Leviticus 18:22 You shall lot lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination (NAS) Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable practice. (NLT)
Leviticus 18:30 Thus you are to keep My charge that you do not practice any of the abominable customs which have been practiced before you, so that you do not defile yourselves with them; I am the Lord your God. (NAS)
So be careful to obey my laws, and do not practice any of these detestable activities. Do not defile yourselves by doing any of them, for I, the Lord am your God. (NLT)
So if I am reading this correctly how can anybody who claims to be a christian also be homosexual?

Not only homosexualiaty was declared an abomination, but also of *equal standing* was wearing clothes of two different materials. We all do that! So, according to your question, how can *you* be a Christian??

If you want to hate... just admit it. :)

Not only homosexualiaty was declared an abomination, but also of *equal standing* was wearing clothes of two different materials. We all do that! So, according to your question, how can *you* be a Christian????

If you want to hate.....just admit it. :)
Can you site chapter and verse please?

"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges
of your beard." (Leviticus 19:27)

Have you shaven lately?


"...do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear
material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19)
Better check the labels of all your clothes.

Have you shaven lately?


Better check the labels of all your clothes.

NK if you are going to quote the Bible, please finish the passage.
Lev 19:19
You are to keep my statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of you cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, not wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.
If you read the whole passage it is saying "A" garment. It says nothing about mixing two different garments does it?

Garment = clothes, no? What is a garment to you?
You are sinning if you wear cotton/polyester mix.

And yet, what did John the Baptist wear?
I have all cotton on today, how about you?

I have all cotton on today, how about you?I bet you don't. Do you think in John the baptist's time they have weaving mills that fed spools of rayon and wool?
What about your locks? Have they ever been shaven?

It's shocking to find out how many Christians don't know their religion when it is written clearly out for all to see.

Choux, that sounds like hate speech to me! And you claimed I was the hate monger?
Don't let your prejudices blind you.

It really amazes me how you and NK can go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with my original question. But instead you choose to try and justify one sin with something that has no baring on the subject at hand.

So if I am reading this correctly how can anybody who claims to be a christian also be homosexual?

The law is the lamp of God's Word that is offered as the guiding light to our path of life. It is to teach us right from wrong. It tells us of our errors, and shows all sins. And as we have seen so far in posting, we are all with sin.

To answer the question above would be to say no one has the right to claim they are christian who do sin. And that is not what Our Lord has offered us....

Matthew 7:1-2 Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Psalms 96:10-13 Say among the heathen [that] the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously. Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth be glad; let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof. Let the field be joyful, and all that [is] therein: then shall all the trees of the wood rejoice Before the LORD: for he cometh, for he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth.

To answer the question above would be to say no one has the right to claim they are christian who do sin. Correct. So if you have cut hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard you cannot claim to be a christian.

Correct. So if you have cut hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard you cannot claim to be a christian.

Not true... Christians are follower of Christ Jesus

We are all sinners, and fall short in our flesh body. Yet belief in Christ Jesus as the begotten Son of God, and Our Father's Grace... We can have the door of salvation opened to us, when we repent of our sins. Eternal Life is a decision of the heart.

Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

Matthew 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Matthew 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Not true... Christians are follower of Christ JesusBut you just said earlier:


To answer the question above would be to say no one has the right to claim they are christian who do sin.

But you just said earlier:





The original question was Quote: So if I am reading this correctly how can anybody who claims to be a christian also be homosexual?

My reply was that Quote: To answer the question above would be to say no one has the right to claim they are christian who do sin. And that is not what Our Lord has offered us....

Our Lord offers forgiveness for all sins as Christians that follow Him!

But it's the same answer for the person who has cut their hair or shaved their beard, they are also transgressing the word in the Bible. Also since a homosexual is a follower of Jesus Christ then he also is a christian. Why are you making a distinction between the two?

But it's the same answer for the person who has cut their hair or shaved their beard, they are also transgressing the word in the Bible.

YES, I agree.. There is no degree in sin, we are all sinners. The scripture I reference along the way also confirms we are all sinners.



Also since a homosexual is a follower of Jesus Christ then he also is a christian. Why are you making a distinction between the two?

That was my point there is no distinction between sin. And I added we should not judge, we are warned not to judge anyone.

However...that does not mean we are not suppose to try and follow the ways of Christ. In the course of life, experience are to teach us, and the desire of eternal life with God says we are to gain wisdom. The beginning of knowledge is the fear of God. God does not like sin

Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction

It makes one wonder why the churches are full of shaven people, even the priests!

Some of you are offering ridiculous arguments. Those laws about hair style, clothing materials, seeds, and cattle were given to ISRAEL ONLY and were intended to teach RACIAL purity.

The law against same gender sex was given in the context of what the inhabitants of the land of Caanan were guilty of, along with adulterey, fornication, incest, and beastialiaty.

The New Testament says nothing about those laws SPECIFIC to Israel, as Jesus fulfilled all of them perfectly.

The New Testament DOES say a lot about the SIN of same gender sex.

By the way, the ONLY persons who could not cut their hair or shave were nazarites and only for as long as they were under that particular vow. Otherwise, Israelites were only forbidden to copy the styles of the Egyptians.

Some of you are offering ridiculous arguments. Those laws about hair style, clothing materials, seeds, and cattle were given to ISRAEL ONLY and were intended to teach RACIAL purity.

The law against same gender sex was given in the context of what the inhabitants of the land of Caanan were guilty of, along with adulterey, fornication, incest, and beastialiaty.

The New Testament says nothing about those laws SPECIFIC to Israel, as Jesus fulfilled all of them perfectly.

The New Testament DOES say a lot about the SIN of same gender sex.

By the way, the ONLY persons who could not cut their hair or shave were nazarites and only for as long as they were under that particular vow. Otherwise, Israelites were only forbidden to copy the styles of the Egyptians.
Lev. 17 is different from Lev. 19?

And yet, what did John the Baptist wear?
I have all cotton on today, how about you?
Cotton shoes?

The New Testament says nothing about those laws SPECIFIC to Israel, as Jesus fulfilled all of them perfectly.
.

New Testament - Galatians

5:19-21
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Jesus fulfilled all that was written. By coming as the Grace of Our Father, The begotten Son of God. "The Word made Flesh"

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

John 1:16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.

Love for Love

Gal 5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

Gal 5:14 [U]For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Walk in the Spirit ... Christ is the Way

Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

Gal 5:22-23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law

Leviticus 18:22 You shall lot lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination (NAS) Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable practice. (NLT)
Leviticus 18:30 Thus you are to keep My charge that you do not practice any of the abominable customs which have been practiced before you, so that you do not defile yourselves with them; I am the Lord your God. (NAS)
So be careful to obey my laws, and do not practice any of these detestable activities. Do not defile yourselves by doing any of them, for I, the Lord am your God. (NLT)
So if I am reading this correctly how can anybody who claims to be a christian also be homosexual?

There can be people who are homosexual and Christian. When a homosexual first comes to Christ, he may still struggle a bit at first, but if he is truly saved, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit will begin to change his desires to be more in line with what God would have him be. Thus, he still be a homosexual when first saved, but if truly saved, he will not stay that way. We see examples of those who were once homosexuals at the church in Corint, who were saved through being saved:

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV

Garment = clothes, no? What is a garment to you?
You are sinning if you wear cotton/polyester mix.

NeedKarma, Christians are not under the law:

1 Tim 1:9-11
9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.
NKJV

Gal 3:19-25
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator does not mediate for one only, but God is one. 21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. 22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
NKJV

Christians are not under the law:



Scripture says those who walk in the spirit are not under the law. The spirit of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law .

A Christian is a following of Christ, who may be on the path toward righteousness in use of the tutor to bring them to Christ, that they might be justified by faith.

Would you not agree with this?

Therefore a christian can indeed be a homosexual.

Therefore a christian can indeed be a homosexual.

Yes, for a period, but a homosexual who is truly saved will not stay a homosexual.

Scripture says those who walk in the spirit are not under the law. The spirit of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law .

A Christian is a following of Christ, who may be on the path toward righteousness in use of the tutor to bring them to Christ, that they might be justified by faith.

Would you not agree with this?

If I understand your intent, no I would not fully agree. 1 Tim 1:9 says that the law is not for a righteous person, and Gal 5:18 says that if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Therefore those who are in Christ, who have His righteousness imputed to them are no longer under the tutor "the law". In part, the reason is because to be under law also means that we would be judged by the law, and by the covering of the righteousness of Christ that comes when we are saved.

I think that you are referring to the sanctification of the believer, and I certainly agree that we are growing after being saved to become more like Christ, and to become more the person that we ought to be, but right from the moment atht we are saved, we are righteousness through His righteousness. We will never be righteous by our own righteousness no matter how much we grow.

If I understand your intent, no I would not fully agree. 1 Tim 1:9 says that the law is not for a righteous person, and Gal 5:18 says that if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Therefore those who are in Christ, who have His righteousness imputed to them are no longer under the tutor "the law".

My intent is that of (Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. KJV)

As I said, Scripture says those who walk in the spirit are not under the law. Gal 5:19 The spirit of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law .

So is your answer still No, or do you see where we agree ?I have said the same word as I said before, and you can Quote me on that.



I think that you are referring to the sanctification of the believer, and I certainly agree that we are growing after being saved to become more like Christ, and to become more the person that we ought to be,

When we become sanctified in Christ, we have been washed in water of The Word that we drink, the Living Water (John 4:14). The same as Christ had santified the church shown in scripture Eph 5:26-27. So I believe we have had the law put into our hearts and mind by Christ. (Hebrews 10:16)



but right from the moment atht we are saved, we are righteousness through His righteousness. We will never be righteous by our own righteousness no matter how much we grow.

I agree

Let's go back to what you said
I certainly agree that we are growing after being saved to become more like Christ, and to become more the person that we ought to be, The word saved is what causes my thoughts to search, and want to reproof what is meant.

We are saved, I feel when we trust in Our Father's Truth, and we accept Christ Jesus as the begotten Son of God, and we fear the Lord by His understand of all that is written, in The Living Word, and being sancified in Christ Jesus.

So it brings to mind those that are weak, knowing that a weak following Christian would grow from the weakness in the flesh, yet the spirit is willing. Would you agree?

My intent is that of (Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. KJV)

As I said, Scripture says those who walk in the spirit are not under the law. Gal 5:19 The spirit of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law .

So is your answer still No, or do you see where we agree ?I have said the same word as I said before, and you can Quote me on that.

This is the comment that I was saying that it appeared that I disagreed with:

"A Christian is a following of Christ, who may be on the path toward righteousness in use of the tutor to bring them to Christ, that they might be justified by faith."

It appeared to me that you were saying that we still needed the tutor (the law) to progress towards righteousness. If that was not your intent than we are probably close to agreement.


Let's go back to what you said The word saved is what causes my thoughts to search, and want to reproof what is meant.

We are saved, I feel when we trust in Our Father's Truth, and we accept Christ Jesus as the begotten Son of God, and we fear the Lord by His understand of all that is written, in The Living Word, and being sancified in Christ Jesus.

So it brings to mind those that are weak, knowing that a weak following Christian would grow from the weakness in the flesh, yet the spirit is willing. Would you agree?

I would not entirely agree with this, if I undersatnd your intent. I don't agree that we wopuld necessarily understand all that is written, but rather what is important is that we understand an received in whole the truth of the gospel itself.

Past that I agree that it is a growth process, and that is what I was referring to when I said that when one first receives Christ, we may yet be weak in some areas, but He will change us.

Lev. 17 is different from Lev. 19?

Not sure what you are asking.

Lev. Ch 18 is the one dealing with sexual sins, and it SPECIFIALLY says that the nations Israel was to disposess were guilty of these sins.

Lev 18:24-25
24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:
25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.
(KJV)

Those sundry laws given in ch 17 and 19 were given to Israel only. It was a part of the body of civil law. There is no evidence that these laws were binding on anyone else, unless of course, they chose to live in Israel.

Therefore a christian can indeed be a homosexual.

No. A Christian can be a FORMER homosexual, just like he can be a former adulterer, thief, or murderer. Just as you cannot continue to be a bank robber, just so you cannot continue to PRACTICE homosexual acts.

I would not entirely agree with this, if I undersatnd your intent. I don't agree that we wopuld necessarily understand all that is written, but rather what is important is that we understand an received in whole the truth of the gospel itself.
.

My intent can be quoted:we fear the Lord by His understand of all that is written, in The Living Word,

We fear the Lord... and that fear rest upon His = The Lord's understand of all that is written. = His judgement.

I can agree with received the whole truth of the gospel itself, because it goes back to belief in The Word = Christ = Word made Flesh

No. A Christian can be a FORMER homosexual, just like he can be a former adulterer, thief, or murderer. Just as you cannot continue to be a bank robber, just so you cannot continue to PRACTICE homosexual acts.

The reason I have said we can not judge each other, but rather show love, is because it is written to love. Walk in the spirit of Christ.

Christ came to save who?

And I can bet you know plenty of Christians, who are following the teaching of Christ, and yet they themselve find it difficult to love everyone. Satan would love to teach us to hate..

Each individual needs to decide who they hear.. satan (or) the voice of Christ

In this discussion, I am not saying we yoke ourselves to those that do error, but if we are yoked to Christ, we show that as our example.

Christian are everywhere but not all christians are sanctified in Christ. We are not the Judge!

As a servant of God be the example..

~child of God

No. A Christian can be a FORMER homosexual, just like he can be a former adulterer, thief, or murderer. Just as you cannot continue to be a bank robber, just so you cannot continue to PRACTICE homosexual acts.
Let's try that again. A homosexual can be a Christian but not acting out his homosexuality.

Human sexuality is fluid. One is a homosexual or a heterosexual or a bisexual or transgender or indeterminate gender or is somewhere else along the Likert scake of sexuality.

The reason I have said we can not judge each other, but rather show love, is because it is written to love. Walk in the spirit of Christ.

Christ came to save who?

And I can bet you know plenty of Christians, who are following the teaching of Christ, and yet they themselve find it difficult to love everyone. Satan would love to teach us to hate..

Each individual needs to decide who they hear.. satan (or) the voice of Christ

In this discussion, I am not saying we yoke ourselves to those that do error, but if we are yoked to Christ, we show that as our example.

Christian are everywhere but not all christians are sanctified in Christ. We are not the Judge!

As a servant of God be the example..

~child of God

Surely you do not mean that one can be saved one week and be found committing overt sin (of any kind) next week and still claim to be saved?
I don't believe it.

John 8:34-36
34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
(KJV)
Free from what if not sin?

Rom 6:17-18
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
(KJV)
A servant of righteousness does not commit overt sin.

I could give you a lot more verses, but that would become tiresome for some reading this.

Surely you do not mean that one can be saved one week and be found committing overt sin (of any kind) next week and still claim to be saved?
.

I did not say a homosexual was saved. I did not say all that call themselves Christians are saved. And I would not judge the heart of anyone...

Let's try that again. A homosexual can be a Christian but not acting out his homosexuality.

No, scripture is clear that an orientation towards sin is also sin.

Scripture says:

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV

To suggest that would be like saying that an adulterer can be a Christian if he does not act out on it, but only lusts.

Jesus Said:

Matt 5:28
28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
NKJV

No, scripture is clear that an orientation towards sin is also sin.

No, it isn't. Your understanding of the words in that passage is incorrect.

No, it isn't. Your understanding of the words in that passage is incorrect.

Really? Why don't you show us your interpretation of the words in the context. Personally, I thought Jesus explained it quite clearly.

Really? Why don't you show us your interpretation of the words in the context. Personally, I thought Jesus explained it quite clearly.
Tom, Tom, Tom. *sigh* We've been around that block so many times already on this board. You certainly will not change your mind, nor will I change mine.

Tom, Tom, Tom. *sigh* We've been around that block so many times already on this board. You certainly will not change your mind, nor will I change mine.

As you wish - you made the claim - if you are not willing to back up your claim, that is your choice.

Mt.5.28 says that lust is a sin. And so it is. What does that have to do with homosexuality? If anyone, gay or straight, were to lust that person would be committing a sin. I don't see how Mt.5.28 is at all relevant to any issue concerning homosexuality as distinct from heterosexuality. It's just telling us not to lust. Period.

Mt.5.28 says that lust is a sin. And so it is. What does that have to do with homosexuality?

Wondergirl said that the act of homosexuality was the issue not the orientation.

Jesus made quite a point of pointing out that the sin starts well before the act, and this is an example. Or do you think that lust is an act?


I don't see how Mt.5.28 is at all relevant to any issue concerning homosexuality as distinct from heterosexuality.

I did not say that it did. Read what I said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, scripture is clear that an orientation towards sin is also sin.

Scripture says:

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV

To suggest that would be like saying that an adulterer can be a Christian if he does not act out on it, but only lusts.

Jesus Said:

Matt 5:28
28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
NKJV
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jesus made quite a point of pointing out that the sin starts well before the act, and this is an example. Or do you think that lust is an act?

Sure it's an act. Not all acts involve moving ones limbs. Thought-acts are definitely acts. Reading is an act, thinking is an act, concentrating is an act, praying is an act.

And Mt.5.28 says that lust is a sin even if you don't have intercourse with the person you're lusting after. It doesn't make the more general claim, which are are ascribing to it, to wit, that "the sin starts well before the act". Even if we suppose that lust is not itself an act, all Mt.5.28 is saying in that case is that the non-act of lust is a sin. It makes no general claim of the sort you are asserting.

Sure it's an act. Not all acts involve moving ones limbs. Thought-acts are definitely acts. Reading is an act, thinking is an act, concentrating is an act, praying is an act.

And since a lustful desire is an act (according to your definition - which differs from most), so must a homosexual desire then, using your definition.

And since a lustful desire is an act (according to your definition - which differs from most), so must a homosexual desire then, using your definition.

I don't accept the synomyny you've introduced. Lust and desire aren't the same thing. Think of it as a Venn Diagram: Lust is a sub-set of desire; all lust is a kind of desire, but not all desire is lust.

I would say this: Any lust, whether it be heterosexual or homosexual or (heaven forbid!) bestial is a sin. I don't think the sinfulness of lust depends upon the object of the lust (man, woman, animal) but on the character of the lustful desire itself. In other words, it is the quality and not the object of the desire that makes it lustful. If the desire has a certain intensity to it, if the subject of the desire yields to it, leans into it instead of resisting it, then it is a lustful desire and hence sinful. Not all sexual desire counts as lust, of course. And this is one prima facie reason to suppose that it is not the object of desire that makes it lustful.

I don't accept the synomyny you've introduced. Lust and desire aren't the same thing.

Interesting. If lust is not a desire, what is it?


Think of it as a Venn Diagram: Lust is a sub-set of desire; all lust is a kind of desire, but not all desire is lust.

Exactly what I said - Lust is a desire.


Any lust, whether it be heterosexual or homosexual or (heaven forbid!) bestial is a sin.

Agreed. Just as any sinful desire would also be a sin.


I don't think the sinfulness of lust depends upon the object of the lust (man, woman, animal) but on the character of the lustful desire itself.

You seem to be trying to distract away from speaking about desire, to focus in on the specific, ignoring what I said about the fact that it was merely an example of a sinful desire.

Or do you think that a desire for something sinful is not sinful? Can you give an example of a righteous desire for sin?

Interesting. If lust is not a desire, what is it?

As I said, lust is a kind of desire. There are other kinds of desires besides lust.


Exactly what I said - Lust is a desire.

Right, lust is one kind of desire. Draw a circle and label it "desire". This will represent the set of all desires. Now inside that circle draw another, smaller circle. This second circle will represent the set of all lustful desires. That is a Venn Diagram.


Agreed. Just as any sinful desire would also be a sin.

Well, that's just true by definition, isn't it? A sinful desire is, by definition, a sin.


You seem to be trying to distract away from speaking about desire, to focus in on the specific, ignoring what I said about the fact that it was merely an example of a sinful desire.

I'm not trying to distract from anything. Mt.5.28, which you quoted, doesn't use the word "desire"; it uses the word "lust". It says that lust is a sin. My point is that you cannot read off from that any more general claim about desire, since it speaks only of one particular type of desire, namely lust.


Or do you think that a desire for something sinful is not sinful? Can you give an example of a righteous desire for sin?

Again, by definition, a sinful desire is sinful. Lust is a sin. But Mt.5.28 doesn't say anything except that lust is a sin. You are interpolating the rest. Now this is something you've often cautioned against, so you shouldn't do it yourself. Mt.5.28 doesn't say anything about orientation or about desire in general. It only talks about lust.

I have pointed out to you that what makes a desire lustful isn't the object of the desire but the quality of the desire. If you have a problem with that, by all means explain the error your take me to have made.

As I said, lust is a kind of desire. There are other kinds of desires besides lust.

Good - I got you off the single focus on lust into the topic of desire.



Well, that's just true by definition, isn't it? A sinful desire is, by definition, a sin.

And since homosexual act is a sin, a desire for a homosexual act (homosexuality) is a sin.

Now you got it!

a desire for a homosexual act (homosexuality) is a sin.
Homosexuality isn't a desire.

I can desire a banana. There is no sin in that desire. The banana isn't sinful, nor is the wish for one.

450donn,
I agree except that some people are homosexual but do not practice that life style simply because they know it is wrong.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Homosexuality isn't a desire.

Really? So homosexuality has nothing to do with a man's sexual desire for another man?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
homosexuality

sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex.
Origin:
1890–95; homo- + sexuality
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good - I got you off the single focus on lust into the topic of desire.



And since homosexual act is a sin, a desire for a homosexual act (homosexuality) is a sin.

Now you got it!

This doesn't follow from anything I've said. All lust is a sin, whether it is homosexual or heterosexual. If acts of homosexuality are a sin, it doesn't follow that the desire for homosexual sex is a sin. And MT.5.28 doesn't say otherwise. It speaks only about lust. Not all desire for sex is lustful, I'm sure you'd agree. Or are you guilty of the sin of lust every time you make love with your wife?

So why did you cite Mt.5.28? It talks only about lust. It certainly doesn't tell us that the desire for sex is in each case lustful. Neither does it tell us that the desire for homosexual sex is lustful. If a desire for sex is lustful, then and only then is the person guilty of sin.

This doesn't follow from anything I've said. All lust is a sin, whether it is homosexual or heterosexual.

Ah, I see that you are back talking about lust rather than desire, which is the point that I was making.


If acts of homosexuality are a sin, it doesn't follow that the desire for homosexual sex is a sin.

Really? Can you show me in scripture where we are told that it is possible to have a righteous desire for something which is sinful? (2nd time of asking)

Ah, I see that you are back talking about lust rather than desire, which is the point that I was making.

Back? I never left. My whole point has been that Mt.5.28 is talking only about lust. You, however, seem to think it's saying something about desire in general. The text doesn't license this interpretation, though.


Really? Can you show me in scripture where we are told that it is possible to have a righteous desire for something which is sinful? (2nd time of asking)

Well, I'm not sure what the phrase "righteous desire" means. Can you show me a place in Scripture where that phrase is defined?

Back? I never left. My whole point has been that Mt.5.28 is talking only about lust. You, however, seem to think it's saying something about desire in general. The text doesn't license this interpretation, though.

You seem fixated on an example of a desire, rather than dealing with what I was referring to, which was sinful desires.


Well, I'm not sure what the phrase "righteous desire" means. Can you show me a place in Scripture where that phrase is defined?

I sense that this discussion is heading towards being useless. Check out the words meanings in a dictionary if you don't know what they mean.

It appears to me that this is a way of avoiding the question. I understand.

You seem fixated on an example of a desire, rather than dealing with what I was referring to, which was sinful desires.

I am fixated on Mt.5.28, which you brought up. And it mentions only lust.


I sense that this discussion is heading towards being useless. Check out the words meanings in a dictionary if you don't know what they mean.

Well, you used them! If you don't know what the words you use mean how on earth is anyone else supposed to?


It appears to me that this is a way of avoiding the question. I understand.

If you say so. The only question that I'm aware of having left unanswered is the one to do with "righteous desires". But when I asked you what that means you said you don't know yourself, so I don't know how I was supposed to answer it.

If you ever figure out what you mean by "righteous desire" let me know. Otherwise, I'm going to bed.

I am fixated on Mt.5.28, which you brought up. And it mentions only lust.

Go back and read the context as to why it was brought up. I copied and pasted it a second time. A third should not be necessary.


Well, you used them! If you don't know what the words you use mean how on earth is anyone else supposed to?

English is a language common to several billion people. Dictionaries make it easy to understand each other in the English language. If you wish to avoid discussing the point, you have the right not to discuss it, but don't waste my time because you wish to avoid a dictionary. We went through this in our last discussion.

You tell us that it is possible to have a desire for sin without sinning but don't wish to, or cannot tell us where scripture gives an example of a righteous desire for sin.

That is fine, we can leave it there if you wish.

It seems to me that a person can have a none sinful desire or a sinful desire.
Lust is a sinful desire if one lusts for someone other than his wife.
A desire to partake of the Eucharist is a none sinful desire.
That is what I believe.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

It seems to me that a person can have a none sinful desire or a sinful desire.
Lust is a sinful desire if one lusts for someone other than his wife.
A desire to partake of the Eucharist is a none sinful desire.
That is what I believe.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Agreed.

So everyone appears to agree that a homosexual act is a sin, so a desire for a homosexual act would be a sinful desire.

Agreed.

So everyone appears to agree that a homosexual act is a sin, so a desire for a homosexual act would be a sinful desire.
Same for hetero outside of marriage. And since homosexuals are not allowed marriage or a legal union, they are shot down right from the get-go. Clever fundievangels.

Leviticus 18:22 You shall lot lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination (NAS) Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable practice. (NLT)
Leviticus 18:30 Thus you are to keep My charge that you do not practice any of the abominable customs which have been practiced before you, so that you do not defile yourselves with them; I am the Lord your God. (NAS)
So be careful to obey my laws, and do not practice any of these detestable activities. Do not defile yourselves by doing any of them, for I, the Lord am your God. (NLT)
So if I am reading this correctly how can anybody who claims to be a christian also be homosexual?


Yes, if they believe and accept Jesus Christ as Lord and savior.


I am a sinner and saved and surely a homosexual, even one that may committing acts, may be saved if they confess and trust in the Lord to help them repent.


Matthew 5: 28

Brings Galatians 3:24 and Romans 8:1-11 into focus.


Surely those who are in Christ know the price that was paid for their salvation.

Psalm 51




G&P

Leviticus 18:30 Thus you are to keep My charge that you do not practice any of the abominable [Canaanite] customs which have been practiced before [i.e. in front of] you
= temple prostitution with males and females =
do not practice any of these detestable activities.

Same for hetero outside of marriage.

Right. I said that before, no sin is greater than the other.

Right. I said that before, no sin is greater than the other.
But the homosexuals aren't allowed to marry...

Like I said -- clever, very clever.

God never said sex within proper bounds is sin. In fact, Adam & Eve were told to multiply.
He has on many occasions said that same gender sex is an abomination.
No ceremony can justify something that God has labeled clealy as sin. To think so is to indulge in self-decption.
Let's follow that line of reasoning further. Suppose laws are passed allowing siblings to marry. Would that make incest proper? What if we legalize group marriage, polygamy, multiple husbands, or marriage to animals? Would the "legalization" of any of these practices mean that they were no longer sin?
I certainly don't think so.

God never said sex within proper bounds is sin. In fact, Adam & Eve were told to multiply.
And if homosexuals had sex within proper and legal bounds, that too would not be sin, just as it is not sin for heterosexuals. Adam and Eve types have multiplied themselves into a lot of parentless children. Adoption by gays and their partners relieves that condition.

He has on many occasions said that same gender sex is an abomination.
That is a misinterpretation of those words and verses. This has been discussed countless times on this board.

We all see this as Sin.. Sin.. Sin.. whether lust or desire it is sin..

In Matthew Christ gave an example of just how sin for man does exist.

Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

The answer to the question ... Keep the commandments.
Matthew 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.


Which commandments?

Matthew 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

The young man concluded he had done so... what lack I yet?

Matthew 19:20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?

Jesus concludes .. " If " thou wilt be perfect

Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go [and] sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come [and] follow me.

whoa.... obviously the treasures this man obtained, were what the lust and desire of his flesh benefits from

Matthew 19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

NOW Hear Jesus warn the disciples... the word "shall hardly" means in greek with difficulty ref (Mark 10:23 - Luke 18:24)

Matthew 19:23-27 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. When his disciples heard [it], they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?

NOW HEAR CHRIST

Same Everytime!!

Luke 18:26-27 And they that heard [it] said, Who then can be saved? And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.

Mark 10:27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men [it is] impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

Matthew 19:26 But Jesus beheld [them], and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Jesus does go on to say any who do follow His Ways and have forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

We Just Can Not Judge!

galveston,
Your reasoning is very good.
Fred

But the homosexuals aren't allowed to marry....

Like I said -- clever, very clever.

So what is the point? People cannot marry their cousins either. There are legitimate restrictions on marriage.

And if homosexuals had sex within proper and legal bounds, that too would not be sin, just as it is not sin for heterosexuals.

Changes to laws of the land does not change what God has decreed is sin. What God says is sin, remains sin.

So what is the point? People cannot marry their cousins either. There are legitimate restrictions on marriage.
Cousins? There was something in the paper this week that geneticists are finding that marriage between first cousins isn't the disaster that has been portrayed. There's no restriction on any other kind of cousin.

Changes to laws of the land does not change what God has decreed is sin. What God says is sin, remains sin.
He didn't say that.

Cousins? There was something in the paper this week that geneticists are finding that marriage between first cousins isn't the disaster that has been portrayed. There's no restriction on any other kind of cousin.

Okay, change cousin to sibling.

He didn't say that.

Read again - here is his quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And if homosexuals had sex within proper and legal bounds, that too would not be sin, just as it is not sin for heterosexuals.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The law of the land (i.e. legal bounds) does not dictate what a sin is.

Okay, change cousin to sibling.
No.

No.

It ruins a good story, doesn't it :p

Read again - here is his quote
His?

His?

Whatever - gender doesn't matter to you, does it? :D

Whatever - gender doesn't matter to you, does it? :D
Wait'll I tell everyone you actually cracked a smile! Maybe twice!

Wait'll I tell everyone you actually cracked a smile! maybe twice!

I do it all the time. You need to stop and take the time to notice now and then.

I do it all the time. You need to stop and take the time to notice now and then.
You mean we might even LIKE you if we met you?

You mean we might even LIKE you if we met you?

Don't even dare think that - it might ruin your whole day to think that would be even possible. :eek:

Don't even dare think that - it might ruin your whole day to think that would be even possible. :eek:Actually, I agree with a lot of what you say -- just not all of it.

Actually, I agree with a lot of what you say -- just not all of it.

I hope that did not hurt too much ;)

I hope that did not hurt too much ;)
Nope. And I'm actually very nice.

Nope. And I'm actually very nice.

I think that it would be good and would make for more effective and interesting discussions if you would show that more in your discussions, especially when you disagree!

I think that it would be good and would make for more effective and interesting discussions if you would show that more in your discussions, especially when you disagree!
I'm always nice when I disagree. Heaven help you if I am not!

I'm always nice when I disagree. Heaven help you if I am not!

Hmmm... I may disagree, but I hope to see you use that approach in the future.

Hmmm ... I may disagree, but I hope to see you use that approach in the future.
Please tell me when I was not nice to you.

Please tell me when I was not nice to you.

Just about every time that you disagreed. But I am opened to being convinced otherwise if you approach differs in the future.

Leviticus, about as exciting a book as a visit to the dentist

I used to think that about all of the Old Testament when I was younger, but when I studied it and understood it in the context of what it is about, I find it all pretty interesting now. There is always something new and uinteresting to learn in any book of the Bible.

To answer the original question, I believe that the issue is NOT homosexuality BUT homosexual ACT.

So, one can be a Christian and Homosexual (less homosexual acts) as well.

Sin, according to bible, is doing what is forbidden, not doing what is commanded, and doing something out of faith. Thus, sin is not based on state of being but based on acts.

To answer the original question, I believe that the issue is NOT homosexuality BUT homosexual ACT.

No, the OP did say "homosexual".


So, one can be a Christian and Homosexual (less homosexual acts) as well.

But will not remain a homosexual after being saved.


Sin, according to bible, is doing what is forbidden, not doing what is commanded, and doing something out of faith. Thus, sin is not based on state of being but based on acts.

Jesus was explicit in Matthew 5 that sin is not the mere act, but also the inclination / desire that one has prior to doing the act (or even if one does not do the act).

But will not remain a homosexual after being saved.
He will always be a homosexual.

Jesus was explicit in Matthew 5 that sin is not the mere act, but also the inclination / desire that one has prior to doing the act (or even if one does not do the act).
A state of being (as mentioned in the previous post) is not an inclination.

He will always be a homosexual.

Why would you say that? Can you provide a scriptural basis for that?

We have an example in scripture where homosexuals changed after receiving Christ, and I have met men who have been likewise.

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV

The power of God can change a person. After receiving Christ, as Paul says in Romans, we are no longer slaves to sin.

Rom 6:5-9
6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more.
NKJV

Why would God free others from sin, but not do the same for homosexuals? Why do so many people try to make homosexuality a "special" sin.

We have an example in scripture where homosexuals changed after receiving Christ, and I have met men who have been likewise.
And I have had the opposite experience.

You are talking about people who believe what they are told to believe and to ignore what they experience. They have been told that being homosexual is a matter of Doing and not a matter of Being. If they have sex with a woman while thinking of a man, that is not doing it with a man, thus they believe they are not homosexual. (And they certainly will not admit to you that they were thinking of a man at the time!)

Faith in Jesus will make them Not Homosexual? Homosexual is what is, and is what they are to their very core. How about eye color? Wearing green contact lens do not make eyes blue; repressing homosexual impulses does not make one heterosexual.

I must point out that Wondergirl,(and others) disagree with the Bible. (What else is new?)

2 Cor 5:17
17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
(KJV)

Gal 6:15
15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
(KJV)

A saved person is a CHANGED person. A mere claim to being a Christian proves nothing unless backed up by a lifestyle.

AND: Under tha OT Law, only actions were judged. Under the New Covenant, attitudes are judged, so NT standards are higher than OT standards.

And I have had the opposite experience.

All there has to be is one to show it is possible, and we have many more than that, along with Biblical testimony to the truth of such changes.


You are talking about people who believe what they are told to believe and to ignore what they experience.

Now you are judging others who you do not even know, because their testimony disagrees with what you believe. That does not sound very logical or very compelling. Further, you are arguing on the basis of what you have NOT experienced regarding the number of homosexuals who you have personally known and still know. That can only be a valid basis for stating a fact if you can state and validate it as fact that you know everything that has ever happened to every homosexual from the beginning of creation, and you know what will happen to those who are still alive or have not yet been born. Otherwise you cannot say that it cannot happen even based solely upon experience - even if we ignore scripture.

All there has to be is one to show it is possible, and we have many more than that, along with Biblical testimony to the truth of such changes.
Have you watched their eyes when a buff guy walks past? Have you asked them what they think about during sex with a woman?

regarding the number of homosexuals who you have personally known and still know.
I've known a few. During the mid-'60s and earlier, they did their best to pass as heterosexuals. And when they commit suicide because they can't deal with the rigidity of and Scriptural misunderstandings by the fundamentalist Christians... Thank God they can live as who they are now (at least more so than before)!

if you can state and validate it as fact that you know everything that has ever happened to every homosexual from the beginning of creation
Can you?

Have you watched their eyes when a buff guy walks past? Have you asked them what they think about during sex with a woman?

Do you often go around asking this of people? Wouldn't you think that a bit... how shall I say it... strange to ask of ANYONE (except maybe your spouse)?


I've known a few. During the mid-'60s and earlier, they did their best to pass as heterosexuals. And when they commit suicide because they can't deal with the rigidity of and Scriptural misunderstandings by the fundamentalist Christians... Thank God they can live as who they are now!

They committed suicide, but now they can live as they want??

Again, all I know are your stories. I know people who have ended up changing. And you could say that those are just stories also, but what do you say to the thousands of testimonies of those who were once homosexuals - are you calling them all liars?

And what about scripture - it is clear about the change. Or do you think that scripture errs there also?

Do you often go around asking this of people? Wouldn't you think that a bit... how shall I say it... strange to ask of ANYONE?
Rhetorical question, Tom, rhetorical question. Of course, counselors can ask that question.

They committed suicide, but now they can live as they want??
Homosexuals, those then and those now. And they still commit suicide...

are you calling them all liars?
I'm calling them scared.

Or do you think that scriptures errs there also?
No, fundamentalist Christians do in their interpretation of it.

Rhetorical question, Tom, rhetorical question. Of course, counselors can ask that question.

Then we can ignore that since it is only speculation on your part. And I don't go around speculating on what other people think about when having sex. So let's move on.



Homosexuals, those then and those now. And they still commit suicide...

So do all sorts of people, all colours, all languages, heterosexual, pedophiles, hypersexuals, alcoholics, drug addicts, etc. etc. for many and varied reasons. I spoke to one homosexual who professed to be a Christian and he refused to change because he "embraced" and "loved" his homosexuality. In cases like that, change is, of course, not possible because he is refusing to change. There is a point where God give us over to our passions:

Rom 1:24-32
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
NKJV


No, fundamentalist Christians do in their interpretation of it.

No interpretation - it is as explicit as any verse in scripture is.

Then we can ignore that since it is only speculation on your part. And I don't go around speculating on what other people think about when having sex. So let's move on.
I'm a counselor.

it is as explicit as any verse in scripture is.
... when it has a fundamentalist, literalist spin on it.

I'm a counselor.

Yep, but stories are stories and all we know is what you tell us. We have no way of validating it because you are not about to give names and contact information. But even if you did, a few cases does not mean that there are never any cured homosexuals, especially when those have changed are often quite willing to tell about it, and scripture tells us specifically that it can and does happen.


... when it has a fundamentalist, literalist spin on it.

Read what it says - It is hard to imagine how it could be any clearer.

Yep, but stories are stories and all we know is what you tell us.
I am, master's in counseling psychology. I don't lie. I'll PM or email you with evidence if you wish.

scripture tells us specifically that it can and does happen.
That's not what that means, if you are referring to the verse you quoted earlier.

It is hard to imagine how it could be any clearer.
... that seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand. Mark 4:12.

I am, master's in counseling psychology. I don't lie. I'll PM or email you with evidence if you wish.

I did not say that you lie, but you should know that saying that you have a master's degree is no proof that a person will not lie. I have seen people claim to have degrees - and don't, and I have seen people with degrees who lie. So that is no proof.

Also, without the ability to validate the evidence (which presumably would also be in writing), we have no way of knowing the details around the situation or validating the story.

Next, you outright reject testimonies of men and women who have been changed - if you don't feel such testimonies are credible then why should we assume yours are any more credible.

Lastly, even if all the testimonies that you provide are true and credible, it still does not alter the testimonies that I know about and does not alter the word of God; and because oen or more people do not change (for whatever reasons), that does not mean that others don't.

Keep in mind that if these people have a counselor who believes that it is impossible to change, then if they accept the advise of the counselor and consider her opinion credible, they will be convinced that they cannot change. The problem may not be with the efficacy of God's promise, or with the person, but they may be convinced that there is no way out.


That's not what that means, if you are referring to the verse you quoted earlier.

You keep saying that, but when I can read the words, see what the experts say, and read the context, your opinion is not convincing.

if they accept the advise of the counselor
Good counselors don't give advice. It's not the counselor's opinion that matters.

You keep saying that, but when I can read the words, see what the experts say, and read the context, your opinion is not convincing.
Others more educated than I have discussed this very thing with you, but to no avail.

When two sides are speaking entirely different languages, based on entirely different worldviews, it's really hard to have any kind of dialogue. I hereby unscribe to this thread.

Good counselors don't give advice. It's not the counselor's opinion that matters.

Just the same, if the person is unaware of the freedom that they can receive through Christ, then they may feel trapped. If a doctor treats a hurting patient, then to fail to provide necessary treatment or give advise on how to deal with an injury, they are not helping the person deal with that. If a person is suffering the consequences of sin, they need counseling regarding the way to deal with that, and yes, I would say that they need advice, sound advice.

I do agree that good advice would not necessarily be the counselor's opinion, but if Christian counselor is counseling a Christian, then I would suggest that good advice is readily found in scripture.


Others more educated than I have discussed this very thing with you, but to no avail.

Others, educated or not may have opinions, but when the Greek language experts and the best lexicons available disagree with them, then their opinions are indeed to no avail, despite what education a person may claim to have.


When two sides are speaking entirely different languages, based on entirely different worldviews, it's really hard to have any kind of dialogue. I hereby unscribe to this thread.

If we are both Christians, then our worldviews should be able to be harmonized through submission to God's word.

No, the OP did say "homosexual".
Nah, Levitucus 18:22 said it's "Thou shalt not lie mankind as with womankind." This is an ACT and not Homosexuals per se.


But will not remain a homosexual after being saved.
Why not? I believe being Homosexuals are by nature; not disease nor "self-made" nor a way of thinking. BEING homosexual is not a sin. Homosexual ACTS are. Icannot find anything in the bible stating that a certain State of Being is a sin. In th first place, God created nature.


Jesus was explicit in Matthew 5 that sin is not the mere act, but also the inclination / desire that one has prior to doing the act (or even if one does not do the act).
Desiring is still an act. So, this will fall under "Not to do" commandment.

Nah, Levitucus 18:22 said it's "Thou shalt not lie mankind as with womankind." This is an ACT and not Homosexuals per se.

You redefine the word "homosexual" because I posted a dictionary definition earlier which defines a homosexual as one who does the act. Also, taking one verse out of context of the rest of scripture and saying that scripture does not speak about homosexuals is not correct:

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV


Why not? I believe being Homosexuals are by nature; not disease nor "self-made" nor a way of thinking. BEING homosexual is not a sin. Homosexual ACTS are. Icannot find anything in the bible stating that a certain State of Being is a sin. In th first place, God created nature.

See above, and let's look at your next comment...


Desiring is still an act. So, this will fall under "Not to do" commandment.

So if a person has a homosexual orientation, and since scripture is clear that the homosexual act is a sin, then by your own logic, homosexuality is a sin.

Though your claim that a desire is an act is flawed:

------------------------------------------------------------
De·sire (dĭ-zīr') Pronunciation Key
Tr.v. de·sired, de·sir·ing, de·sires

1. To wish or long for; want.
2. To express a wish for; request.

n.

1. A wish or longing.
2. A request or petition.
3. The object of longing: My greatest desire is to go back home.
4. Sexual appetite; passion.


[Middle English desiren, from Old French desirer, from Latin dēsīderāre : dē-, de- + sīdus, sīder-, star.]
De·sir'er n.

Synonyms: These verbs mean to have a strong longing for: desire peace; coveted the new convertible; craving fame and fortune; wanted a drink of water; got all she wished.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source

------------------------------------------------------------

So if a person has a homosexual orientation, and since scripture is clear that the homosexual act is a sin, then by your own logic, homosexuality is a sin.
I think you're twisting my words. I am very clear with what I said "Homosexual per se (by nature)" is not sin. Homosexuality is a practice and therefore a sin. Homosexual per se is not a sin.

Just I have said, I do not believe that Homosexual is acquired mere orientation but nature. One cannot be adulterer without, aldultering; one cannot be drunkard withut, drinking. One is not born adulterer nor drunkard.

But can one be homosexual without Homosexual Acts? Are homosexuals born or made? I think this is a vital question needs answering. Otherwise, we'll just go in circles.

I have talked to some homosexuals before, they say it's innate. One pointed out "Who wants to be ridiculed? If I am to choose, I would rather be a man or a woman".

With regards to desire, please read Revelation 20:12 and please tell me if man is to be judged according also to their desire.

I think you're twisting my words. I am very clear with what I said "Homosexual per se (by nature)" is not sin. Homosexuality is a practice and therefore a sin. Homosexual per se is not a sin.


Just I have said, I do not believe that Homosexual is acquired mere orientation but nature.

Show me this distinction in scripture.


One cannot be adulterer without, aldultering; one cannot be drunkard withut, drinking.

Jesus disagrees. That was the point of his sermon in Matthew 5. One does not sin merely by committing the act.


One is not born adulterer nor drunkard.

One is not born a homosexual either Paul says in His first letter to the Corinthians that some of them had been homosexuals and were changed when they were saved.


With regards to desire, please read Revelation 20:12 and please tell me if man is to be judged according also to their desire.

One cannot take a single verse out of context and ignore what else scripture says.

Matt 5:21-23
21 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder,' and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment. 22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment.
NKJV

Matt 5:27-30
27 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.
NKJV

Jesus is God. Are you saying that He erred?

I honestly cannot understand how you define an ACT. Is it not getting angry without reason an act? Is it not looking with a lustful eyes an act as well?

I Corinthians 6 refers to effiminate, a man who dresses like women; not the one who have feelings to man rather a woman. Please check the Greek translation.

Homosexuals have definitely power over their acts and clothings, but do they have power to change their preference for man over woman?

Criado,
There are good acts and evil acts.
Generally speaking they are physical, but I believe that there are also mental acts done with thought.
Yes there are those former homosexuals who have not only stopped homo acts, but have learned to love a woman.
Some of those can be found in posts on the internet.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

I honestly cannot understand how you define an ACT. Is it not getting angry without reason an act? Is it not looking with a lustful eyes an act as well?

It is not my definition - it is how it is defined in English and in scripture. An act is something done physically with your body.

What are "lustful eyes"? Do you eyes change in some way? A man can look at a girl with the same eyes, and the same light entering his eyes and not sin. But when the orientation of his thoughts change to be one of lust, then the sin of adultery has occurred.

That act of adultery differs. It is taking the girl physically and committing an a sinful physical act with her. But whether it is a mental orientation or a phsyical act, it is the same sin according to Jesus.

Criado,
Generally speaking they are physical, but I believe that there are also mental acts done with thought.

This is actually my point Fred but it seems Tj3 believe that there's no such thing as mental acts.


It is not my definition - it is how it is defined in English and in scripture. An act is something done physically with your body.

I disagree. As far as English and scripture is concern, there is such thing as mental acts.


What are "lustful eyes"? Do you eyes change in some way? A man can look at a girl with the same eyes, and the same light entering his eyes and not sin. But when the orientation of his thoughts change to be one of lust, then the sin of adultery has occurred.
This is exactly the mental acts.


Yes there are those former homosexuals who have not only stopped homo acts, but have learned to love a woman.
Some of those can be found in posts on the internet.
Sorry, Fred, I do not wish to dismiss this but I honestly don't know these people. I even don't even know if they have vested interest in posting this over the internet. But, one this is I know, due to my inquisitive of their being, all of the person I talked to before (old classmates, officemates , friends and friends of friends) who are gay told me that their affection over man than women is not something they just made; it is uncontrollable feeling. They even tell me it's from childhood. Thus, I believe that it is their nature. What is of nature, we cannot control. (Romans 9:20-21)

Criado,
Never-the-less that are those who claim to have made the change, difficult as it is.
Fred

This is actually my point Fred but it seems Tj3 believe that there's no such thing as mental acts.

It is a moot point one way or the other. If it is an acts, then it would still be a sin. If it is not, Jesus said that it was a sin even if the physical act did not take place. Even if you prefer to use a definition other than the dictionary definition, nothing changes.

That's right! Am I claiming differently?

Sin is based on Act and not on Nature.

That's right! Am I claiming differently?

Sin is based on Act and not on Nature.

That is only but your redefinition of the word "Act". You effectively deny any differentiation between thought and act.

You argument about nature falls apart on two points:

1) Your definition of homosexual (as you definition of acts) is not the same as the dictionary definition:

------------------------------------
Homosexual

Adjective
1. sexually attracted to members of your own sex [ant: bisexual, heterosexual]

Noun
1. someone who practices homosexuality; having a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Cite This Source
------------------------------------

2) You have failed to show that a homosexual is a homosexual by nature. Scripture is clear that homosexuals can change.

What I understand as homosexual is what is "having a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex"

.. and this is what I am saying is natural to them... based on my conversation with them

Kindly clear, what can be changed to homosexual that you are claiming that can be changed based on the scripture.

Criado,
I am fimrly convinced that and act can be either physical or mental or both.
I frequently pray by mind and not spoke word.
And I'm convinced that God hears my prayers as such
Peace and kindness.
Fred

What I understand as homosexual is what is "having a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex"

.. and this is what I am saying is natural to them... based on my conversation with them

Unfortunately, this understanding which you say is based upon anecdotal evidence, is not supported by science of the Bible.


Kindly clear, what can be changed to homosexual that you are claiming that can be changed based on the scripture.

I am not sure what you are asking, but people can choose to be homosexual:

Rom 1:18-32
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man--and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. 24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
NKJV

And can change from homosexuals to heterosexuals:

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV

As Fred pointed out, and I can attest to, this is not just words in the Bible, but there are organizations which have shown considerable success in witnessing to homosexuals who have changed and I have met men who were once homosexuals changed by the power of God.

Unfortunately, this understanding which you say is based upon anecdotal evidence, is not supported by science of the Bible.
I beg to disaree. Nature teaches. (I Cor 11:14) and one of the things I learned that these person cannot change what they are. And what cannot be change is of nature, created by God. (Romans 9:20-21).


I am not sure what you are asking, but people can choose to be homosexual:
I agree. But this is not the one I am referring to (and maybe this is the cause of our misunderstanding).

1) Those who are like prostitutes for natural homosexuals. I honestly don't know how to call them. I don't know if you got what I means.

2) They are also those mentioned in Romans 1:26-27. This persons are using women before then shifts to man.

These of course have choice unlike the naturally born ones. But I still believe that there are those based on what the nature shows.

I beg to disaree. Nature teaches. (I Cor 11:14) and one of the things I learned that these person cannot change what they are.

First, this verse has nothing to do with the topic. It is speaking about hair length:

1 Cor 11:14-15
14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?
NKJV


And what cannot be change is of nature, created by God. (Romans 9:20-21).

Circular reasoning. You assume that it is the nature that they are born with, thus you conclude that it cannot be changed, and thus your proof that it is their nature.

The reality is that scripture attests to homosexuals changing to heterosexcual and both Fred and I have attested to modern cases. Based upon your syllogism, if it can be changed, it is not their nature.


I agree. But this is not the one I am referring to (and maybe this is the cause of our misunderstanding).

1) Those who are like prostitutes for natural homosexuals. I honestly don't know how to call them. I don't know if you got what I means.

2) They are also those mentioned in Romans 1:26-27. This persons are using women before then shifts to man.

These of course have choice unlike the naturally born ones. But I still believe that there are those based on what the nature shows.

Homosexuality is exhibited in many ways, but whether you believe that homosexuality can be something that a person can be born with does not make it fact, and does not alter what the evidence is (both scientific and scriptural).

First, this verse has nothing to do with the topic. It is speaking about hair length:

1 Cor 11:14-15
14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?
NKJV
This is to show that nature really teaches things.


Based upon your syllogism, if it can be changed, it is not their nature.
Yes;


Homosexuality is exhibited in many ways, but whether you believe that homosexuality can be something that a person can be born with does not make it fact, and does not alter what the evidence is (both scientific and scriptural).
Scientific? Please research about the comparison of brain structure of homosexuals and heterosexuals. You should also consider "studying them" (I hate using this word to them but I can't think of any term.. sorry.. ) by talking to them.
Scriptural? I already laid my basis.

This is to show that nature really teaches things.

No one has disagreed. What is the point with respect to the topic?


Yes

And since we have shown that they can be changed, homosexuals are not homosexuals by nature.


Scientific? Please research about the comparison of brain structure of homosexuals and heterosexuals. You should also consider "studying them" (I hate using this word to them but I can't think of any term.. sorry.. ) by talking to them.
Scriptural? I already laid my basis.

I have done both, and I related the results.

And since we have shown that they can be changed, homosexuals are not homosexuals by nature.
Wrong. If they have changed, they are not BORN homosexual.


I have done both, and I related the results.
So am I.

Wrong. If they have changed, they are not BORN homosexual.

That is what I said. So homosexuals are not homosexuals by nature.

That is what I said. So homosexuals are not homosexuals by nature.
I think you missed my post #126.

I think I you missed my post #126.

I saw it.

Then is it clear now?

Then is it clear now?

I see no difference to what I said before. My comments were in response to that post.

I just point out in my post#126 the Homosexual that can be changed to hetero.

I just point out in my post#126 the Homosexual that can be changed to hetero.

So why are you arguing with me over homosexuals being "natural"

I beg to disaree. Nature teaches. (I Cor 11:14) and one of the things I learned that these person cannot change what they are.
I agree. If homosexuals "change" and act like heterosexuals, get married to someone of the opposite sex, even have children, they are living a lie. They are still homosexuals to the core. I could "change" into a homosexual and move to the Bay Area and become a partner to my homosexual friend Laurie, but I am living a lie. I am still a heterosexual to the core.

I agree. If homosexuals "change" and act like heterosexuals, get married to someone of the opposite sex, even have children, they are living a lie.

Who are you to insult so many men and women who have had the courage to come to Christ and submit their choice of orientation to Him.

Criado,
Again I agree with Tj3 .
There ARE former homosexuals who HAVE changed.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Who are you to insult so many men and women who have had the courage to come to Christ and submit their choice of orientation to Him.
The truth will eventually come out. If anything, such a person is bisexual. Human sexuality is very fluid.

How many have "changed"?

The truth will eventually come out. If anything, such a person is bisexual. Human sexuality is very fluid.

How many have "changed"?

Who knows? Over the centuries it is thousands, tens of thousands or millions.

No one deserves to be called a liar because they wish to be obedient to God and allow Him to change them to what He created them to be.

Who knows? Over the centuries it is thousands, tens of thousands or millions.
Give me a break! There is a HUGE payoff if a bisexual or even homosexual claims to have been "changed." Suddenly he gets accepted into a church body of fundamentalist/evangelical Christians, is high-fived left and right, is considered saved, and is told he will enter heaven someday.

Give me a break! There is a HUGE payoff if a bisexual or even homosexual claims to have been "changed."

And without even knowing these people, you are prepared to label them all as liars.

And without even knowing these people, you are prepared to label them all as liars.
Where are the scientific studies, or are they all self-report?

Where are the scientific studies, or are they all self-report?

The fact is that there are no scientific studies which say that homosexual are homosexual at birth. I do not plan to look them up right now, but in reality the onus would be on you in any case to prove that that homosexuals are born that way, and this to try to validate your vcliam that all ex-homosexuals are, as you suggest - liars.

But I note that you are now changing the subject.

The fact is that there are no scientific studies which say that homosexual are homosexual at birth. I do not plan to look them up right now, but in reality the onus would be on you in any case to prove that that homosexuals are born that way, and this to try to validate your vcliam that all ex-homosexuals are, as you suggest - liars.

But I note that you are now changing the subject.
Nice twist!

Many published reports of "successful" conversion therapies are unreliable in that the participants' initial sexual orientation was never adequately assessed. Many bisexuals have been mislabeled as homosexuals with the consequence that the "successes" reported for the conversions actually have occurred among bisexuals who were highly motivated to adopt a heterosexual behavior pattern.

Studies on "reparative therapy" are simply compilations of self-reports from psychoanalysts who are attempting to change their patients' sexual orientation (and who are highly motivated to report "success").

Many published reports of "successful" conversion therapies are unreliable in that the participants' initial sexual orientation was never adequately assessed. Many bisexuals have been mislabeled as homosexuals with the consequence that the "successes" reported for the conversions actually have occurred among bisexuals who were highly motivated to adopt a heterosexual behavior pattern.

Studies on "reparative therapy" are simply compilations of self-reports from psychoanalysts who are attempting to change their patients' sexual orientation (and who are highly motivated to report "success").

So what we are left with is the personal testimonies of those who once were homosexuals and the testimonies of God's word that in fact homosexuality is a sin and that the power of God can change homosexuals.

So what we are left with is the personal testimonies of those who once were homosexuals
Testimonies = self-reports


the testimonies of God's word that in fact homosexuality is a sin and that the power of God can change homosexuals.
That's not what those Bible passages are talking about.

Testimonies = self-reports


And you say that the ones that agree with you are from honest homosexuals and those that disagree with you are from liars.

Sound like discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation to me, if you think that all former homosexuals are liars.


That's not what those Bible passages are talking about.

So you claim. The experts in Koine Greek disagree.

Sound like discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation to me, if you think that all former homosexuals are liars.
Your choice of words, not mine.

So you claim. The experts in Koine Greek disagree.
Akoue and I have both gone 'round and 'round the block on this one.

Jesus said nothing on the subject. There is not a single word in the Gospels about any type of same-sex sexual activity. Jesus did not hesitate to comment on all the evils of his day. He said nothing about homosexuality. Jesus' silence on this particular subject is worthy of note.

There is no word in the original language of either the Old or New Testament that can be properly translated "homosexual" or "homosexuality". If this word is used in your translation, the translators themselves have inserted it. It is not in the original Hebrew or Greek texts. Again, there is no reference in the Bible to homosexual orientation. One can only conclude that homosexual orientation was not a concern to Jesus, to the writers of the Bible materials, or to the societies in which they lived. Whenever same-sex references are made in the Bible, they are always references to some particular heterosexual act in the context of temple rituals that involve rape or prostitution.

Your choice of words, not mine.

Not really. In post 137, you made the charge, when you said, and I quote:

"If homosexuals "change" and act like heterosexuals, get married to someone of the opposite sex, even have children, they are living a lie."


Jesus said nothing on the subject. There is not a single word in the Gospels about any type of same-sex sexual activity. Jesus did not hesitate to comment on all the evils of his day. He said nothing about homosexuality. Jesus' silence on this particular subject is worthy of note.

He did not need to. The Jews of His day would know the OT and would know that homosexuality is a sin.


There is no word in the original language of either the Old or New Testament that can be properly translated "homosexual" or "homosexuality".

Your claim. Koine Greek experts disagree.

Not really. In post 137, you made the charge, when you said, and I quote:

"If homosexuals "change" and act like heterosexuals, get married to someone of the opposite sex, even have children, they are living a lie."
Um, my point was (since you apparently missed it) that there is no such thing as a "changed" homosexual. Bisexual, maybe, possibly. Homosexual, no.

He did not need to. The Jews of His day would know the OT and would know that homosexuality is a sin.
I repeat: Jesus did not hesitate to comment on all the evils of his day. He said nothing about homosexuality.

Your claim. Koine Greek experts disagree.
Name one.

Um, my point was (since you apparently missed it) that there is no such thing as a "changed" homosexual. Bisexual, maybe, possibly. Homosexual, no.

That is what I am saying is insulting. Who are you to suggest that these thousands of people are all liars simply because they have chosen to follow Christ's lead rather than believe you.


I repeat: Jesus did not hesitate to comment on all the evils of his day. He said nothing about homosexuality.

Every reference in scripture is Jesus' word - The Bible is the word of God, and Jesus is the word made flesh.

Or are you now going to tell me that you don't believe that Jesus is God?

That is what I am saying is insulting. Who are you to suggest that these thousands of people are all liars simply because they have chosen to follow Christ's lead rather than believe you.
Wait, wait, wait! Name a Koine expert first. That's the request currently on the table.

Every reference in scripture is Jesus word - The Bible is the word of God, and Jesus is the word made flesh. Or are you now going to tell me that you don't believe that Jesus is God?
What an outré segue!

Wait, wait, wait! Name a Koine expert first. That's the request currently on the table.

I could name several. I used BGAD (considered the foremost Lexicon used by Greek Scholars and translators) when we were last discussing this.

When someone asks what the Bible says about homosexuality, my most honest answer is: "Nothing!" So how to deal with today's homosexuals? God is love and we are supposed to love God with all that is in us and our (gay/lesbian/bisexual/ heterosexual/transgender) neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 22:37-40).

I could name several.
Then please do so.

When someone asks what the Bible says about homosexuality, my most honest answer is: "Nothing!"

Then clearly you have not studied what scripture says. It has plenty to say.


So how to deal with today's homosexuals? God is love and we are supposed to love God with all that is in us and our (gay/lesbian/bisexual/ heterosexual/transgender) neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 22:37-40).

So why do you call them all liars when they receive Christ as Saviour and the Holy Spirit frees them from homosexuality?

Then please do so.

I named the foremost Lexicon put out by 4 of the foremost scholars. I see no value in providing a long list. After all, if they said something that would lead to scripture saying that homosexuals can change, I am led to wonder if you'd call them all liars also.

Then clearly you have not studied what scripture says. It has plenty to say.
Your misinterpretation only.

So why do you call them all liars
Please track correctly when you read what I write.

when they receive Christ as Saviour and the Holy Spirit frees them from homosexuality?
That has never happened.

I named the foremost Lexicon put out by 4 of the foremost scholars. I see no value in providing a long list. Afterall, if they said something that would lead to scripture saying that homosexuals can change, I am led to wonder if you'd call them all liars also.
You said you could name several Koine experts. I asked for their names, not "a long list."

They won't say homosexuals can change.

Your misinterpretation only.

Sigh! I am going by what scripture says, taking iot at face value, using the word meanings provided by the Koine Greek experts.

You say that your personal interpretation trumps that. That is why we keep going around in circles. When one person makes themselves a standard unto themselves, not only claiming that their interpretation alone is right, but saying that any homosexual whose personal testimony disagrees is a liar, then there is abolsutely no hope of coming to terms.

To be honest, I'd never send my worst enemy to such a counselor if they needed help to deal with homosexuality. What hope would they have?


when they receive Christ as Saviour and the Holy Spirit frees them from homosexuality?
That has never happened.

It most certainly has. I know from testimonies that I have heard in person, Fred has testified to the same, and we have the testimony in scripture. But you tell us that they are all liars.

You said you could name several Koine experts. I asked for their names, not "a long list."

They won't say homosexuals can change.

They disagree with you translation of Greek words (i.e. 1 Cor)
r
BTW, how do you know what they believe on this [point? Have you spoken to them personally? Are you saying that if they dare to hold an opinion that disagrees with you, they are liars also?

Abortion should remain legal.

That is not the topic of this thread.

Sigh! I am going by what scripture says, taking iot at face value, using the word meanings provided by the Koine Greek experts.
No, you aren't. Where are the names of several Koine experts you said you can name?


that is why we keep going around in circles. When one person makes themselves a standard unto themselves, not only claiming that their interpretation alone is right
Yes, it gets harder and harder to discuss this when you do that, doesn't it.

To be honest, I'd never send my worst enemy to such a counselor if they needed help to deal with homosexuality. What hope would they have?
They'd learn how to accept their homosexuality and how to deal with the people who reject them.

It most certainly has. I know from testimonies that I have heard in person, Fred has testified to the same, and we have the testimony in scripture. But you tell us that they are all liars.
Name someone. I want to telephone that person. In fact, give me several names.

Wondergirl,
I believe that it is very wrong to say that the many people who have changed from homosexuality are all liars.
Pleas refrain for that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Wondergirl,
I believe that it is very wrong to say that the many people who have changed from homosexuality are all liars.
Pleas refrain for that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Tom says they are liars. I said it is self-report with no scientific proof.

I believe it is also wrong to say that homosexuals need to change their sexual preference. That's like telling someone that it's wrong for them to like chocolate ice cream just because you prefer vanilla ice cream.

I don't want to encourage homosexuals to change who they are. If they are happy with same sex relations then who am I to tell them it's wrong? They're not hurting anyone. I encourage homosexuals to embrace who they are.
Reminds me of all the left-handers who got smacked repeatedly by ruler-wielding teachers years ago when those teachers believed only righthandedness was correct (and lefthandedness was evil).

Tom says they are liars. I said it is self-report with no scientific proof.

WG,

Kindly be honest. I never said that. Here is the quote FROM YOU from post #137:

"If homosexuals "change" and act like heterosexuals, get married to someone of the opposite sex, even have children, they are living a lie. They are still homosexuals to the core. I could "change" into a homosexual and move to the Bay Area and become a partner to my homosexual friend Laurie, but I am living a lie."

Now if you wish to withdraw your claim that saved homosexuals are liars, then please do so.

No, you aren't. Where are the names of several Koine experts you said you can name?

I am and have name a few already, but note - you can ignore what I posted and carry on. If you don't care and if you are not willing to look at the evidence (i.e. calling saved homosexuals liars), then where is the value in giving you yet more names? You already told me that the experts would never agree that homosexuals can change, and you don't even know them.


They'd learn how to accept their homosexuality and how to deal with the people who reject them.

And what if they want to obey scripture and become the person that they were created to be?: You'd tell them that they are trapped?


Name someone. I want to telephone that person. In fact, give me several names.

I would suggest calling these people:

Exodus International - Thinking of Leaving Homosexuality? (http://exodus.to/help/?option=com_content&task=view&id=327&Itemid=147)

Living Waters Canada :: Resources (http://www.livingwaterscanada.org/resources.html)

They could likely put you in touch with several. But if you start calling them all liars, I suspect that they will likely not want to carry on the discussion with you for long. I would suggest that you be respectful and listen to what they have to say.

WG,

Kindly be honest. I never said that you did. Here is the quote from post #137:

"If homosexuals "change" and act like heterosexuals, get married to someone of the opposite sex, even have children, they are living a lie. They are still homosexuals to the core. I could "change" into a homosexual and move to the Bay Area and become a partner to my homosexual friend Laurie, but I am living a lie."

Now if you wish to withdraw your claim that saved homosexuals are liars, then please do so.
Ha! You actually took the time and effort to go back and look. Wow!

Ha! You actually took the time and effort to go back and look. Wow!

That is the 2nd or third time that I quoted you. Now are you going to admit that you said that they are all liars?

And are you going to have the integrity to apologize for claiming that I said it?

WG,

Kindly be honest. I never said that. Here is the quote FROM YOU from post #137:

"If homosexuals "change" and act like heterosexuals, get married to someone of the opposite sex, even have children, they are living a lie. They are still homosexuals to the core. I could "change" into a homosexual and move to the Bay Area and become a partner to my homosexual friend Laurie, but I am living a lie."

Now if you wish to withdraw your claim that saved homosexuals are liars, then please do so.
I will not withdraw. They are still homosexual.

I will not withdraw. They are still homosexual.

You lied about what you claimed that I said. You do not plan to withdraw or apologize for that false comment?

I really doubt that you will ever meet someone who have received Christ as a homosexual and changed. Because if they are wise, they will stay away from you to avoid being hurt by your nasty remarks that they are liars because they offend what you want to believe about them.

It reminds me of the attitudes of some white Supremacists with respect to non-whites. They have ideas in their head about them and no matter what the facts say to the contrary, they will deny. I find such attitudes quite offensive.

The reference is correct, and despite the other person’s response, it is clear God does not approve of homosexuality. If it were 'natural' as so many claim it to be, it would not contradict one of God's other directives which was to go forth and multiply. Obviously to men or two women cannot conceive and multiply. That aside, God hates it just as he does lust, or greed, or hate, or gluttony, or any other form of sin. Thus, unless you are perfect, as Jesus was, it is no stranger for a homosexual to desire a relationship with God as it is any other sinner. I am certain my Church was filled this week with folks that don't really deserve God's love or forgiveness. Fortunate for us, God hates the sin, but loves the sinner. He is holy, and therefore cannot be associated with sin. However he loves us, and even while we were sinners, Christ died for us.

Please don't misunderstand me; I am not condoning the behavior. And where most homosexuals trip on this is that they cannot (or will not) differentiate between sinning as an occasional disobedience to God versus a lifestyle. Often homosexuals will embrace a gay lifestyle, and expect God to understand because it is the "way they are wired".

Though I feel for them, this is a poor excuse. Speaking as a heterosexual man, it is "natural" for me to want to have sex with lots of women I find attractive. However, I am married, and therefore have to control my "natural" desires as they would offend God and the covenant relationship I have with my wife. Likewise, the mass murderer could probably make s a case for how he or she was "born that way". However we do not excuse their behavior on that basis.

The truth is we all have selfish desires that offend God, and all of us have to fight against our natural inclinations to lie, cheat, drink, use drugs, cheat on a spouse... our taxes... and so on. God loves homosexuals, God does not approve of their lifestyle, nor will He excuse it, anymore than He will excuse me for cheating on my wife, or even looking at another woman lustfully. That may sound harsh, but don’t confuse harsh for fair. Consider God has given us every provision to overcome our natural desires (what ever they may be) by looking to Him as our strength.

And to the other responder... quit hiding behind the hater tag. It's unproductive bordering on silly to simply call someone speaking an honest and true word a hater just because it does not align with your perspective. After all, if you are preaching tolerance, you must also be tolerant of others views as well. Anything less makes you a hypocrite.

You lied about what you claimed that I said. You do not plan to withdraw or apologize for that false comment?

I really doubt that you will ever meet someone who have received Christ as a homosexual and changed. Because if they are wise, they will stay away from you to avoid being hurt by your nasty remarks that they are liars because they offend what you want to believe about them.

It reminds me of the attitudes of some white Supremacists with respect to non-whites. they have ideas in their head about them and no matter what the facts say to the contrary, they will deny. I find such attitudes quite offensive.
Who are the several Koine scholars you can name for me?

northstar80,
I think that those homosexuals that want to change and do so are doing it because they want to.
Whatever reasons they may have is up to them.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Who are the several Koine scholars you can name for me?

Are we going to play this game again? What have you done with the names that I gave you?

northstar80,
I think that those homosexuals that want to change and do so are doing it because they want to.
Whatever reasons they may have is up to them.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

I think those of us who are Christians have an obligation to give as much support and prayer as we can to those homosexuals who are following Christ in their desire to change. From what I have seen, this is a difficult time, because it is so life changing and there will be many who will make it harder for them by their comments or desire for them to hold on to their old life.

Are we going to play this game again? What have you done with the names that i gave you?
The BGAD authors?

The BGAD authors?

Yep - are you ignoring them?

The BGAD authors?

FYI, if you haven't already, you should take a look at Boswell's work on this topic. You'd like it a lot.

Yep - are you ignoring them?
You didn't name them.

You didn't name them.

Ah, I guess that I thought you could look them up. Have a look a little more than half way down the page.

http://www.jesuswalk.com/revelation/refs.htm

Ah, I guess that I thought you could look them up. Have a look a little more than half way down the page.
Um, I did because you never got around to telling me.

Um, I did because you never got around to telling me.

Do you know the source of the notion that appeal to lexica can be used to settle all concpetual disagreement? It's really quite bizarre.

Um, I did because you never got around to telling me.

I told you a number of times. This resource was discussed on here before. You never asked before for the details. It is a common abbreviation, very easy to look up on internet.

Do you know the source of the notion that appeal to lexica can be used to settle all concpetual disagreement? It's really quite bizarre.
No. Please tell me.

I told you a number of times. This resource was discussed on here before. You never asked before for the details. It is a common abbreviation, very easy to look up on internet.
You had mentioned you knew of Koine experts. Several, in fact. You didn't say they were the BGAD authors.

Pssst, Tom, I be a librarian.

You had mentioned you knew of Koine experts. Several, in fact. You didn't say they were the BGAD authors.

I still did not say that were BGAD. These are some.


Pssst, Tom, I be a librarian.

Back in post 104 you were a counselor.

You change jobs fast. How is the new job going?

No. Please tell me.

Actually, it was an honest question. I have just noticed that some people think that a dictionary can settle questions such whether mental acts are really acts and the like. These are conceptual questions that require careful thought--and often a lot of study--and I am just astonished that anyone would think that a lexicon, which is nothing more than a snapshot of common usages of terms in a given period, can settle the matter.

I have done more than a few translations, and I always consult lexicons, but they settle very little. One really has to study a language and the history of its development and use, in order to make any precise decisions about meaning. This is why Boswell's work is so widely respected: He is a scholar, not a peruser of lexica. And, as you may know, Boswell has shown that "arsenokoitai" in the NT refers to male prostitution. The term is used very infrequently outside the NT, and at least a few of those refer to anal sex. In fact, we have a couple of instances where Greeks authors speak of men who engage in "arsenokoitai" with their wives. This makes it pretty clear that it doesn't refer, in any exclusive way, to homosexuality.

I still did not say that were BGAD. These are some.



back in post 104 you were a counselor.

You change jobs fast. How is the new job going?
I'm actually both. I counsel by appointment. Being a senior cataloger at a public library is my day job.

Actually, it was an honest question. I have just noticed that some people think that a dictionary can settle questions such whether mental acts are really acts and the like. These are conceptual questions that require careful thought--and often a lot of study--and I am just astonished that anyone would think that a lexicon, which is nothing more than a snapshot of common usages of terms in a given period, can settle the matter.

I have done more than a few translations, and I always consult lexicons, but they settle very little. One really has to study a language and the history of its development and use, in order to make any precise decisions about meaning. This is why Boswell's work is so widely respected: He is a scholar, not a peruser of lexica. And, as you may know, Boswell has shown that "arsenokoitai" in the NT refers to male prostitution. The term is used very infrequently outside the NT, and at least a few of those refer to anal sex. In fact, we have a couple of instances where Greeks authors speak of men who engage in "arsenokoitai" with their wives. This makes it pretty clear that it doesn't refer, in any exclusive way, to homosexuality.
I had read somewhere recently that during a certain time it was translated as masturbation. I will do an ILL Monday on Boswell.

I'm actually both. I counsel by appointment. Being a senior cataloger at a public library is my day job.
If you say so...

Odd that you were not able to find BGAD then.

If you say so...

Odd that you were not able to find BGAD then.
Huh? You had promised me authors. I had found BGAD weeks ago.

Huh? You had promised me authors. I had found BGAD weeks ago.

Then why did you ask - forget it - we will just go around in circles again.

Then why did you ask - forget it - we will just go around in circles again.
I thought you had in mind some Koine Greek buddies that you could name. Do you know the names of the BGAD authors?

Here's a citation from (password-protected) WorldCat --

A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature :
A translation and adaptation of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der übrigen urchristlichen Literatur /

William Arndt; F Wilbur Gingrich; Frederick W Danker; Walter Bauer
1979 2d ed. rev. and augmented /
English Book Book xl, 900 p. ; 26 cm.
Chicago : University of Chicago Press, ; ISBN: 0226039323 9780226039329
Get This Item
# Availability: Check the catalogs in your library. Libraries worldwide that own item: 859
# Find this in your library Search the catalog at your library
# External Resources: Link to external web site Cite This Item
Find Related
More Like This: Search for versions with same title and author | Advanced options...
Find Items About: Arndt, William, (max: 6); Gingrich, F. Wilbur (max: 1); Danker, Frederick W. (1); Bauer, Walter, (max: 54)
Title: A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature :
A translation and adaptation of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der übrigen urchristlichen Literatur /
Author(s): Arndt, William, 1880-1957.
Gingrich, F. Wilbur; 1901-1993. ; (Felix Wilbur),
Danker, Frederick W.
Bauer, Walter,; 1877-1960. ; Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testament und der übrigen urchristlichen Literatur.
Publication: Chicago : University of Chicago Press,
Edition: 2d ed. rev. and augmented / by F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker from Walter Bauer's 5th ed. 1958.
Year: 1979
Description: xl, 900 p. ; 26 cm.
Language: English
Standard No: ISBN: 0226039323; 9780226039329 LCCN: 78-14293
SUBJECT(S)
Descriptor: Greek language, Biblical -- Dictionaries -- English.
Grec biblique -- Dictionnaires anglais.
Identifier: Bible; New Testament; Greek Greek-English dictionaries.
Title Subject: Bible. N.T. -- Dictionaries -- English.
Note(s): Includes bibliographical references.
Class Descriptors: LC: PA881; Dewey: 487/.4
Responsibility: by William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich.
Vendor Info: Baker and Taylor YBP Library Services (BTCP YANK)
Document Type: Book
Entry: 19780718
Update: 20081011
Accession No: OCLC: 4135874
Database: WorldCat

I thought you had in mind some Koine Greek buddies that you could name. Do you know the names of the BGAD authors?

Ah - apparently you did not go to that link that I gave you. If you really want answers to the questions that you ask, it would be more obvious if you actually read my messages!

Ah - apparently you did not go to that link that I gave you. If you really want answers to the questions that you ask, it would be more obvious if you actually read my messages!
I have better sources.

I have better sources.

Then why do you play games by continually asking me for details that you already have?

I am sure that you have a part time job as a Bible translator also :D

Then why do you play games by continually asking me for details that you already have?
I wanted the names of your Koine buddies, but they turned out to be authors I am already familiar with. I thought you had new information (your "long list"). Silly me!

Well, time for my bedtime snack. Big week ahead -- library book delivery week for the homebound. Between cataloging non-fiction books and AV material, I do reader's advisory calls on Monday, my volunteers Virginia and Sheila pull and pack books on Tuesday, and Marilyn delivers them on Wednesday. Big week! Got to get my beauty sleep. Good night, and thanks for the fun!