Gays and Romans 1:26-32

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 10:26 AM GMT
    I was perusing the Chick gospel tracts that I discovered through our very own MenschPress, and I came across a cite to Romans 1:26-32. I had always remembered from my childhood days as a fundamentalist that the Levitical codes barred homosexuality, but that the new covenant overturned the Old Testament laws. I didn’t remember any New Testament references to homosexuality, and the Romans one seems to be clearly homophobic. I remember believing New-Testament based Christianity condemned homosexuality, although I doubt I had any particular textual reason to think so.

    I don’t know why I’m curious (it helps that a certain particularly vocal Christianist has left), but I’m wondering how our resident gay Christians reconcile their faith and their spirituality? Do you just reject biblical literalism? Is there a translation or interpretation that makes the problem disappear?

    (And since it’s RJ… no attacks on the religious or non-religious in this thread guys icon_wink.gif )

    (note – moved from the “All Things Gay” section)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 3:45 PM GMT
    When I was trying to doll myself up in traditional christian moral garb, I'd convinced myself that homosexuality was my cross to bear, as I'd imagined that everyone gets a cross. If I could just carry that cross to my grave, I'd win the prize. Everytime I dropped my cross, it was agony. Not giving up and picking up that cross was my reconciliation. Insanity was a lifestyle choice I could no longer bear.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 4:04 PM GMT
    The church with a capital "C" or all Christians everywhere does not know what it believes about sexuality let alone homosexuality. The only sin with a capital "S" is idolatry and the sins with small "s" we talk about are external symptoms of the internal thoughts and motivations. I interpret passages as not attacking homosexuality but perversion and people being so intoxicated with sex that they desire it more than desiring a loving relationship with God.

    Remember that the original language of scripture is Hebrew from OT and the Epistles (Paul was Jewish). Then we have translation into Greek (thanks again to Paul for hasty spread of the Good News as we call it). The non-Jewish Greeks and the non-Jewish Romans again reinterpreted Hebrew originated scripture to reflect their beliefs like Mary being a virgin when Hebrew words indicate young woman (shocking, right?). Then Latin, German, King James English, etc until the Bible and especially the NT is mixed with not just the original Hebrew but litered with inaccurate stories and interpretations to reflect non-Jewish values, beliefs, and cultures. If you want a Bible version that seeks to remove all the changes then New Revised Standard Version is recommended for NT and the Tanakh in English for OT.

  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 4:07 PM GMT
    hey bro, go back and start reading at verse 20. FOR SINCE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD dates the rest of this passage as kinda a history lesson.

    LUKE 17:34 is the only place JESUS ever mentions gays.

    and just so you know, the reason Leviticus is written the way it was written is simple. Before Jesus came there was no such thing as LOVE. the word is only mentioned 2 times in the old testament. it was early on for man kind and God didn't want his Chosen people to miss out on filling the world with their seed so he put rules on them to guide their sex to fill the world with people. i can go into it a lot further if you need bro.

    also, anytime you see the word SODOMY in the new testament it is a mis translation so don't even look at the word
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 4:14 PM GMT
    dugandaniel saidhey bro, go back and start reading at verse 20. FOR SINCE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD dates the rest of this passage as kinda a history lesson.

    LUKE 17:34 is the only place JESUS ever mentions gays.



    Are you sure you have that verse right?
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Mar 05, 2010 4:33 PM GMT
    Is there a translation or interpretation that makes the problem disappear?

    It's not clear enough as message about homosexuality itself. If it were then why is it only in that context if it is about homosexuality and God's word concerning it to us? Can you really apply it as it is to yourself? If we are to take that as the Bible/God's word about homosexuals/homosexuality then it would mean that gay men and women are as such as it says - you know idol worshipers that rejected God and so were given over to such desires by God and also are murderers and inventors of evil things.

    Is that you? What about all the men and women who grew up in strong Christian families not rejecting God at all, not idol worshipers, not inventors of evil - just kids happy to serve growing up in Christian families but realizing they are gay but not straight? Obviously they are not as described in the Bible here.

    So either the Bible is wrong since it's description doesn't fit real life homosexuals in general OR the Bible is right but that it's being interpreted wrong if used as a judgment against homosexuals/homosexuality since it just doesn't work if applied to homosexuals in explanation of origin or as description of them as exemplified above.
  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 4:36 PM GMT
    ok, please don't listen to that other guy. whew, so sad that someone like that is giving out advice.
    bro, sin is a personal thing.
    there were hundreds of books of the bible written.
    the standard books we have today were put together by a couple of priest.
    well, those priest weren't gay men in the 21st century, they were men who had devoted their life to god and a KING told them to make a few bibles.

    its not the "bible" you have to worry about

    the WORD of God is what you need to know.

    john 1:1 in the beginning was THE WORD and THE WORD was with God and the WORD was god.

    john 1:14 and THE WORD became flesh and walked amongst us

    Know Jesus and know what he commands us to do.
    LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF AND YOU HAVE FULFILLED MY COMMANDMENTS.

    Jesus is THE WORD OF GOD, not the "bible". those words in Red writing (if your version does that) will NEVER preach anything but a good positive message unless you are a pharisee (which is someone who is snooty about how much they go to church and tell you you're wrong for not going.

    and always remember, in court precedings there is a judge, jury, and an executioner.

    Matthew says JUDGE NOT AND YE BE NOT JUDGED.
    The jury tells wether or not they think the defendant is guilty of a crime
    The Judge sentences them
    and we know what the executioner does

    be a jury with out any regrets, but the MOMENT you become the judge and say "you're gonna go to hell for ______" you've crossed the line and will be judged accordingly. if you don't cross the line, YE BE NOT JUDGED, take it at word value bro, if you don't judge, guess what, you are NOT gonna be judged.

    good luck bro


  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 4:38 PM GMT
    and yes, LUKE 17:34 JESUS states I'll tell you, in that night there will be two men in one bed. the one will be taken and the other will be left

    he's talking about the second coming and how no one knows who gets to go to heaven
  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 4:42 PM GMT
    and to the guy asking about children raised in the Lord, the Bible wasn't written for the righteous. it was written for the lost. some people are truly excused from following the bible. when i was 5 my dad was speading by 4 miles per hour and i mentioned it, he's never sped again. now yeah, he's a preacher for The Church of Christ and runs the largest prisoner missionary in the country, but he truly doesn't sin. he spent 23 years in the military and never drank, my parents have been married for 43 years and they are the best you could imagine. the bible wasn't written for him. it was written for him to teach. God impresses on my Father his own rules for salvation, even though he'd never contradict a word on the good book
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Mar 05, 2010 4:50 PM GMT
    There is one verse that Jesus does mention men as 'eunuchs' that were born that way in explanation of some who are able to refrain from marriage to women, Matthew 19:10-12 (verse 12)
    To me it certainly raises an eyebrow about the possibility of how some men of the time might be viewed that didn't have sexual attraction to women - one being that they were homosexual but people didn't have an academic or formal way of recognizing then.
  • Space_Cowboy_...

    Posts: 3738

    Mar 05, 2010 4:54 PM GMT
    Not going to lie you got


    PWNED!
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Mar 05, 2010 4:55 PM GMT
    dugandaniel saidand to the guy asking about children raised in the Lord, the Bible wasn't written for the righteous. it was written for the lost. some people are truly excused from following the bible. when i was 5 my dad was speading by 4 miles per hour and i mentioned it, he's never sped again. now yeah, he's a preacher for The Church of Christ and runs the largest prisoner missionary in the country, but he truly doesn't sin. he spent 23 years in the military and never drank, my parents have been married for 43 years and they are the best you could imagine. the bible wasn't written for him. it was written for him to teach. God impresses on my Father his own rules for salvation, even though he'd never contradict a word on the good book


    Are you talking to me? My point was if that is suppose to be a description of what makes a person homosexual and/or of being homosexual then it fails and hence the Bible fails because it obviously doesn't work when applied to people who are not idol worshipers and who grow up in Christian families as strong Christians themselves only to realize they just happen to be gay.
  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 5:06 PM GMT
    what is difficult for us to understand is a world where monogamy and monotheism weren't the norm.

    just as Most people today who are religious or spiritual or whatever believe in one God, when the Bible was written polytheism reigned supreme. Just as there was no such thing as monogamy.

    the sodomy mentioned in the new testament was actually in reference to individuals who worshipped a god through the act of homosexual sex.

    mankind is not str8 or gay. just like everything else, nature predicts. world is over populating, hmmm, more people are gay and more people are waiting to have children. thats nature.

    in leviticus God knew they needed to go against nature.

    when lots daughters got him drunk and screwed him, was that a sin?
    no, it wasn't. after there city was destroyed and their mother turned into salt they honestly thought they were the last people on earth. they knew their father's seed had to continue. the needed to reproduce.

    SIN IS BETWEEN YOU AND GOD.
    what is sin to me is not sin to some people. and some things i do is considered sin to others. BUT STOP WORRYING ABOUT THE SIN AND BAD THINGS.

    just love. you'll fulfill god's commandments






  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 5:13 PM GMT
    why does everyone think the bible HAS to say something about homosexuality and the way it is today? are there any lesbians in the bible? NO.
    the Bible was put together by priest for a king who was trying to do away with roman rule.
    roman's were open sexually. men ruled the romans. so, anytime they could come close to a book saying something to turn people against the roman rulers (remember they are making these bibles for constantine) THEY DID.

    TODAY is NOT the same day as the Bible. we don't have magic. we can't hold our arms up to keep the sun from setting. angels are having sex with humans and making giants.

    RED LETTERS, that is all ya gotta read.
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Mar 05, 2010 5:29 PM GMT
    dugandaniel said
    mankind is not str8 or gay. just like everything else, nature predicts. world is over populating, hmmm, more people are gay and more people are waiting to have children. thats nature.


    I really don't think that world population or even overpopulation has anything to do with how many people turn out gay or not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 5:34 PM GMT
    dugandaniel saidand yes, LUKE 17:34 JESUS states I'll tell you, in that night there will be two men in one bed. the one will be taken and the other will be left

    he's talking about the second coming and how no one knows who gets to go to heaven



    Is that what the original Greek says? No English translation I've ever seen says "two men". It always says "two people".
  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 5:34 PM GMT
    well, i do. lol


    we all thought global warming was gonna keep progressing but hey!, nature changed that.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 5:35 PM GMT
    dugandaniel saidhey bro, go back and start reading at verse 20. FOR SINCE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD dates the rest of this passage as kinda a history lesson.

    LUKE 17:34 is the only place JESUS ever mentions gays.

    and just so you know, the reason Leviticus is written the way it was written is simple. Before Jesus came there was no such thing as LOVE. the word is only mentioned 2 times in the old testament. it was early on for man kind and God didn't want his Chosen people to miss out on filling the world with their seed so he put rules on them to guide their sex to fill the world with people. i can go into it a lot further if you need bro.

    also, anytime you see the word SODOMY in the new testament it is a mis translation so don't even look at the word


    Sorry but everything you say in this post is false. For example, what hebrew root are you claiming only appears twice in the OT? ´hb? Lot more than twice. Chsd? lot more than twice.

  • dugandaniel

    Posts: 40

    Mar 05, 2010 5:57 PM GMT
    see man,
    i look at hb as being god's love for us aka agape, and chsd as charity. i may be wrong, but is there a philos type love in ancient hebrew?

    and honestly, slipped up by saying it was in the old test 2 times. brain scramble. several things going on right now. sorry yo
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 7:07 PM GMT
    The ten commandments are the ten worst sins according to God.
    Correct?
    Being involved in a same sex relationship is not among the ten.
    God doesn't make mistakes. He is infallible. Correct?
    Therefore He didn't FORGET to include homosexuality.
    It didn't slip His mind.

    Some of the ten commandments are routinely broken by Christian fundamentalists, and other Christians.
    Yet these ten sins are supposed to be the ten worst sins in God's eyes.
    Therefore, using the Lord's name in vain should be a worse sin than being gay.
    Or, not keeping the Sabbath "holy".
    Or, coveting the possessions of those who have more money and valuables than you do.
    Those sins should be more offensive to Christian fundamentalists than homosexuality - because they are more offensive to God.
    As we know, that is most definitely not the case.
    The fundamentalist haters ignore the commandments they think aren't so bad - and God's word, and have made homosexuality almost as great a sin as murder because of their own bigotry and intolerance, even though it's not among the ten commandments.

    Breaking a commandment should be considered to be the worst sin possible, and being gay is not on the list.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 7:19 PM GMT
    rickrick91 saidThe ten commandments are the ten worst sins according to God.
    Correct?
    Being involved in a same sex relationship is not among the ten.
    God doesn't make mistakes. He is infallible. Correct?
    Therefore He didn't FORGET to include homosexuality.
    It didn't slip His mind.

    Some of the ten commandments are routinely broken by Christian fundamentalists, and other Christians.
    Yet these ten sins are supposed to be the ten worst sins in God's eyes.
    Therefore, using the Lord's name in vain should be a worse sin than being gay.
    Or, not keeping the Sabbath "holy".
    Or, coveting the possessions of those who have more money and valuables than you do.
    Those sins should be more offensive to Christian fundamentalists than homosexuality - because they are more offensive to God.
    As we know, that is most definitely not the case.
    The fundamentalist haters ignore the commandments they think aren't so bad - and God's word, and have made homosexuality almost as great a sin as murder because of their own bigotry and intolerance, even though it's not among the ten commandments.

    Breaking a commandment should be considered to be the worst sin possible, and being gay is not on the list.




    Oh very good point here and I do appreciate the basic fundamental of the 10...So many are forgotten, rationalized and then of coarse....broken down to say that adultery, fornication would "include" homosexuality, however, that would be wrong because GOD meant ADULTERY was due from a man/woman relationship....

    GAY'S I do think (Homosexual men) are on a far more superior note.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 7:20 PM GMT
    Anto said
    dugandaniel said
    mankind is not str8 or gay. just like everything else, nature predicts. world is over populating, hmmm, more people are gay and more people are waiting to have children. thats nature.


    I really don't think that world population or even overpopulation has anything to do with how many people turn out gay or not.


    Actually, a current working theory (which is slowly being backed by studies), shows that the more male siblings a new born male has, the more likely he is to be gay.

    They're thinking it's due to the fact that the Y chromosome is considered foreign to a female body, and so her immune system attempts to get rid of it.

    Sorry to go off track with the thread. icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 7:24 PM GMT
    I let President Bartlett talk for me...

    [url][/url]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 7:42 PM GMT
    McGay saidWhen I was trying to doll myself up in traditional christian moral garb, I'd convinced myself that homosexuality was my cross to bear, as I'd imagined that everyone gets a cross. If I could just carry that cross to my grave, I'd win the prize. Everytime I dropped my cross, it was agony. Not giving up and picking up that cross was my reconciliation. Insanity was a lifestyle choice I could no longer bear.


    I'd say I had a very similar experience.

    Eventually I figured out that there are too many inconsistencies in the religion for me to really be a true believer.... (and I was raised LDS/Mormon). So... i took it upon myself to do soul searching and I figured out what *I* truly believed. And that's what I stick to now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2010 7:48 PM GMT
    McGay saidWhen I was trying to doll myself up in traditional christian moral garb, I'd convinced myself that homosexuality was my cross to bear, as I'd imagined that everyone gets a cross. If I could just carry that cross to my grave, I'd win the prize. Everytime I dropped my cross, it was agony. Not giving up and picking up that cross was my reconciliation. Insanity was a lifestyle choice I could no longer bear.


    This has also been my experience. It almost led to my suicide. They almost won.

    Almost doesn't count.