Homosexuality is a Biblical Sin. Is a Sin a Sin, or Not?

I came across this, and thought it was pretty funny, and makes a good point. I am an agnostic, and have a hard time understanding why so much time and energy and worry is devoted to obsessing about the personal lives of others. I mean, I am a student of psychology, so I understand the obsession from a psychological stand point, but not from a moralistic one.

www.capetownlesbians.co.za...

On her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

=============

Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle- room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16.
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. Your adoring fan. James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus Dept. of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

I guess I am curious as to whether the people who are anti-gay due to their religious convictions are also faithful to other edicts in the bible.

I realized that I was reflexively thinking that most self-described Christians are hypocritical, and that I feel that the choice to fixate on the issue of homosexuality says more about that person's internal psychology, as opposed to their religious devotion.

Honestly, as a 'normal' straight male, I just don't see what the big deal is. I remember around 6 or 7 years old playing doctor as a kid, and the animalistic arousal I felt when seeing my friend's sister's naked body during an 'examination.' I imagine that gay people felt a similar attraction, but just towards the same sex. Why should I begrudge another person that is the way god or nature or whatever created them? I mean, I try to imagine being in a society that is reversed, and think I would probably kill myself. Can any straight people imagine being told that you chose to be straight, and could choose to be gay??!! Gross, that would just seem so unnatural. I don't see how it doesn't cut both ways.

So basically, yeah, I'm curious if any of the people that post anti-gay perspectives are equally as faithful to other edicts in the bible? If not, why? Have any of you ever thought about personal reasons for fixating on gay issues?

Best,
Skunknuts

It also says, THOU SHALL NOT KILL. What happened to that one.
Thou shall not steal, another good one.

To only follow the rules you want to from a set of rules that you believe in is hypocrisy in it's highest form.

If we actually treated each other the way we would want to be treated the world would be a better place.

reply to post by skunknuts

Context, context, context...

All instruction regarding aberrant sexual behaviour in the bible was directed to God's own people within a specific cultural and historical context usually for very pragmatic reasons of survival in very hostile settings.

The problem arises when these instructions are reapplied in a modern or post-modern setting without reference to the context.

These instructions were never applied to persons outside of the faith communities in which they were given.

In the Old Covenant setting, anyone who was within the community of Israel was bound by the laws of the community...
...just as your local club has a dress code or rules about footwear.

In the New Covenant the comments were made in letters directed specifically to people who were caught up in the history of the Jesus event and had received the Spirit...
...the comments are general overviews confirming what they would have already realized from their internal dialogue with the Spirit.

This how it worked...
...the Spirit revealed things to individuals and what they received they shared amongst themselves...
...it was a form of internal group confirmation that what they were receiving was from the Spirit and not originating in the 'flesh'.

This Spirit community gave way to Formalism...
...spiritual specialists arose (priests, clergy)...
...lists of doctrines were created (confessions, theologies, creeds)...
...and these early Christ-ones (persons filled with the Spirit) were replaced with religion.

A horizontal community of equals where all knew the Spirit...
...became a verticle human organization where instuction flowed from the top down.

Religion replaces the witness of the Spirit with law...
...and law tends to be directed outward.



[edit on 4/1/10 by troubleshooter]

<
Homosexuality is a Biblical Sin. Is a Sin a Sin, or Not?>



I think when the Bible, both OT and NT condemn homosexuality,
they are referring to perversion, homosexuality as we understand
it today was not defined untill the 1800's. Biblical authors new
nothing about sexual orientation.

What I don't understand is how can anyone possibly mistranslated the Bible to condemn homosexuality?

I have studied the bible in and out. I have researched books and on the internet.

There are NO verse that condemn homosexuality.

The joke's on them.

Originally posted by rileyw

I think when the Bible, both OT and NT condemn homosexuality,
they are referring to perversion, homosexuality as we understand
it today was not defined untill the 1800's. Biblical authors new
nothing about sexual orientation.

Sorry but you are mistaken...
...here is one of the words used in discussion from 1 Cor 1:9

malakos [mal-ak-os']
Meaning: 1) soft, soft to the touch, effeminate, of a catamite, of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man, of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness, of a male prostitute.

I re-emphasize...the content of this letter was directed to believers who each knew the Spirit...
...this was not directed to a secular community where these practices were common.

Originally posted by troubleshooter

Originally posted by rileyw

I think when the Bible, both OT and NT condemn homosexuality,
they are referring to perversion, homosexuality as we understand
it today was not defined untill the 1800's. Biblical authors new
nothing about sexual orientation.

Sorry but you are mistaken...
...here is one of the words used in discussion from 1 Cor 1:9

malakos [mal-ak-os']
Meaning: 1) soft, soft to the touch, effeminate, of a catamite, of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man, of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness, of a male prostitute.

I re-emphasize...the content of this letter was directed to believers who each knew the Spirit...
...this was not directed to a secular community where these practices were common.

Yes, but there was no understanding of the nature of homosexuality.
It was perversion. In Romans St Paul condemns idolatry. Homosexual
acts were a part of sacred ritual in the worship of idols and therefore
was a rejection of the 1st commandment,....no other gods before Me..., this was an abomination.



18
The wrath 13 of God 14 is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness.
19
For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them.


20
Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse;
21
for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.
22
While claiming to be wise, they became fools
23
and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.

24
Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts 15 for the mutual degradation of their bodies.
25
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,
27
and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

Romans 18-32


How we do or do not understand homosexuality somewhat determines
our interpretation.

Yes, but there was no understanding of the nature of homosexuality.

It was perversion.

And it is still a perversion of the original human design.
(that's what perversion means)

What I am saying is that homosexuality is a 'work of the flesh'...
...it is one abberation that is expressed by a fallen human nature...
...so to those who are not yet quickened by the Spirit, it seems normal.

Btw Romans was a letter Paul wrote to a Christian community...
...it was not an open letter to the secular Gentile world.



[edit on 4/1/10 by troubleshooter]

Originally posted by troubleshooter

Yes, but there was no understanding of the nature of homosexuality.

It was perversion.

And it is still a perversion of the original human design.
(that's what perversion means)

What I am saying is that homosexuality is a 'work of the flesh'...
...it is one abberation that is expressed by a fallen human nature...
...so to those who are not yet quickened by the Spirit, it seems normal.

Btw Romans was a letter Paul wrote to a Christian community...
...it was not an open letter to the secular Gentile world.

Yes, Paul address the fledgling community in Rome, who were still
valunerable to pagan forms of worship and idolarty.


Paul warns against heterosexuals perverting themselves in
homosexual acts.

Just as an example, we all hear the horror stories of homesexual
rape in prisons. Most are not homosexuals but heterosexual
perverts. Once out of prison they again practice heterosexuality.

While you may consider the homosexual nature 'disordered', there
is no biblical understanding of the 'nature' of homosexuality.



And there is absolutely no reason why a homosexual cannot be
'quickened by the Spirit.' She/he must decide whether to act on their
sexuality or to be celibate.














[edit on 4/1/10 by troubleshooter]

Originally posted by troubleshooter
...so to those who are not yet quickened by the Spirit, it seems normal.

the only thing that seems *normal * to Spirit is
LOVE

all you need is love
love is a flower you've got to let bloom
love IS the answer

its basically the same argument since the beginning.

people feel that they have the right to live the way they want.

the bible tells people how to live and gets into their business.

people dont like this.

if you feel that GOD has no right to tell you how to life, then the bible isnt for you.