The Bible and other sexual behaviors

What should we make of the fact that Leviticus (OT) demands the death penalty for homosexual sex, and Paul (NT) condemns homosexuality?  Jesus, as we have seen, is silent on this issue. 

In this context, it is helpful to look at other sexual practices (such as adultery, prostitution, concubinage, sexual slavery, etc.) and see what the Bible says about them.  (Much of the following is taken from an excellent article by Walter Wink.)  

 

The Bible and sexual behaviors: Penalties

The following, according to the Bible, are to be punished by death: adultery, homosexual sex, incest, brides who are not virgins. Sex with a menstruating woman is punished by expulsion from the community of believers (kareth). Those who witness a father’s (anyone’s?) nakedness is cursed to be slave. 

 

Crime: Adultery.  Penalty: Death. 

Lev. 20

 10 ” ‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.”

Deut. 22: 22 “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.”

 

Crime: homosexual sex.  Penalty: Death. 

Lev. 20: 13 ” ‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

 

Crime: sex with menstruating woman.  Penalty: expulsion from the community of believers

 Lev. 20: 18 ” ‘If a man lies with a woman during her monthly period and has sexual relations with her, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them must be cut off from their people.

 

Crime: Bride marries while not a virgin.  Penalty: Death. 

Deut. 22

13 If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.

 

The Bible and sexual crimes: no penalties

In another category, there are actions we would strongly disapprove of today—if not totally condemn—which are allowed by the Bible: polygamy/levirate marriage, sexual slavery, concubinage, prostitution. 

Polygamy/ “levirate” marriage.  A woman is obliged, after her husband’s death, to marry one of her husband’s brothers–if there were no children–in order to continue the line of the dead husband.

Deuteronomy 25:5

If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her.

Jesus mentions this custom without criticism (Mark 12:18-27).

 

Prostitution was considered natural and necessary as a safeguard of the virginity of the unmarried (Gen. 38:12-19; Josh. 2:1-7).  Note, however, that while a man was not guilty of sin for visiting a prostitute, the prostitute herself was regarded as a sinner.

Paul attacks prostitution (1 Cor. 6:12-20); but he places it in a separate–and apparently lesser– category than adultery (vs. 9). 

 

Slavery.  The Old and New Testaments both regarded slavery as normal and nowhere categorically condemned it. 

Eph. 6

5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, 8because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.

 

Sexual slavery.  Likely flows from the justification of slavery in general, and which 2 Sam. 5:13 permitted. (American slave owners who raped their female slaves used this verse as justification.)

Num. 31:18

7 They fought against Midian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and killed every man. 11 They took all the plunder and spoils, including the people and animals, 14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army—the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds—who returned from the battle. 15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

Exodus 21

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners…

Deut. 21

10 When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God hands them over to you and you take them captive, 11suppose you see among the captives a beautiful woman whom you desire and want to marry, 12and so you bring her home to your house: she shall shave her head, pare her nails, 13discard her captive’s garb, and shall remain in your house for a full month, mourning for her father and mother; after that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. 14But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money.

 

Concubinage (in general, the state of a woman in a quasi-matrimonial relationship with a man of higher social status. Involuntary, or servile, concubinage sometimes involves sexual slavery.) This is specifically allowed in 2 Sam. 5:13.  Examples: 

Abraham took a slave girl as a concubine (Genesis 16).  King Solomon “had 700 official wives and 300 concubines….” (1 Kings 11:1-3).  See also the story in Judges 19-21, in which a rape of a male guest is avoided in the following way: 

23 Then the man, the owner of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my fellows, please do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not commit this act of folly.

24 “Here is my virgin daughter and his concubine. Please let me bring them out that you may ravish them and do to them whatever you wish. But do not commit such an act of folly against this man.”

 

The Problem of Authority 

These cases are relevant to our attitude toward the authority of Scripture. They are not cultic prohibitions from the Holiness Code that are clearly superseded in Christianity, such as rules about eating shellfish or wearing clothes made of two different materials. They are rules concerning sexual behavior, and they fall among the moral commandments of Scripture. Clearly we regard certain rules, especially in the Old Testament, as no longer binding. Other things we regard as binding, including legislation in the Old Testament that is not mentioned at all in the New. What is our principle of selection here?

 

For example, virtually all modern readers would agree with the Bible in rejecting: incest, rape, adultery, and intercourse with animals. But we disagree with the Bible on most other sexual mores.

[…]

Surely no one today would recommend reviving the levirate marriage. So why do we appeal to proof texts in Scripture in the case of homosexuality alone, when we feel perfectly free to disagree with Scripture regarding most other sexual practices? Obviously many of our choices in these matters are arbitrary. Mormon polygamy was outlawed in this country, despite the constitutional protection of freedom of religion, because it violated the sensibilities of the dominant Christian culture. Yet no explicit biblical prohibition against polygamy exists.

If we insist on placing ourselves under the old law, as Paul reminds us, we are obligated to keep every commandment of the law (Gal. 5:3). But if Christ is the end of the law (Rom. 10:4), if we have been discharged from the law to serve, not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6), then all of these biblical sexual mores come under the authority of the Spirit. We cannot then take even what Paul himself says as a new Law. Christians reserve the right to pick and choose which sexual mores they will observe, though they seldom admit to doing just that. And this is as true of evangelicals and fundamentalists as it is of liberals and mainliners.

Advertisements

28 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

28 responses to “The Bible and other sexual behaviors

  1. josephudo

    As I understand, in the times of the Old Testiment, God punished people Now…at that time. In the New Testiment, the punishment is for the END. I’m not 100% sure of this but it sounds biblically logical.

  2. When it comes to your own family you next often have to learn to live in love with what you got .. and the same attitude applies to divorce, you try to make the best of it.

    http://thefocusonthefamily.wordpress.com/2008/07/18/most-popular-post-the-focus-on-the-family/

  3. Mr. Incredible

    ==Jesus, as we have seen, is silent on this issue. ==

    No, He was not.

    Jesus was God on Earth, and He said that He had been given all authority in Heaven and on Earth.

    So, whatever God said, Jesus said.

    God said that what we now call “homosexuality” is an “abomination.” So, Jesus said it, and He has yet to disagree with it. or overturn the Father’s condemnaton of it.

    This shows that Jesus was NOT silent on the issue.

  4. Mr. Incredible

    Where is the discrimination in a law that says that “marriage” is between a “man” and a “woman,” or that it is between a “male” and a “female”? Isn’t everybody either a man, or a woman, a male, or a female? Is anybody left out of those?

    So, if a man is heterosexual, he may marry a woman who is heterosexual, or who says she is homosexual, or a man-beater.

    If a man says that he is homosexual, he may marry a woman who is heterosexual, or who says she is homosexual, or a bank robber.

    If a woman is heterosexual, she may marry a man who is heterosexual, or who says he is homosexual, or a wifebeater.

    If a woman says she is homosexual, she may marry a man who is heterosexual, or who says he is homosexual, or a serial killer.

    All men are equal and all women are equal. All have equal opportunity, equal protection and equal application.

    Now, if there are members of a third sex who are left out, lemme know.

  5. Mr. Incredible

    ==As I understand, in the times of the Old Testiment, God punished people Now…at that time. In the New Testiment, the punishment is for the END. ==

    Those who are born again are not subject to the wrath of God, unless they backslide and do not repent.

    Those who are not born again are subject to the wrath of God.

  6. “Jesus was God on Earth, and He said that He had been given all authority in Heaven and on Earth.
    So, whatever God said, Jesus said.God said that what we now call “homosexuality” is an “abomination.”
    So, Jesus said it, and He has yet to disagree with it. or overturn the Father’s condemnaton of it.
    This shows that Jesus was NOT silent on the issue.”

    I understand your position. But if we accept it, then the voice of God that commands the destruction of entire cities, the slaughter of male children, etc.–then these commands come also from the mouth of Jesus. But that makes no sense, since Jesus criticized the old law and the old ways. He brought a New Covenant based on love, not on vengeance or eye-for-an-eye.

  7. “Where is the discrimination in a law that says that “marriage” is between a “man” and a “woman,” or that it is between a “male” and a “female”? Isn’t everybody either a man, or a woman, a male, or a female? Is anybody left out of those? … All men are equal and all women are equal. All have equal opportunity, equal protection and equal application. Now, if there are members of a third sex who are left out, lemme know.”

    Nobody is left out. The problem is that both men and women face a choice of marital partner that is proscribed by law. Men cannot marry men, etc. This makes no sense, based on fundamental ideas of liberty. Why limit, by law, my choice of marital partner? For what good reason?

  8. Mr. Incredible

    ==I understand your position. But if we accept it, then the voice of God that commands the destruction of entire cities, the slaughter of male children, etc.–then these commands come also from the mouth of Jesus.==

    Except that Jesus, as God, said them under the Covenant of wrath, not the Covenant of Grace; and, yet, the condemnation against homosexuality is reiterated in Romans.

    == But that makes no sense, since Jesus criticized the old law and the old ways.==

    For those who are born again.

    == He brought a New Covenant based on love, not on vengeance or eye-for-an-eye.==

    Except that He doesn’t treat the disobedient the way He treats the obedient, and those who are not born again are still under the Law and wrath.

    ==Nobody is left out.==

    Then, where’s the discrimination????

    == The problem is that both men and women face a choice of marital partner that is proscribed by law.==

    TGhat’s not a problem for anybody cuz all are covered by the law.

    == Men cannot marry men, etc.==

    NO man, heterosexua, nor one claiming to be homosexual, may marry another man. ALL men, heterosexual and those claiming to be homosexual, may marry women.

    ==This makes no sense, based on fundamental ideas of liberty.==

    You mean the “funadamental” ideas you’ve conjured up about “liberty.”

    == Why limit, by law, my choice of marital partner?==

    The law doesn’t. Men who say they are homosexual have the same opportunity to marry as men who are heterosexual. That goes for women, too. The law doesn’t say that men have to be heterosexual in order to marry. The law doesn’t say that women have to be heterosexual in order to marry.

    == For what good reason?==

    Uhhhh, equal protection of the law. Equal application of the law.

  9. Mr. Incredible

    Now, the law would be discriminatory, IF members of a third, human sex are excluded. You’re not saying that those who claim to be homosexual are members of a third sex, are you??? If you say they are, give us the conclusive, unbiased, uncorrupted, scientific and empirical “biologics” that they are.

  10. Mr. Incredible

    ==Men cannot marry men, etc. This makes no sense, based on fundamental ideas…==

    WHOSE ideas?

    ==…of liberty.==

    According to this “sense,” if you insist on calling it that, it makes no sense to limit your choice of speeds on the highway and laws holding you back are anti-liberty.

    ==Why limit, by law, my choice of marital partner?==

    Why limit your choice of speeds?

    == For what good reason?==

    Cuz we decide, based on our Morals, what is good for society, and so-called “same-sex ‘marriage'” does nothing for society and, in fact, demeans it.

  11. Mr. I,

    Straights get to marry; homosexuals don’t. I can’t think of a better way to explain how the marriage laws you advocate are discriminatory. Yahoo Answers, however, is usually pretty good at providing really simple answers to simple questions. You could try there; I am sure they could help you understand.

    We will have to agree to disagree on our views of Jesus. You want to put words in His mouth, from elsewhere in the Bible, condemning entire peoples to die, executing male babies, stoning adulterers, executing non-virgin brides, etc. Very weird, and apparently a unique interpretation of His message, but hey, to each his own.

    Unfortunately– and predictably– you want to impose your rather idiosyncratic religious views on the rest of us. Your analogy is the speed limit. Because there is a speed limit, and my freedom to drive faster is limited, therefore anti-gay legislation is acceptable, and you can limit my freedom to marry. Hey, presto!

    Spot the difference, readers? Allowing people to drive 100 mph is dangerous to the community. Same-sex marriage is not. Of course, Mr. I claims it is very damaging, somehow, to someone, somewhere. You make that same argument about anything, of course, if you want to ban it badly enough.

    Note that with the same argument (someone is damaged therefore ban the practice) we can also put anti-Semitic laws into place, based on some other weird view of the Bible. The Jews harm the community (somehow, somewhere–no clear argument required). Just as we can limit your ability to drive fast, therefore, we can limit one’s ability to practice Judaism, or even persecute those who do.

    Mr. I, instead of trying to influence public policy, perhaps it would be easier to establish a commune in the desert somewhere, like the breakaway Mormon sects do? You know, the ones that want to practice polygamy and other strange yet Biblical practices? That way, you can follow whichever Biblical laws you want, and ignore the others. You’d be totally free to rail against the dangerous threat posed by homosexuals–you could even execute them by stoning, if the cops don’t catch you. There are lots of those types of religious communes, paranoid about something, convinced of their own inerrant interpretation of the Bible, convinced the Jews or homosexuals or communists are taking over the world, or whatever.

  12. Mr. Incredible

    ==Straights get to marry; homosexuals don’t.==

    The law does NOT stop those who claim to be homosexual from marrying. Where the law says “marriage” is the union of a “man,” or “male,” and a “woman,” or “female,” it covers everybody, unless you claim that members of a third sex are excluded. “Male/man” and “female/woman” covers everybody.

    ==I can’t think of a better way to explain how the marriage laws you advocate are discriminatory. ==

    That’s cuz there is no way to say that those who say they are homosexual can’t claim to be other than men and women and that they are already permissibly covered by the law.

    ==Yahoo Answers…could help you understand. ==

    I already understand; and I understand how the lobby of those who claim to be homosexual, their supporters and activists wanna impose their less than 2% agenda to change this society, this culture and this country.

    ==We will have to agree to disagree on our views of Jesus.==

    We understand that you are stubborn.

    == You want to put words in His mouth, from elsewhere in the Bible…==

    Soooo, to YOU, He was not God on Earth, even though the Word and Jesus both say that He was. Ok, we get that, too.

    ==…condemning entire peoples to die, executing male babies, stoning adulterers, executing non-virgin brides, etc.==

    Not true, of course.

    ==…a unique interpretation of His message…==

    No private interpretation needed, nor allowed. I can read English, and the Word says that he was God on Earth, and He, Himself, said that He was. We understand that you disagree with Him. That’s what the Liberal Church has done to you. Tsk, tsk.

    ==…but hey, to each his own.==

    So, to you, there are many ways to the Father???

    The Holy Spirit can’t be tellin’ you one thing and me another. The clear language of the Word says that Jesus was God on Earth. If He was God, then, as God Jesus condemned what wse now call “homosexuality” as an “abomination.”

    Now, you indicate that the condemnation was by God, not Jesus, that God and Jesus are not the same, and you’d have to believe that Jesus was not God on Earth, though the Word is clear that He was, and It is clear in several places, to boot. Scripture upon Scripture.

    Of course, you’re free to try to come up with a line of scritural thought that contradicts that; however you’d be arguing in favor of the notion that the Word contradicts Itself, and, by that, I wouldn’t be surprised.

  13. Mr. Incredible

    ==Unfortunately– and predictably– you want to impose your rather idiosyncratic religious views on the rest of us.==

    I’m not the one drifting from the Word of God. I report It.

    ==Your analogy is the speed limit. Because there is a speed limit, and my freedom to drive faster is limited…==

    And, so, as you say, that goes against your liberty.

    ==…therefore anti-gay legislation is acceptable, and you can limit my freedom to marry.==

    Nobody limits your freedom to marry. “Man/male” and “woman/female” cover everybody, unless you have proof that the law excludes members of a third sex.

    ==Allowing people to drive 100 mph is dangerous to the community.==

    Not necessarily, as most speeders will tell you.

    == Same-sex marriage is not.==

    But it is dangerous to this society, this culture and this country.

    == Of course, Mr. I claims it is very damaging, somehow, to someone, somewhere.==

    God condemns what we now call “homosexuality” as an “abomination.” If we were to go along with efforts to ignore that, He would let evil come upon us, and, so, we are directly jeopardized.

    ==You make that same argument about anything, of course, if you want to ban it badly enough.==

    And, if you want you agenda bad enough, you can say that OUR position is dangerous. And, of course, you do.

  14. Mr. Incredible

    ==Note that with the same argument (someone is damaged therefore ban the practice) we can also put anti-Semitic laws into place, based on some other weird view of the Bible. The Jews harm the community (somehow, somewhere–no clear argument required). Just as we can limit your ability to drive fast, therefore, we can limit one’s ability to practice Judaism, or even persecute those who do.==

    Straw man.

    ==…instead of trying to influence public policy, perhaps it would be easier to establish a commune in the desert somewhere, like the breakaway Mormon sects do?==

    Then, you should do that. You have that freedom.

    ==That way, you can follow whichever Biblical laws you want, and ignore the others.==

    However, this is my country, and it has been the same for eons, and, now you people wanna change it, enven though God says, “NO!”

    ==You’d be totally free to rail against the dangerous threat posed by homosexuals…==

    I’m free to do that now.

    ==…you could even execute them by stoning…==

    Nothing in the Word tells those who are born again to stone anybody.

    ==…convinced of their own inerrant interpretation of the Bible…==

    The Word of God is of no private interpretation.

    ==…convinced the Jews or homosexuals or communists are taking over the world, or whatever.==

    We understand that it is part of your agenda to minimize the threat.

  15. Mr. Incredible

    ==Straights get to marry; homosexuals don’t.==

    The law says nothing about a man and/or a woman having to be straight, or homosexual, or bank robber, or child molester. It says only that a man, or male, may marry a woman, or female. The man may be heterosexual, or claim to be homosexual. The woman may be heterosexual, or claim to be homosexual. They can claim to be martians. They can claim to be dogs and cats. All that’s necessary is that a man — whatever his claim — marry a woman — whatever her claim. So, heterosexuals have no more “Right” to marry than those who claim to be homosexual since the law doesn’t make that distinction about the choice personally to go homosexual.

    Further, the State is not required to perform the contract with whose terms it does not agree. The State doesn’t have to be party to a contract with whose terms it doesn’t agree; and, so, if two men want the State to be party to a marriage contract between them, the State must adhere to law and not become a party to that contract.

  16. Mr. Incredible,

    What is the threat posed, and to whom, by homosexuality and same-sex marriage?

    If you would like to write an entire post on this subject, I will happily post it on this blog.

  17. >>As I understand, in the times of the Old Testiment, God punished people Now…at that time. In the New Testiment, the punishment is for the END. ==

    >Those who are born again are not subject to the wrath of God, unless they backslide and do not repent.

    >Those who are not born again are subject to the wrath of God.

    Old or new testament do still say the same thing.. God is not mocked what a person sows he reaps.

    Too many sinful. spoiled persons clearly have a false concept of God, that they also falsely try to teach to others too, where God is a good guy, the devil is the bad guy, and in their religion God does not punish anyone for their sin. Now this false theological ostrich concept of God is PERSONALLY mostly held clearly to deny facing the possibility of the existence of the negative consequences for one’s personal sins, to AVOID facing up to, or immediately dealing with them, admitting them. Had they read the Bible they would have seen how God still punishes all persons for their still unrepentant sins.

    Jer 46:28 But I will chasten {and} correct you in just measure, and I will not hold you guiltless by any means {or} leave you unpunished.

    Jer 47:6 O you sword of the Lord, how long will it be before you are quiet?
    .
    Jer 47:7 How can it [the sword of the Lord] be quiet when the Lord has given it an assignment to discharge?

    (Micah 3:8 KJV) But truly I am full of power by the spirit of the LORD, and of judgment, and of might, to declare unto Jacob his transgression, and to Israel his sin.

    (Micah 3:11 KJV) The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet will they lean upon the LORD, and say, Is not the LORD among us? none evil can come upon us.

    (Prov 27:5 KJV) Open rebuke is better than secret love.

    (Rev 3:19 KJV) As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

  18. Firstly we want to state that for all professing Chrsitians Divorce is also equally wrong and hurts our society just as much.. and it too should not be practiced in any Christian church by any Christian persons too..

    Now in the Christian church all lusts, rape, adultery, sex outside of marriage, per the Bible now too, is immoral, unacceptable, and was well all human rights abuses are also still unacceptable, whether it is verbal, physical.. God never approves of it neither should any of us.. the public exposure and prosecution of the bad persons serves everyone’s best interest next too.. being kind, nice to bad guys is a waste of time, for they will not change unless they themselves experience real, negative, personal appropriate consequences .. we need to hate all evil, all abuses and to be angry at it too.. we can use the whip to deal with it like Jesus did to chase out the money lenders, commercial business in the temple, Christian Churches soley. Some persons would say that many homosexuals are violent and sexually deviant, but others would rather point out that most of the violent, sexual deviants are heterosexual men harming women, then they next are charged with getting off-topic, but one still can add the reality that anyone who files for divorce, male or female is also a sexual deviant.. according the same Bible. We need to stand against all sins in the church.

    In reality all men and women are still born and do act as equal sinners. And thus all unacceptable sins and abuses need to be presented honestly, fairly and equally too and not just as one side bashings of the abortionists, or gays now too.. even in the churches now too.

    We still cannot force anyone, gays included to believe like we do, to live like we do as well, for they have their own free will, rights too, but in love we can try to use our free speech right and tell them how the Bible sees their behavior too..

    15 Reasons Why Homosexuality Is Wrong and should not thus be part of any church.
    http://thefocusonthefamily.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/homosexuality/

  19. Mr. Incredible

    ==What is the threat posed…==

    To the institution of marriage, as contemplated by God. So-called “same-sex ‘marriage'” demeans the marriage institution.

    ==…and to whom…==

    To this society, this culture and this country, all of which understand that there is something Godly to be gained and maintained by the man-as-husband/woman-as-his-wife marital union, and that there is nothing Godly to be gained by the so-called “same-sex ‘marriage.'”

  20. Mr. Incredible, I guess you didn’t need an entire post to fully explain your views.

    Clearly, you had to go run catch the bus, or wash your hair–maybe your favorite show came on the TV? Anyway, it was something important that prevented you from describing the “threat” posed by homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

    The thing is? It might look, to some uncharitable souls, very much like you don’t have the merest, slightest, first clue what this “threat” might be. And if there is no threat, all that we are left with is your personal dislike of the idea.

    Of course, I realize you just had something come up–the toast was burning?– and could not finish your comment. So take your time, and tell us all about this danger.

    This is going to be good, I am sure.

  21. Mr. Incredible

    ==I guess you didn’t need an entire post to fully explain your views.==

    No, I don’t.

    ==Clearly..==

    Really?

    ==… you had to go run catch the bus, or wash your hair–maybe your favorite show came on the TV?==

    Not quite.

    == Anyway, it was something important that prevented you from describing the “threat” posed by homosexuality and same-sex marriage.==

    Nothing prevented me since I explained it to you. You just missed it.

    ==It might look, to some uncharitable souls, very much like you don’t have the merest, slightest, first clue what this “threat” might be.==

    I can’t help that they can’t see it.

    == And if there is no threat, all that we are left with is your personal dislike of the idea.==

    Except that I explained the threat.

    ==Of course, I realize you just had something come up–the toast was burning?– and could not finish your comment. So take your time, and tell us all about this danger.==

    Already did. I’d just be repeating myself.

    ==This is going to be good, I am sure.==

    And I’m sure that what prevented you from getting it the first thousand times is your preclusing yourself from getting it at all.

  22. Mr. Incredible

    ==We need to stand against all sins in the church.==

    However, “homosexuality” is the sin we’re dealing with here, unless somebody wants to take us off topic and talk about the sin of, say, stealing, or the weather.

  23. Mr. Incredible

    ==In reality all men and women are still born and do act as equal sinners.==

    Except that those who are born again are not guilty.

  24. Mr. Incredible

    preclusing yourself >>>>> precluding yourself

  25. Mr. Incredible

    ==The problem is that both men and women face a choice of marital partner that is proscribed by law.==

    In other words, you agree that ALL men are treated the same, and that ALL women are treated the same. I knew you would come around.

    Since all those who claim to be homosexual are either men, or women, you agree that none are left out. All have the same opportunity to marry.

    You, on the other hand, wanna make the opportunities go beyond what God says those opportunities ought to be. We can’t go long with what you want because we would risk God’s wrath on us for giving place to darkness. The darkness does not comprehend the Light.

    In any case, we love God too much not to want to please Him. We have come to understand what is His Good, and that does not include homosexuality. So, we choose to accept what He wants rather than what the world wants, since the world wants only what it wants, as you have shown.

    So, now, you may ask, “Where is the compassion??”

    However, that kind of compassion is worldly compassion, the kind that lets people do what they want and doesn’t get them mad and doesn’t get in their way and doesn’t mess with their conscience. It is not biblical compassion, the kind expressed in Matthew 9:36.

    But, if those who claim to be homosexual believe that what they are doing is correct, why do they need even biblical compassion??

    What you need to do is get away from those Liberal churches. You’ve opened the door to a voice that is not Jesus’. You’re considering another gospel.

  26. Mr. Incredible

    ==…you want to impose your rather idiosyncratic religious views on the rest of us…You want to put words in His mouth, from elsewhere in the Bible, condemning entire peoples to die, executing male babies, stoning adulterers, executing non-virgin brides, etc. Very weird, and apparently a unique interpretation of His message==

    It WOULD be weird and unique to those of another gospel:

    (Mat 9:3) And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.

  27. Mr. Incredible

    Those who want so-called “same-sex ‘marriage'” want to blur the line between what God, through Jesus, wants and what humans want so that it appears that God wants it — what humans want — too. They insist that we who know better help them blur the line even further.

    Still, to God and to those who love Him, the line is bright. Yet, darkness doesn’t comprehend the Light of it, and that’s why you got these people saying that it makes no difference.

    It is also the case with the line between the Godly nature of the regenerated spirit and the sin nature of the unregenerated spirit.

    To these people, the line separating them is not clear. It is fogged up by strong delusion. And, so, what is ungodly seems, to them, as natural as can be; and THAT’s why you got them saying that there is no difference.

  28. Mr. Incredible

    On the other thread, “the Bible and Homosexuality,” Marge says, “When He [Jesus] said that He is the only way to the Father, one can correctly infer that all other ways are false. Likewise He didn’t have to mention any samples of false marriage because He positively stated that marriage is between a man and a woman.”

    I answered:

    EXCELLENT, Marge!

    Likewise, when He, as God, said that what we now call “homosexuality” is an “abomination,” He was making a positive statement that is reiterated in Romans and is supported by the numerous statements about God’s joining a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife, as being the ONLY Godly, matrimonial unit. He referred to this in Matthew, didn’t He.

    In other words, He didn’t contradict the Father on this, even though He had the chance.

    Further, the law that says that “marrigae” is the union of a “man” and a “woman,” or “male” and “female,” doesn’t say that the man/male must be heterosexual; he can claim to be homosexual, or a bank robber, or a child molester. Same for the woman/female. So, I’m still wonderin’ where the discrimination is we’ve been hearin’ so much about.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s