Religious Objections to Homosexuality

[Delta4Embassy]

Since most publicly condemning homosexuality use religion as their justification ok, let's take a look at that justification.

22. You shall not lie down with a male, as with a woman: this is an abomination.
- Leviticus 18

13. And a man who lies with a male as one would with a woman both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon themselves.
- Leviticus 20

Pretty clear-cut. Yet there's only the punishment of death. Nothing about not allowing us to marry one another, adopt children, have equality in the eyes of the law, or anything else. Just death. So if people objecting to homosexuality are doing so using religion, why not seek death for them? If so religious, but not actually obeying that religion, you're just as guilty as those you condemn.

Sodom and Gomorrah were both destroyed because of the actions and sins of the majority. If you tolerate sin in your midst you risk incurring this same judgement and punishment. Objecting to homosexuality, but not actually trying and executing homosexuals you're not doing yourselves any favors. G-d may still wipe you and your community out.

If not willing to obey the Laws of G-d, you might wanna re-examine what you really believe and why. Of course, to mete out G-d's justice there are a few requirements and provisos to pay attention to:

29. These shall be for you a statute of justice for all your generations, in all your dwelling places.
30. Whoever [namely the blood avenger] kills a person, based on the testimony of witnesses, he shall slay the murderer. A single witness may not testify against a person so that he should die.
- Numbers 35

15. One witness shall not rise up against any person for any iniquity or for any sin, regarding any sin that he will sin. By the mouth of two witnesses, or by the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be confirmed.
- Deuteronomy 19

12. These cities shall serve you as a refuge from an avenger, so that the murderer shall not die until he stands in judgment before the congregation.
- Numbers 35
(inference here is that in a capital case, the accused still deserves a trial to determine guilt and since homosexual acts are a death-penalty offense, so accused must be tried first.)


Ok, so we now know the sin-crime of homosexual acts (not the orientation but the actual sexual acts) is a sin-crime punishable by death. We now know how many witnesses are needed (at least two who saw the sexual act-crime,) and we know that to mete out justice we first have to give accused homosexuals a trial. So we're all set right?

...Uh-oh, homosexuality isn't illegal here in the US. So how exactly do we arrest homosexuals? On what grounds? Just the Levitical charge? Is US law ready to hear cases of two consenting adults making love together? I don't think so. Think we tried that in times past, but don't any more. So if we as a society aren't putting homosexuals on trial for their actions any longer, aren't we just a modern day Sodom angering G-d and inviting His judgement and punishment? If so, why are we still here? Surely if G-d can create the whole planet He could take out a country if He wanted to. And let's look at Israel itself, they allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military and have never been defeated in a war. Surely if G-d had a problem with homosexuality He wouldn't continue to favor Israel right?

By comparison, the US is a majority Christian nation and is loosing wars of late, whereas Israel is a majority Jewish nation and remains undefeated. For those into riddling the meanings of things, riddle me that.

 

[Chuckt]

By comparison, the US is a majority Christian nation and is loosing wars of late, whereas Israel is a majority Jewish nation and remains undefeated. For those into riddling the meanings of things, riddle me that.

Christians are not the majority anymore.
This is a post Christian nation.
This could be the last Christian generation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Religious Objections to Homosexuality

Most gay Americans are Christian, and many more persons of faith.

In addition, there is no Christian ‘consensus’ as to the ‘sin’ of homosexuality, where many Christian denominations don’t condemn homosexuals, and welcome gay Americans to their churches.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear DE:
When people respond to this issue, there are actually several conflicting points
combined. To reach agreement, each of these points is better off resolved separately and fully. Otherwise emotions attached get projected on other points, causing confusion.

A. Separating the issue of relationship abuse and sexual abuse from homosexuality
Instead of targeting just the homosexuality, why not address all cases of either
* sexual abuse
* relationship abuse in general

So if people consider homosexuality to be sexual abuse or adultery/relationship abuse,
then they can include that; And people who don't, can focus on child abuse, rape or other forms of abuse.

If we talked about the issues we agree we are against, such as ANY KIND OF ABUSE,
we could agree to address these directly, each according to our priorities,
and keep these out of government where they are better addressed
on a personal level where earlier intervention and counseling can take place effectively.

B. More general Biblical terms that cover all cases of abuse
In Biblical terms, "adultery" can be addressed in general as sex between people who are not committed marital partners but are someone else's partner or intended partner. So that is why it is relationship abuse. If it is not respecting those people's true spiritual partners.

Once agreement is reached on having respect for each other's committed partners, then again, cases can be broken down between heterosexual infidelity and abuse along with homosexual infidelity and abuse, and not argue about one type more than another.
it's still abuse if people are not respecting true spiritual committed partnerships.

C. the issue of homosexuality itself, if it is natural or unnatural, changeable or not

I have found there are not all one type of cases:

some are natural born not by genetics but by spirit, people are born of other orientations
or one gender in the opposite gender body etc.
some are unnatural, where the sexual patterns of abuse or addiction were caused
by sexual abuse of the person and it wasn't natural for them

also

some of these cases can change by healing the spiritual abuse causing it
some cannot whether the person was born or became that orientation

The common factor I found in cases of people either coming to peace with their homosexuality or changing it, is spiritual healing through forgiveness therapy

if people can agree that
* both types of cases exist, natural or unnatural
* some cases can be healed or changed if they are unnatural,
but some cannot be and are not meant to change
(ie some eunuchs are made by god and some by man)
* spiritual healing resolves the issues of abuse
regardless if people are meant to change or not

then we can stop fighting about this issue and whether homosexuality can be healed.
sometimes yes and sometimes no. it depends on the person's spiritual path in life.
and regardless of that path, spiritual healing is good for everyone and causes no harm.

 

[Noomi]

Christians like to say that they ignore the Old Testament, but whenever they want to argue about gay marriage, they use the Old Testament to validate their arguments.

Never understood that.

 

[emilynghiem]

Religious Objections to Homosexuality

Most gay Americans are Christian, and many more persons of faith.

In addition, there is no Christian ‘consensus’ as to the ‘sin’ of homosexuality, where many Christian denominations don’t condemn homosexuals, and welcome gay Americans to their churches.

What about focusing on adultery.
Wouldn't general abuses of sexual relations also fall under that?

having sex with someone other than your "true spiritual partner"
would cover:
incest, pedophilia, bestiality, prostitution

This still allows room for differences if people believe
* married couples could still swing or consent to other partners within their marital agreement
* homosexual couples may be spiritual male/female partners but in same sex bodies

Isn't the issue underneath whether or not people have consensual committed
and not abusive relations?

Note: even if people do not agree religiously, that is more reason for the state to stay out of this issue instead of abusing govt authority to push legislation or bans one way or another. the state should stay completely out, and rely on people to form a consensus.
if they can't agree, that means to keep policies separate by beliefs, and out of the state.

 

[emilynghiem]

Christians like to say that they ignore the Old Testament, but whenever they want to argue about gay marriage, they use the Old Testament to validate their arguments.

Never understood that.

Which part of the OT> the ten commandments remain the main laws.
So all those laws should be maintained and fulfilled, by commitment as Christians.

But all the parts about genocide and wars, rape, slavery etc in the OT
are providing the history of humanity before Christ came and fulfilled the laws.

The difference between OT history and NT future of humanity is "death vs. life":
* killing and dying by the letter of the law
(ie retributive justice by jdugment and punishment)
* living and loving by the spirit of the law
(ie restorative justice by correction and restitution)

So the point of the negative history given in the OT is a warning of the
corruption that occurs when the letter of the law is corrupted by greed and fails.

That is not the same as the basic laws given in the OT
that are followed and fulfilled in the spirit of Justice which Jesus represents.
the coming of Jesus or Justice for all is like the happy ending when the cycle of suffering is broken,
and humanity is saved from more retribution by forgiving, learning and teaching from the past
instead of repeating it.

Please specify what you mean, and I'd probably agree with you.

 

[emilynghiem]

By comparison, the US is a majority Christian nation and is loosing wars of late, whereas Israel is a majority Jewish nation and remains undefeated. For those into riddling the meanings of things, riddle me that.

Christians are not the majority anymore.
This is a post Christian nation.
This could be the last Christian generation.

Dear Chuckt: Do you consider all people who commit to following the law by conscience
to be Christian in spirit? For example, anyone who commits to follow Constitutional laws by conscience connecting us with God (or greater good for all humanity) is still invoking the spirit of Christ when taking this oath to serve the public good, since good will is the same as God's will, or the highest ideal.

I consider myself Christian, I do believe in Christ, while I follow the path of Natural Laws that I believe Jesus fulfills equally as scriptural laws as other Christians follow. So I use Constitutional laws, secular science, even Buddhism to explain the "natural laws" that Jesus fulfills as the "universal law of justice."

I don't teach that Jesus only fulfills the Bible laws, but all laws, secular and natural
even laws of science and psychology. All laws that describe or govern human relations
with each other and society are included.

So ideally all people will be joined in Christ, regardless of our beliefs or systems of laws.

the same way traditional Christians teach that the people are the church, the people embody the laws and become one.

the equivalent under natural or civil laws is that the people and government are one,
the laws are the contract between people and government as one in spirit.

so by that ideal all people should be joined in one conscience under one law, as the constitution is the law of the land for all people of all states. so i see that as fulfilling Christian ideals. the same way followers of the Bible unite under scriptural laws and authority, the people under the Constitution unite under that law and authority as one.

are you okay with this explanation of being Christian or of one conscience under law?

 

[Jroc]

Christians like to say that they ignore the Old Testament, but whenever they want to argue about gay marriage, they use the Old Testament to validate their arguments.

Never understood that.

Ummm..No they don't. Women together isn't mentioned in the old testament, only men shall not lie with another man as if he were a women. and I'm cool with that actually.

 

[Flopper]

Religious Objections to Homosexuality

Most gay Americans are Christian, and many more persons of faith.

In addition, there is no Christian ‘consensus’ as to the ‘sin’ of homosexuality, where many Christian denominations don’t condemn homosexuals, and welcome gay Americans to their churches.

What about focusing on adultery.
Wouldn't general abuses of sexual relations also fall under that?

having sex with someone other than your "true spiritual partner"
would cover:
incest, pedophilia, bestiality, prostitution

This still allows room for differences if people believe
* married couples could still swing or consent to other partners within their marital agreement
* homosexual couples may be spiritual male/female partners but in same sex bodies

Isn't the issue underneath whether or not people have consensual committed
and not abusive relations?

Note: even if people do not agree religiously, that is more reason for the state to stay out of this issue instead of abusing govt authority to push legislation or bans one way or another. the state should stay completely out, and rely on people to form a consensus.
if they can't agree, that means to keep policies separate by beliefs, and out of the state.

No, I don't think the underlying issue is people having consensual committed relationships but maybe it should be. I think it's about people who see homosexual acts as repulsive and have been taught from early childhood that such acts are disgusting and wrong. They have no problem with the existence of homosexuality as long as it's hidden away. It's not being homosexual that's the problem, it's admitting it.

Puritan American has a long hypocritical history of tolerating all manner of unexceptionable behavior as long it's kept under wraps.

 

[Chuckt]

By comparison, the US is a majority Christian nation and is loosing wars of late, whereas Israel is a majority Jewish nation and remains undefeated. For those into riddling the meanings of things, riddle me that.

Christians are not the majority anymore.
This is a post Christian nation.
This could be the last Christian generation.

Dear Chuckt: Do you consider all people who commit to following the law by conscience
to be Christian in spirit? For example, anyone who commits to follow Constitutional laws by conscience connecting us with God (or greater good for all humanity) is still invoking the spirit of Christ when taking this oath to serve the public good, since good will is the same as God's will, or the highest ideal.

I consider myself Christian, I do believe in Christ, while I follow the path of Natural Laws that I believe Jesus fulfills equally as scriptural laws as other Christians follow. So I use Constitutional laws, secular science, even Buddhism to explain the "natural laws" that Jesus fulfills as the "universal law of justice."

I don't teach that Jesus only fulfills the Bible laws, but all laws, secular and natural
even laws of science and psychology. All laws that describe or govern human relations
with each other and society are included.

So ideally all people will be joined in Christ, regardless of our beliefs or systems of laws.

the same way traditional Christians teach that the people are the church, the people embody the laws and become one.

the equivalent under natural or civil laws is that the people and government are one,
the laws are the contract between people and government as one in spirit.

so by that ideal all people should be joined in one conscience under one law, as the constitution is the law of the land for all people of all states. so i see that as fulfilling Christian ideals. the same way followers of the Bible unite under scriptural laws and authority, the people under the Constitution unite under that law and authority as one.

are you okay with this explanation of being Christian or of one conscience under law?

I think this idea of modern day law fails in many respects.

Following the law does not make an atheist and myself Christian in spirit.

Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Do you see the word "might"? We might be justified by faith. It doesn't mean "will" by being united by following a law.

What does the law do? The law is a mirror. The law shows us ourselves. The law shows us that we are sinners:

Romans 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

The law shows you that you are guilty and need a savior.

The government is incomplete because there is no mercy to this realization:

Matthew 9:13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

The government is just the opposite because there are no Christians in leadership. They would rather there be no mercy and that you pay and sacrifice for breaking the law because with them there is no mercy. There is no way for someone to really be restored from their mistakes although becoming forgiven doesn't really restore you of your mistakes either. There is no confession.

The governmental system is a cruel hard master.

Matthew 11:30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

Jesus differs because He is not the same.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXxs9SmXU5U]The Demise of Moral Government Theology - YouTube[/ame]