Sin, Heterosexual and Homosexual!

[sincereheart]

This was in direct response to sinceheart's post where he was trying to draw a comparison between adultery and homosexual sex.

No, she is drawing a comparison between sin and sin. Pick any one you like..... The point being that homosexuality IS a sin no matter what man may say or even want to believe. Obviously, it's not the only sin. However, trying to say it isn't a sin is the problem..... But since you didn't like the comparison I used, how about comparing it to bestiality? That way we stay in the order of Scripture....

Leviticus 18
22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
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 a perversion.

Leviticus 20
13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.

Oh yeah, that's the OLD Testament. Sorry -  

Romans 1
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

[ebia]

This was in direct response to sinceheart's post where he was trying to draw a comparison between adultery and homosexual sex.

No, she is drawing a comparison between sin and sin. Pick any one you like..... The point being that homosexuality IS a sin no matter what man may say or even want to believe. Obviously, it's not the only sin. However, trying to say it isn't a sin is the problem..... But since you didn't like the comparison I used, how about comparing it to bestiality? That way we stay in the order of Scripture....

Leviticus 18
22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
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 a perversion.

Leviticus 20
13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.

Oh yeah, that's the OLD Testament. Sorry -  

And we both know there is heaps of prohibitions in Levitcus that we don't keep anymore.

Romans 1
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Then we can get into a discussion of what St Paul was refering to with the phrases translated as "committed indecent acts with other men" if you like.

Why not just choose my comparison of sex before marriage?  That's a sin, isn't it?

[ebia]

Ebia,

I find your quote out of Ezekiel interesting......that's the one that "churches" that have homosexual members quote quite often. You wouldn't happen to fall into that category would you?

What category?  Last time I looked I was a person, not a church.

"Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth AS AN EXAMPLE suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignitaries." Jude 7-8

That doesn't say what the "defiling the flesh" consisted of, and puts it on a par with with saying nasty things about the President.

Ollie,

"There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow, for even both these are abomination unto the Lord they God." Deut 23:17-18

I went to the Strong's Dictionary and the word sodomy was not in there, but the term sodomite and Sodom were. I don't want to get into semantics here.....the concept of sodomy (the act of two men or a man and a beast) is throughout the scripture. In the NKJV they are referred to as homosexuals, and sodomites. Other versions either water the term down or omit it.

Because it's not an accurate term.  Some people in the past have misunderstood the sins of the city of Sodom, and invented the English word sodomy.  Neither the greek nor hebrew uses Sodom or a derivative word to refer to anything other than the place and the people.

The New Century Dictionary refers to a sodomite as one who was an inhabitant of Sodom; one who practices unnatural sexual itnercourse, esp of one man with another, or a human being with an animal.

Thats because it's a definition ultimately worked backwards from an [idiotic] assumption about what the sin of the city of Sodom was.

No matter what how you cut it...it's sin and an abomination.

Maybe it is, maybe it's not, but Sodom irrelevent to the argument.

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? DO NOT BE DECEIVED. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor exstortioners will inherit the kingdom of God" I Cor.6:9-10 NKJV

...nor revilers, nor exstortioners [sic]
why not concentrate on the last two for a change?

Judges chapter 19-20 is real clear about what happens to a nation when they harbor and protect sodomites. Thousands can die....

Its a story about rape and hospitality - can you really not see that?

This new legislation that has passed in Canada to speak out against sodomy ,is now a hate crime. The radical sodomites want to silence anyone who would dare confront them in their sin. It will come to the U.S. soon

I won't remain silent on the issue....

No.  Instead you'll spout the kind of ill-informed bigottry that will make those laws come all the quicker

[Heidi]

The laws in the old Testament that we don't keep any more are the rituals done to atone for sin. But the sins will always remain the same because they don't come from man, they come from God. We are forgiven for them  but there are REASONS why they are sinful. Whatever is done for one's own gratification is a sin. Sin glorifies human desires and is done for self-serving purposes. Any act that is done for that reason is a sin. As Paul puts it, "Food for the stomach but i will not be MASTERED by anything." What that means is that when we do things for God's purposes rather than for self-serving purposes, then we are living life the way we were created to live it. We then have the capacity to reap abundantly because we are living according to natural (God's) laws. But when we engage in desires primarily for self-gratification, then we are living for ourselves. That will eventually end in death because we no longer care about God's laws. The natural consequences of such acts (like std's) in the case of sexual sins will fall back down on us.  

[ebia]

The laws in the old Testament that we don't keep any more are the rituals done to atone for sin.

This simply doesn't hold water when you look at the list of what rules we do and don't keep.  Unless you use a very contrived definition of "rituals done to atone..."

But the sins will always remain the same because they don't come from man, they come from God.

I don't think you meant that the way it reads.

We are forgiven for them  but there are REASONS why they are sinful. Whatever is done for one's own gratification is a sin. Sin glorifies human desires and is done for self-serving purposes. Any act that is done for that reason is a sin. As Paul puts it, "Food for the stomach but i will not be MASTERED by anything." What that means is that when we do things for God's purposes rather than for self-serving purposes, then we are living life the way we were created to live it. We then have the capacity to reap abundantly because we are living according to natural (God's) laws. But when we engage in desires primarily for self-gratification, then we are living for ourselves. That will eventually end in death because we no longer care about God's laws.

I don't have a problem with any of that.  What I do have a problem with is the way it is applied by many people.

[Psalm 119]

Ebia,

Are you a homosexual? or a lesbian? A yes or no answer will do.

Please read this article, it will dispel all the myths regarding sodomites.

http://www.operationsaveamerica.org/articles/articles/homo-heresies.htm

Where will you spend eternity?

Psalm 119

[ollie]

Surely homosexual sex would be more reasonably compared to sex between two unmarried hetrosexuals than adultery.

It was not mean't to be a comparison but a statement of what God says the acts are, adultery which makes it sin.

eh?

Perhaps I am not understanding your statement and gave a wrong not applicable response. Could you reword it?

Thanks.

I'm not sure whether your response was wrong or not, since I'm not sure what it meant.

All I was trying to say was that most homosexuals are not married, and therefore sex between them is surely more similar (sin wise) to sex between unmarried heterosexuals than it is to adultery (which is a serious act of betrayal).

This was in direct response to sinceheart's post where he was trying to draw a comparison between adultery and homosexual sex.

I understand now.

Thanks.

[ebia]

Ebia,

Are you a homosexual? or a lesbian? A yes or no answer will do.

No.

Please read this article, it will dispel all the myths regarding sodomites.

http://www.operationsaveamerica.org/articles/articles/homo-heresies.htm

If you want to debate the subject, you can do it here.

Where will you spend eternity?

I think thats up to God, don't you?

[Heidi]

If you want to get technical, Ebia, what i meant was that the rituals done to atone for sin are no longer considered the law. What is consider law according to the New Testament is what is right and wrong. That law comes from God.

[ebia]

Fine - that's not what I thought you meant.  Although I'm not sure thinking about that as "law" is always helpful, as the word law tends to imply a list of [slightly arbitrary] rules rather than the huge guiding principles of the gospels.

[sincereheart]

ollie,
Hmmmmm!  ??
Not sure just yet.

How about now?   Nowhere is ebia trying to condone any of the heterosexual sins, just the homosexual ones.

And we both know there is heaps of prohibitions in Levitcus that we don't keep anymore.

Let's look at the whole chapter of Leviticus that deals with 'unlawful sexual relations'......
6 " 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations.
7 " 'Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother.
8 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's wife;
9 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your sister,
10 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter
11 " 'Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father's wife, born to your father
12 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's sister
13 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your mother's sister
14 " 'Do not dishonor your father's brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations
15 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law
16 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife
17 " 'Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter
18 " 'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living
20 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor's wife
22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman
23 " 'Do not have sexual relations with an animal

I left out menstruation and child sacrifice since they aren't pertinent to this.
So tell me which of these others you condone beside the homosexuality ones? Which of the 'unlawful sexual relations' are now ok?

Then we can get into a discussion of what St Paul was refering to with the phrases translated as "committed indecent acts with other men" if you like.

No, let's talk about what Paul meant by this:
Romans 1
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

What I gather is that men being inflamed with lust for men is unnatural.

Why not just choose my comparison of sex before marriage?  That's a sin, isn't it?

You can compare it to ANY sin you'd like. However, if your whole point is that homosexuals should just get married and then they're no longer sinning, you'd still be incorrect. God's law is not superceded by man's law. Man can legalize abortion or sodomy or 'common-law' marriages and it's still sin!

[ebia]

And we both know there is heaps of prohibitions in Levitcus that we don't keep anymore.

Let's look at the whole chapter of Leviticus that deals with 'unlawful sexual relations'......
6 " 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations.
7 " 'Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother.
8 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's wife;
9 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your sister,
10 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter
11 " 'Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father's wife, born to your father
12 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's sister
13 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your mother's sister
14 " 'Do not dishonor your father's brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations
15 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law
16 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife
17 " 'Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter
18 " 'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living
20 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor's wife
22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman
23 " 'Do not have sexual relations with an animal

I left out menstruation [...] since they aren't pertinent to this.

Why not?  Thats still a sexual sin according to leviticus.

So tell me which of these others you condone beside the homosexuality ones? Which of the 'unlawful sexual relations' are now ok?

You just answered that, by leaving out the ones concerning menstruation.

Then we can get into a discussion of what St Paul was refering to with the phrases translated as "committed indecent acts with other men" if you like.

No, let's talk about what Paul meant by this:
Romans 1
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

What I gather is that men being inflamed with lust for men is unnatural.

Then what you infer is not true, and therefore cannot be what St Paul intended to imply.

Why not just choose my comparison of sex before marriage?  That's a sin, isn't it?

You can compare it to ANY sin you'd like. However, if your whole point is that homosexuals should just get married and then they're no longer sinning, you'd still be incorrect. God's law is not superceded by man's law. Man can legalize abortion or sodomy or 'common-law' marriages and it's still sin!

The point I was trying to make above, was that homosexuality is certainly no worse a sin than sex before marriage, yet from the discussion here you'd think it was the worst possible sin in the world.

Why does everyone always evade this:

Quote:
"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? DO NOT BE DECEIVED. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor exstortioners will inherit the kingdom of God" I Cor.6:9-10 NKJV
 
...nor revilers, nor exstortioners [sic]
why not concentrate on the last two for a change?

[sincereheart]

I left out menstruation and child sacrifice since they aren't pertinent to this.
I didn't think they were pertinent to this particular discussion, either sex during intercourse OR child sacrifice...... Are suggesting that these are now ok?

Romans 1
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

"abandoned natural relations "  

The point I was trying to make above, was that homosexuality is certainly no worse a sin than sex before marriage, yet from the discussion here you'd think it was the worst possible sin in the world.

No, from the discussion here the only 'sin' you defend is homosexuality. And as I've said (more than once) it doesn't matter which sin you compare it to as long as you realize that it IS a sin!

Why does everyone always evade this:
"Everyone" hasn't evaded or avoided it.

9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Passing legislation to condone a sin or having a parade to celebrate it isn't putting the sin in past tense.... "and that is what some of you WERE..."

Where on this forum is someone (anyone) saying that any of the other sins are okay? It always comes back to homosexuality getting more attention because it is the one sin that so many try to make right in man's eyes and conveniently ignoring the fact that it is still a sin!

Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Idolatry and adultery and male prostitution and homosexuality and thievery and drunkeness and slandery and swindling are wrong. But we aren't asking God for judgement on these, we are asking for mercy. And mercy is what we we will get WHEN WE ACKNOWLEDGE OUR SINS AND TURN THEM OVER TO HIM!

Just for the record, ebia, the above listed aren't a problem for me. However, I do have my own sins that I turn over to the Lord. And I will not sit back and let anyone justify them in man's eyes whether they are sins I'm guilty of or not.  
I don't believe that someone else's sins are 'worse' than mine. I believe that the worst sin is the one that we don't acknowledge! Mine would be different than yours....

 

[ebia]

I left out menstruation and child sacrifice since they aren't pertinent to this.
I didn't think they were pertinent to this particular discussion, either sex during intercourse OR child sacrifice...... Are suggesting that these are now ok?

eh?
I assume this isn't what you meant to say:
either sex during intercourse

Romans 1
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

"abandoned natural relations "  

There are plenty of ways to read this other than that which you have committed yourself to.

The point I was trying to make above, was that homosexuality is certainly no worse a sin than sex before marriage, yet from the discussion here you'd think it was the worst possible sin in the world.

No, from the discussion here the only 'sin' you defend is homosexuality. And as I've said (more than once) it doesn't matter which sin you compare it to as long as you realize that it IS a sin!

These are two entirely separate questions.
I don't accept that it is always a sin.  But separate, and more important to address, is the hatred that is reserved here for this particular sin.

Why does everyone always evade this:
"Everyone" hasn't evaded or avoided it.

9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Virtually everyone here is guilty of reviling, and everyone here is collectively responsible for the collective extortion that we in the "western" countries inflict on the rest of the world, yet I don't see a single thread addressing either.

Passing legislation to condone a sin or having a parade to celebrate it isn't putting the sin in past tense.... "and that is what some of you WERE..." Where on this forum is someone (anyone) saying that any of the other sins are okay? It always comes back to homosexuality getting more attention because it is the one sin that so many try to make right in man's eyes and conveniently ignoring the fact that it is still a sin!

More likely because its easier to rant about someone elses sin than address our own.

Just for the record, ebia, the above listed aren't a problem for me.

LOL

I don't believe that someone else's sins are 'worse' than mine.

Then start acting like you mean that.

[Psalm 119]

Ebia,

I'm glad to know that you're not a homosexual; but why do you keep defending the sin of homosexuality (i.e. sodomy)

Romans 1:32 states that  it's not just those who practice such things (sexual immorality) that are worthy of death but also to those who approve of such things.

Why do you defend the things that God hates?

I urge you again to read the above article on homo-heresies. I could not explain things any better.

Sincereheart,

You have laid down the scriptural evidence down , ebia has rejected it.

"Then whoever hears the sound of the trumpet and does not take warning, if the sword comes and takes him away, his blood shall be on his own head. He heard the sound of the trumpet, but did not take warning, his blood shall be upon himself. But he who takes warning will save his life." Ezekiel 33:3-4

You have given the warning along with others on this matter.

Ebia, will you heed the warning?

Psalm 119