Please stop using the bible against homosexuality

[Achilleez]

Being that homosexuality is one of the most debated topics on this forum, I felt obliged to get this monkey off my shoulder. I don't at all mind debate over homosexuality or its place in private organizations such as the BSA, but what really fuses me is the constant use of the bible as a weapon against gay rights. I know that is says in the bible (no idea where) that theives, murderers, adulterers, fornicators, and homosexuals will not see God's kingdom (or something along those lines anyway). This and similar passages in scripture are among the most prominent weapons used to justify homosexual discrimination.

 

However, biblical passages like these must be looked at in context. They were written at a time when homosexual couples would have been unheard of, let alone homosexual marriage. So therefore, of course any homosexual would have automatically been and adulterer / fornicator. In addition, when wars were faught in this age, the victorious armies would often rape the losers, as a type of final humiliation. Homosexuality was almost always committed under sinful circumstances, so of course the bible would speak against it.

 

But today we live in an age where victorious armies do not rape the losers and homosexuals can, if given the chance, live in relationships being faithful to one partner.

 

As for me, I disapprove of homosexuality for reasons entirely different, so I am not defending it or attacking those who disapprove of it. I am simply requesting that people on this forum cease from ignorantly brandishing the bible as their weapon of discrimination.

[Rooster7]

The Bible is relevant today - all of it. Don't deceive yourself by evoking the tired and baseless arguments of self-serving men, who are desperately trying to justify a sinful lifestyle, even if it means twisting Gods Word. The Bible addresses the sinfulness of homosexuality in several passages. Take a look at Romans 1:18-32. You cant play gymnastics with the Bible and explain these passages away. The Bible clearly teaches that homosexuality is unnatural and evil..

[Fat Old Guy]

So, in your mind, only the passages in the Bible that you agree with are relevant?

 

"But today we live in an age where victorious armies do not rape the losers"

 

Sure they don't.

 

"homosexuals can, if given the chance, live in relationships being faithful to one partner."

 

Sure they do. What planet are you on?

 

 

[WHEELER]

Achlleez why should we follow your opinion. Are you greater than God?

Why should I do as you say? Because you "feel" so

 

The Bible is the moral teaching of God. It is not an opinion but an authority.

 

II Tim 3:16 "ALL scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness." Righteousness is a V-I-R tue.

 

Scripture is an authority. Not man's opinion. You are even trying to tell us not to use it. St. Paul says to use it. What's the difference between you and him?

 

The Bible condemns homosexuality consistently.

 

Plato condemns Homosexuality.

 

"I mean to pronounce it wrong that the male should have to do carnally with youthful male as with female--and to fetch his evidence from the life of the animals, pointing out that male does not touch male in this way because THE ACTION IS UNNATURAL. (Laws 836c)

 

"Everyone must censure the unmanliness of the one party, who surrenders to his lusts because he is too weak to offer resistance, and reproach the other--the impersonator of the female. (Laws 836e)

 

 

Philosophy also backs this up. God is male. God begets. He doesn't receive anything. Because he is perfect. Anything that receives is weak. In the sex act, the woman receives while the man begats.

 

The act of the male is to beget. The act of the woman is to receive.

 

In homosexuality the man becomes female in order to receive.

 

Homosexuality is the inversion of the natural order and an attack upon the very essence of what it means to be a man. That is why the left like it.

 

Plato says "Lawless as most men are". (Laws 838a)

 

Homosexuality is lawlessness. Without order.

[scoutldr]

"and to fetch his evidence from the life of the animals, pointing out that male does not touch male in this way"

 

Every Biologist knows this is false.

[Adrianvs]

Please stop using the Constitution against _____________. It was written in a time when _______________.

 

Fill in the blanks to your liking.

[Fat Old Guy]

"and to fetch his evidence from the life of the animals, pointing out that male does not touch male in this way"

 

Every Biologist knows this is false.

 

That's only because the perverts have been sneaking into the woods to teach the animals their disgusting ways.

 

 

[evmori]

No I won't stop using the Bible to defend the immorality of homosexuality. The Bible is the ultimate written authority. It is the Word of God! And it is never wrong or irrelevant.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Laurie]

Achilleez, the problem here is that those of us who see the bible as authority are going to use it in all of our decisions, in all of our understanding of life and the world around us. Those who do not are certainly welcome to disagree, particularly here in a forum titled Issues and Politics. For many people, asking that the bible not be used is like asking that the BSA stop using BSA literature. It is what defines a person and is so much more than just a book or resource. Likewise, those using other books related to the faith they practice might feel the same way. Sorry, but this is probably a request that won't be honored--not because of you, but because of how dear the constitution, the bible, and any other religious or patriotic texts are to those who define their very lives using these texts. I would hope that we could agree to disagree on this issue.

 

Wheeler, you ask Achilleez: "why should we follow your opinion. Are you greater than God? Why should I do as you say? Because you "feel" so" Well, now, I just have to wonder how you think you can come here and spout off all about how the BSA needs to change, about how it is failing, about how wonderful you are to forward your research freely to all here, and then go after Achilleez like this. All Achilleez did was to make a request, and you somehow twist that about to make it sound as though he thinks he is greater than God, and in so doing, your wording makes it clear that you feel superior to at least Achilleez if not to God. The God I know teaches that we are to treat one another with respect, even when we do disagree.

 

Achilleez, I hope you don't feel I took a liberty in speaking on your defense just now, but it just really bugs me that this person talks at fellow posters and puts fellow posters down; you did not do that, so I think it unfair that you were put down that way.(This message has been edited by Laurie)

[Sturgen]

If you havent noticed I try to use science, not the bible to argue facts. Heres a scientific argument for you. Sex is a means of reproduction, in fact until the last decade or so it was the only means of reproduction for all primates, and the vast majority of animals, depending on how you define sex. Homosexual sex does not, nor can it ever bring about reproduction, it is biologically impossible. In regards to your comment that victorious armies no longer rape their opponents, you obviously have never studied the Middle East, South Africa, or any other modern areas of comment, although the militaries of first world nations may no longer participate in mass rapes, it still occurs on an individual basis in all militaries, and in mass numbers in uncivilized countries.

[WHEELER]

There are always exceptions to the rule. Yes, I know there are examples out there in the bioshpere but they are few and far between.

 

Generally, most people are exposed to farm animals and predators. I have never seen homosexual acts in animals. Do I see roosters humping other roosters? No Cattle? NO Horses? NO Cats? NO Do dogs hump one's legs? yes but has this been caused because the dogs have been spayed or neutered? Who knows.

 

Yes, in the jungles and oceans of the world, I read the article in the recent magazine, one can find cases.

 

EXCEPTIONS does not make the rule. The general does. But if remember right, when the choice is open to procreate the animals procreate. Homosexual men leave women and hang exclusively to other men. They seek death.

 

In order to continue their society, they must recruit. The recruit other effeminate men who are unsure of their sexuality and manliness. Homosexuality always erupts in cities. In the country, when a country man, usually of low intelligence, and CAN NOT CONTROL HIMSELF, will use bestiality.

 

As John Adams said, "All men are cracked."

[NJCubScouter]

I don't why I am even bothering, but I know that on this issue, Wheeler is not alone in his opinions. Wheeler says:

 

But if remember right, when the choice is open to procreate the animals procreate. Homosexual men leave women and hang exclusively to other men. They seek death.

 

How do you account for the heterosexual people who choose not to have children? Do they seek death too? I have known a number of these folks, married and living-together couples, with nothing physical (that I was aware of) preventing them from having children. They just never tried, so they never succeeded. And there are others I have known who did have some problem having children and decided to go straight to adoption (or childlessness) without trying any of the modern technological means for having their own children. Do they seek death, too?

 

We seem to have survived pretty well as a species with "only" 95 percent of us being "oriented" toward procreation.

 

In order to continue their society, they must recruit. The recruit other effeminate men who are unsure of their sexuality and manliness. Homosexuality always erupts in cities.

 

I have to shake my head when I read things like this. I have known a number of gay people and it just seems like very few (if any) fit some of the generalizations I read about in this forum. I think most gay people would just like to be part of society in general, not their own "society." And as for "effeminate," I've known both gay and straight men who seemed "effeminate" and both gay and straight men who did not. And I've never seen a lot of recruitment going on, though admittedly I don't hang out in too many places where it is likely to go on. It's difficult for me to believe that someone could be "recruited" to homosexual activity if they are not oriented toward it. As for what goes on in cities, I think it is just the opposite, that many gay people tend to gravitate to cities because they think they will find more acceptance there. I also think that is becoming less and less true all the time. I have seen newspaper articles explaining that homosexuality is becoming an increasingly "suburban" phenomenon, with gay couples (some with children) buying homes and living the Ozzie and Harriet lifestyle, just with one little difference. In fact there are suburban communities in New Jersey (and I assume in some other states) that are becoming increasingly known as "gay friendly" locations and slowly but surely, that demographic is becoming a significant force in the community. I am sure you will not find that a welcome development either, but it does go against your image of homosexuality as some dark and perverse illness that breeds in cities along with the cockroaches and sewer rats.

 

In the country, when a country man, usually of low intelligence, and CAN NOT CONTROL HIMSELF, will use bestiality.

 

Do tell. I find it interesting that some of those who are most rabidly anti-gay seem to talk about bestiality quite a bit. I will defer to your superior knowledge of the subject, as I have never known someone who acknowledged this sort of behavior. Maybe my urban and suburban upbringing has shielded me from these things.

 

[msnowman]

edit by author, I changed my mind about wading into this debate(This message has been edited by msnowman)

[Adrianvs]

nsnowman,

 

I'm sure that you draw the line on "tolerance and acceptance" when it suits you. Even limiting it to sexual acts between consenting individuals, I am sure that there are many that you would not want presented to your children as "acceptable lifestyles." Where and how do you draw the line?

 

As for using Bible passages, most do not see Scripture as a homogenous collection of direct commandments to the reader. That is an Islamic notion. Jewish and Christian Scriptures are historical records using many literary forms. The New Testament explains why the Levitical laws no longer apply. It also explains why Paul's admonitions do apply. I assume that you aren't really so ignorant of Scriptural understanding as to believe otherwise, however. If you want to argue that a particular writing of Paul's was directed to a specific local church, then proceed. But don't present some absurd means of Scriptural understanding and pretend that you have done something by refuting it as absurd. It is absurd. And it is absurd to bring it up in ignorance.

[Rooster7]

Msnowman,

 

If you have something worthwhile to say, dont build a straw-man argument for your opposition; simply state your case logically. Unfortunately, that possibility seems unlikely. Your references to the Bible prove to me that you dont understand its contents. Try buying and reading a study bible. Prayer isnt a bad idea either. Old Testament ritualistic laws address our broken relationship with God, and how His Children, can approach Him. Jesus atoning sacrifice on the cross changed that relationship for all time. And thus, many of the ritualistic laws noted in the Old Testament do not apply. Unless you understand that God is a most Holy God (i.e., the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord), then it will be difficult for you to grasp many of the requirements spelled out in the Old Testament. Nor will you fully appreciate the nature of Jesus sacrifice. Christs sacrifice erased our sins (past, present, and future), but it did not relieve us of our duty to strive for a sinless life. Homosexuality was and is a sin. This is plain to see, not only in the Old Testament, but also in the New Testament. Read the bible in context. Theres no denying this fact.