his people; for by giving his children to Molech, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. 4If the people of the community close their eyes when that man gives one of his children to Molech continued-

JohnQ

03/20/2004 11:39:13 AM

michaelbea- Lev 18:21 "'Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD. 22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is to’evah. 23 " 'Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is tebhel. Here, the command is sandwiched between a reference to child sacrifice to Molech and female bestiality. What is odd is that while female homosexuality isn't mentioned, female bestiality is specifically mentioned. Female bestiality of any sort has to be extremely rare and uncontrived* female bestiality is almost unknown. The fact that Molech was a (male) bull God who was to have sex with the (female) earth goddess, Astoroth, lends credence to the idea that this was a list of Molech cult practises that God wanted God’s followers to avoid. continued-

michaelbea

03/19/2004 06:16:07 AM

Hi JohnQ, have another read of it. Leviticus is for the Israelites. Yes, Ch18V3 refers to the practices of the Canaanites but only in the sense of "don't do as they do". Then from V4 onwards, it's God's Laws to His people. see V4 "You shall keep my judgements and keep my ordinances, to walk in them: I am the Lord." - this is clearly an instruction. (i.e. the reference to the Canaanites is as an example of what not to do, that's all, the instructions that take up the rest of the chapter are for His people.) And by virtue of Christ's words indicating that most of "the Law" still applies, this is His instruction to His followers too. God bless you.

JohnQ

03/17/2004 08:00:48 AM

michaelbea- Thanks, I agree. Except with your understanding of Leviticus 18. This addresses cultic and cultural practises of the pagan Canaanites. So, the message here is to stay true to God and not to pagan cults. God Bless and Peace with You!

michaelbea

03/17/2004 02:22:22 AM

JohnQ Yes, His teachings were geeared towards compassion and understanding but He also preached against sin, and for repentance and righteousness. There are enough verses where He told people literally to repent and/or "sin no more" that we can say that He expects His followers to repent and to resist sin. (see Matt5:29,30, Mark9:43-45, John8:11, Luke 13:3&5, Luke17:3, Luke5:32, Matt18:15, Luke24:46&47, John5:14, Luke15:1-10, etc., etc.) These words we know He said, and that's where we should find our guidance on things that He didn't mention specifically. To understand what He considered to be sin, He also said that the Law still stood (Matt5:17-18, Luke16:17), except where He said otherwise. So, Christians are expected to respect and obey the Law, which includes Lev18 which does condemn homosexuality. Yes, compassion and understanding are very, very important, but so is repentance, which leads us to obedience. God bless you.

JohnQ

03/16/2004 10:22:15 AM

michaelbea- I will agree that the lack of words attributed to our Lord Jesus Christ on the subject of homosexuality does not insure that he condoned it. Likewise, I can not agree that the lack of words insures he condemned it. His teachings were geared towards compassion and understanding as well as against people taking advantage of others. Peace!

michaelbea

03/15/2004 07:42:52 PM

.. cont'd Secondly, just because it's not recorded in the Gospels, we cannot assume He never spoke about it. I'd guess there are many, many events and teachings that occurred on a daily basis that we're either not specifically told about or only told in short summary. So, Jesus' silence in the Gospels about homosexuality, doesn't necessarily mean that He aproved. We have to assess it in light of what we are told in both the Old & New Testaments.

michaelbea

03/15/2004 07:42:29 PM

Another couple of thoughts have occurred to me since my last message. Firstly: We cannot judge what anyone thinks by what they don't say, even when we know the full context of their supposed "silence". So how can we presume to know what Christ thought/thinks about something that he hasn't spoken about. (That we know of!) If we were to think long and hard, we could probably come up with a long list of activities, occupations, orientations, thoughts etc., etc. that Christ was silent on. You can be sure that there'd be many among the list that we could say without doubt He wouldn't approve of. I may be wrong, but I don't think He spoke directly about brothels or the practice of prostitution (though He did minister to at least one prostitute), torturing people or animals, rape or even lying. None of that means that He condoned those things, does it? There are probably many other examples that could be added. cont'd

michaelbea

03/14/2004 08:47:48 PM

to discount them (e.g. Matt 15 Christ is accused of transgressing tradition and one of His answers is in v11 "Not what goes in to the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man." This flies in the face of not just some traditions, but quite likely the cleanliness & food Laws in Leviticus. Let's also not forget that in the passage referring to marriage & divorce in Mark 10:1 - 12, Christ mentions only husband and wife, man and wife, male and female, woman and husband. Nowhere does it mention man and man or woman and woman. So, that shows pretty clearly His understanding of marriage as between a man and a woman. Please read those passages prayerfully yourself. May God bless you in your search for the truth.

michaelbea

03/14/2004 08:36:59 PM

JohnQ: I can't see anything in Ex 20 that speaks to incest. As to sodomy, if you mean v17 and "covet", that possibly includes sodomy with animals. But since v14 already mentions adultery, why would "not covet your neighbour's wife" be meant in a sexual sense, as that's already been covered? I doubt that this verse is meant in a sexual context, more likely in the sense of envy/jealousy. So, "nor his ox, nor his donkey" probably isn't referring to sodomy. I think that's reinforced by the final phrase in v17 "nor anything that is your neighbour's." This seems to include inanimate objects so it must mean envy/jealousy not "lust". So, I disagree, incest and sodomy aren't covered in the Ten Commandments. So, their inclusion in Lev 18 has to be taken into acount when analysing His silence on the subject of Lev 18. Besides, as I said before, Christ mainly only mentioned specific laws when he wanted to modify them (e.g. divorce & adultery - where His views are MORE strict!) or ..cont'd

imdancin

03/12/2004 01:36:24 AM

I think Jesus would say to someone contemplating a gay marriage.......... To repent is to turn your back on sin and turn toward God. To sin is to turn your back on God and embrace sin. No man can be both sinful and holy. Christ makes clear the only alternatives to unregenerate man: repent or perish! By sinning, we step out from God's protection and become His enemies. We cannot be neutral. God says we are either for Him or against Him. This doesn’t mean we are unsaved if we sin. If that were true, none would make it. But His word is clear.

imdancin

03/12/2004 01:28:42 AM

I believe Jesus said, that All who accept Him and are born again......will be with Him in heaven.......... If this were not true, than He lied to us. I would like to think that in all civilization, more than 144,000 got saved. ha ha ha I am not to good with math......but I think the number is much much higher........:)

pamchad

03/11/2004 10:59:05 PM

Jesuswords, Thank you for the quotes. I tend to believe that the 144,000 and Messianic Jews not the sum total of saved people. Anyway, I understand that we are to love everyone as we want ourselves to be loved. I tend to agree with Michaelbea about what Jesus meant & felt about marriage and its purpose. pamchad~

Jesuswords

03/11/2004 01:51:07 PM

Marriage was never of God, but man's creation. Jesus has clearly spoken. This is why it has been written that only 144,000 will truly see heaven and be with Jesus. Our societies have promoted marriage and the churches have back it. Society has created sin and not know of what they have done. Leave man's worries and laws to those that are dead in spirit and understanding and follow the Lord Jesus Christ. As what has been written, Give unto Caesar, what is Caesar's.

Jesuswords

03/11/2004 01:50:53 PM

In summary, Jesus taught: And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's the same shall save it. For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. (Mark 8:34-38)

Jesuswords

03/11/2004 01:49:20 PM

If any man have ears to hear let him hear. (Mark 4:23) (Mark 7:16) And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given. For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not from him shall be taken even that which he hath. (Mark 4:24-25)

Jesuswords

03/11/2004 01:46:59 PM

Furthermore, Jesus says: Judge not, that ye be not judged For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. (Matthew 7:1-5) Many times Jesus has said men do not understand of what he has spoken: And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. (Mark 4:9)

Jesuswords

03/11/2004 01:40:43 PM

Jesus' final words on marriage, plainly spoken are: And Jesus answering said unto them. The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels: and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him. (Luke 20:34-38)

JohnQ

03/10/2004 12:39:53 AM

-michaelbea- Incest and besitality are covered by the Ten Commandments. The most logical conclusion is 'Tacit Approval'. Peace!

michaelbea

03/09/2004 07:14:17 PM

Jesus' silence on the subject is tacit approval? I've heard this logic before, but it ignores an obvious fact. Leviticus 18 also condemns incest & sexual relations with animals. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Jesus ever actually condemned those activities either! So, this logic would suggest that His silence about those activities are acceptable too! I'm pretty sure that Jack Miles (or most others who use this argument) wouldn't even try to suggest that. Since Christ came "not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it", wouldn't it be far more logical to infer that His silence on a particular part of the Law actually means that He supports that Law? I believe most of the Laws that He specifically spoke about were in the context of amending them or contradicting them. So, surely the most logical conclusion is that He still viewed homosexuality as an abomination! By the same token we are not to vilify homosexuals but lovingly show them their error and lead them to repentance.

Morah

03/03/2004 02:39:17 PM

I Realize this is a really old post but... SelfleMiyu, You said "Apostolic authority is a clever way of saying without fault." I don't understand this? Do you mean it's a clever way of sayint the person has no faults? Because if that is what you are saying I would suggest that you study Catholic tradition for just a little longer because that is absolutely not even implied in the Catholic (or the Orthodox or the Anglican for that matter) concept of 'apostolic authority.' If you are going to make criticisms at least make sure they are valid. Now, if that was just an unclear way of saying we believe their teachings are infallible then...I agree and I'm sorry for takivg offense.

Morah

03/03/2004 02:21:33 PM

::sigh:: This article makes me sad. Somebody said this man was once a Jesuit? Did he just conveniently leave out the Magisterium when considering Christian doctrine? Anyway, the fact is, the Church has always taught (and always will teach) that homosexual acts are abominable and should not be tolerated within Christianity. The real issue with modern Christians is that they accept that (because it does not affect them) but they scorn the fact that...ADULTERY is abominable and should not be tolerated within Christianity. Our hyopcrasy, though, should not negate the absolute sinfulness of sexual relationships outside of marraige (which is the real issue of Homosexuality...they can never be married by the church and therefore they can never have proper sexual relationships).

imdancin

03/03/2004 10:43:13 AM

JOhnQ The meaning is not changed. Give me scriptures where the meaning has changed

cknuck

03/03/2004 07:24:34 AM

Hey Brock that poll doen't surprise me at all. Although I feel that the men were a little less than truthful. blessed <

JohnQ

03/02/2004 10:45:47 PM

Howdy, Brock 13- click on "Beliefnet's Complete Coverage" which is a link just to the left of this post. Then, you will have to go down the list. You should have great fun! Peace!

Brock_13

03/02/2004 09:35:56 PM

Hey, JQ, mind pointing me back to the gay marriage debate? That pro/con one I wouldn't shuht up on earlier? I can't seem to find it, and I don't feel like getting accused of chaining my wife up in the kitchen, beating her, and forcing her to have babies against her will right now.. Maybe I'll feel like getting into that discussion some other time, but for now, I wanna stick with what I know--gay bashing. Sorry, couldn't resist. O=P

Brock_13

03/02/2004 09:29:11 PM

It's really cute how gay activists are blaming the crumbling of marriage on divorce, considering their liberal cohorts in the feminist movement are the reason the divorce rate is so high in the first place. We just did a poll for one of my sociology classes at TX State, between the heart of the Bible Belt and Mexico, one of the most Catholic countries in the west this side of Equador. Polled 100 students, 64 females, 36 males. Q: If you were in a strained, nonviolent relationship w/ your spouse, would you remain married for the sake of your children? Strongly agree: 3 m, 2 f Agree: 28 m, 9 f Disagree: 5 m, 13 f Strongly disagree: 0 m, 40 f There ya have it. For women in this country, personal satisfaction in a relationship means... well, pretty much everything. To hell with the children. But does that really surprise anybody?

JohnQ

03/02/2004 06:28:37 PM

-imdancin- Matthew 7:9 In many versions of the Bible, the word 'man' is utilized. In many newer versions 'which of you' or 'which one of you' is used. No, I am not in favor of changing the ten commandments. I think they are more pure to God's will than is the Bible. Peace!

imdancin

03/02/2004 01:03:22 PM

JohnQ Give me some examples...........how man has changed scriptures to fit the time. Do you think the Tem Commandments should be revamped? so that they fit the times?

namchuck

02/29/2004 07:40:57 PM

Sorry, in a hurry to get to class! That line should have read: 'I didn't say that Hellenistic influences 'effected' Jesus' ministry, but that he could not have been unaware of such influences...'

namchuck

02/29/2004 07:38:10 PM

Well, yes, cknuck, but even many of the early Christians didn't approve of much that Paul was doing to their beloved Gospel, and he had some rather weird notions about marriage too, didn't he (inspired of course, by his belief that Jesus was about to reappear to usher in a new world order)? And I suppose (despite the fact that earlier you were definite homosexuality was a modern phenomenon) that you are implying that the Greeks no longer exist (of course they do) because of their sexual proclivities? And, I didn't say that Hellenistic influences had 'effected' Jesus' ministry, but that he would have been unaware of such influences, including the Hellenistic approval of homosexual relationships, which makes his silence on the issue as likely a tacit approval as that of condemnation.

cknuck

02/28/2004 10:15:40 PM

Right namchuck, why would any society want to be like the Helenial society, by the way what are they doing now? The Hellenistic influences effected Jesus' ministry very little if at all, but Paul had much to say about it, it wasn't good. blessed<

namchuck

02/28/2004 06:45:03 PM

Do readers not find it amazing that certain believers will even invoke Jesus' silence for condemnatory purposes!? And one can only be staggered at the benightedness manifested when a believer would attempt to convey that homosexuality is a relatively modern phenomenon. Does cknuck know nothing -- just to name one society where gay relationships were perfectly acceptable -- of the sexual proclivities of the ancient Greeks? Hellenistic influences, including sexual practices, were prevalent in Palestine at the time of Jesus and serve as another clue that Jesus' silence can in no way be invoked as a condemnation of the practice.

JohnQ

02/28/2004 02:38:44 PM

-cknuck- First, no I can not conclude Jesus' silence on homosexuality is a condemnation of it. I think that the during the many translations and updates of the Bible that most but not all references were removed. Second, as a Gay Man probably pretty close to your age, I will suggest that homosexuality was much less visible 20years ago. But, not less common. I dated males and females in college. All my dorm mates knew when I was on a date with a female. None, knew when I was at the movies, or out for a beer with a guy...that we were on a date. Peace!

cknuck

02/28/2004 12:56:21 PM

Jesus' silence in the matter of homsexuality can be considered His condemnation of it. After all Jesus had much to say about hetrosexual sex and marriage, and if homosexuality was alright with Him or people He shared time with, might He not give some references to it, and I'm sure you do not delude yourself as to why He did not give instructions on such of an affair. It is false to think that this behavior was common as steppen suggests; why, it was not as common as little as twenty years ago. Many of the heterosexual practices of today were not common back then because of sanitary conditions alone, not to mention of the strick religious practices most folk followed. blessed<<

steppen0410e

02/28/2004 08:03:10 AM

Considering that certain possibly homophobic believers would have us believe that the deity has an inordinate interest in our sex lives, JohnQ, it is an oversight, if homosexuality is an offence to god, that it should go unmentioned, as you rightly point out, in the Ten Commandments and in the teachings of Jesus. When one keeps in mind that the practice was as common in the ancient world as it is today, the supposed oversight evaporates into complete irrelevance, especially in relation to, as I pointed out below, to the far more serious issues of oppression, war, poverty, etc.

JohnQ

02/27/2004 08:34:56 PM

-popplsa- With all due respect, this is a civil matter. A matter of Equal Rights under the Constitution of the USA. Now, as a Christian, I understand what you are saying. I especially like you concept of plain things. When I review the all the verses of the Bible that deal with the words of Christ our Lord, I find none where he even mentions homosexuality. When I refer to the Ten Commandments, I also come up with not a word. Truely, I believe if homosexuality were a major sin it would be covered in the Ten Commandments. And, since Christ never mentions it I do not see how we can even consider it a minor sin. Your respect for people and your compassion comes through in your words. I beleive your intentions are good. Peace!

popplsa

02/27/2004 08:24:23 PM

Our lives should reflect God's glory in act and in fact. We should all examine our hearts, because God judges our hearts. If you are a homosexual, are your actions in accord with the guidance of The Holy Spirit or are you living in defiance? This is written in love, with no malice intended. Peace and grace to anyone who reads and understands.

popplsa

02/27/2004 08:24:09 PM

So I do believe that everyone, as we are all God's children, should be treated with the same amount of respect, I do not believe we are called to accept a lifestyle that is against what is clearly written in scripture, and that includes all ongoing, willful sins that might be deemed a "sinful, unrepentant lifestyle." (cont'd)

popplsa

02/27/2004 08:23:55 PM

I have always been taught and believe that, in scripture, the plain things are the main things, and vice versa. This is one of the main and plain things. I believe our Heavenly Father, being full of grace, would not have so plainly defined marriage as between a man and a woman. On the contrary, I believe He would have created a genderless race. (cont'd)

popplsa

02/27/2004 08:23:18 PM

While I have very real concerns about how gay marriage might impact our children in general, I also have the strong belief that homosexual activity is a sin. Don't misunderstand, I don't believe it is a sin to BE homosexual, I believe it is a sin to act on it. Even though it may seem unfair for a loving God to prohibit someone from experiencing romantic love, at the same time, I have no doubt but that He did create some people with a different purpose in mind. I truly don't believe romantic love is the kind of love that is of utmost importance to God, do you? (cont'd)

steppen0410e

02/27/2004 05:57:39 PM

As I said, cknuck, I am indifferent to the whole gay-marriage issue. Gay people pose no threat to me, so I say, 'live and let live'. The whole business of believers harping on about gay issues, etc, is simply irrelevant and a distraction from far more important issues, like oppression, war, poverty, and the vast disparities between rich and poor. If people can still base their lives on belief in ancient superstitions despite an education in open-minded use of reason, experiment, observation and careful evaluation of data, the world has an uphill task in trying to reach sanity and peace.

jacknky

02/27/2004 12:39:19 PM

cknuck, If the Bible spoke as clearly as you pretend, how can so many other Christians read that same Bible and conclude that Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality? BTW, if you're so literal about the Bible, why aren't you pushing to make divorce against the law? That is something Jesus REALLY did have something to say about. cafeteria religion, cafeteria morality...

ajstone

02/27/2004 11:38:20 AM

cknuck, please tell me how, by asking for the right to marry, gays and lesbians are asking for "special rights"? As a legal matter, the right to marry is no different from the right to vote; and yet you claim to have manned the barricades against those who would deny black Americans that right. Why do you now man the barricades to prevent all Americans from enjoying the same right of marriage that you posssess? cknuck, you don't have to approve of same-sex marriage in order to support the right of gays and lesbians to enter into the same union as you or I. As I opined, Jesus likely would condemn intolerance before he would condemn two people who wanted to publicly share their lives together. He might not perform the marriage ceremony himself, but he certainly wouldn't resort to open bigotry to condemn the happy couple.

JohnQ

02/27/2004 10:49:26 AM

-part #2- Matthew 22:36-40 36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[1] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[2] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." Peace!

JohnQ

02/27/2004 10:47:44 AM

Donaldito- Here are two important "Christian" Biblical verses that don't seem to get enough attention: Matthew 7 : 1-3 "Do not judge or you too will be judged. For in the same way judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of saw dust in your brother's eye, but pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" ---Jesus Christ -continued-

Donaldito

02/27/2004 07:19:33 AM

cknuck: "Hey I'm sure you could get a lot of homosexuals to follow your evidence-less philosophies." Specifically, "evidence-less philosophies:" saying such a thing would indicate to me that you, in contrast, have evidence for your philosophies which, unless I'm mistaken, is Christianity. Please provide some of this evidence so I, too, may believe in something.

cknuck

02/27/2004 07:12:03 AM

steppen0410e: It's obvious that you do not want to talk about gay marriage issues, so I'll meet you on the b-log to explain about your evidenceless-philosophies. Not now, I have a hugh presentation coming up for which I must prepare, but I'll show up, look for my response. blessed<<

steppen0410e

02/26/2004 11:36:26 PM

(con'td) Finally, while I certainly wouldn't refer to my own benevolence as 'unsurpassed', the benevolence I do extend to my fellow man is not the carrot-and-stick variety inspired by a Bronze Age worldview, nor do I pretend to some non-existent spiritual advantage. I really cannot comprehend why anybody of sound mind would find a god who orders the murder of children worthy of either obedience or emulation, much less a worthy resource to social morality.

steppen0410e

02/26/2004 11:29:33 PM

I'm completely indifferent to gay marriage, cknuck, and it is the Bible god that commands the killing of witches. Do you honor the whole Bible or just those bits, like every other cafeteria Christian, that you like and ignore the rest? And how does one hurt a deity, especially one for which their is not a scintilla of evidence for? And out of sheer curiosity, what are the 'evidence-less philosophies' that I am supposed to be an adherent of? I can only imagine that last little bit of idle speculation was inspired by your own sense of frustration.

cknuck

02/26/2004 09:53:26 PM

steppen0410e: Oh what a ridiculous reach that bit of preaching was. You've had better arguments, but to accuse me of mudering witches or subscribing to such a thing as murder really shows you will go to no end to hurt God and anyone that follows Him. And of course on gay marriage you stand in favor of it? Your benevolence, is unsurpasted, and the world should follow your notions of religion and worship ourselves? Hey I'm sure you could get a lot of homosexuals to follow your evidence-less philosophies. I hope you reconcile your frustration with God. blessed <<

steppen0410e

02/26/2004 08:38:36 PM

That line should have begun: 'cknuck may go on about...'

steppen0410e

02/26/2004 08:37:10 PM

cknuck says 'sin is sin', but only if you buy into the old notion rooted in wishful thinking and superstition that there is some kind of despot god, like the biblical one, that has an inordinate interest in our sex lives. There is nothing clearer, of course, than that morality is a human invention, and something that is constantly being negotiated as conditions change. may go on about how he does 'not deny rights or anything', but the biblical morality he adhere's to would still have us murdering witches, which, considering there are no such thing, is as about as immoral and perverse as you can get.

cknuck

02/26/2004 05:02:50 PM

What would Jesus say about gay marriage? Well since you have put words into Jesus' mouth, perhaps He would say; "don't speak for Me," and say it's just sinful. And I know for sure from my life experience, Black Americans would say don't ride my back, we fought a different struggle. You already have and always have had civil rights as a man or a woman, that's all we were looking for, but you are looking for something different. You are asking for a special right, that is different to the nature of humans, as God intended. Now I'm not denying rights or anything, but also I'm not in denial, sin is sin and the fact that it has become acceptable in these end-times only goes to prove scripture and prophecy. It's funny that you preach that Jesus would agree to change the very nature of man as His Father, God designed it. blessed<

Donaldito

02/26/2004 03:39:03 PM

Hey, maybe no one cares, but I just thought I'd say: I won't have internet access for approx. 10 days, so I won't be posting. Although being invloved in these discussions can be absolutely exasperating at times, I do enjoy it over all. Talk to you soon.

JohnQ

02/26/2004 03:26:03 PM

-acolytejohn- The Bible clearly says many things that are certainly not clear. Are you quoting Old or New Testament with your Man with Man quote? While the Bible was inspired by God, it was still humans that put the words on paper and humans that have translated those words to fit the cause of the time. Peace!

JohnQ

02/26/2004 03:22:55 PM

-imdancin- I believe the way to know God's will is to read the Bible, pray, and ask for guidance. I believe that the Holy Spirit is available to all of us. I still very much believe in what Christ said in Matthew 22:36-40 God Bless You and Peace!

acolytejohn

02/26/2004 02:57:14 PM

The idea and notion of hiding behind discrimination is just a front for a more sinister cause.It says clearly "Man shall not lay down with man"At one time the left realy caried for the poor and the little guy that was perhaps before the new generation devaets came into play.How sneaky of the devil to sneak into a just cause and slowly corrupt it and making it seem as though it apeals to the human nature of caring.

jacknky

02/26/2004 02:47:37 PM

cknuck, The black struggle against discrimination is very relevent to the gay struggle against discrimination. In both cases, those wanting to discriminate were justifying it using the very same Bible. I myself heard the Bible being used to justify segregation from the pulpit when I was growing up. The point is that society is more enlightened now and anyone trying to use those Biblical arguments would be discredited. The point is that we are now on the path to being enlightened about gay rights too and your Biblical arhguments will have no more weight than the ones used to condone slavery, segregation, banning mixed race marriages and using women as property. I'm sure you're sincere but you're on the wrong side.

ajstone

02/26/2004 11:21:51 AM

cknuck, rights are rights. You can't get past that simple fact. Just as black Americans were denied the civil rights that were enjoyed by (generally speaking) the vast majority of Americans, you would deny a discrete group of Americans a right again enjoyed by a vast majority of Americans. It was bigotry when black Americans were denied civil rights back then; you advocate the same bigotry now against homosexuals. Jesus healed those who were physically impaired and catigated those who, by their actions, hurt others (an example of his penchant for social justice). Gays are neither physically impaired nor do their actions harm others--certainly not in any meaningful social-justice sense. Again, we come back to square one: Jesus was not a bigot. Instead of condemning same-sex marriage, he likely would take greater issue with homophobes using sacred scripture to further their own narrow prejudices.

imdancin

02/26/2004 09:21:18 AM

Tell me, how we ever would have come to know God's plan without the Bible? How would we have known prophecy? The Bible is also historical......... In the Bible, it says God loves all of us. He loves the sinner. BUT........you’re a fool if you think, he likes sin. Sin separates us from HIM. Why is that so hard for you to get? I would suggest you get that Bible out and read it. read the creation story. about Adam and Eve, and Gods intentions. READ Romans, the Corinthians.........READ what Paul had to say about indecent acts. Homosexuality is a sin. Bottom line. The Bible is clear, plain on this issue, as it is with other sins. God did make us different. We all have a DNA apart from one another.......doesn’t that attest to Gods supreme being. He was clear...He said I love you, but sin no more. I am curious however if you feel lust is ok? Does the Bible condone lust?

imdancin

02/26/2004 09:20:33 AM

jimmyrow.....divine order? How would you know? Are you God? I don’t think the United States show much divine order do you? I'll tell you what is in my heart, I do not need to examine it. Jesus is in my heart. He validates me. I do not worship the Bible. However this is Gods inspired love letter to CHRISTIANS. It is all we know that is written for us to follow.

jimmyrow

02/25/2004 10:17:13 PM

God resides in the human heart, not in the Bible. Why go outside yourself for every answer? In doing so, you invalidate your own existence. Instead, examine your heart - the compass of the soul. Your relationship with God begins through your heart. Forget about what the books and our religious and gov't leaders say. What does your own heart tell you??? In your heart, do you honestly want to deny two people in love the right to formalize their union? Forget about laws and biblical passages, what does you heart say on the matter? Accept that God made many people with a different sexual orientation than you. There's nothing to be afraid of. The universe is still in divine order.

imdancin

02/25/2004 07:31:20 PM

oneboneb Jesus is the second part of the Godhead. God, Jesus and the Holy Sprit. God inspired the Bible. The Bible is clear on homosexuality. Hardened hearts that sin, and cover it up......have a hard time even recognizing morality. You answer this for me. Show me scripture where God says its ok. Show me one scripture where God talks about homosexual marriage. Show me One place where God says.....a man leaves his parents to cleave to a man. Tell me why He didnt create.......a man for adam?

acolytejohn

02/25/2004 04:20:54 PM

ha tax collectors

cknuck

02/25/2004 01:07:54 PM

ajstone: Here we go again, riding the backs of the black american with your cause. Can you not prove your case on gay marriage on it's own merits, without trying to bring the sufferings of a race of people into it? Or do the gay marriage issue have no merit so you have to ride our backs and the backs of our black ancestors. I think Jesus would have hung out with gays just as He hung out with tax collectors, lame, blind, or lepers, but when He would be try to heal them they may have chose that He not heal them, and that would cause the parting of the ways with Jesus. Remember He healed the blind and the lame and required the tax-collectors to repent. blessed<

oneboneb

02/25/2004 10:12:08 AM

Leviticus 18: 19 " 'Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period. 20 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor's wife and defile yourself with her. (remarriage) 29 " 'Everyone who does any of these detestable things-such persons must be cut off from their people. Is that what you bible literalists truly believe each day? You actually walk around with this fear? I pray that you learn the love and compassion of Jesus COMMANDED us.

oneboneb

02/25/2004 10:05:40 AM

Question to the bible literalist - Why did Jesus not say anything about homosexuality, if it is so important? Why do we condone, and embrace second marriages, if Jesus was clearly against it?

ajstone

02/25/2004 08:24:55 AM

Here it is: Jesus would have no problem with same-sex marriage because, if there is one thing that the New Testament is clear about, is that he consorted with folks that mainstream society rejected--lepers, the lame, the blind, etc. Just as Jesus would have marched in Selma, Alabama, in support of civil rights for black Americans, he would be marching in favor of civil rights for gay Americans. Bottom line: Jesus was not a bigot. I hope that his adherents will seek to emulate him rather than let their personal distaste for same-sex activity to distract them from doing what is right.

cknuck

02/25/2004 06:57:01 AM

A lot of good conversation that was about gay marriage, has been censored blessed<

Beliefnet_Tiger

02/24/2004 09:57:13 PM

Hi everyone Just a friendly reminder that the topic of this article is 'What would Jesus say about gay marriage?'. Please confine your discussion to the topic of the article. If you'd like to discuss another topic, click here to visit our discussion boards. Off topic posts on this thread may be deleted because this thread is growing too quickly to allow me time to move them. Thank you Beliefnet_Tiger Beliefnet Community

The-Pathmaster

02/24/2004 10:37:31 AM

I do know that people are dying to find out. Jesus isn't here.......so be careful putting words in that mouth.

Donaldito

02/24/2004 08:04:31 AM

I think this will be my last post here. It's far too frustrating to listen to people constantly spewing their bigoted rhetoric. And, as I've mentioned before, it's even more annoying and biting because no one has the confidence and intelligence to say, "This is my opinion, and I'm sticking by it." Instead, these people, in essence, "blame" either their religion or the bible for it. Absolutely disgusting. If you're going to have a stance on an issue, whether moral or not, have the balls to say it's your opinion instead of hiding behind jesus christ or god. And, as I've also sad before, some of you here deserve a lot more respect than you're given. In my humble opinion, you should demand it. Goodbye. Maybe I'll see some of you on another discussion.

thefish

02/24/2004 01:55:13 AM

cknuck... Love you too, my friend. I saw a quote by Voltaire I'ld like to tweek, will due respect to Voltaire... "I may disagree with the words you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say them." I'ld like to change that to... "I may disagree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to disagree." Peace <

SquirleyWurley

02/24/2004 12:33:15 AM

Oops on the width. Here was the link Homosexuality in the Bible

SquirleyWurley

02/24/2004 12:32:00 AM

Well the point is Jesus was more concerned with divorce... and yet homosexuality was rampant in Roman culture, and Romans dominated Palestine, and the Jewish collaborators with Rome, as Hellenized Jews may have indulged in all sorts of things starting with divorce and adultery to perhaps homoseuxality, I don't know, what does history say? Jesus did say in astonishment that the Roman Centurion, had more faith than Israel, and healed his servant. No comment on homosexuality regarding Pagans. Why not? All I can say is pray about it and reflect on the Biblical arguments of the gay friendly churches http://www.mccchurch.org/HandBible/HandBible.htm

JohnQ

02/23/2004 11:10:06 PM

-trust mst b absolute- The Bible is a book filled with words attributed to God by humans that are not perfect as is our almight Lord. Peace!

truth_mst_b_absolute

02/23/2004 10:41:45 PM

John-the entire bible is Gods Word.The bible is filled will scripture rebuking homosexuality.Refer to the gospel of John chapter 1 concerning Gods Word.

cknuck

02/23/2004 10:21:57 PM

No JohnQ it would not be the worst thing I could imagine. But then again I know very little. blessed <

JohnQ

02/23/2004 10:06:36 PM

-cknuck- Does the thought of several thousand same-gender marriages really sound like the worst thing you can imagine? That is a serious question. Peace!

JohnQ

02/23/2004 10:04:20 PM

-cknuck- My point was that the topic of "Gay Marriage" is just that "Gay Marriage", not all the other things that people bring up, probably out of fear. I could use the same "where would we draw the line" argument on why we should have never let males and females get married. Where would we draw the line. I do not think that either one of us believe that underaged people should marry people many times older than they are...nor, that brothers (family) should marry. Where should we draw the line? Where our good sense tells us. Using the Bible I can definitly make a case against Pediphillia, Incest, Adultery, etc. Peace!

cknuck

02/23/2004 09:13:41 PM

JohnQ: How could anyone misunderstand your 2/23/04 7:50:44PM post it's the landslide that gay marriages would produce: All things are permissible. A brother marrying his own brother? Another gay person who I really like, unfortunately made another statement like this, in that they could not see why old people could not marry teenagers. This will have no end, how can you end it once it starts. blessed <<

Beliefnet_Tiger

02/23/2004 09:04:08 PM

Hi everyone I'd like to remind you that the topic of this article is 'What Would Jesus Say About Gay Marriage.' Any off-topic posts will be deleted. This board is growing too quickly to allow me the time needed to move posts. If you'd like to discuss other topics, click here. Beliefnet_Tiger Beliefnet community

cknuck

02/23/2004 09:04:06 PM

Love you thefish

JohnQ

02/23/2004 08:57:01 PM

-truth mst b absolute- I disagree. 1. Yes, you quote Bible verses. Please review these verses in old hebrew and aramaic and you will be less sure about what you think they say. 2. The complete works of everything Jesus Christ said on the subject of homosexuality as taken from the Bible could fit on the point of a pin. Specifically, there is not some much as a line within a verse. 3. There is nothing in the Ten Commandments against Gay Marriage nor, homosexuality. Peace!

thefish

02/23/2004 08:54:03 PM

JohnQ... You are "da MAN!!!" I would like to add something here. Yes, NATURE, which I believe to be designed by God, requires a FEMALE egg and MALE sperm in order to produce new life. Question: How do homosexuals change that FACT in any way? Also...I would be mored concerned with Scientists cloning new life out of eggs and DNA material, not sperm. To me, THAT is against NATURE, thereby being against God. JMHO. Of course, that would mean we didn't need MEN anymore to procreate. Oh, my...now that would be opening a can of worms. side note to cknuck: I am not ignoring you, my friend, but since our last few posts were deleted, I would prefer to continue our discussion in another forum. You may send me a private e-mail if you feel the desire to question me further. Peace to ALL <

truth_mst_b_absolute

02/23/2004 08:45:33 PM

Jesus would not condone gay marriages-Jesus is God-the Son,not a son-He is the Christ-the Lord,not a lord-Immanuel which means God with us. It is quite clear how God views the act of homosexuality from the old testament to the new testament-from the beginnihng of the bible to the very end of it-there are plenty of scripture verses that rebuke homosexuality-even in much detail-(refer to Romans chpt 1-vses-26,27)If you need...read vs 32 in Romans which warns of those who will condone what God says is detestable.Heck,just read the whole chapter:)And...if you turn to the Lord with all your heart in repentance and belief-Jesus will be there. Whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved-Romans 10-13-God can help anyone with anything.

JohnQ

02/23/2004 07:50:43 PM

-popplsa- Please do not misunderstand my next question. Please do understand that I am neither condoning or encouraging anyone to do so. But, what if out of the millions of people in the USA two brothers wanted to marry....what is the worst thing that would happen to the rest of us? I don't think that if they did, suddenly lot of brothers would be racing off to say their vows. Peace!

JohnQ

02/23/2004 07:31:12 PM

-cknuck- I am a pawn broker and sell used cars at night from a poorly lit lot. hehehhehehe I could not resist. Peace!

JohnQ

02/23/2004 07:28:48 PM

-popplsa- I believe Jesus would and possible did bless "Gay Marriage". I know that a lot of people are "Anti-Marriage". But, I am not convinced that there is scripture to back up their stance. The Ten Commandments do not mention homosexuality. The issue of "Gay Marriage" is not about or related to: incest, polygamy, adultery, pedophilia, etc. What it is about is two people who have feelings, who may or may not be Christian, who want to out of respect for each other...confirm their dedication to each other. It is about all the same things that any mixed couple gets married for. Your concern shows in your post. It does not sound like you wish to cause harm to anyone. God Bless You and Peace be with You!

cknuck

02/23/2004 07:26:50 PM

My oh my, I love the way you communicate JohnQ. You must do well in the world. blessed <<

JohnQ

02/23/2004 07:21:32 PM

-popplsa- I don't know why some people are homosexual and others are hetrosexual, other than God made us this way. Just another one of God's mysteries! Children learn values based on what their families teach them. I have no children, but I guarantee you that none of my nephew will rip the clothes off a female during Super Bowl or not. This is because of the values they learn from family, adult friends, and at church/synagogue. Jesus taught values. -continued-

popplsa

02/23/2004 06:47:01 PM

Who's to call that immoral? Where's the harm between consenting adults for such a union to occur? Since they can't reproduce with each other, where's the harm? The harm is in the message it sends to our children, that whatever they want to do is okay as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. As Christians, are we not to concern ourselves with morality? Are we really supposed to elevate to the level of marriage (which is a sacred union and covenant with God) relationships such as these just because it doesn't harm anyone else? I think not. True enough it isn't recorded in scripture that Jesus condemned homosexuality outright, but He clearly reaffirmed that marriage is between a man and a woman and that fornication and adultery are sins.

popplsa

02/23/2004 06:46:29 PM

When someone successfully asserts that a law or a state constitution is discriminatory because it forbids marriage between certain parties, what's to then stop two brothers or two sisters from claiming they are in love with each other and should have the same right?

popplsa

02/23/2004 06:46:08 PM

It's easy to say it doesn't hurt anyone – "they're consenting adults and they're in love, leave them alone." But has anyone stopped to consider just one of the ramifications of allowing same-sex marriage?

popplsa

02/23/2004 06:45:11 PM

Western culture has been increasingly confronted with the issue of homosexuality (gay pride, gay rights, and now gay marriage). Despite what many gay activists would have us believe, people who oppose homosexual matrimony are not all homophobic or bigoted, though some may be (there are always exceptions). I confess that I do not really understand it – the notion of being sexually attracted to someone of my own gender – but I know it is a reality for some very dear people. I never heard it discussed when I was growing up; it was only hinted at on playgrounds. By contrast, I grew up well acquainted with racial bias, knowing instinctively that it was wrong, and rejected it outright. The same way I knew racial discrimination is sinful is the same way I know homosexual behavior is sinful – God's law is written on our hearts. ...

cknuck

02/23/2004 06:22:40 PM

Good point "jagggar" there would not have been much homsexuality going on, the Jewish community were big on cleanliness. They called a woman's period "her time of uncleanliness," well you can imagine what they would think of oral and anal sex, simply out of the question. blessed <<

cknuck

02/23/2004 06:12:36 PM

He was not looking for a help mate among the animals, that's just silly. he was showing Adam that the animals had mates so he would know he needed one too. A female, not a male. Metaphor or not it's easy to understand. Male + Female =be fruitful and multiply. blessed<

jagggar

02/23/2004 06:08:47 PM

Has there been anything written on if homosexuality was a problem in the Jewish community during Jesus's time? If there wasn't much homosexuality going on among the Jews when there was lots of divorce, why would he spend his time focused on what wasn't a problem at the time?

JohnQ

02/23/2004 04:52:08 PM

-pamchad- Absolutely, I will allow for the possiblity that the Bible may accurately speaking out against (by the way, you said about, I think you ment against) Gay relations. I can allow for the possiblility that Jesus would condemn Gay Marriage. I regularly examine my beliefs. You have posted several things that give me pause. With all that said, I do still believe that humans have overtime altered the original meaning of serveral verses in the Bible. -continued-

pamchad

02/23/2004 04:34:34 PM

sinsonte, Okey doke...I will play. I do not have fear about homosexuals. I do not want anyone to not have love in their lives. I want you to be able to have the right to pursue your happiness. However, what I want should not be of sole consideration. I am a simple woman with all kinds of conflictions and convictions. I am not our creator, my religious stuff is more of a lifestyle and not just beliefs I have. I am fallible and not always able to see all sides. I am having to opt for further guidance and that is through God. Does this make more sense? pamchad~ Thanks for posting to me!

pamchad

02/23/2004 04:00:43 PM

JohnQ, Jesus addressed people perverting the word of God numerous times so does other disciples in the NT. I just wondered why you do not see this as a prediction for the past interpretations and those in the future. It is written that the biblical text will be taken out of context. So, with that preface is it not possible the the Bible does accurately speak out about Gay relations and this is not taken out of context. Racism is for sure because God was speaking about spiritual mixing not races although many have a problem with this. My daughter is Chinese and Caucasian but still a child of God. I get your point though. I just wonder how it is in your mind that God has not inspired the words we have in the Bible. Warmly,Pamchad~

JohnQ

02/23/2004 03:58:55 PM

-Donaldito- One last thought. There are several people who post here that believe that Jesus would not have condoned same-gender marriage. And, there is no trace of fear/hate in their posts. I do not argee with their belief...but, I am not suggesting that they are taking the Lord's name in vain. Nor, are that they are wrong for their belief nor, any less important for expressing a difference of opinion. Peace!

JohnQ

02/23/2004 03:54:27 PM

-Donaldito- Thanks! But, I am no different than you and/or anyone else who posts here. However, I am currently making different choices than some. Fear/hate can not occupy the same area as love. I choose love. And, I choose not to accept fear/hate from others when they try to give it to me. Would Jesus have choosen to be afraid of homosexuals or same-gender marriage? I think not! Again, I am not likening my self to Jesus...but, I am doing my very best to following his teachings! Peace!

Donaldito

02/23/2004 03:37:56 PM

JohnQ: I do understand. On the one hand, I find it so infuriating that anyone holds such an opinion, and then to shift the blame onto some institution or book (religion or bible) infuriates me further. But, as I said, I understand the need and desire to live life how you choose, undaunted by the opinions of others. I think the world needs more like you.

JohnQ

02/23/2004 03:37:18 PM

-Donaldito- As far as "spineless". I think spineless would be if I accepted their belief that somehow I am less for being gay. Or, became silent and hid from their beliefs. I hope it is pretty clear that I do neither! I have no hesitation to say I am gay! I have no misconception that somehow gay makes me any less than anyone else. Other peoples hate will never be stronger that my love. For many of the same points I have made above, I beleive that Jesus would have celebrated "Gay Marriage". And, NO I am not likening myself to Jesus! Thanks for the interaction. Peace!

Beliefnet_Tiger

02/23/2004 03:29:46 PM

Hi everyone I'd like to remind you that the topic of this article is 'What Would Jesus Say About Gay Marriage.' Off topic posts will be moved or deleted. If you wish to discuss another subject, please visit our discussion boards here. Thank you Beliefnet_Tiger Beliefnet Community services

JohnQ

02/23/2004 02:39:31 PM

-pamchad- I absolutely believe that almight God is capable of continuing to inspire humans and keep the Bible accurate with God's will. However, I don't hink this is want God has done. If the Bible had not been used in our lifetime in our great country to justify: slavery, the inferiority of some races, the inferiority of females, etc. I might think otherwise. BTW, not that you need my opinion but, I do not think you are a Bigot. Though, some of our Brothers and Sisters who post here seem to have perfected the art. Peace!

JohnQ

02/23/2004 02:30:26 PM

-chnuck- I agree "God created sex". But, the second part about "man and woman" is certainly questionable. Peace!

seastream

02/23/2004 02:24:03 PM

When Moses said what God has joined together, no human being must separate along with he commanded that man give woman a bill of divorce and dimiss her. Where Jesus informed the people Moses granted this because of the hardness within their hearts, but from the beginning this was not so. When they responded with then it is better to not marry, Jesus answered with Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom that is granted. Some are incapable because they were born so; some because they were made so by others, some because they have renounced marriage for the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it. This is in Matthew with reference to Moses and I am sure most of you know where it is since many seem to quote scripture on beliefnet and seem to miss the point?

pamchad

02/23/2004 01:36:24 PM

Donaldito, Do you really think that we are bigots? I just do not feel like one but you hear something and you have to look within if you have any integrity. I really feel that we are just pointing out something most Christians know. Maybe we are trying to let others know who do not have God in their lives our understanding of things. Are you a bigot deary because you disagree with us? Are you against the conservatives/ Christians? Is this not kinda the same thing? Just wondering and enjoying the brain candy. pamchad~

pamchad

02/23/2004 01:33:56 PM

cknuck, I am just agreeing with you bud not attacking. I am sorry if it reads that way. Pamchad~

pamchad

02/23/2004 01:33:09 PM

cknuck, Seems to me that the Song of Solomon is pretty clear about the "relations" between men and women. Why even put that sucker in the cannonized text if it was not significant? I mean can we agree that God understood that we would be here today doing just this thing-debating his word? I think it is really clear that homosexuality was not being touted as part of everyday sexuality or choice and if it is depicted in the Bible it is done harshly. Just a rambling thought. pamchad~

Donaldito

02/23/2004 01:30:16 PM

cknuck: sure, wise if you let ancient mythology rule your life. But I guess that's okay if you're looking for reasons to justify bigotry.

cknuck

02/23/2004 01:28:44 PM

I think the wisest statement yet to end all arguements was made by imdanin: That "God created sex." And I think He made sex with a specific design in mind "man - woman." blessed <<

Donaldito

02/23/2004 11:59:42 AM

imdancin: if you're a "true christian" that's just great. The question is somewhat rhetorical in that, we do not see numerous conservative christian groups, like the ones filing suit in San Francisico, protesting and filing suit against the "state" for the many divorces they allow, so why are they so up in arms about gay marriage? It's rhetorical because there's no logical answer, except that they are bigots and wish to force their outdated beliefs on everyone who opposes them.

imdancin

02/23/2004 11:37:35 AM

God intended marriage to be permanent. He gave 4 reasons for the importance of marriage. You can find them in Matthew 19:4-6 1- He created them male and female. 2. Man leaves his mother and father and unites with wife 3.They are no longer two but one flesh 4. God joined together, no man should separate. But in OT times as well as in Jesus day the practice of marriage fell short of what God intended. Our sinful nature made divorce inevitable, and Moses instituted laws to help shall we say the victims. These civil laws were designed to protect woman who in that culture were vulnerable living alone. A man could not throw his wife out,.he had to write a letter of dismissal. God made marriage to be however indissoluble.

imdancin

02/23/2004 11:36:56 AM

God hates divorce and marital infidelity in which the marriage vows are irreparably broken. Historically the church has allowed divorce for causes of infidelity but Scripture makes no allowance for two sincere Christian believers to divorce because of irreconcilable differences or for any other excuse. An unbelieving partner or person who chooses to disregard God's word may tritely underfoot his/her marriage vows, but true believers do no such thing.

imdancin

02/23/2004 11:36:05 AM

mykal............ I'll answer your question. God does not like divorce. DOESN'T. He meant for marriage to be permanent. God has written the best book on marriage and how it is to be lived out. The husband is head of the Christian home, and he is to "love his wife as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her" His role should not be one of a domineering spirit but of a servant leader willing to lay down his life for his wife and family. Problems arise in any marriage and God talks about the biblical grounds for divorce.

Donaldito

02/23/2004 10:39:27 AM

Hello pamchad: Could you address my questions, too?

pamchad

02/23/2004 10:36:06 AM

hermanvonpetri, Wow this is potent stuff. I hope that you are not truly batching us all together in this blanket statement. "I know Christian scripture well enough to know that the examples which are most quoted by conservatives against gay marriage are examples in which the chief proponents of morality are themselves living lives in contradiction to conservative morality AND with God's consent." None of us can live up to God's standards without understanding what they are,us needing or having a willingness to obey what God wants, and we have to have a personal relationship to be able to do these things. Please note, that I am so not perfect and do not pretend to be. pamchad~

pamchad

02/23/2004 10:29:46 AM

Donaldito, Glad you are back and you are right I am one of the tenants/tenets offenders. Forgive me! hee hee! Have a great day and sorry for the computer meltdown. I have been on the other end of that lots. pamchad~

pamchad

02/23/2004 10:27:49 AM

mykal100, Divorce was sanctioned under two conditions. One, you are abandoned by a spouse or two, you spouse commits adultery. For other reasons, God wants you to seperate and try to work on getting back together not as a prelude to divorce. Many people say, " What about being married to an alcohol or physical abuser?" This is hard for sure. Still the Bible is real clear about grounds for divorce. I think that if we did get to know our partners much like the Jewish people of that time we might not marry so arbitrarily. Today we are a disposable society. People are even thrown away. Sad stuff. I hope that I answered your questions. pamchad~

pamchad

02/23/2004 10:23:01 AM

JohnQ, Hey you! I understand that homosexual marriages were not a part of the Jesus' experience, but don't you believe that they too felt they were entitled to be free? Of course, they would have been stoned, but many people have stepped forward to defend concepts so why not the homosexual community? The Greeks were blantantly homosexual, especially, in the army. There were lots of culturally, diverse societies that embraced this lifestyle. Why is it that Jesus does not once mention it? Or are you of the belief that the Bible is tailored to men and their agendas? Just wondering. pamchad~

pamchad

02/23/2004 10:17:19 AM

hermanvonpetri, You mentioned that you do not really care if the Bible mentions roles or relationships etc...because this is about marriage benefits for those that want them today. Okay, but by the same token, if we talk, you want us, Christians, to give you our opinions backed up with proof! So, you are definitely sticking to your views, can we just be allowed to have our own without the bash? One more thing, though you care not one fig for this, in Titus the women are instructed to be keepers of the home, and train other women for this role. Why is it phrased this way? I know this might seem like a lame point, but God does continue to support heterosexual relationships not once a homosexual one. pamchad~

mykal100

02/23/2004 09:33:46 AM

I've been following the thread waiting for a Christian to explain why divorce is OK. Has it happened yet?

Donaldito

02/23/2004 09:08:46 AM

Something I have to mention because it's killing me: every time I've seen someone here use the word "tenants" they really mean "tenets." Just a friendly vocabulary reminder. Man, my computer crashed Thursday night so I wasn't able to keep up on this debate. I suffered a little withdrawal.

hermanvonpetri

02/23/2004 01:26:17 AM

I know Christian scripture well enough to know that the examples which are most quoted by conservatives against gay marriage are examples in which the chief proponents of morality are themselves living lives in contradiction to conservative morality AND with God's consent. The verses so often stated which have been said to enshrine "one man one woman" ideals involve families which regularly practiced incest, adultery and polygamy in order to accomplish that multiplying effect God demanded of them.

JohnQ

02/23/2004 01:09:08 AM

-pamchad- Jesus did not attend a homosexual marriage because Rome had past a DOMA just before his birth. Hahahah! Ok, I concede that Jesus did not attend a Gay Marraiage. I did not say Paul says God prohibits marraige for priests. I agree that he was addressing it as a distraction. Peace!

imdancin

02/23/2004 01:06:30 AM

You who are for same sex marriages shun sin and treat it lightly. Sin is more than mere self-centeredness. Only God's view can give us the true perspective. And for that view we have the Bible for reference. Sin regardless of the type, whether it be homosexuality or adultry or murder, or cheating,....will always bring disastrous consequenses. Sin is the opposite of God's perfection. Some want to make their own rules...to justify their actions. Jesus would say, I love you but I told you and I showed you clearly in the Bible, creation. I gave you an understanding about the nature of man in Creation and the specific roles for man and woman. Then He would ask to see the scripture that talks about same sex marriage. That is what I believe Christ would say. Lastly, He would say, Repent and sin no more.

imdancin

02/23/2004 12:55:25 AM

Sex was God's idea. He intended for married couples to have sex. Why do you think He created this pleasure? For the procreation of the race and as part of that intimacy, He intended it to be enjoyed within marriage. TEll me how same sex couples can procreate among themselves. They can't. This was not what God intended. It is clear thoughout the Bible in the OT and the NT, homosexuality was a sin.

hermanvonpetri

02/23/2004 12:55:00 AM

Quite frankly I couldn't care less what your scripture says about who should obey whom or what roles they should take. Your scripture doesn't say anything about the state licensing couples in order to receive marriage benefits either but we do it. If you can't come up with a more mature argument than "who's the man in the relationship" I suggest you find better things to do than worry about how everyone else structures their relationship within their faith.

imdancin

02/23/2004 12:46:42 AM

God says that the husband (male) is head of the household, of the Christian home and he is to "love his wife (female) as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her." If two men marry who is the husband, who is the wife? Who is the head in God's eyes? Same question for lesbians. Find me scripture that says specifically what God commanded of a same sex marriage. Surely He would have mentioned it, if it was ordained. Wouldnt you think so?

hermanvonpetri

02/23/2004 12:42:13 AM

"God 'made them male and female.' For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." Big deal. That only tries to explain why heterosexual men seek out a wife (within the context of Christian scripture). But it says nothing about why gay men seek out gay partners. The Q & A goes something like this: Q="Why would a man leave his parents and marry a woman?", A="Because God made both men and women and when you put them together they can make new life." This happens to explain ONE possible scenario but it does NOT negate other possibilities. You can't use the above argument to forbid gay marriages any more than you can use the above argument to forbid men staying single for their whole lives. The example is explanatory NOT compulsory.

pamchad

02/23/2004 12:01:15 AM

Jesus' disciples were married and it mentions Peter in the Bible in particular. I do not find an instance where Jesus attended a homosexual marriage but he did attend a heterosexual the wedding at Cannan. Also the Bible is full of Jesus being the bridegroom and we, the church, are the bride. When homosexuals get married is this terminology used? I do not think so. I get the impression that this is what Jesus says quite clearly about heterosexual marriages verses homosexual ones. Pamchad~

pamchad

02/22/2004 11:57:31 PM

Greling and JohnQ, What is being talked about regarding celibacy is Paul noting that marriage can be a distraction from the ministry. Paul was a missionary that was married. He is talking about it being easier without worrying about servicing the people and managing/contributing to a marriage. The other thing that Paul notes is that young widows or young people should get remarried lest they are tempted to sin by having sexual relations without being married. I do not know where it says that priests cannot be married. The Bible talks about deacons and other spiritual leaders being married. Where are you guys referencing. pamchad~

JohnQ

02/22/2004 10:37:10 PM

-greling- Paul was speaking to "Men of God" in other words priests when he was speaking of celibacy. For anyone who wishes to embrace celibacy great! But, I don't receommend it! Peace!

Beliefnet_Tiger

02/22/2004 09:28:55 PM

Several posts have been deleted from this thread. Please confine your discussion to the topic of the article, 'What would Jesus Say About Gay Marriage'. Off-topic posts will be deleted or moved. Thank you Beliefnet_Tiger Beliefnet Community

greling

02/22/2004 09:17:46 PM

Would Jesus approve gay marriage when heterosexual marriage reflects His work on the Cross? Celibacy relects Christ's work on the Cross more than anything else. Christ himself never married and later we find that Paul elborates on this by telling us that a life of celibacy is superior to that of monogamous marriage. Paul go so far as to say that only those who can't control themselves in their lust should marry, since a spouse only serves as distraction from one's spiritual life with God.

greling

02/22/2004 09:14:35 PM

I'm sure if Jesus ever came to the door of many posters here, he'd be shunned as a radical, raving liberal, lunatic and told that he isn't welcome.

cknuck

02/22/2004 05:54:14 PM

Good work Texas Tommy, nicely said blessed<

TexasTommy

02/22/2004 05:46:30 PM

Mr. Miles should consider all of scripture. Other biblical writings carry as much weight as Jesus words (See 2 Tim. 3:16). So, principles of sexual identity and behavior, as those in Romans 1:26-27, Ephesians 5:22-33, should also be discussed. He then says: "On the ethics of homosexuality, we must assume that He would maintain his silence". Yet, in context, Jesus’ words in Mark 10:6-8 provide direction: "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." Jesus affirms God’s purpose in making the sexes different: so they could be united in monogamous marriage. Ephesians 5:22-31 further shows that marriage of a man to a woman reflects Christ's love for the church. Would Jesus approve gay marriage when heterosexual marriage reflects His work on the Cross? Mr. Miles rightly condemns the church for tolerating divorce. Any Defense of Marriage Act should make divorce harder to get.

theisticagnostic

02/22/2004 03:47:52 PM

JohnQ, In the USA, this is really a civil issue and not a religious issue. So it really does not matter what we think he would or would not have said. That was my point... among others. Cheers

JohnQ

02/22/2004 03:23:20 PM

theisticagnostic- We don't have to conjecture about what Jesus said about homosexuality. To borrow words from my fundamentalist brothers and sisters "the Bible is quite clear on this" he said nothing! In the USA, this is really a civil issue and not a religious issue. So it really does not matter what we think he would or would not have said. Peace

theisticagnostic

02/22/2004 03:13:03 PM

What would the historical Jesus have thought about homosexuality. Well, if he had thought of it at all he would probably have said homosexuals should be stoned. That would not, however mean he was right. But really, isn't it arrogant to pretend to speak for him or anyone else in history.

jacknky

02/22/2004 03:07:02 PM

Frankly, I don't care what the Bible says about homosexuality, although it seems clear Jesus had nothing to say. What's important is that certain American citizens are being denied their rights because of who they are. Simple as that...

PeleMa

02/22/2004 11:47:36 AM

You guys prove my point. Divide and conquere politics is at work here. What would Jesus say if you disagreeded with him? I wrote this a few years back... "If you would know the message of Jesus, Try to understand his Love. His Love that excluded no one, not even His condemers. In His Love alone, we will be lifted into rightousness, And the sickness and the evil will melt in our hearts like sweet butter in the sun."

JohnQ

02/22/2004 11:09:46 AM

imdancin- "Why has the homosexual had to stay in the closet all these years?" The same reason Christians have sometimes in the past and sometimes still do stay in the closet. They have not always felt welcome...and, it is not always safe to be out! Yes, homosexuality has always been with us. There have been several times in history where it has been accepted...not only by native Americans and ancient cultures. I believe Gods plan is for all of us to be companions. I am "Pro-Marriage" both for mixed-gender couples as well as same-gender couples. God Bless You....hope you have a great day!

JohnQ

02/22/2004 11:03:30 AM

imdancin- I do not dismiss Leviticus, nor, Romans and Corinthians. I do believe that their original meaning has become clouded...not by God...but by the imperfection of humans. I believe that these verses are imploring us not to take our focus from God! Could it be that these verses are giving us examples of what others have done while turning away from God? Is it not replacing God with the worship of money, food, our own glory, etc also a sin? Let me be clear, I do not dismiss God nor the son of God, Jesus Christ. They are both a part of every part of my day!

JohnQ

02/22/2004 10:50:50 AM

imdancin- Good Morning! I thought not but, just wanted to be sure. No apology needed! :-) We agree in many things. I think these inclued: Almighty God is our Creator. Jesus is/can be our personal saviour if we allow it. God loves both or us and everyone else. The Bible is the inspired word of God. Here is where I think we differ: I believe that we humans in our imperfection screwed up the Bible to some extent. Not limited to homosexual issues but, including them. I am not speaking for all homosexuals...but, yes I would say: Jesus said nothing about homosexuality. I do not think we can say that because the disciples spoke of it therefor they must have gotten this from Jesus. continued-

JohnQ

02/22/2004 10:40:33 AM

stopen- The "good" that can come from the actions of homosexuals are the same that can come from hetrosexuals. Unless, you believe that the only good that comes from a mixed-gender couple is procreation. I am not saying that everything/anything that homosexuals do is "good". Neither is everything that hetrosexuals do. Homosexuals and Hetrosexuals can show compassion to those that need. Donate their time and money. Raise children to be responsible, contributing members of society. They can be good workers on any job. They can be owners of ethically operated businesses that employ poeple. They can donate time and resources to worthwhile causes. They can attend and be active in church. They can drink beer and play cards. Or, they can be self-centered, greedy, irresponsible people. Gender and orientation do not determine any of this. Each individual makes their own choices. These are my words as well as my feelings. Peace!

JohnQ

02/22/2004 10:22:07 AM

part #2- No, "homosexual behaviors" are not high risk. Some sexual acts are "high risk" regardless of whether same gender or mixed gender couples perform them. There is noting that same gender couples do that mixed couples do not! The rise and continuation of the spread of AIDS here as well as everywhere else in the world was/is not homosexual practices but rather, people acting irresponsibly. Why are you "Anti-Marriage"? I beleive Jesus would condon relationships between same-gender as well as mixed-gender couples who make a committment to each other. For, I agree with you, Jesus would choose compassion! God Bless You and Peace be with You!

JohnQ

02/22/2004 10:14:06 AM

valueadder- part #1 I agree that Christianity can unite. It depends on what we humans do with it. Just as religion can divide. Who knows if one day activists will push for: besiality, incest, etc.? That's not what is being discussed here. The topic is same-gender marriage and Equal Rights for homosexuals. Why do you bring these unrelated topics into the discussion?

imdancin

02/22/2004 10:06:34 AM

Do you think JohnQ that the Bible is God breathed, inspired? Do you believe Jesus is God? The homosexual will say, Jesus said nothing about homosexuality. If Jesus is God, and Leviticus stands as inspirational scripture and Gods word, then how do you dismiss it? JohnQ , all you have to do is look how mankind was set up. Look at the order, the structure and organization. God created everything to work and fit together. Even if you are a nonbeliever, you can see this. You can witness this.

imdancin

02/22/2004 10:06:07 AM

Debate homosexuality........without the Bible? I am a Christian, I live my life as a Christian John, not for one day or one minute of my life will I deny that I am His. His Word is a part of me. I give Him all the glory. How could I dismiss for one moment His word and what would it matter really? We are both Christians, so why leave Gods word out of it? He loves both of us. I see creation all around me. I know that God was the architect, the First Cause. I know that there are two sexes. Male and female. Had homosexuality or lesbianism, been the route God wanted, we wouldn't even be debating this topic today. Homosexual marriages would have been the norm too. But they are not. Although homosexuality has always existed, it has not been the norm for relationships. It has always been looked on until now a sin, a perversion. Why has the homosexual had to stay in the closet all these years? God intended, woman to be the companion to man. Woman is the glory of man.

imdancin

02/22/2004 10:05:42 AM

They were not addressed to you JohnQ sorry they were addressed to... namchuk

valueadder

02/22/2004 05:08:03 AM

Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim Back to Miles. Most people mistaken Christ's love (agape) with worldly love (phileo, storge & eros). Agape build up the world, uniting it into peace. If you read Lev 18, you will see that God discourages harmful sexual practices because of social and medical reasons (such as between sibling). From medical point of view, homosexual behaviors are considered high risk. Do you know that homosexuals cannot even donate blood? Do you remember the causes of the rise of AIDS in the west beside IV users: homosexual practices? God also condemns other destructive sexual practices that spread STD's & cost society its resources incl money

JohnQ

02/22/2004 02:35:56 AM

imdancin- I assume that your last three posts are not directed at me. If they are....please let me know! Thanks! Peace!

JohnQ

02/21/2004 08:02:58 PM

imdancin- I do agree with antiquegoddess. I too believe Jesus was very clear about what he thought about homosexuality and that is deomonstrated by what he said. He said NOTHING on the topic. That is how important it was to Christ. Peace!

antiquegoddess

02/21/2004 06:32:38 PM

"Divorce, not homosexuality, was the deviation that preoccupied him." That is because homosexuality wasnt a consideration worth discussing. WWJD? He would say, "Go, and sin no more."

JohnQ

02/21/2004 12:40:31 PM

PelaMa- Your second post can never be said too often. It is half the point of Christ's message, the other being Love thy God. Peace!

PeleMa

02/21/2004 12:35:33 PM

It seems to me that Jesus tried to make it real simple for us: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Love your neighbor as yourself.

themarirev

02/21/2004 10:32:29 AM

The marriage debate going on now is about the CIVIL recognition of a joined relationship. Ths was not always the case. Heterosexuals wanted a piece of paper from the government (let's call is "ceasar") to prove they were indeed not just saying they were married just to reap the sociological benefits no matter where they traveled. This is the very situation for gay people. There is no need for permission to marry for homosexuals any more then it is for heterosexuals. As much as it may disrupt the heart rythms of the fundementalists out there, gays have already been gettting married. "Mr. & Mrs. Fundie" just aren't invited to the weddings. Cont...

themarirev

02/21/2004 10:32:11 AM

Cont.. This is not about religious viewpoints, it is all about telling individuals they must pay taxes and not recieve the same equal treatment as all other who pay their taxes. Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasars. Homosexuals are not the ones that gave marrige over to Ceasar (Opps! I mean the government.) IF heterosexual had kept their religious rites within their own religions, this would have never been an issue. You reap what you sow, which means, if you plant a seed there is no guarentee you will get the abundant harvest you desire. That is always in the hand of God. Rev themarirev.us

god_is_in_the_tv

02/21/2004 09:00:13 AM

I agree stopen, this will open a door for the depraved and take us into the prophecies of the Bible. Then you should be ecstatic that geys are getting married. You're one step closer to the return of your myth! Why again are you against this if it's making your fairy tale come true?

stopen

02/21/2004 08:03:02 AM

We are born with some sins which may not be accountable and held blameless in the eyes of god but we accumulate other sins as a result of giving in to tempations. I do not believe they are equal. A man born a homosexual is not the same as a man who induldges in it for selfish pleasure. Just a thought.

DawnLouise

02/21/2004 07:42:11 AM

In Ezekiel one of the lists of sins, is oppressions of other's. If the Bible instructs one person not to be gay, and they understand it that way, then it is required that is how they serve. For another, to see it differently is their personal relationship with God, not a place for any one person to oppress. And gay marriage is between consenting adults, of an age where they can make decisions on their own. Relationships happen between adult men, and young girls all the time,girls as young as infants, and in all this time, of marriage between males and females, the age of marriage has moved towards older not younger. There is no rational reason, to expect any different from gay marriage. Creating false charges, to events that haven't happened, is doing nothing to change the afore mentioned, de evolution.

sweetness4life

02/21/2004 12:08:42 AM

Watching the news from San Francisco the past few days, all I can say is, "Hooray for the gays!" I'm not sure about the legality of Gavin Newsom's actions (guess that's for the courts to decide), but after all, why not? Let 'em marry if they want to get married! Oh, and as for Miles' article (he's provocative as always), Jesus' prohibition of divorce is one of those things that just never worked in the real world. Sort of like his saying you shouldn't "look on a woman with lust"--hell, if it weren't for lust, none of us would be here! It's a perfectly healthy and natural emotion! I think Jesus liked to make very radical pronouncements, because he was young, and he seemed to think the world was coming to an end soon, anyway. Maybe if he had lived longer, and had more time to think about practical rules for an enduring movement, he would have taken back some of his more radical stuff. Might have saved us in the West a lot of grief over the centuries...

randrforever

02/20/2004 06:45:33 PM

1 John 2:1-2 1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

sinsonte

02/20/2004 06:27:13 PM

chesterarmadillo, In answer to your question: I think people who oppose gay marriage are not being rational. Every reason they give as to why marriage should only be between a man and woman falls on it's face when examined. "Marriage is for procreation." Where in law is that required? Do marriages dissolve if they fail to produce issue? Do we deny the right to marry to the infertile or the elderly? "It's always been this way." Nope. The ending of polygamy, of laws against miscegination, of grounds for divorce show the institution is in constant flux -- not to mention the radical changes brought about by feminism. "It's unnatural." Homosexual pairings occurs in nature When those arguments fail to justify their prejudices, they revert to the canard -- "My god says it's wrong."

maggieno

02/20/2004 05:50:42 PM

Just read a column by Walter Cronkite that mentioned something I hadn't thought about before: A constitutional ammendment on s/s marriage would "dictate what individual churches could do in regard to recognizing or performing s/s/ marriages." Talk about slippery slopes! Years ago a coalition of churches supported the Native American Church in its right to employ peyote in its sacred services because the churches understood that the danger of gov't intervention in religious rights threatened them all. Not all Christians agree on s/s marriage, let alone nonChristians. I should think that all religions would want to protect their rights to bless the unions they approve of.

DawnLouise

02/20/2004 05:34:03 PM

There is nothing in the Constitution that allows one group of people on basis of personal belief, to deny the rights to pursuit of life and happiness of another group of citizens. God states that judgement of those that God deals with is a far greater abomination, then the ones who sined. So why is it even suggested that one group of people get to disallow rights to another group of people, simply because of a belief, and judgement based on that belief. When specifically, we are not granted the right to do so in either the Constitution, or the Bible.

sinsonte

02/20/2004 04:29:01 PM

Bravo88, When Jesus gathered food on the Sabbath he was forsaking one of the holiest Commandments in Judaism. The law he was breaking was ordainded by God Himself, not by rabbinic addition. God demanded a rest from all work because he rested on the 7th day after creation -- "Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do ANY work," Ex. 20:9-10. God was so strict about sabbath observance that he ordered Moses to stone a man who was gathering sticks on the sabbath -- sticks -- not food -- just sticks! Numbers 15: 32-36. If the sabbath (whose holiness is attested to in numerous scriptures)is made for man and man not for the sabbath, what are we to make of other prohibitions like "man shall not lie with mankind" which is mentioned only a couple of times?

chaplaintx

02/20/2004 04:16:52 PM

The Constitutional language they propose is: "Neither the federal government nor any state shall predicate benefits, privileges, rights or immunities on the existence, recognition or presumption of non-marital sexual relationships." I do not understand how a person of faith could adhere to such policy that deprives people of their civil rights. Believe what you want about the rights and wrongs of same-sex relationships, but what do you beleive about the basic human need for freedom and equality. The heterosexual couple has already watered down the institution of marriage with divorce and unfaithfulness. So, I'm not sure I take serioisly the warnings of America's moral breakdown. In many ways, we area already there. Maybe by allowing something as simple as civil rights to gay couples will get us heading in the right direction. God save us from our misdirected fears!

JohnQ

02/20/2004 04:13:09 PM

Note, Gay Marriage has broken out in Sandoval County, New Mexico also. Bet by this time next week there will be another 2-3 places. For those of you who are afraid because of this....sorry, you feel that way. There is nothing to fear but fear itself! Peace!

JohnQ

02/20/2004 03:56:11 PM

jacknky- As always, well said! I very much believe this is a Civil Matter. I don't mind debating this from a religious and/or Christian point of view....but, it truely is a Civil matter! Peace!

jacknky

02/20/2004 03:45:36 PM

Here's a thought. Those of us who believe that homosexuals have a right to marry are shooting ourselves in the foot when we allow Christians to frame the debate as a religious one. The real issue is a civil rights issue: whether homosexual citizens should have the same rights and privileges states bestow to its heterosexual citizens. If churches don't want to acknowledge these marriages they don't have to. But as long as there are state-bestowed benefits to marriage they should be available to ALL citizens.

Bravo88

02/20/2004 03:26:29 PM

Sinsonte: Although your point seems reasonable, you are equating hunger with behaviour. Jesus was telling the temple leaders that they needed to be merciful because they had no mercy at all. They made up extra restrictions that went far beyond the Law that Moses received. They forced others to do more than they did and would not help those people with their burdens. The teaching that Jesus related after picking grain on the Sabbath had nothing to do with working on the Sabbath but to do with mercy. Picking grain to eat was not work though the temple leaders attempted to define it as work. The temple leaders wrongly made every action to be "work" and Jesus rightfully rebuked them on this. Finally Jesus confirmed that the Sabbath was made for man and that He was/is Lord of the Sabbath.

thefish

02/20/2004 02:21:00 PM

Oy...the weakness of the flesh... That's "they KNOW not what they do." Peace <

smokey

02/20/2004 01:32:28 PM

Why are we bashing the homosexuals?? I am a Christian and sometimes I feel that my fellow brethen try to act like GOD. God word is everywhere and those who do not heed to it have to answer to God. Christians behaving this way turn away any potential believers. As far a gay marriages, I feel that the union should be called an life partnership and it should have the same benefits as a marriage. Because it is not traditional in any culture. I feel it would be accepted much more if we called it something else besides marriage.

JohnQ

02/20/2004 01:25:33 PM

jacknky- Oops! I have been outed. Thanks for noticing! DawnLouise- Intersting thoughts! Thanks! Peace!

jacknky

02/20/2004 01:06:41 PM

JohnQ, Seems like there's lots of Buddhism in your posts. Good for you... Peace

DawnLouise

02/20/2004 01:02:05 PM

I think, the first gift, of man and woman as sharers of dominion, is the one we need to respect. While we allow male and female to divide, for the female not to be the companion of man, there is fault and sin in this world. The right to end marriage within itself, and without itself, is the first error, the first sin. How can anyone say anything to a homosexual, when none of us clearly understand, that Jesus is trying to return us to the begining, of health for marriage, from within itself. Homosexuality, exsists, we all failed in the begining. Not a result of anything the homosexual themselves chooses for themselves. In that day two men will be in bed together one will be left, the other taken. Two men will be grinding together in a field one will be left one will be taken. I know how wise and prudence has always seen that verse. However, if we step back a second, and see it as sin will be sin, until we return to the first gift of life, then we are all here failing to defend what is of God.

DawnLouise

02/20/2004 01:00:32 PM

And while one persons perceptions may allow and justify to themselves, hurting other's for things that are truly none of our business, that is doing nothing, to return any of us to life. And, even though judgement and the stone throwing it justifies, is clearly defined by God Ezekiel, that too will remain, until we can end the causes of divorce.

dmorcats

02/20/2004 11:51:39 AM

I'm off of here, there is no sense in bantering back and forth with those who will not acknowledge their Creator. TV, you WILL stand before God Almighty. Rest assured, He is NO myth. When you're standing there, ready to put Revelation 20 to effect for yourself, you'll realize just how wrong you were.

god_is_in_the_tv

02/20/2004 11:41:53 AM

In the long run, it doesn't matter what Jesus would have said about gay marriages. Want to know why? BECAUSE HE'S NOT HERE. What would Dionysus have said about gayt marriage? How about Osiris? Or any number of sacrifical lamb myths? Who cares. We're talking about the reality of our lives, and you people can't see past your mythology. Believe what you want, but keep your beliefs out of our lives. It's unwelcome. Unless and until you or anyone else can show a compelling state interest against gay marriage that doesn't come from spurious garbage like "God's intended use for marriage" (what a laugh - Oh no! a Myth doesn't like that there are gay people!) you're blowing hot air. You're against gay marriages? DON'T HAVE ONE.

mgabor

02/20/2004 11:23:01 AM

For all those who deny that Jesus cares about the homosexual issue, please turn your attention to the words of our Savior "whoever hears you, hears me, whoever rejects you, rejects me". He delegated his authority to teach ALL truth on matters of faith and morals to the Apostles. So, although he did not make any explicit reference to homosexual sex, the Apostles did, as did their successors (Catholic Bishops). This teaching has remained consistent for 2,000 years. "Whoever rejects you, rejects me". To deny the teaching authority of the Apostles or their successors is to deny Christ. His words leave no room for your re-interpretation. Either the Apostles and the Catholic Bishops are correct about the morality of homosexual behavior, or Jesus is a liar. Make your decision, but stop playing games.

imdancin

02/20/2004 11:14:17 AM

Jesus did condemn some people for their sin. In Matthew 23, He called the religious leaders hypocrites seven times. He told them they were blind fools, children of hell, full of hypocrisy and sin. He said “You serpents, you generation of vipers, how shall you escape the damnation of hell” He then said to the wicked, “Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. Matthew 25:41 He will judge sin.

themarirev

02/20/2004 10:59:14 AM

Ultimately I feel Jesus might have said... "Why do you spend so much time rejecting your brothers and sisters while I am spending so much time loving you? As you deny their love are you really wanting your own love denied as well? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. For is this not the ulitimate understanding or do you think this is merely a suggestion my child?" Rev themarirev.us

stopen

02/20/2004 10:57:39 AM

I am a hetrosexual by birth and a pain in the rear for some on this website, by choice.

dmorcats

02/20/2004 10:55:04 AM

The topic is whether or not there should be laws that permit homosexual marriage, that it doesn't hurt anyone and that no one has a right to tell two of the same sex what to do. On that basis, anything goes. What if I decide that I have the freedom of sexual expression to get on a bus, take off all my clothes and proceed to "make love to myself" on the train in front of your spouse. Have a problem with that? Why should you, it's an expression of my freedom of sexual choice. Or, how about, if someone wants to marry their goat because that is their lover. You say, how ridiculous! Oh? That is exactly where we are headed. If marriage between one man and one woman is not upheld, then anything and everything must be permissible. It may take a few years, but we are headed down a very slippery slope here.

stopen

02/20/2004 10:53:25 AM

Sex is not love, it is one among an infinite number of affections that are acted on to show that love. To say that to deprive a homosexual of a single affection is to deprive him of love in it*s totality does not quite come up to the mark. Homosexuality is one part of the total person, not his whole persson unless he makes it so. A good engineer who is homosexual will probablly be reckonized as an engineer first and second as a homosexual. Why aren*t homosexuals promoting other parts of themselves along with their sexual preference?

Donaldito

02/20/2004 10:42:14 AM

sorry, the second part (quite obviously, actually, so I may not need to post this) is intended for stopen.

Donaldito

02/20/2004 10:41:36 AM

dannyuk2: Absolutely, I agree with you. Much like I am unable to understand this rant: "Why would you put one member of your body in a place with pleasure and find it revolting, If you were forced to put another member in the same location?"... I still don't understand your point about plato. Please clarify.

stopen

02/20/2004 10:28:30 AM

Donaldito: Plato cannot be see as a great philosopher bexause of his wisdom and at the same time be fos.

dannyuk2

02/20/2004 10:26:23 AM

sorry first sentance shud read "No relious view should be forced onto anyone"

dannyuk2

02/20/2004 10:25:28 AM

Now religious view whould be forced onto anyone, it is not fair or right to force heterosecual marriage only. civil marriage is NOT a religious matter, but it is important to the people who want to marry. It is cruel and unjust to deny marriage rights to certain couple just because your religion doesnt agree with those couples rights.

Donaldito

02/20/2004 10:22:51 AM

kevah500: if I may interject on behalf of pamchad. Although I don't agree with her stance, I will be the first to say that she, unlike many other posters here, does NOT seem intent upon forcing her beliefs upon others.

kaveh500

02/20/2004 10:16:30 AM

"I believe God has reasons that I do not always understand for condemning this sort of love between people." Uh huh. Well, given that God isn't doing any talking, what right do you think you have for enforcing that view on other people who think differently?

pamchad

02/20/2004 10:09:39 AM

abarenboshogunvi, Do you really believe it was simply the off season for figs? This is not asked sarcastically. Do you think possibly that this really could have been another parable that Jesus was trying to express to those with him? pamchad~

pamchad

02/20/2004 10:06:27 AM

dplatt, I know that this would be a heart tearing experience dplatt. I do not wish to experience it but I know that unfortunately it is the current law. Do you have the right to try and change this law? Of course, and I can stringently vote against what you propose. I believe that emotionally I am with you on wanting love etc... But you know, my thinking and feelings can be flawed. I continually show poor judgment. I fail heaps and so it leads to fall upon a higher authority and that being God for me. Again, this is my stuff and not to be bludgeoning anyone with "MY TRUTHS." I believe God has reasons that I do not always understand for condemning this sort of love between people. I do not think God hates anyone so why should I? To me, we are just talking and God is going to deal with us according to what He sees fit. I hope that this makes it more clear of what my goofy thoughts are. Thank you for posting to me. pamchad~

dannyuk2

02/20/2004 10:05:31 AM

contd. and above all we serve our purpose without overpopulating the planet. what do you think would happen if everyones purpose was to multiply? This world would be vastly overpopulated and resources would run out before they could be replenished. Conservatives would do well to remember this.

dannyuk2

02/20/2004 10:01:39 AM

Stopen stopen if your using this analogy to say y gays cant marry then its a dreadfully short sighted one. you seem to be implying that gays dont serve the purpose for what god made them, i dont think anything could be more narrow sighted or further from the truth. gays make your food for you when you eat out, they look after sick people, they are your policemen, your postemn, your lawyers, your shop assistants, your family, your butcher, your baker, your grocer, your friends, your good samaritans, some have rasied families, others are foster parents. The purpose of human beings is not just to go forth and multiply. it is many other things too. and as god created gays, its very safe to assume that reproduction was not on their top of his list of priorities.

Donaldito

02/20/2004 09:53:40 AM

stopen: are we having a dialogue or not?

abarenboshogunvi

02/20/2004 09:40:34 AM

Stopen, The fig tree that Jesus destroyed in a fit of pique had no ripe figs on it simply because it was spring and thus too early in the growing season. The tree had either not yet been pollinated by a male fig tree or had only just been pollinated. Jesus' extreme reaction to the tree's lack of figs was probably simply a consequence of being ravenously hungry--a classic symptom of very low blood sugar. Ripe figs are very sweet; eating them rapidly relieves symptoms of hypoglycemia. The fig tree simply couldn't help Jesus, and Jesus was in the mood to engage in a little payback. :-)

stopen

02/20/2004 09:30:37 AM

Why would you put one member of your body in a place with pleasure and find it revolting, If you were forced to put another member in the same location?

stopen

02/20/2004 09:26:58 AM

Christs answer to his disciples of why he had withered the fig tree after it had given him the benefit of its shade, "It does not serve the purpose for which it was intended, therefore it is of no value. (My wording, not a direct quote)

dplatt

02/20/2004 09:25:36 AM

Pamchad - I would draw the line at "carte blanche to sexual variance." But I truly think it's possible for two people of the same gender to have great love for each other. The way I see it, it is humane to recognize gay marriages. If the person you loved the most in the world were sick, how would you feel if the doctors didn't let you in because you weren't "family"?

pamchad

02/20/2004 09:21:02 AM

dplatt, I just wanted to say something about what you posted about David, Jonathon and Paul. David and Jonathon to me, were best buds who grew up together. As to Paul, I truly believe that he is referencing that to Christ there are no defining factors that make one group of peoples superior to another. I do not think he was giving carte blanche to sexual variance. It also says that God is no respector of persons in regards to heaven being our new home. Pretty much again, stating that we are all equal in God's eyes. It also seems to be saying that in heaven we will not be genderized or married etc...We will be spirits without the need of earthly labels or identity. Just my goofy thoughts for the day. Good post. Made me think. pamchad~

pamchad

02/20/2004 09:15:02 AM

Donaldito, I also wanted to tell you that Christianity is as much a lifestyle as a belief system so for me to talk about this issue was like cutting off an arm to make a point. I understand that producing children might not be a desire for some homosexuals. Straights make the same choice. It just can never be an option and maybe that is the key if we take the Bible out of it. Thanks for the talk though. Good morning brain candy. pamchad~

dplatt

02/20/2004 08:59:12 AM

Stopen: I believe the fig tree that didn't produce figs was a symbol of someone/something not living up to its potential. But, to be frank, the gay people I have known have *never* shown any signs of possibly being straight. It would be denying their nature to force them to be straight. People ignore the fact that there are examples of strong same-sex love in the Bible. David and Jonathan, for example, said their love was "passing the loven of women." Even Paul,. the supposed homophobe, said "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Donaldito

02/20/2004 08:44:32 AM

stopen: First, I've never heard that quote before. Secondly, do you think I come across as the guy who said it, or do you (and others, maybe) view me as plato... an that what I say is BS?

bbdh

02/20/2004 08:39:03 AM

BS"D What if homosexuals were more than simply walking genetalia? Would that change the arguments?

stopen

02/20/2004 08:38:14 AM

Donaldito: I in no way mean this to be offesive and you may correct me if I am wrong and their will be no offense taken. Your postings oft times come across to me as somewhat like the man who said, "I believe that plato was a great philosopher but I think wwhat he had to say was a lot of BS>

stopen

02/20/2004 08:20:53 AM

What did jesus do with the fig tree that furnished him with needed shade but was unable to produce figs?

stopen

02/20/2004 08:17:14 AM

What kind of branches will sprout forth from the tree of homesexual?

Donaldito

02/20/2004 08:09:41 AM

stopen: Yes, I would judge them the same way. Namely: NOT AT ALL.

stopen

02/20/2004 08:08:03 AM

What if there were two types of homosexuals? Those born homesexual and those who became homsexual throuugh tempation. Would we judge them equally Those who had a choice and those who didn*t?

Donaldito

02/20/2004 08:05:26 AM

Thank you for a thoughtful response. As a follow-up, I would say, in response to this "...I have been taught to be acceptable for the mores of our culture": I think this code of what is acceptable comes from a culture with feet firmly planted in christianity. Also, I don't agree that homosexuality goes against anatomy or physiology at all. I assume the reason for saying this is that homosexuals can't reproduce. So what? I believe that is another deeply instilled idea that (the obligation to reproduce) comes from christianity. You, too, have made me think!

pamchad

02/20/2004 07:59:21 AM

This article by Jack Miles is interesting and I wanted to babble about it for a sec. It talks about Jesus/ pre-occupation about divorce. When Jesus was here, the men would put away their wives because they lost interest, found someone new, wives weren't bearing offspring etc... Jesus commented on this because people were not taking marriage seriously and as God intended the institution to be for His people. Homosexuality did not come up as a platform of discussion to my way of thinking because the Jewish law already forbid this type of behavior which was punishable by death. It would be like Jesus spouting off about murder when the laws were already afixed and in place. We all assume that murder is wrong. Jesus talked about adultery. Jesus talked about many things and taught his disciples (does everyone agree?) So, if homosexuality is addressed in other books of the Bible by disciples where did they get their beliefs? Can it really all be their own personal agenda? Just curious. pamchad~

pamchad

02/20/2004 07:53:31 AM

Donaldito, YOU do ask interesting questions my friend. I guess it depends on your expectations of marriage. I am an odd duck... I did not get married for the right reasons myself. I would say that most people get married to have children, be with someone they love and respect, and hopefully spend a lifetime with. Do I think that homosexuals are able to do these things? Sure. Of course,children would not be by both gay parents but there is adoption. So many children do need homes or there is surrogacy. Still Donaldito, there is always a niggling thought that this is not what I have been taught to be acceptable for the mores of our culture, this is not biologically in design for our bodies and these seem so silly to mention. It is however our culture and current anatomy/physiology. Believing in the Bible's teaching just gives reasons for it. Hope this entertained you! :) I really did try to think on it some. pamchad~

Donaldito

02/20/2004 07:38:48 AM

A question out of curiosity: I know this is a difficult/odd request, but I'm going to throw it out there anyway... Removing god from the debate (I know, it's tough), how do those who are against homosexual marriage (or homosexuality, in general) justify this? Seriously, if you didn't have your bible to tell you (not that it does anyway, but you go on believing that if you must) it's wrong, why do YOU, PERSONALLY, think it's wrong?

cknuck

02/20/2004 07:26:58 AM

JohnQ, brother in Christ did you do the music? You are indeed equal to any Christian that posts here and I respect you. My sin is no less than your sin. And Jesus died for both of us. I believe people have trouble with homosexuality because they look at it as organized, deliberate sin that we all are forced to look at and witness. Jesus will judge that and tell us all about it at His feet as we marvel at His teachings. blessed <<

mellisslynn

02/20/2004 07:00:19 AM

seastream>> Seems to me you are an angry person... you have lashed out at JohnQ as if he has personaaly attacked you. It has been my experiance that anger is a masking for fear... what are you so afraid of?? do you think that if gays and lesbians are given any freedom, that theyll come banging down your door... demanding you succumb to their ways?? do you truly feel that if they are allowed the freedom to marry, that the heterosexual way of life will cease to exist? Dont let your fears consume you. live and let love.. no ones out to hurt you... there is no need to strike with so much animosity.

Bessie16

02/20/2004 05:48:47 AM

You forgot to quote the proper context of the gospel "Mark 10:9" Mr. Miles? Purely unintentional I'm sure. Let me help you with the rest of it. "BUT FROM THE BEGINING OF CREATION,GOD MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER,(not father and father or mother and mother) AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE. (not his partner) Mark 10:6-7

JohnQ

02/20/2004 01:35:19 AM

seastream- Thank you for telling me what I did that is bothering you. Please remind me of the questions and I will answer it right away and I will do my very best to be direct, honest, and authentic. Again, thanks!

seastream

02/20/2004 01:27:11 AM

Dear John: This obviously by you will be taken as an attack? Right? I am being DIRECT, HONEST here and you were not being honest with me or anywhere or with anyone else you are posting here. I was not attacking you as I asked you a DIRECT question which you have not answered yet. Meanwhile you jump all over this net posting to prove what?

JohnQ

02/20/2004 01:04:32 AM

Arwen100- I agree, "the Bible does not separate God from his people". But, I do believe that people often use the Bible to separate themselves and try to separate others from God. Which "we" are you refering to? I too am a Christian as are most of my family and friends. We, do not have a problem with "Gay Marriage". Gay Marriage is not against God's Plan for the world. When you say: "Gay relationships may appear to be capable of the same 'love' shared between a man and a woman but it cannot compare the spiritual and natural purpose and benefits of married man and a woman." are you speaking from experience or are you conjecturing? Your post makes it sound like you are speaking for all Christians. Please understand that you are not. Several of the Posts do sound as though they are "Mocking Christians" and, I can not help but notice that many are not very respectfully of gay people. As both a gay male and a Christian I think both are unfortunate! Peace!

thefish

02/20/2004 12:44:22 AM

I'm Christian... : ) Peace <

thefish

02/20/2004 12:42:23 AM

JohnQ... Yes, very nice touch. I thought it was "Celebrate"...is it the Beatles??? The love in your heart always shines so bright. Never let it die... Peace <

Arwen100

02/20/2004 12:42:16 AM

Gay relationships may appear to be capable of the same "love" shared between a man and a woman but it cannot compare the spiritual and natural purpose and benefits of married man and a woman. Christianity does not keep God separate and external from Man. We believe that God is in everyone and that Love comes from God. Who am I to judge the sins of others, when I have my own to contend to? All of this is a sign of the lack of morality we are going into. I know there are many of you who may not agree with my views. After reading some these posts I am deeple disturbed. I want to respect your views, but I as well, do not agree. STOP MOCKING US CHRISTIANS. We are humans, trying to live the will of GOD the best way we know how, every fibre of our belief is clear on the stand of gay marriages. I will keep you all in my prayers...God Bless.

Arwen100

02/20/2004 12:42:03 AM

jimmyrow....I don't know what your experience is of the Bible but I certianitly did not agree not appreciate your post. The Bile does not separate God from his people. It is through the Bible that we come to know and love God. It is through the Bible that we build a friendship with God and His Son. When we say we are against Gay Marriages it is not only because it is against nature and against God's plan for the world.

JohnQ

02/20/2004 12:37:40 AM

thefish- No it is Celebrate! Nice touch huh! Thanks for the support! Peace!

thefish

02/20/2004 12:34:27 AM

BTW...is it just my computer playing music??? Peace <

thefish

02/20/2004 12:33:30 AM

cknuck... I am who I said I am. If you expected me to come flying out of the sky on clouds, you have been deceived, my friend. As far as the courage it took for me to "out" myself like that, just think how much COURAGE it took for Jesus to be nailed to a cross for YOU!!! Peace <

cknuck

02/19/2004 10:44:22 PM

maggieno: I agree that sex was not only created for procreation; but I must insist that sex also was not created so we could imitate animals. That is derived by human deviant vanity. blessed <<

jimmyrow

02/19/2004 10:41:57 PM

Why wouldn't our Society recognize and treasure all unions forged in love? Love is a positive, creative, unifying energy, and God knows, the world can use more love and hope in all forms. Love needs to be encouraged and nurtured not condemned and shamed. There is no gender differentiation on the "other side". Suppose each one of us is an expression of spirit having an experience in this physical reality. Look at the world with your spiritual eyes rather than physical eyes, and gender becomes less important. To many of you out there I suggest you put down that dusty, old bible written by men 2,000 - 3,000 years ago and start thinking for yourselves and listening to your hearts. That Bible and your religion is more hindrance than help in making a connection with God. Christianity keeps God separate and external from Man. How can any person find it in their hearts to dishonor and prohibit any loving relationship between two children of God.?

maggieno

02/19/2004 10:37:25 PM

cknuck, you know very well that my post was countering the notion that the activities/inclinations under discussion are not "natural" or applicable only for procreation. As in "God created sex/sensual behavior only for procreation."

JohnQ

02/19/2004 10:20:33 PM

thefish- Thanks for the post: "How are same sex partners “joined?”. At the soul. This could never be stated too often. Hopefully it applies to all committed couples male/female as well as same gender! I always enjoy your posts. Again, thanks and Peace be with You!

cknuck

02/19/2004 10:19:28 PM

thefish: your 2/19/04 8:05 post: Who are you "revealing yourself" as, that you said something "2000 years ago"? Is this how you revere your unBibled version of Jesus? I'm curious. blessed<<

JohnQ

02/19/2004 10:14:48 PM

moehopper- I get so tired of everyone twisting the Bible to suit there purpose. I get even more tired of people taking the Lord's name in vane by using it as a weapon against others. Please read or re-read the earlier post by thefish. Maybe there is something you can learn from them. Shall we put to death all those that can not reproduce? Or, what would you want to do with them. I chose not to reproduce. There seems like more than enough children in the world at this time. Peace!

thefish

02/19/2004 10:12:08 PM

magg... You go, girl!!! Peace <

thefish

02/19/2004 10:11:39 PM

E.... Oh, my...well said!!!! Peace <

cknuck

02/19/2004 10:10:35 PM

maggieno: All due respect, I don't think I'm going to model my behavior sexual or other wise, after any other mammal, retile, invertebrate, fish or fowl. God separated people from animals and made us in Their image, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So sorry if I don't all worked up over animals sexual behaviors, but really, get some perspective. blessed <

JohnQ

02/19/2004 10:06:00 PM

Maiorano- Thanks for your opinion on anatomy. You may want to check out the article in this months Time Magazine regarding homosexuality in the animal world. I would not have brought this up, but since you have, if it is true about certain body parts...then, why do so many hetrosexual men and women engage in anal sex? I look forward to your answer. Peace!

JohnQ

02/19/2004 09:59:54 PM

angel 62- How does homosexuality jeopordize procreation? Peace!

maggieno

02/19/2004 09:58:21 PM

Even the RCC recognizes that sex exists for more than procreation. Sexual/sensual behavior is also a social expression of concern, caring, love, connection. Even for apes. Other mammals use sexual behavior for dominance expression also.

thefish

02/19/2004 09:57:26 PM

namchuck... Thank you...you are most gracious. Believe it or not, you are an angel and don't let anyone make you think it's of the "evil" kind... Also, is it just me...am I the only one hearing "music"...one of my favorites... "Celebrate" by the Beatles??? Peace <

ElGabilon

02/19/2004 09:55:55 PM

Woe unto you hypocrites who judge others but not yourselves. The gates of hell await you. The jaws of evil shall suck you in keeping you in agony for all eternity. Woe unto you hypocrites who condenm the actions of the Lord Almighty who in creating the world, also created the universe and all that lies within it. The jaws of hell await you who dare to condemn anything within the universe for all is Gods creation. Woe unto you hypocrites who have placed your faith in a book rather than the reality of what is. The gates of hell await you with open arms. God created homosexuality, what his reason for doing so is not known. It is not up to you or any other human to question that creation. And all who condemn, condemn themselves to the agony of hell.

moehopper

02/19/2004 09:25:26 PM

I get so tired of gays trying to twist the bible to justify their actions when it is just common sense that God intended sex as a reproductive act between a man and a woman. If homosexuality were "natural", it would lead to reproduction. Also, It was mentioned that Jesus was totally against divorce. If my wife is unfaithful and unrepentant, I cannot believe that I would be expected to stay with her or that I would be expected to be alone for the rest of my life because of her sin. We must be talking about two different Gods here, because the God I know is not that cruel.

maggieno

02/19/2004 09:11:58 PM

Maiorano, for the zillionth time, not all couples, straight or s/s, engage in anal sex. We are not talking about physical acts when it comes to marriage. Celibate couples can be married couples. And, the "natural" world is full of sexual creatures that do more than male on female reproductive sex. Oral sex of all sorts exists for our nearest physical cousins, the chimpanzees, for example (98+% genetic material shared between chimps and humans).

namchuck

02/19/2004 08:51:57 PM

Well said, thefish. Some can only see homosexuality in strictly physico-sexual ways.

thefish

02/19/2004 08:50:44 PM

I can't take it anymore!!! I'm ready to reveal myself. I am the one you are looking for. I am NOT on your side (those who condemn and judge). Did I not say over 2,000 years ago that you will always have the poor? I say NOW that you will ALWAYS have homosexuals as well...how you treat them will determine how GOD treats you. Got it???? Peace <

namchuck

02/19/2004 08:49:38 PM

Evidence from nature does not support your hypothesis, Majorano. Homosexual behaviour is rampant in the salamander, very common in a variety of other vertebrates, and for some it may even be the practice of choice.] And I wonder what kind of God would place the recreative organ so close to the refuse-expelling one?

thefish

02/19/2004 08:44:54 PM

"How are same sex partners “joined?”. At the soul. I'm sorry if someone else already hit on this issue. I just logged on after being away from the computer since this MORNING...and there are so many posts, I haven't had time to read them all. I just had to respond to that one. Peace <

maiorano

02/19/2004 08:30:15 PM

Nature itself witnesses to marriage being exclusively between male and female. The male organ is formed for the female;The rectum is exclusively for excretion of feces.

namchuck

02/19/2004 08:24:20 PM

(con'td) Well said, sinsonte. It looks like even Jesus had the nous to recognise that human values were the subject of constant re-negotiation as times and conditions change.

namchuck

02/19/2004 08:21:34 PM

The scripture also said that one should not wear garments of mixed fibres and that mentruating women should be secured away for at least a week. It also says that women should keep their mouths closed in Church, and dozens of other such odd proscriptions reflecting a worldview that is no longer tenable. I think that the Christian preoccupation with sex cannot allow them to perceive same-gender relationships in any other ways but sexual.

sinsonte

02/19/2004 08:11:49 PM

Bravo88, When Jesus was hungry, he chose to pick grain (corn) on the sabbath -- a violation of the Forth Commandment that carried the death penalty. By his actions Jesus was saying the law needs to be merciful and beneficial to man, in other words, things change and our application of the law needs to change as well

Bravo88

02/19/2004 07:46:21 PM

There is no need for Jesus to have said a thing about homosexuality; He Himself testified of the truth of the scriptures. He did not pick and choose the commandments that could be obeyed. He likely did not mention sex between those of the same gender because the scripture clearly speaks against it; He touched upon marriage and divorce because He was specifically asked about it. The teachers were trying to see how much they could get away with and still be righteous before GOD. Jesus made it clear that divorce was only "allowable" on the grounds of adultery but I am certain that He meant specifically when there was no way that the marriage could be renewed or saved. This is not permission to divorce at the first hint of adultery or even once adultery has occurred, it allows for the fact that one of the divorced persons may not be reachable and that the one being harmed should not be forced to suffer any further from the evil acts of the other person.

Bravo88

02/19/2004 07:34:43 PM

GOD is loving but He did not create this world with the mind of anything but relationships between a man and a woman. It is men and women themselves who have taken it upon themselves to have relationships with those of the same gender. Some claim it is not a choice; oftentimes an act may feel like it is being forced upon us or that we have no choice but ultimately the fact that we act upon a desire is due to a choice that each of us make. It is my belief that many of the theories about human behaviour are lies or built upon lies, these lies are used to justify not changing our behaviour. Freud was once highly respected but many of his theories have fallen into disrepute. Characterizations or labels of people, such as those like heterosexual and homosexual are often used to excuse people from taking responsibility for their own behaviour.

numenprof

02/19/2004 07:33:18 PM

namchuck's point is well-taken, since the question is really whether the Bible is a book of such a kind as to deserve our uncritical compliance. One simple example can be pointed out; in 2 Sam 7 YHWH speaks through Nathan to king David and makes an unconditional promise to keep an heir of David on the throne of Israel forever (repeated), even when (not if) that heir should sin. What actually happened? In 587/86 B.C.E. David's line came to an abrupt end - no more Davidic king. Ever since, literalist theologians have engaged in a most creative exegetical dance trying to explain how the Bible could be inerrant given this obviously failed prophecy.

Bravo88

02/19/2004 07:26:10 PM

For the record, I'm not American. In Canada, there've already been attempts not only to have civil unions legalized but they are attempting to force marriage officials to perform the marriages and if they won't then they must quit. There's a saying "Give someone an inch and they may take a whole yard." As far as civil unions are concerned, if people are bound and determined to have them then so be it. It seems to me that the judges and law makers of both America and Canada are bound and determined to bring laws in place to allow civil unions. Having said that, there are people whom because of their beliefs cannot abide the thought of those laws coming into force and therefore they publicly object.

namchuck

02/19/2004 07:19:48 PM

(con'td) Following on from these facts, I believe that the Bible is the last source of guidance on such an issue as homosexuality. As an aside, I wonder why a loving creator-God would create a world where same-gender sex would be rife in the natural world?

namchuck

02/19/2004 07:15:18 PM

I wonder how you would go about proving your hypothesis, Hotdoggie, that the world is getting 'worse and worse'? Even a casual perusal of history would quickly identify that we moderns are no better or worse than all the generations that preceded us. In respect to getting a Bible and in anticipation of Jesus imminent arrival, well, the Bible clearly indicates that Jesus' predictions of his second coming in the days of those he actually spoke to utterly failed. The Bible, rather than being a 'powerful source of communication' has, rather, been a constant source of confusion, evidenced by the fact that hardly a Christian can agree on any of its tenets or teachings.

icthys

02/19/2004 07:15:04 PM

nsos: "...the argument that the word in the New Testament that we translate as 'homosexual' is actually a word that was used for a kind of temple prostitute." The worshipping of false gods of any type, in any way completely covered the prohibition regarding temple prostitution. There was little need for the Apostle Paul to point out what was already understood and the evidence isn't there he did. The evidence isn't there Leviticus did. Like it or not: "Nothing is new under the sun". Individuals of the same-sex from all centuries have more than likely claimed they hold a right to love and sleep with whoever they wished. In fact, there were socities that allowed it. Doesn't make the Bible's stance less clear on the matter. Only that sin of any type has been around since the Fall occured in Genesis 3.

Bravo88

02/19/2004 07:14:41 PM

As far as two people being compensated by society for taking care of each other and others, there is nothing "wrong" with it apart from the fact that it speaks of a "sense of entitlement" that certain societies have allowed to flourish. Societal debt has come out of all the programs and benefits that people have become accustomed to and feel they are "entitled" to. Money is not infinite and therefore encouraging more governmental spending on benefits could well be short-sighted. Some people insist that it is unfair that only married men and women receive benefits to help them (not all those who receive such benefits necessarily need them), therefore a wiser and fairer option would be to stop paying those benefits (or at least universally) so that nobody is discriminated against.

hotdoggie

02/19/2004 07:04:40 PM

I think God Has made it perfectly clear what he has to say About Homosexuality in his word the Bible.Either we choose to believe it or not that is up to the individual themselves; but be assured we will all one day be Judged on the decisions we make. WHY did God create a helpmate for Adam in the form of a woman?Why not A manif it was an acceptable practice to him. THe Bible says in the last days before his comingevil shall get worse and worse.Folks we are there! His Coming could come at any moment. now and we all should be ready.He is not willing that anyone should perish but that all should come to repentance.I choose to be ready for that event;I hope you do to before it is to late.This old world is fast reaching a climax.Asfor what Jesus says; get a Bible and read it IT will answer any and all Questions you might have if you do not find your answer there ask him he will gladly tell you.Prayer is a powerful source of communication.IF you do not believe in God than my heart bleeds for you.

hotdoggie

02/19/2004 07:04:22 PM

I think God Has made it perfectly clear what he has to say About Homosexuality in his word the Bible.Either we choose to believe it or not that is up to the individual themselves; but be assured we will all one day be Judged on the decisions we make. WHY did God create a helpmate for Adam in the form of a woman?Why not A manif it was an acceptable practice to him. THe Bible says in the last days before his comingevil shall get worse and worse.Folks we are there! His Coming could come at any moment. now and we all should be ready.He is not willing that anyone should perish but that all should come to repentance.I choose to be ready for that event;I hope you do to before it is to late.This old world is fast reaching a climax.Asfor what Jesus says get a Bible and read it IT will answer any and all Questions you might have if you do not find your answer there ask him he will gladly tell you.Prayer is a powerful source of communication.IF you do not believe in God than my heart bleeds for you.

angel_62

02/19/2004 06:57:55 PM

I believe that homosexuality is a sin,as previous comments made we are all sinners, so we are going to pray for all of them,cos if we encourage them i believe procreation might be jeopardized.And we continue to fight a losing battle, but i know the devil comes in different ways, this happens to be one of them.

numenprof

02/19/2004 06:52:40 PM

To continue my previous comments, perhaps more importantly, I would like to know how dmorcats escapes being guilty of demanding that the state, the instrument of public policy, "establish religion," a clear violation of the First Amendment, when the only basis for prohibiting same-sex marriage offered is grounded in the Christian Bible? I would like to suggest that dmorcats re-read 1 Cor 5:12b-13a, where Paul says, "Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside.? Why are conservative Christians trying to do what they should belief to be God's job?

numenprof

02/19/2004 06:52:05 PM

I'm curious, given dmorcats' confident proclamations, just how do we know that the Greek words referred to are so "definitive"? Arsenokoitai, as I search the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, doesn't occur before Paul's coinage. Since grammatically the word is not formed in the same way that other compounds in the sentence are formed, e. g., eidololatrai, how do we know that the word isn't a nominative feminine plural referring perhaps to promiscuous women? As for malakoi, where is dmorcats' first-century or earlier comparative examples for its meaning? Are we simply to rely on out-of-date lexica all compiled by Christian scholars?

anidominus

02/19/2004 06:43:17 PM

Did Jesus speak of Child Molestation or rape? Did Jesus object to the marring of a human an animal? What about refering to women as "bitches" and "hoes".? I can not understand for the life of me why when Jesus didn't speak on something it obviously meant what he didnt speak on was ok. Perhaps moses made it so clear homosexuality was an abomination the people in that era knew full and well gay sex was not suppose to exist let alone gays getting married. Why would Jesus spend time talking about something people understood clearly and did not partake in? Or, perhaps we dont have in front of us everything Jesus ever said.

mark834

02/19/2004 06:36:51 PM

I might remind people that gay marriage was a non-issue until about six years ago. How would it have been relevant for Christ to address in his time? Remember he was a jew, living in an occupied jewish land with jewish customs. The jewish custom was that marriage was permissiable under some cirsumstances - he struck this down, saying it was in violation of God's will. The jewish law that homosexuality/beastiality/incest was wrong was not struck down. We therefore can't claim he supported IT, let alone actual homosexual marriage. By the way, I support stricter divorce legislation, along with my fellow Christians. It would be hypocritical not to

mark834

02/19/2004 06:36:45 PM

I might remind people that gay marriage was a non-issue until about six years ago. How would it have been relevant for Christ to address in his time? Remember he was a jew, living in an occupied jewish land with jewish customs. The jewish custom was that marriage was permissiable under some cirsumstances - he struck this down, saying it was in violation of God's will. The jewish law that homosexuality/beastiality/incest was wrong was not struck down. We therefore can't claim he supported IT, let alone actual homosexual marriage. By the way, I support stricter divorce legislation, along with my fellow Christians. It would be hypocritical not to

JesusIstheRock

02/19/2004 06:31:10 PM

dmorcats..hehe no of course not i was writing to jontemplar =) Speaking of which jontemplar..we all have to come to the point where we realize before we are to know everything we have to admit we know nothing. For God will make fools of men who think they are wise by their ways and understanding. If we are to seek life eternally we have to go where knowledge of that kingdom is and that is directly to God not ourselves. That I'm afraid is your first big obstacle for some including myself I had to take something life changing to humble enough to get to that point..I pray you realize it before you have to fall on your face or before it's too late period...

free4all

02/19/2004 06:20:34 PM

Well,, nothing like a little fact-based article about faith. Congratulations, Jack Miles, you seem to have hit the nail on the head. I have ALWAYS thought that Leviticus and Paul played second fiddle to Jesus and that Jesus really is the only one to listen to. I think He said all that needed to be said. Thank you, Mr. Miles. It's about time somebody used Jesus' words to understand this issue rather than something out of the Old Testament or Paul's pretty rigid view of things.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 06:10:06 PM

Jesusistherock: I hope you are not writing to me - please read my last post. I believe exactly like you do!!

JesusIstheRock

02/19/2004 06:07:35 PM

Who is going to take away your sin? What is going to save you from hell? Your 24 hours of greek study? God provided the way to life through His Son because of His love, grace, and mercy that endures forever. But again after you die on this Earth..which you will all of us will..how will you save your own soul because if you reject Christ you will die in your sins and be judged. I did not say this..but God did..cleary through His Word.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 06:02:19 PM

BTW - God did speak audibly and very thoroughly through Jesus Christ, Himself God. Who are we to decide when and where God should audibly speak. He's God, obviously we are not. But, He provided the answer through Jesus. Jesus didn't die to excuse sin, He died to provide a sacrifice for sin, because sin equals spiritual death. Only through Jesus is any sin dealt with, whether that is lying, stealing, adultery, murder, greed, homosexuality, anything. Sin destroys. We can't just say there are no consequences. Jesus didn't. In fact His death was the result of our sin. Homosexuality is sin (God's Word). Only through Jesus Christ can it be forgiven.

jontemplar

02/19/2004 05:56:12 PM

Ps. When the truck is coming, I'll move, you can stay put and pray.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 05:55:41 PM

jontemplar: I have 24 hours of Greek study - I think I know the original language pretty well - you?

jontemplar

02/19/2004 05:54:44 PM

I did that purposefully because I knew when someone did not have an argument they would attempt to assassinate my character based on my profile. Kudos to you :)

dmorcats

02/19/2004 05:53:34 PM

Darnay and others: That said, many have missed the fact that I have stated that, yes, I hold that homosexuality is a sin, but that I do not hate people who are homosexuals. We ALL sin. What the issue for me is, if God wants us to live according to His guidelines, then I can't embrace homosexuality. It goes against everything that God has decreed. I also believe it hurts us all - we all suffer when people are caught in sin, but I'll leave that for another time. My life is given to helping people in all walks to live according to God's standards, because when we do, that's where we find true freedom and fulfillment. There is no fulfillment in sin.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 05:53:17 PM

Darnay: Sorry, you deserve a better answer than that. Homosexualiy was addressed in the bible as early as Genesis 19. I think they knew full well the ramifications of these acts well before the writings in Leviticus. The issue had its own agenda. It had nothing to do with the treatment and subservience of women in the society. By the way, the strongest words against homosexuality are found in Romans 1, and I'm sorry, they cannot be simply explained away.

jontemplar

02/19/2004 05:51:29 PM

Why would God speak on a limited number of occasions? Why would God use pyschic mediums to write "his" book to reveal to us "his word"? This is a little too Raelian to me. I don't claim to be a scholar but it seems to me that a scholar would have learned the language of the original scriptures so as to study them in their "purest" form. Would you like me to point out some relevant facts about mistranslations that are believed to be fact by the vast majority of Christians? Like the prediction of virgin birth? The Greek and Hebrew words that don't match? The Greek and Hebrew that have been mistranslated in English for generations because a "council" voted on what they ought to be interpreted as instead of what they are. I recommend a masters degree in history instead of a corrospondence course in theology.

JesusIstheRock

02/19/2004 05:47:26 PM

jontemplar, funny that in your profile you state you're pagan, buddist,secular, etc...who are you even to say what you think Jesus would say when you don't even know who Jesus is? Because you see He died for our sins and by accepting Him into your life is the only way for us to truly know Him and for Him to know us especially on that last day when we are all to be judged.

JesusIstheRock

02/19/2004 05:47:17 PM

So by accepting you believe these other religions you cannot serve two masters you either love one and hate the other. So it's clear at this point you do not follow or believe truly who Jesus is. Just because you don't believe something is true doesn't make it not true. Maybe to you it might seem that way but can you change reality by merely what you believe..if a truck is coming at you at 65mph on a freeway and is going to hit you unless you move yet you just stay there and believe it's not going to hit you..does it magically not hit you because you believed it wouldn't..Certaintly not! Same thing it's just we are given free will and God's Word so that we must make a very real choice. A choice that will either lead to life or death.

JesusIstheRock

02/19/2004 05:46:49 PM

So ask God for the truth..For He loves you so much..enough to die for you so you can be with Him and have everlasting life for through His sacrifice He conquered sin and death for those who would follow Him..for the truth because there is only one truth otherwise it itself would cease to be the truth.

jillzmama50

02/19/2004 05:44:44 PM

IF Jesus has a profound cause for not approving of same sex marriages I'm sure he would address it and not have someone else dictate the morals. Who is to say that angels could not marry? They were asexual in description and fully accepted in God's sight according to the Bible. At the same time, man has taken the original text and rewritten to suit personal views. I can be in no position to judge for others of a sexual orientation. That was something that Christ made quite clear. What does it matter what my neighbors do except to love and provide for a caring peaceful environment. My job is to love my brother, live and let live. I figure Jesus says it is none of my business and in case things are questionable, turn the other cheek.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 05:42:48 PM

Darnay: all I can say is, are you for real? Good grief!

jontemplar

02/19/2004 05:42:08 PM

LOL...darnay3 & Hootie - Stop making sense!

dmorcats

02/19/2004 05:40:11 PM

JohnQ: You claim circular reasoning on my part. Nope, this is what I was meaning: The Bible is God's full and complete revelation to us. He spoke on very limited occasion in an audible voice, but He spoke fully through the books of the Bible (using authors of His choosing). The Bible, God's expression of HIS truth, emphatically terms homosexuality a sin and immoral. I said, that Jesus was corroborating truth that God had expressed through His Word, that Jesus spoke often of immorality. Thus, I was saying that since God has expressly stated in His Word that homosexuality is immoral, and since Jesus condemned immorality, that Jesus substantiated the truth God Himself expressed about homosexuality. I didn't make the claim on my own that homosexuality was immoral, God the Father did. That is NOT circular reasoning. That is following a pattern of logical thought and Biblical consistency.

hootie1fan

02/19/2004 05:38:08 PM

It seems logical that those who want to pass an amendment against gay marriage would also promote an amendment against heterosexual divorce and remarriage and divorce and remarraige and........ So far I haven't heard too many doing so.

darnay3

02/19/2004 05:32:11 PM

dmorcats, As a scholar of the bible, I'm sre you realize that homosexuality, understood as a psychological orientation naturally present in 3-10% of the animal kingdom, was not something comprehended by society in the world of Leviticus! Furthermore, yo are familiar with the patriarchal society that unjustly viewed femeninity as far less equal to masculinity! Also, you understand that you cannot just pick and choose what you wnat to believe from the Bible to suit your own morals, instead you have to be challenged by the scripture in the light of huankind's evolving understanding of science and the universe! I would hate to think any reputable institution of higer learning would award a master's degree to someone without properly vetting them with regards to basic psychological science.

jontemplar

02/19/2004 05:29:30 PM

I think Jesus would have said, "I now pronounce you husband and husdand or wife and wife". He never spoke about it. I am not sure when the Catholic church grabbed marriage and made it a sacrament but before that people got married all the time using their rituals. Marriage in the Roman Empire was much like it is today, a legal registration. Those darn Romans were a bunch of lawyers and warriors. Circular reasoning, I think that is when you say that Peter was inspired by God and you know that because the Bible states it and that book was inspired by God.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 05:08:35 PM

dmorcats- If, that is not circular reasoning, please explain it to me so I might understand how you arrive at your conclusion. Peace be with You!

dmorcats

02/19/2004 04:59:49 PM

JohnQ There is no twisting going on. Only a study (lifetime study, Master of Divinity, my profession) of the entirety of the Bible and how it all fits together. There is no circular reasoning if that is what you are inferring.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 04:57:22 PM

Selfie: God Himself has indicated that Paul was inspired by Him to write His truth. Check it out in the N.T.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 04:50:12 PM

dmorcats- I for one do believe in God! And, I believe in and accept the word of God! I sometimes question the word of man! imdancin- Are you speaking for Jesus? Or, are you stating an opinion? God Bless You!

JohnQ

02/19/2004 04:46:17 PM

dmorcats- Is what you are saying: Both Jesus and God condemn immorality...and, that you believe homosexuality in immoral..therefore God and Jesus both state that homosexuality is immoral? Peace!

SelfieMiyu

02/19/2004 04:41:03 PM

dmorcats said: The only argument then is whether or not you believe in the Word of God No, it appears that the only argument is whether you and your camp are capable of understanding that at no time in history was Paul ever elected God.

imdancin

02/19/2004 04:37:24 PM

Jack Miles, has no idea what he is talking about. Jesus is God. God created everything. He created Eve for Adam. Jesus would say Mr. Miles, is missing an oar.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 04:08:59 PM

dmorcats- I want you to know that I accept you as a brother in Christ and do not look down upon you. And, though I think you maybe twisting the Gospel to suit your purpose, I do think your intentions are good. God Bless You!

dmorcats

02/19/2004 03:53:35 PM

Here's a list for those who need it. (Jesus established the New Covenant through the cross the principles of which were then delineated in the New Testament by those writers appointed by God.) The list is from Paul, 1 Corinthians 6:9 -- ...Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders (gender case male - Romans 1:26 mentions lesbians) nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards...will inherit the Kingdom of God. The only argument then is whether or not you believe in the Word of God - not whether or not the prohibition is there. The original Greek words used here are definitive. Homosexuality is NOT acceptable to God. As a society, we do not accept thievery, murder or swindlers... there are laws which protect our understanding of what is right, homosexual marriage must fall squarely under the same scrutiny. It is immoral in God's sight. Therefore, we must uphold His morality if we are to be a moral nation.

cknuck

02/19/2004 03:48:55 PM

As always JohnQ I do respect and love you as a brother in Christ and it's a credit to your walk that we can disagree. blessed <

cknuck

02/19/2004 03:47:13 PM

maggieno: apparently you and JohnQ both took the wrong meaning of my quote, subsequently both took the oppotunity to low road your responses, neither responses reflexing the correct teachings of Jesus. Hmmm, the strange subtleties of sin. blessed <<

JesusIstheRock

02/19/2004 03:46:35 PM

Well obviously Jack Miles you believe in a different Jesus than one spoken of in the Bible and the one who now sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven. Repent and ask God for forgiveness and turn from your sins and follow His truths that are given in His Word and will be reinforced by His Spirit. Because what you just said is completely wrong..and you need His Holy Spirit to be able to see that.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 03:41:06 PM

cknuck- Though we don't always agree, I certainly always respect you and the point you are making. Once again however, we are of the same heart and mind with your last post! Peace!

maggieno

02/19/2004 03:40:43 PM

dmorcats: I think the reason people ask about what Jesus said is that not all people consider the editorial comment in the Bible (anything that is not a quote of Jesus) inerrant. For these Christians, Paul and the Apostles and their followers were free to interpret Jesus and local morality as they wanted; and contemporary Christians can do the same. That's why so many people study the old languages and old societies and old customs: to determine what is the basic Message and what is editorial comment. And even then, people reinterpret. Jesus told Martha that sitting and talking philosophy with him was more important for (one of the) Mary than doing housework. THAT's an idea that many people throughout Christian history ignored and actively fought against!

qtp3

02/19/2004 03:39:33 PM

Where is the position of sex in the Human Experience??? If a person's sexuality is the center of their identity or experience, then God is second and all roads leads to their sexuality. The main point of particulary, the Abrahamic Faith is essentially, submission to God. My point is that we live in a sex obsessed society. Which is more like ancient greece and Rome.

maggieno

02/19/2004 03:36:20 PM

"Please quote me the verse that specifically quote Jesus speaking on pedophilia, or perhaps bestiality, foot fetishes, peeping toms, public nudity, addictions I could mention more." Just makes the point that many rules are simply man-made interpretations...and can be revised when Society decides that the old rules are no longer constructive.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 03:33:49 PM

Some have asked when Jesus denounced homosexuality. Jesus consistently denounced 'sexual immorality' and the New Testament consistently denounces homosexuality as being immoral (see Romans 1). Jesus also was consistent in showing love to the sinner while denouncing the sin. All Christians should do the same. In being against homosexual marriage, I am standing against the sin - while ready to show love to those who I feel are caught in a sinful lifestyle. Jesus uses the word, porneia, a word that encompasses all types of sexual immorality. Jesus would have never gone against God's law as provided in the OT which labeled homosexuality as "immoral." Jesus taught in parables, parables that didn't "list" sins but spoke in general terms - but He still spoke convincingly of the gravity of sinful behavior.

cknuck

02/19/2004 03:30:02 PM

Will I recognize you at judgment by your surprised look on your face? Or you by mine? (lol hahahehe) At any rate I believe we both will have a seat at the table. In God's eyes my sins are no lesser than your, thank God for our Advocate, Who, even now, is pleading our case. Hallelujah; glory to the Lamb. blessed <<

JohnQ

02/19/2004 03:17:43 PM

cknuck- Thanks! My point exactly. This board is filled with Biblical quotes that are being used and/or misused to indicate Jesus' opinion and/or word on the subject. I do not neccessarily condon the other examples in your post. And, as I think you know I believe pedophilla, bestiality, adultery, etc are "sins" based on the Ten Commandmants. I still maintain that homosexuality is not addressed in the Ten Commandments! As always, Peace!

dmorcats

02/19/2004 03:13:49 PM

Septegram: You wrote that because you don't believe in my God that you are not subject to being judged by Him. Wow! I really don't want to be in your shoes on judgment day! I could choose not to believe in gravity, but if I jump out of a tall building I will still be dead. God is real, whether you choose to believe or not. I know, I know - you say, I don't believe the same way. I just wonder what the attitude will be when Revelation 20:11-15 comes to pass. This is still yet to occur, and will occur whether you believe in the Word of God or not.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 03:10:22 PM

gtp3- It already is religiosly permissible! MCC, UCC, Unity, and some branches of Judism to name a few. Peace!

cknuck

02/19/2004 03:08:48 PM

JohnQ: Please quote me the verse that specifically quote Jesus speaking on pedophilia, or perhaps bestiality, foot fetishes, peeping toms, public nudity, addictions I could mention more. blessed<<

qtp3

02/19/2004 03:03:45 PM

If a person is Gay, that is between their body and God. But that's different than making it apart church doctrine.. I believe that the worry over this issue is making it religiously permissable.

izzys007

02/19/2004 02:51:24 PM

i better go back to proof reading before clicking on submit.

izzys007

02/19/2004 02:49:48 PM

ajstone, you said it well. to hammer out the issues between faith and intellect is difficult. One of the things that has increased my faith and renwed belief in God has been the amazing scientific discoveries in space. I am a labor and delivery nurse, and i never stop marvelling at the glory and wonder of life, the world, the universe. There is no way this is all a cosmic accident or something unintended. To theres who fell that Christians hste homosexuals: I lived in an upper flat over two gay men who were a monogamous couple. They were two of the greatest, nicest people in the world. They even came to my wedding. I have had other friends who are gay/lesbian. I love and respect them, for they are wonderful people. I am not in the position to judge them because of their sexual choices. The only reason I started posting on here was to address the issue of what Jesus whould have said about gay marriage.

izzys007

02/19/2004 02:35:31 PM

to Judex, I am with Jesus on the divorce issue. Luckily, I married a wonderful man, and although neither of us were Christians when we married,we have had a great marriage. Now I have become a Christian, and I hope that through my example of being an even better wife, he will also come to accept Jesus as the Christ.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 02:31:49 PM

Request to one and all- Please quote me the Bible verses that specifically quote Jesus speaking about Gay Marriage and/or gay couples. Thanks!

JohnQ

02/19/2004 02:29:24 PM

cknuck- I agree completely with your last post except for: "In short, gay marriage will change marriage more than it will change gays." Lack of monogamy seems to me to be also rampant amoung straight/hetrosexual married couples. I certainly do not want to make it sound like I think this is the case with all straight couples. But, neither is in the case with all gay couples. My point is, for some gay or straight, monogamy is missing in their definition of marriage. Peace be with You!

cknuck

02/19/2004 02:27:38 PM

septegram: Don't disillusion yourself, God is still sovereign even over the USA. You should thank Him that He is: This earthly empire can fall over any of the many mistakes we as a country make time and time again. The prayers of the rightous availeth much. blessed <

maggieno

02/19/2004 02:26:04 PM

Cknuck, sounds like heterosexual marriage to me. Seriously, you can find plenty of straight people who would say the same thing....and plenty of gay/lesbian people who believe in monogomy. Traditionally (there's that word), males have sought partners outside of their legal spouses in large numbers...society has even condoned it by not punishing males (when it punishes females). Judging by my conservative work situation, monogomy went out of fashion long before the question of marriage for gays come up.

ajstone

02/19/2004 02:22:37 PM

cknuck, all that will change about marriage is the way some people see it. The fact that so many people--gay and straight--want to be a part of it means that it is a healthy institution that will continue to inspire people as it has always done.

maggieno

02/19/2004 02:19:53 PM

izzys007, thank you for your well-written post! Please remember that the Great Mystery/God speaks in many different ways to people and has for thousands of years. Many if not most of the people here have truly had a transcendental experience -- such as you have had -- that has led them to different expressions of faith. What works for each of us to make us loving, compassionate, and life-affirmative is TRUE for each of us. The Great Mystery/God speaks to you through Jesus and the Bible. The Great Mystery/God speaks to me through Taoism.

ajstone

02/19/2004 02:19:43 PM

izzys: Glad it works for you. I'll keep trying to hammer out a more satisfactory partnership between my faith and my intellect. I mean, if that's okay with you.

cknuck

02/19/2004 02:19:26 PM

The former moderator of the Metropolitan Community Church, a largely homosexual denomination, made the same point. "Monogamy is not a word the gay community uses," Troy Perry told The Dallas Morning News. "We talk about fidelity. That means you live in a loving, caring, honest relationship with your partner. Some would say that committed couples could have multiple sexual partners as long as there's no deception. A recent study from the Netherlands, where gay marriage is legal, suggests that the moderator is correct. Researchers found that even among stable homosexual partnerships, men have an average of eight partners per year outside their "monogamous" relationship. In short, gay marriage will change marriage more than it will change gays. blessed <

izzys007

02/19/2004 02:11:42 PM

It is so interesting to read the posts of the non-believers. Less than a year ago I could have authored any one of those posts. It is true that one does not have a true understanding of God and the Word until one is Baptized in the Spirit. The Bible was foolishness to me for so many years. It is weird, bizarre, how my understanding has increased. The people who are posting and are not believers, have all the information they need to make an informed decision. They have to be open minded enough to consider that accepting the gift that God has given ALL PEOPLE (by coming to earth and being crucified for us), by accepting Jesus as the Messiah, is the true path to eternal life. They have to let God convict their hearts. This requires humility and a desire to change.It involves admitting you were wrong and that is not easy to do. I am so thankful the Shepherd called me back.

izzys007

02/19/2004 02:09:43 PM

imdancin, I was a born again Christian at 16 years old. I was raised Catholic studied the Bible & really did not understand what being born again meant. Through the past 31 years since then I have been Baptist, Presbyterian, Jewish, Bahai, Buddhist, agnostic& finally Atheist (Humanist). A few years ago my neighbors started a Bible study group. I joined as an effort to get to know them & because a good offense is the best defense (I was an atheist) To my great surprise God convicted me but this time I understood what it all meant. I became Baptized this past summer in my backyard pool.

maggieno

02/19/2004 02:09:29 PM

"Those who persist in sinning, not those who are struggling to overcome sin --do not belong to the community." Fine, exclude "sinners" from YOUR church...but leave the civil arena alone! Just like most other Americans, gays are tax-paying, law-abiding citizens who deserve equal protection under our laws.

ajstone

02/19/2004 02:07:06 PM

I can't help but notice the number of literalists who come out to play every time the issue of gay marriage comes up. What gives? Why such a special focus on gay marriage? Why not back an adultery amendment or laws prohibiting women from speaking in church? Why the special venom reserved for homosexuality?

sunshine2777

02/19/2004 01:49:29 PM

JohnQ:"Are you saying all homosexual acts are adultery." Yes. According to God's law, ANY sexual activity outside the bonds of a covenant marriage between a man and a woman is adultery.

septegram

02/19/2004 01:37:55 PM

Quoth dmorcats: However, God is still sovereign. Not in the USA, He isn't, dmorcats. Here the people are sovereign, through the Constitution, which guarantees equal rights for all. This is not a theocracy, you know. All people will face Him Nah. Not being a follower of an Abrahamic religion, I'm not subject to your God. Those who would try to live by His truth and call our nation to live by His truth will continue to be vilified by those who are blind to that truth. Leaving aside the dubious claim of "truth," you must remember that you don't get to have your religious beliefs enshrined in law in this country. If you want to live in a theocracy, try Saudi Arabia or Iran.

godswill777

02/19/2004 01:36:15 PM

My Dad used to say, "When you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps the loudest is the one who got hit." I am a dirty rotten sinner, saved by grace, Gods word (all of it) and his Holy Spirit are what convicts me of that sin. The wiles of the devil are to somehow convince me and others, that what we are doing is not as bad as someone else. If he can distort, and water down the Word enough, it will no longer reflect God or his nature. Another trick, is to take the Word totally out of context to make it mean something other than what was intended.(Matt. 4:6-7) I thank God for his loving mercy and his Grace. The wages of sin is death. Peace

ajstone

02/19/2004 01:34:04 PM

Wow. The bigotry expressed on this board is truly breath-taking. I invite those who believe that gay marriage is an abomination to read Virginia v. Loving, the case that struck down prohibitions against mixed-race marriages. The trial judge in that case observed that "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix." Today, opponents of gay marriage use hauntingly similar arguments to back up their point of view--namely, that it is against God's will for such unions to take place. (Miscegenation opponents cited scripture in support of their position, as well--"Sons of Ham" and all of that.) Intolerance is intolerance, bigotry is bigotry, and no amount of Bible-banging or quoting from dead Hebrew writers will change that simple fact.

barblee

02/19/2004 01:14:44 PM

Spirituality is not just spouting off with you mouth it is walking the walk. That takes great discipline on our part and is a day to day struggle with sin but those of us who "believe" feel that it is worth all the effort.

barblee

02/19/2004 01:07:27 PM

Immorality must be judged. 1 Cor. 5. 1st. Cor. 5:13. Those who persist in sinning, not those who are struggling to overcome sin --do not belong to the community.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 01:05:14 PM

For those of you not familar with 2 Chronicles 7 14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

Donaldito

02/19/2004 01:02:52 PM

iamjdh: "Technically, bigotry is religious discrimination." Wrong. "Your discrimination against those ("nuts") who choose it is exactly the definition of bigotry." If I was actually discriminating against someone, that could be called bigotry. Yes. But, I'm not. Bigotry does not pertain only to religious beliefs. You should learn a bit more about the English language before telling someone else he is using it incorrectly. Which I didn't. And which I make certain not to do before I post. You should also learn a bit more about the art of debate. Saying, "Ha ha, you're doing it, too!" is childish, and does not progress this discussion whatsoever.

barblee

02/19/2004 12:59:28 PM

Those who inherit the Kingdom of God are not merely those that are "saved from sin" but those who actively pursue and manifest a righteous, changed sanctified life. Those who continue in a lifestyle of fornication, theft, idolatry, adultery or drunkenness cannot "inherit" or experience the blessings of the Kingdom of God on this earth. Fornication can cover any sinful sexual activity. whatever a person's martial status happens to be. Judge. 19:2; 1 Cor. 7:2, 1Thess. 4:3. Can be harlotry or prostitution and various other forms of unchastity. John 8:41, Acts:15:20, 1 Cor. 5:1.

dmorcats

02/19/2004 12:55:20 PM

I believe that those of you who want to reject the Bible as being irrelevant will continue to believe that way, regardless of what is said. The Bible even says, "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:14) That said, the embracing of homosexuality and lack of adherence to the things of God are all indications that we have heard what God has to say and have rejected it. However, God is still sovereign. All people will face Him, even those thinking His truth is foolishness. Those who would try to live by His truth and call our nation to live by His truth will continue to be vilified by those who are blind to that truth. My fear is that our nation, which has turned its collective back on God will reap the consequences. The only recourse for our people is to apply 2 Chronicles 7:14.

dannyuk2

02/19/2004 12:53:56 PM

indeed greling. too often christian fundamentalists (especially so called "pro family" ones) seem to forget who their leader really is.

JohnQ

02/19/2004 12:51:15 PM

sunshine2777- Are you saying all homosexual acts are adultery. Or, only those acts engaged in by by people who are already committed to another person? Peace be with You!

JohnQ

02/19/2004 12:48:17 PM

Let's all remember, that we are all children of God. For the non-Christians, being a child of God does not demean you...it just allows you into the club. For the Christians let's remember that Jesus' message to the world was NOT the way to God is through the path of bigotry. Let's all look at the beam in our own eyes before we become concerned with the speck in our neighbor's eye. God Bless on and All!

sunshine2777

02/19/2004 12:46:25 PM

godwill777: I like your posts. God ordained marriage as covenant between a man and a woman. God said Do not commit adultery. Jesus DID reference the 10 commandments and talk about obeying. So, homosexual relationships are adulterous relationships just as much as heterosexual relationships outside the bounds of marriage. So, I'd say He addressed the homosexuality issue quite clearly as well as the divorce issue. Greling, "Whoever said Jesus was "pro-family", got the wrong idea." You obviously dont know Jesus, if you did, you wouldnt make such a statement. But then you wouldnt say alot of things you say, I'm sure. He still loves you anyway. Thats how awesome He is.

barblee

02/19/2004 12:37:03 PM

Jeraneous; you are so wrong on this one !! lst Thessolonians 4: 1-8 "For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality, that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles that do not know God; that no one should take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also forewarned you and testified. For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness, therefore he who rejects this does not reject man but God who has also given us His Holy Spirit.

greling

02/19/2004 12:25:05 PM

Let's keep the WHOLE Old Testament, not just the parts we like. Right? Let's stone disobedient children, shun all those who eat pork or shellfish, and force all raped women to marry their rapists. Let's be morally consistent with the New Testament as well. For those of us who are left-handed, let's take the "traditional" approach of the church and cut it off. Let's punish those who are divorced. And only those who abandon their families and loved ones can be a disciple of Christ, so that will be a stringent requirement for membership in the Kindgom of God. Right? Whoever said Jesus was "pro-family", got the wrong idea.

themarirev

02/19/2004 12:23:52 PM

As a Christilenne, not a Christian, I find it disturbing that we are still including civil liberties with religious edict. As has already been expressed, if you don't like, want or be in the company of gay marriages due to your belief system, so be it. However, this is, as with many laws, a financial impairment upon a person or persons who has the same dollar bill that say's "In God We Trust," not "In our religion we trust." This the reason for the legal separation issue. I see so much pompous piety. Metaphoriclly speaking, It seems so many spend their time declaring "Beleive me!" instead of "love you." Seemingly looking for ways to separate instead of inclusify all of humanity into the the grace of divine comfort available to all. While I somewhat agree with Mr. Miles assertions, I feel I would have to use the veribage "might have said" rather then "would say." Cont...

themarirev

02/19/2004 12:23:29 PM

Cont... What most people seem to be missing in this spiritual evolution is people will eventually have to depend on God alone for their relationships because our species can be corrputed due to its dependence on the written word. The direct and divine communication with God is availabe to everyone and is not as corruptable as others wish it could be. Why is faith not enough? Why must we force others to have the same relationship with God as we have individually and independent of any other person? Especially on the issue of freedom of love and liberty for everyone making a contribution to the greater good of all, i.e. taxes. There so many far worse things to waste time on; other then who should be allowed to love who as well as what legal citizen deserves life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and and what legal citizens do not. Rev themarirev.us

iamjdh

02/19/2004 11:55:14 AM

donaldito Technically, bigotry is religious discrimination. Each Christian should know that the bible applies equally to themselves. It is a guide for those who choose Jesus’ path. Your discrimination against those ("nuts") who choose it is exactly the definition of bigotry. Mutilating the language does not help your case.

godswill777

02/19/2004 11:48:32 AM

sin is sin, murder, drunkeness,false wittness,cheating, adultry, and homosexuality. God is the same now as allways, Jesus did not come to erase the old testament but to fulfill it. Peace

iamjdh

02/19/2004 11:46:41 AM

farbettyj Actually the scripture does say to judge, discern, distinguish and deal with unrighteousness, of all kinds. You may be referring to not judging in the sense or 'condemning'--that is for god, I agree. And not condemning an adulterer, a fornicator, or a child molester is correct... but judging that these are evil behaviors is exactly what god's laws was give to teach us!

godswill777

02/19/2004 11:44:29 AM

But dear friends, remember what the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. They said to you, " in the last times there will be scoffers who will fallow their own ungodly desires." These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the spirit.(the book of Jude)

Rigel5740

02/19/2004 11:44:03 AM

Dannyuk2, I did not claim that homosexuality is equal to murder or child abuse. My point was that you can't infer that the Gospels tolerated homosexual behaviour simply because they didn't mention it. If that were so, then the Gospels could be interpreted to support every activity it doesn't talk about, including slavery, murder, and child abuse. Personally, I have no problem with genuine homosexuals who marry each other, and I think lawmakers (not judges) should recognize gay marriage and strengthen marriage in general by denying the rights of married people to unmarried partners. I however am not Christian, and do not pretend that the Gospels support my personal views. If you don't like Biblical or Apostolic Christianity, then don't be Christian.

godswill777

02/19/2004 11:40:35 AM

Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: "see the LOrd is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

godswill777

02/19/2004 11:35:21 AM

They are Godless men who change the grace of our God into a license for imorality and deny Jesus Christ our Lord and only Sovereing and Lord.7, In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suufer the punishment of eternal fire.

godswill777

02/19/2004 11:30:44 AM

Dear friends, allthough Iwas very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write to you and urge you to contend for the faith that was once and for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you.

Donaldito

02/19/2004 11:29:10 AM

farbettyj: She's got it right. Although I think she meant leviticus, not deuteronomy (but I could be wrong). I've said this so many times before, it's becoming exhausting: Bigots look for justification for their hatred. What better place to find evidence of their hatred than the "all-knowing" bible? And then you have barblee, who makes things up and says they're in the bible to justify her hatred! You people are nuts...

NJlee

02/19/2004 11:21:35 AM

Give me a break. I am sure that Jesus understood that man and woman are different biologically and appreciated his Father’s wisdom in creation. The thesis of this article is based on “What God has Joined together. . . . “ Virtually all of humanity understand the “joy” of such heterosexual joining. How are same sex partners “joined?” For most of us the thought of such “joining” is repulsive. Contrast this with the natual God created “joining’ of a man and women.

Jeraneos

02/19/2004 11:02:18 AM

barblee .... You said:He called deviant behavior (homosexual, lesbian) an "abomination".Where did Jesus say this? Please be specific. Not all gay people are Bible-believing people, nor do all gay people subscribe to your belief system. As such, your belief system cannot be the sole basis upon which secular law is established. And frankly nor can mine. As for interpretations of the Bible (sigh) ... just read Matthew chapters 5, 6 and 7 and you'll see an enormous reinterpretation given by Jesus of several parts of the Mosaic Law (God's Word). In this sense it appears flexibility was employed by the Messiah much more than legalistic strictness (as practiced by the Pharisees .. and evidently people such as yourself). If gay marriage is an afront to your beliefs, so be it. That is a problem you must deal with on a personal level. But whether it is wrong or right for others is not for you to judge. Let your God decide in the end.

dannyuk2

02/19/2004 11:00:13 AM

and rigel5740 what logic makes you think that a loving gay relationship is equal to murder/child abuse? homosexuality harms no one, it is the homophobes who cause the harm with reguards to homosexuality and no amout of logic or biblical teaching will prove otherwise.

dannyuk2

02/19/2004 10:57:42 AM

i must correct you barblee - jesus never said a word about homosexuality - let alone condemn it. i pity any gay person who trusts you - be they your children, relatives, or friends. for your words will needlessly tear them apart. Jesus would probably weep if he saw what you guys are doing to a part of gods creation through fear and misunderstanding.

farbettyj

02/19/2004 10:54:58 AM

One of the most important things Jesus said was to not judge. That is not for us to do. My daughter is gay and attends church every Sunday as she believes in God. When you go back to Deuteronomy where the only startment is about homosexuality it also says If someone says to worship other Gods we are to kill them, stone them, do you do that? It says not to eat pig, do you? It says every seven years we must cancel all debts. Do you do that? You can not pick and choose which ones to follow. Jesus gave the final words. Love one another and Judge not less you be judged.

barblee

02/19/2004 10:44:13 AM

Jesus would not condone gay marriage. His Word is specific on how we are to live our lives. It leaves no doubt in your mind if you believe His Word. He called deviant behavior (homosexual, lesbian) an "abomination" and His Word is just as true today as it was then. The Bible leaves no room for "self interpretation". It is final.

Rigel5740

02/19/2004 10:38:49 AM

It's been a long time since I've read the Gospels. Did he ever say that murder or child abuse was wrong? If he didn't, does that mean he wasn't concerned about murder or child abuse? That he didn't talk about homosexual acts does not mean he would tolerate them. Jack Miles is right though that divorce and adultery would probably concern him more. It is the height of hypocrisy that remarried Christians technically living in a state of perpetual adultery consider themselves forgiven while at the same time claiming that committed homosexuals are not.

iamjdh

02/19/2004 10:36:36 AM

MoeLarryandJesus Jesus and Judas... you like the idea of joining holyness with evil... in a 'gay' marriage. But which is which? Do you believe that Jesus was inclined to marry Judas? Judas did have a jealous outburst over a woman putting oil on Jesus feet. Perhaps you are onto something, God and Satan may really be quarreling (same gender) lovers? In any case God sees it as a mistake to couple men together. Satan, well evidently he does not. Neither is right? If they had only 'married' we'd have a better world?

iamjdh

02/19/2004 10:18:03 AM

Jack Miles may be rational... but he is doing his own version of selective scripture quoting. I guess that if you disagree with the quote you bash, if you agree with the quote you love him. Here is a quote that Jack could have used, but it would not endear him to the very powerful segment that read and like his view: (1Tim 1:8-17-you can read it) Paul may have been divorced. Of course that would nullify this passage--right? Jack seems rightly to have recognized that there is a bending of God's perfect will for divorce for the Hebrews of the old testiment. No such shift ocurred for man lying with man. So Jesus did not have to remind us of God's very obvious will in this issue. We also have to assume that the apostles teachings came partly out of conversations that were not recorded as quotations of Jesus.

SelfieMiyu

02/19/2004 10:02:17 AM

Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Well, though I should probably reprint the quote 14 times, I'll spare the board... If Jesus is coming back for a Holy Church, then by all means, spend the next couple of milennia working that out IN YOUR CHURCH and let the rest of the world do what they do. It has nothing to do with you. If you're right, and the people who aren't following every jot and tittle of the book you worship instead of the creator of the universe are going to burn burn burn, then again - WHAT HAS THAT GOT TO DO WITH YOU??? Do you believe by codifying your own morality into law it will save even one soul? Why do any of you bother trying to force heaven on people who don't really care? If you're against same-sex unions, please feel free not to have one. Case closed.

WillSea

02/19/2004 09:54:57 AM

Jesus, as a matter of fact, eschewed ALL political statements. His "defense of marriage" was at the heart level, not the political level. And if God didn't join a couple --if love wasn't the source of that relationship, but it was a political union--would he have sanctified it? I don't think so. My own previous marriage had become a political union, with all of the attendent political battles. It ended and I believe that its end was a sanctified blessing. Now who at a political level, has the power to sanctify any relationship? No one. Who, on a political level, can know the heart of any couple --no matter their gender-- and decide for them that the relationship should be prevented, or prevented from ending? Again, no one. So politics has no place in marriage. Since God is Love, Love sanctifies itself.

jamesrfitz

02/19/2004 09:54:08 AM

Though I personally have not been given the certain knowledge of what Jesus would or would not do facing today's challenges, I am sure that God is enjoying the resulting chaos of revealing one thing to PeaceRadio and revealing the contradictory to Jack Miles. What a great sense of humour he must have! As for me, I'm still grappling with Jesus' commandment to love others as myself. I guess PeaceRadio has already mastered that one and has moved on to helping Jesus judge the quick and the dead.

MoeLarryAndJesus

02/19/2004 09:20:56 AM

Hey, maybe if gay marriage had been available in Jesus's day, he and Judas could have married and a whole lot of trouble and hurt feelings could have been avoided.

Donaldito

02/19/2004 09:08:40 AM

PeaceRadio: "They mis-printed what i juast posted!" Considering the fact that you just posted something, say, ten freakin' times, maybe it was YOUR mistake and not THEIRS.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:38:13 AM

They mis-printed what i juast posted! God will never! Agree to sin Because God will never go beyound what his word says. God will never agree to sin or the conduct that follows!

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:36:00 AM

Jesus would say only what the spirit of God tells him to say. Jesus came to save the world not condemn it. God will agree with sin ,no matter how someone trys to justify it. Being gay is an abomination to God and it goes against his word!

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:47 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:44 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:42 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:38 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:36 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:34 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:28 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:25 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:25 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:23 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:14 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:08 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:32:07 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:31:50 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

PeaceRadio

02/19/2004 08:31:44 AM

Jesus only did what God the father sent him here to do. Jesus came to save and heal the world,not condemn it. In the(KJV)Lev.18:22 Gods word explains about how his children should live and what the results will be, if they do the opposite of what his word says to do. God is Holy and will not go beyound what his word says. Jesus was with out sin and would only do what the spirit of God directed him to do. God loves all his children,but God is Holy!God will never change his mind about sin!God loves all his children ,Please remember Jesus is coming back for a Holy church with out spot or wrinkle and all who believe and do Gods will is the church. Jesus is coming to judge the nations.This is the time of the world's visitation.It is time to repent and forsake our wicked ways.We must line our lives up with the word of God and I believe Jesus would say exactly what Gods word says.

delfentor

02/19/2004 07:55:30 AM

Has anyone ever noticed how many issues America has with sex and violence? I find this interesting because that is what is always on T.V. Now I know why I don't watch T.V., its all an illusion.

delfentor

02/19/2004 07:51:41 AM

God is love. Love is all there is. Everything else that isn't an expression of love is an illusion.

bardmountain

02/19/2004 07:42:35 AM

Once again I have to agree with Jesus, despite the contrary urgings of many of his followers.

smc93

02/19/2004 07:22:41 AM

Jack Miles... brings smiles

SelfieMiyu

02/19/2004 07:15:08 AM

If Jesus is God, then Jesus did have something to say about homosexual relationships. Regardless of whether Jesus was or wasn't God (I personally believe he was, but that's just me), he was never one to argue with public policy. "Render unto Ceasar..." Even Jesus knew when to separate Church and State. God allows us to make choices. Who are any of us to deign to decide for God how anyone should live (besides ourselves)? I don't see any brimstone falling from the sky, so either God's changed His mind about how to deal with nations that live outside of His will, or the story in Genesis is a cultural myth (like much of Genesis - written hundreds of years after the supposed events occurred.)

godtruthseeker

02/19/2004 06:59:50 AM

If we truly believe that Jesus came from God, and that's is up to your own level of belief, then God did speak about homosexual relationships. He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and sent His representative to Abraham to let him know what was going on before hand. Also, I believe that some of the people in that city truly got along together, their lusts were not just driven by lashing out at one another and tormenting each other or they would have destroyed themselves, so I think they really did have meaningful relationships even back then. To say otherwise is to lie to yourself. If Jesus is God, then Jesus did have something to say about homosexual relationships.

SelfieMiyu

02/19/2004 06:56:24 AM

The word was "arsenokoites," and was never seen before Paul used it. He made it up. Paul also had serious sexuality issues, claiming he wished that he had no feelings whatsoever in that arena, and that people who had those yucky, icky feelings were better off married, while those who nevewr married were the most blessed. Why on earth would anyone allow someone who is so obviously dysfunctional when it comes to sexuality dictate to them how God intends his wonderful gift to be celebrated? Just a quick reminder - Paul (and everyone else who wrote the Bible) was a man. Just a man. With faults, foibles, and yes - even prejudices. "Apostolic authority" is a clever way of saying "without fault." BS. Everyone has faults. Paul's were numerous. God bless us all.

nsos

02/19/2004 04:56:19 AM

And I want to emphsize that I am not a scholar of Biblical languages, and the issue of the translation of a specific word is not one I am prepared to defend or deny without much more information. But the issue of the social connotation of a sex act is something I think is important to pay attention to -- neither heterosexual nor homosexual sex took place in the same social situations as it does nowadays.

nsos

02/19/2004 04:53:07 AM

icthys, I believe that the issue of "temple and idol worship" you are referencing comes from the argument that the word in the New Testament that we translate as "homosexual" is actually a word that was used for a kind of temple prostitute. The idea is tha Paul was condemning a) abusive sex (of young slaves by temple patrons)and b) sex in the service of idolatry. At least I think I am accurately representing that argument. It is important to keep in mind that what we think of as "homosexuality" is not a concept that was around in New Testament times. There was certainly male on male and female on female sex, but it did not have the same connotations of loving, commited relationships that it does today. It may have been considered deviant not because of the inherent sexual act invovled, but because of the social circumstances under which those acts took place. Nowadays, even heterosexuality is a very different thing, in terms of the way it is practiced socially, than it was back then.

hippie2u2

02/19/2004 03:57:03 AM

How is it that evrybody seems to know what somebody would say about something without that person actually saying it?? Is this a kind of mediumship?? If Jesus would ressurect I bet he would say a whole lot about evrything. My guess is that what he would say wouldn't make most people to happy. With most people claming to be Jesus ressurected locked up in mental hospitals I don't even think we would reconize him for who he is and that he will join his hundreds of wannabe friends in the loony ben. With Mr. Miles already saying that Jesus never said anything about the subject we better fend for ourself in this matter. And with all the claims that God is all about unconditional love who are we to restrict the legality of love to hetrosexuals.

icthys

02/19/2004 02:50:14 AM

I do wonder why some like to bring up the whole "temple" and "idol worship" type thing to state homosexuality wasn't really condemned within God's word, just a specific type. Last I checked, false gods already included that prohibition by default. The only reason I can think up of why the verses of the sexual behavior of that sort is overlooked is merely to justify that behavior.

icthys

02/19/2004 02:46:39 AM

Miles dismisses the very verses which he provided for his argument. Marriage defined as between man and woman is supported throughout the Old and New Testaments. And it is the only type of marriage Biblically supported. For that matter, marriage was the only place for any sexual activity to be taking place period. "...male and female created He them." Genesis 1:27 "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Genesis 2:24 I do agree one thing. If one condemns homosexuality as being sin cut right to the chase and at least be consistant that all manner of sexual activity outside that of a husband and wife is sin for it attacks the sanctity of marriage. And yes, this includes divorce save for the Biblical exception of unfaithfulness as well as abandonment and abuse which unfaithfullness would fall under.

erikkid

02/19/2004 01:46:34 AM

Fear. It's the number one thing fueling the gay marriage debate. It's also another attempt at the Religious Right (Falwell and Co.) to try to legislate morality. I love what David Burchett wrote in "When Bad Christians happen to Good People"...He basically said the church universal has been trying to remove sin from the world for decades, if not centuries, but that is an impossible task. Sin will be in the world simply because their is a universal force of Good (or God) versus Evil(the Devil). Wouldn't it simply be easier if we just loved each other. Didn't Jesus say the greatest commandment was to love your neighbor as yourself? I can't wait to see the day come when science proves fully that God made gay people the way they are and God doesn't make any junk.

imdancin

02/19/2004 12:17:07 AM

izzy.... I am curious.........Do you believe you can lose your salvation? Say a person gives their life to Christ as a young adult. Years later they sin doing one of the following.... homosexuality, adultry, stealing..........Do they lose salvation that Jesus promised after we become Born Again? I believe sin separtes us from God. God hates sin. I believe God spanks, and spanks hard when we do not walk with Him. Sin is sin.........we all sin.........if God only took people who did not sin........no one would make it..........I sure would'nt. But I gave my life to Christ. I admitted I was a sinner, I know sin is death, I acknowledged Jesus died and rose again for me.......and I asked Him into my Heart.........Are you saying if I sin, I am going to hell?

judex

02/19/2004 12:15:07 AM

With perfect scriptural authority, Miles has drawn our attention to Jesus' absolute, uncompromising, unqualified, zero-tolerance prohibition of divorce. He has called the bluff of all Christians who want to invoke scripture on homosexuality and escape it on divorce. Here's my question: are all you correspondents who are so obsessed with anal intercourse willing to follow Jesus in his teaching on divorce? Are you with him on that one or against him?

robinsgarret

02/19/2004 12:02:42 AM

Paul did not address anything close to committed gay couples or gay marriage. He referenced temple prostitutes and idol worship. He never used the word "abomination". Some Christians' hatred of gay people is so intense that they don't want to look beyond cherished misconceptions. They never go deep to the underlying priciples and explain how love, committment and responsibility are bad for anyone.

izzys007

02/18/2004 11:12:12 PM

And the Christians who practice oral sex &/or anal sex between a man and a woman are also being sexually immoral. Being a Christian is not easy. You cannot just do what you want and keep saying, "oh sorry". You have to REPENT, which includes following in the footsteps of Jesus, who was sinless, as closely as you can. Christians are not perfect. We are sinners, but we are supposed to be trying and working toward improving ourselves and helping fellow Christians grow stronger in faith.

izzys007

02/18/2004 10:54:40 PM

Oh... Jesus IS GOD. So, if God is called God or Jesus, or any of the other names he was called in the OT, it is all the same being.

izzys007

02/18/2004 10:51:00 PM

I am a strong supporter of the separation of church and state. If the government wants to condone a civil/legal arrangement between two people, then that is fine, but it should not be called a marriage. By the way, it is not only Christians whose religion is based on the word of God, regarding sexual immorality, and it's consequences. The Muslims and Jews also believe in the Old Testament teachings, the laws of the God of Abraham.

dplatt

02/18/2004 10:42:36 PM

Bravo88 2/18/04 10:02:10 PM Sorry... These are my last words on Jack Miles... Check the info on him; he has supposedly written a biography on GOD. He was a Jesuit; perhaps he has fallen away from the faith or never had the faith to begin with. Have you actually read God: A Biography? It is a very objective portrayal of the God of the Hebrew Bible. Nothing Miles says about God does not come directly from the Old Testament. He appears to be one who writes what he wants to believe rather than the truth necessarily. What is the truth in this case? Name one thing Jesus said about homosexuality.

cknuck

02/18/2004 10:42:14 PM

Hi maggieno: I know today it is popular but because of sanitary conditions (indoor plumbing, etc.) but of Jesus' day it would be most unattractive and I would even say because of sanitary reasons oral sex would have been out of the question also. These behaviors come about with the luxury and leisure time of the rich and decadant and idle. blessed <

b-baggins

02/18/2004 10:37:47 PM

This is bogus. The teachings of Christ didn't end with His death and resurrection. The Apostles were specifically commissioned by Christ to carry on his teachings after his ascension to heaven. Paul was an Apostle of Jesus Christ, and his teachings in scripture are the de facto teachings of Christ, and Paul most certainly address homosexuality. He called it an abomination and declared with apostolic authority that those who practiced it would not inherit the Kingdom of God. Case closed.

maggieno

02/18/2004 10:32:32 PM

And really, since Jesus is quite clear on his opinion of divorce, can someone explain to me why Christians who hold to literal interpretations of the Bible don't insist on laws against remarriage and don't penalize public officials who are divorced? Some states used to have laws like that. And I remember when a divorced politician couldn't get elected. But people seem to have "reinterpreted" the Bible in this case. Why?

maggieno

02/18/2004 10:30:02 PM

Bravo88, why shouldn't two adults who take care of each other (and often children and elderly parents) thereby relieving Society of the burden be compensated by that same Society through the legal recognition of their willingness to accept such legal burdens? If Civil society decided to allow all adult, mutually agreeable, humans to make such contracts and called them civil unions/partnerships/or something else...and left the ceremony of marriage to the various churches, would you be able to live with it as an American -- in light of America's stated support of freedom of belief?

maggieno

02/18/2004 10:25:41 PM

cknuck, I know you believe that your God directed every development of the Christian Bible, so I won't argue what it says with you. However, you must know that anal sex is not limited to s/s male couples? I first learned about it from straight people. Read any sexual advice column and you'll discover that plenty of straight people enjoy that practice. You're letting yourself get distracted by misinformation. The real argument here is over interpretations of what people wrote down as Jesus' history and words.

cknuck

02/18/2004 10:15:54 PM

False teachers, how could he know what preoccupied Jesus, who was God. Einstein only wished to know God's thoughts, and but Jack claims he knows them. People act like homosexuality was openly practiced back in Jesus' day. Those old guys had laws on how to wash your hands, having sex with women on their period, and you think they would contemplate anal sex? the fact that it was not mentioned only means it was the farthest thing from their minds, unimaginable too repulsive to even consider. Don't think of it in todays standards for back then. blessed <<

Bravo88

02/18/2004 10:02:49 PM

Boy beliefnet doesn't always work too well...

Bravo88

02/18/2004 10:02:09 PM

Sorry... These are my last words on Jack Miles... Check the info on him; he has supposedly written a biography on GOD. He was a Jesuit; perhaps he has fallen away from the faith or never had the faith to begin with. He appears to be one who writes what he wants to believe rather than the truth necessarily.

Bravo88

02/18/2004 10:01:52 PM

Sorry... These are my last words on Jack Miles... Check the info on him; he has supposedly written a biography on GOD. He was a Jesuit; perhaps he has fallen away from the faith or never had the faith to begin with. He appears to be one who writes what he wants to believe rather than the truth necessarily.

Bravo88

02/18/2004 09:57:34 PM

Unfortunately, I doubt that many people concerned want to be shown the scripture that refers to GOD's commandment on relations between two of the same gender. Anyway, my last words are: two thumbs down to Jack Miles' column...

Bravo88

02/18/2004 09:55:05 PM

As for marriage between two of the same gender: perhaps it can be said that it will not hurt society, nor those around them, nor even those whom are committed to that choice. Perhaps... If two people wish to do so then they have every "right" to do so but they should not expect to have it condoned by everyone, nor to receive the financial support accorded to marriage of a man and woman. Perhaps it is time to simply end all financial benefits for marriage? Then there would be fairness.

Bravo88

02/18/2004 09:51:10 PM

It has always been true that men and women wish to follow after the desires of their heart rather than GOD's heart, even when they instinctively know that they are wrong to do so. Some are so dead to the conscience that they will do whatever they want, whether it is to rape, kill, lie or steal. Jeffrey Dahmer is one individual who was so dead to his conscience that he committed horrible crimes.

izzys007

02/18/2004 09:49:34 PM

Well, Homosexual feelings and love is not a sin. Acting on these desires is. We all have temptations that we must resist, whether it is to steel, kill or practice immoral sexual behavior. The Truth of God's Word, is still the Truth, whether you want to accept it or not. PRACTICING homosexuals who do not repent (and become celibate), will go to hell. It is their choice to make. 1Corinthians 6:9-10 or don't you know that the inrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetors, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor extortioners, will inherit the kingdom of God

Bravo88

02/18/2004 09:47:49 PM

I would not say "Bravo Jack". Does he presume to know the mind of the Lord Jesus Christ? I would not presume to do so but one thing is certain, He upheld the scripture. Just because He said nothing about "marriage between two of the same gender" does not mean He had no opinion or no word from GOD on it. Do you seriously believe that Jews of Jesus' time would need teaching on that? They knew scripture and knew what GOD would've felt about that. I'm sure that they knew what the teaching on divorce was, they just wanted to "push the envelope". Scripture of the Old Testament clearly outlines GOD's teaching on that and therefore what Jesus would uphold.

edelphi

02/18/2004 09:22:55 PM

Amen Jack.

cknuck

02/18/2004 09:09:33 PM

How on earth did this guy win an Pulitzer Prize? His whole "what would Jesus say" skit, putting words in Jesus' mouth, is more like a Dick and Jane book. See Jack spot. blessed<

Windsinger

02/18/2004 08:39:38 PM

Jack Miles coming in with a rational statement when other Christians are saying the stupidest things imaginable is beginning to be a trend. Does that mean it's time for him to get thrown out of Christianity?

LairdsChapel

02/18/2004 08:07:23 PM

What they really want is to profit from pitting one group of vulnerable people (their own followers) against another group of people perceived to be vulnerable and defenseless (in this case gays and lesbians). This way extrachromosome conservatives can keep getting soundbites and donations. Wonder if they'll actually go after the real problems in the world like organized crime, drugs, corporate greed and corruption. Maybe even heal the sick, feed the hungry, cast out prejudices. Unlikely. Thank you Mr. Miles for this thoughtful article. Lairds' Chapel

crow39

02/18/2004 07:31:58 PM

THANK YOU!!!! I'm constantly amazed at the number of so-called (divorced) Christians who feel that it's entirely their business to condemn others' lives, quote scripture (selectively), generally act holier-than-thou, and hand out dictats to the rest of us... Let's see, who's divorced on the national scene? Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan... I could go on, but you get my drift.

jkevinm

02/18/2004 07:18:13 PM

AMEN! The sin is the failure of the promise, not the desire to make it.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

DiggDeliciousNewsvineRedditStumbleTechnoratiFacebook