What the Law and the Bible say about Homosexuality.

[Gary K]

I'm not saying that they are unintended no matter how you want to put it.

They are a natural consequence of following the intended value that God places in the marriage relationship.

And that means God thought that out beforehand, and those consequences are a part of the reason for the laws. Nothing God does ever has unintended consequences. His plans, His word, His laws, are all preplanned to the point we humans can't even recognize all the reasons behind them. He has multiple reasons for everything He does.

It's like I said before. The fact that God told the Israelites what the results would be if they followed His commands and statutes before He gave the laws said His laws and the results of obeying them were planned out well in advance. You have argued against that position from the very beginning of this discussion. You have said, repeatedly, that God only gave the laws about sexual behavior to illustrate the relationship between Him and His people. It's just not true and the facts do not back you up.

Oh, well, we obviously will never agree on this so I'll just agree we disagree and close this discussion on my part. I see no point in continuing it.

 

[Right Divider]

And that means God thought that out beforehand, and those consequences are a part of the reason for the laws. Nothing God does ever has unintended consequences. His plans, His word, His laws, are all preplanned to the point we humans can't even recognize all the reasons behind them. He has multiple reasons for everything He does.

It's like I said before. The fact that God told the Israelites what the results would be if they followed His commands and statutes before He gave the laws said His laws and the results of obeying them were planned out well in advance. You have argued against that position from the very beginning of this discussion. You have said, repeatedly, that God only gave the laws about sexual behavior to illustrate the relationship between Him and His people. It's just not true and the facts do not back you up.

Oh, well, we obviously will never agree on this so I'll just agree we disagree and close this discussion on my part. I see no point in continuing it.

No, I never said that HE ONLY did that. I have always said that was secondary.

If a person follows God's rules regarding sex in marriage, the issue of sexually transmitted disease is moot.

And I agree with most of what you have said.

 

[Jacob]

Jacob,

You consistently on this thread have equated your singleness with "obeying God", and then point to scripture that tells you that you are obeying Paul's opinions, not God's commands. When I point this out to you you duck, dodge, weave, etc... rather than admit what the scripture actually says. Then you give a quote that omits the relevant verses in which Paul says what you quote is his own opinion and not God's commands.

So long, Jacob. When you won't have an honest dialogue with me on this subject any conversation about it is over between the two of us.

I believe that you have completely misunderstood me.

To say that I have said that being single is obeying God, it may be if God has called you to singleness, but that wouldn't be the case. So I wouldn't say that I am more righteous than you. It is other singles who have had a relationship and are not married, but I haven't. I am not married. Then when I become married I would have a relationship if I ever do.

 

[Clete]

I believe that you have completely misunderstood me.

If so, that's your fault, not his.

All anyone can do is read your posts, Jacob, not your mind. You seriously need to do some work on figuring out how to clearly write what you mean to say. Even this last post of yours was a muddy mess that I had to read two or three times to decipher what the heck you were trying to say and I'm still not sure about it. The following sentence isn't even a sentence...

"It is other singles who have had a relationship and are not married, but I haven't."

There's no verb! How do you get from the capital letter at the start to the period at the end without placing a verb somewhere inbetween? There's no way anyone could possibly understand that sentence without basically guessing as to your intent. Does this happen because you're just in too big a hurry and don't bother to read back through your posts to edit and revise them for clarity or is it because you just don't realize that you've made such errors and simply don't know how to express yourself in writing in an intelligible manner?

Regardless, if you want to have substantive discussions with people on an internet forum, you need to learn to write and you need to take the time that's required to edit and revise your comments before posting them. Believe me, we'd all much rather have to wait an extra hour or even a day to get a response from you if it meant that the response was going to be of much higher quality. Believe me, the time it takes to edit and revise is time very well spent. Imagine how much time you wouldn't have wasted arguing over points that you don't even believe and re-explaining what you do believe. Doing things right the first time is always faster than having to go back and correct things.

Clete

 

[Gary K]

I believe that you have completely misunderstood me.

To say that I have said that being single is obeying God, it may be if God has called you to singleness, but that wouldn't be the case. So I wouldn't say that I am more righteous than you. It is other singles who have had a relationship and are not married, but I haven't. I am not married. Then when I become married I would have a relationship if I ever do.

LIke Clete said, this is an incomprehensible post. To me you're still equating marriage status with righteousness and still referring to a passage of scripture where Paul says he's giving his own opinion, not commands from God.

 

[Jacob]

If so, that's your fault, not his.

All anyone can do is read your posts, Jacob, not your mind. You seriously need to do some work on figuring out how to clearly write what you mean to say. Even this last post of yours was a muddy mess that I had to read two or three times to decipher what the heck you were trying to say and I'm still not sure about it. The following sentence isn't even a sentence...

"It is other singles who have had a relationship and are not married, but I haven't."

There's no verb! How do you get from the capital letter at the start to the period at the end without placing a verb somewhere inbetween? There's no way anyone could possibly understand that sentence without basically guessing as to your intent. Does this happen because you're just in too big a hurry and don't bother to read back through your posts to edit and revise them for clarity or is it because you just don't realize that you've made such errors and simply don't know how to express yourself in writing in an intelligible manner?

Regardless, if you want to have substantive discussions with people on an internet forum, you need to learn to write and you need to take the time that's required to edit and revise your comments before posting them. Believe me, we'd all much rather have to wait an extra hour or even a day to get a response from you if it meant that the response was going to be of much higher quality. Believe me, the time it takes to edit and revise is time very well spent. Imagine how much time you wouldn't have wasted arguing over points that you don't even believe and re-explaining what you do believe. Doing things right the first time is always faster than having to go back and correct things.

Clete

It is true that I do not have my own computer to use. However, I forget what that kind of sentence is called. No verb is amazing. I am not really accepting of other people not using both a noun and a verb in a sentence. However, I have heard that other languages use just nouns for a sentence. Interesting. No exception for the English language though. It does make sense to speak this way. It is a phrase not a sentence.

Clete, I am an individual bound to the same God and Jesus Christ that you are. If I am different from you in any way, feel free to bring it up. Small things should be inconsequential. I use the same internet that you do. I should not be forced to be like you. But I do not think that you are forcing me to be like you. However, you do know what you like, and I am not keen on how to act your way. I do have an education, by the way. But I am responsible for what I post.

Thank you for raising your concerns in a respectful way. Please don't get upset about anything that I post. It is not worth it to you. But do raise concerns if you ever have one.

Back to the OP. Do you have any problem with it?

Shalom.

Jacob

 

[Jacob]

LIke Clete said, this is an incomprehensible post. To me you're still equating marriage status with righteousness and still referring to a passage of scripture where Paul says he's giving his own opinion, not commands from God.

No. Being single without a relationship is more righteous than being single with a relationship, because without a relationship you are still being honest about not being married. However, some people date rather than court or an arranged marriage, and are betrothed or engaged before they are married.

I appreciate Paul's opinion wherever it says that it is his opinion. But I refuse you not allowing his words to speak to me the way that they have. Where in what I posted did it say anything about his opinion not being worth anything? He is an apostle of Jesus Christ. He doesn't just speak. You should respect his opinion. If it is not his opinion then I hope that you accept it all the more.

However, I have learned from your post here, and I thank you for it. I do not know if you are upset at me or something, but you shouldn't be. Every interaction with another fellow believer should be an opportunity to learn. With me it is that way with you. I do not know if you would ever give me marriage tips, but if I don't plan to get married because I am serving the Lord I hope it is okay that you not be required to do so (not that you were offering). However, when you talk about marriage status I think you must mean that you are married and I am not and I don't know what difference it makes to you. Again, Jesus and Paul never married.

 

[Clete]

It is true that I do not have my own computer to use. However, I forget what that kind of sentence is called.

"Stupidity" is the word you're looking for.

No verb is amazing. I am not really accepting of other people not using both a noun and a verb in a sentence. However, I have heard that other languages use just nouns for a sentence. Interesting. No exception for the English language though. It does make sense to speak this way. It is a phrase not a sentence.

It's called talking like a blithering idiot.

Use full sentences! You're in an English speaking country on a text based internet forum that universally uses English.

IS THERE ANYTHING - ANYTHING AT ALL - THAT YOU WILL SIMPLY AGREE WITH AND ACCEPT?

What sort of moron makes an argument trying to pretend that he wrote that stupid, unintellible "sentence" on purpose and that its the reader's fault if they didn't understand it?

Clete, I am an individual bound to the same God and Jesus Christ that you are. If I am different from you in any way, feel free to bring it up. Small things should be inconsequential. I use the same internet that you do. I should not be forced to be like you. But I do not think that you are forcing me to be like you. However, you do know what you like, and I am not keen on how to act your way. I do have an education, by the way. But I am responsible for what I post.

Who said even one syllable about forcing you to do anything?

You can be as big an idiot as you want to be! Just don't whine about it when people get frustrated or angry because they're tired of trying to wade through your stupidity. Now that I know it's intentional, I, for one, am through having one ounce of patience with it.

Thank you for raising your concerns in a respectful way. Please don't get upset about anything that I post. It is not worth it to you. But do raise concerns if you ever have one.

Thanks for letting me know that you're not simply a waste of time but an intentional one.

Back to the OP. Do you have any problem with it?

Shalom.

Jacob

I wouldn't tell you if I did. There could be no possible point in doing so.

 

[Gary K]

No. Being single without a relationship is more righteous than being single with a relationship, because without a relationship you are still being honest about not being married. However, some people date rather than court or an arranged marriage, and are betrothed or engaged before they are married.

I appreciate Paul's opinion wherever it says that it is his opinion. But I refuse you not allowing his words to speak to me the way that they have. Where in what I posted did it say anything about his opinion not being worth anything? He is an apostle of Jesus Christ. He doesn't just speak. You should respect his opinion. If it is not his opinion then I hope that you accept it all the more.

However, I have learned from your post here, and I thank you for it. I do not know if you are upset at me or something, but you shouldn't be. Every interaction with another fellow believer should be an opportunity to learn. With me it is that way with you. I do not know if you would ever give me marriage tips, but if I don't plan to get married because I am serving the Lord I hope it is okay that you not be required to do so (not that you were offering). However, when you talk about marriage status I think you must mean that you are married and I am not and I don't know what difference it makes to you. Again, Jesus and Paul never married.

All I'm going to comment on is what I bolded.

Huh? Being single without a relationship is more righteous than being single with a relationship? It makes no sense, Jacob, unless you equate sex with a relationship. Having sex with, and having a relationship with, another person are two different things. Ever heard of a platonic relationship? Ever heard of being in love and practicing abstinence? Ever heard of simple friendship? All three of these types of relationships exclude sex. Being a brother, sister, father, mother, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece,or cousin to another person are types of relationships too. Even being an aquaintance to another person is having a type of relationship. It's no wonder you're so hard to understand. Your word usage is so vague it's almost impossible to understand you. Nobody but you thinks you must have sex to have a relationship with a person of the opposite sex. At least I've never met anyone who did/does. Seems to me you're obsessed with sex if that is the meaning of having a relationship in your mind. Your thinking is so muddled in this area that I wonder if you think you can't have a relationship with God because you and God can't have sex....

 

[Jacob]

"Stupidity" is the word you're looking for.



It's called talking like a blithering idiot.

Use full sentences! You're in an English speaking country on a text based internet forum that universally uses English.

IS THERE ANYTHING - ANYTHING AT ALL - THAT YOU WILL SIMPLY AGREE WITH AND ACCEPT?

What sort of moron makes an argument trying to pretend that he wrote that stupid, unintellible "sentence" on purpose and that its the reader's fault if they didn't understand it?


Who said even one syllable about forcing you to do anything?

You can be as big an idiot as you want to be! Just don't whine about it when people get frustrated or angry because they're tired of trying to wade through your stupidity. Now that I know it's intentional, I, for one, am through having one ounce of patience with it.


Thanks for letting me know that you're not simply a waste of time but an intentional one.


I wouldn't tell you if I did. There could be no possible point in doing so.

It's okay. Just that a thread should follow the OP. I suppose I contradicted myself with No exception for the English language though.

Listen, I was not picking a fight and you seem to be fighting me for no reason. Blessings to you Clete. Nothing was intentional.

 

[Jacob]

All I'm going to comment on is what I bolded.

Huh? Being single without a relationship is more righteous than being single with a relationship? It makes no sense, Jacob, unless you equate sex with a relationship. Having sex with, and having a relationship with, another person are two different things. Ever heard of a platonic relationship? Ever heard of being in love and practicing abstinence? Ever heard of simple friendship? All three of these types of relationships exclude sex. Being a brother, sister, father, mother, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece,or cousin to another person are types of relationships too. Even being an aquaintance to another person is having a type of relationship. It's no wonder you're so hard to understand. Your word usage is so vague it's almost impossible to understand you. Nobody but you thinks you must have sex to have a relationship with a person of the opposite sex. At least I've never met anyone who did/does. Seems to me you're obsessed with sex if that is the meaning of having a relationship in your mind. Your thinking is so muddled in this area that I wonder if you think you can't have a relationship with God because you and God can't have sex....

I have not even mentioned sex. A romantic relationship doesn't need to include sex, but it is like being married except you are not married.

 

[Clete]

It's okay. Just that a thread should follow the OP. I suppose I contradicted myself with No exception for the English language though.

Listen, I was not picking a fight and you seem to be fighting me for no reason. Blessings to you Clete. Nothing was intentional.

I'm not fighting you, I'm trying to help you have a vastly more productive experience on an English speaking text based web forum!



Never mind. You're hopeless. Just forget it.

 

[Jacob]

I'm not fighting you, I'm trying to help you have a vastly more productive experience on an English speaking text based web forum!



Never mind. You're hopeless. Just forget it.

I do not know why you have a negative attitude toward me. Why say something and then say to forget it? It sends a mixed message.

I have grown up with English. Maybe I type like I speak. I do not know. Maybe it is advanced. In any case it is probably not for essay writing for school. I could do better. How I speak or communicate is different from how I should maybe. But I do put thought into it. If it were something moral I would understand. But I want to understand others as we all should. God bless. Please do not let it detract from our communication with each other. A standard. I do not want to be hypocritical or legalistic with this. I am sorry for my poor use of the English language.

 

[Clete]

I do not know why you have a negative attitude toward me. Why say something and then say to forget it? It sends a mixed message.

I see. So, the fact is that you're stupid.

You've spent plenty of time trying to make me believe that, anyway. I have no idea why it took me this long to get convinced.

I've only spent the last several days explaining precisely where my attitude is coming from and why.

I have grown up with English. Maybe I type like I speak. I do not know. Maybe it is advanced. In any case it is probably not for essay writing for school. I could do better. How I speak or communicate is different from how I should maybe. But I do put thought into it. If it were something moral I would understand. But I want to understand others as we all should. God bless. Please do not let it detract from our communication with each other. A standard. I do not want to be hypocritical or legalistic with this. I am sorry for my poor use of the English language.

How about the poor use of your mind, are you sorry about that too?

The fact is, I don't believe you. You're not sorry at all! You're just being 'nice'. Trying being kind instead by not wasting everyone's time writting things that only you can understand.


Okay, Jacob, that's the end of this. DO NOT respond to this post because I WILL NOT READ IT! Go be your stubbornly stupid self and waste someone else's time.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Many people are under the mistaken assumption that Homosexuality is not against the Law........

Allow me to correct that: Many fake Christians who are wolves among the sheep are pushing an agenda and are saying that homosexual activity is not a sin. They lie with purpose.

People who are honest about Christianity know that homosexual activity is a sin.

*Note that I differentiated between "homosexuality" and "homosexual activity." That is an important distinction. We all have issues, and as sinners we must all try to not sin. Just being a homosexual is not a sin. Engaging in the act is where the sin comes in. Its like alcoholics: As long as an alcoholic stays clean and sober he does not sin, even though drunkenness is a sin.

 

[Jacob]

Allow me to correct that: Many fake Christians who are wolves among the sheep are pushing an agenda and are saying that homosexual activity is not a sin. They lie with purpose.

People who are honest about Christianity know that homosexual activity is a sin.

*Note that I differentiated between "homosexuality" and "homosexual activity." That is an important distinction. We all have issues, and as sinners we must all try to not sin. Just being a homosexual is not a sin. Engaging in the act is where the sin comes in. Its like alcoholics: As long as an alcoholic stays clean and sober he does not sin, even though drunkenness is a sin.

Being a homosexual or an alcoholic is sin and involves sin. Rather a person should be able to say that they used to be an alcoholic.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Being a homosexual or an alcoholic is sin and involves sin.........

Not if you don't commit the sin!

 

[Jacob]

Not if you don't commit the sin!

Why would you want a label of sin without sin being there? If you no longer sin you should not be called a sinner.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Why would you want a label of sin without sin being there? If you no longer sin you should not be called a sinner.

YOU are the one calling them sinners, not me.

Because of original sin, our desires are all disordered. We all desire things out of order, like too much food, getting high, thrill seeking that endangers your life, etc. We are all stuck with out-of-order desires. That is why it is hard not to sin. BUT: As long as you don't give in to your sinful desire, then you are not sinning. The alcoholic needs to not drink; the glutton needs to eat only moderate amounts; the homosexual needs to practice chastity; the liar must be an honest man, and so on and so forth. If they do, then they do not sin.

 

[TrumpTrainCA]

YOU are the one calling them sinners, not me.

Because of original sin, our desires are all disordered. We all desire things out of order, like too much food, getting high, thrill seeking that endangers your life, etc. We are all stuck with out-of-order desires. That is why it is hard not to sin. BUT: As long as you don't give in to your sinful desire, then you are not sinning. The alcoholic needs to not drink; the glutton needs to eat only moderate amounts; the homosexual needs to practice chastity; the liar must be an honest man, and so on and so forth. If they do, then they do not sin.

That is exactly correct