Homosexuality

Post Reply New Topic

Are you kidding? These are the opening lines of some of Paul's letters, where he is proclaiming himself to be an Apostle. You've got to do much better than that!.

No, I don't. If you care to rewrite the Bible, please send your alterations to whichever publisher you think will listen.

Isn't be Paul generally considered to be one of the Apostles after his conversion on the road to Damascus? If Paul was never an Apostle, who was he and why is his gospel included in the NT?

And what does this all have to do with homosexuality?

Last edited by slowmutant on 11 Aug 2008, 6:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

His epistles, not gospel. Gospel would be a biographical record of Christ.

My mistake.

Ask ed, because it apparently matters to him to deny Paul's Apostleship, or is confused about the difference between a Disciple and an Apostle. See Roman 1, 1 Corinthians 6, etc.

For Christ, He considered only heterosexual relationships valid, just as in the Law His Father gave to Moses did:

Matthew 19:4-6 ASV
[4] And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,
[5] and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh?
[6] So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Those who don't follow Christianity have their reasons for doing so, and for these individuals the concept of sin is null-and-void. There can be no sin for one who doesn't believe in the existence of sin, right? What's the use of trying to put the fear of God into someone who is atheist or non-religious?

It's just an ongoing antagonism between gays and Christians, then. It's just counterproductive if no one's willing to give an inch. Personally, I wouldn't expect to be able to convince a homosexual person into repentance. No, I'd be too concerned with causing offence. I'm definitely not the Christian Soldier type. I just don't have the wherewithall.

I'm too meek.

Not sure if this was mentioned, but the part that says we are not to eat pork is in there not far from the homosexual parts. Didn't Jesus say to ignore that part and eat all the port we wanted?

Also, was it mentioned the part where Paul said that men and women should not marry? But that if they couldn't contain themselves to just marry anyway. That is was better for a man NOT to be married to a woman.

I'm giving a whole lot more than just an inch. I'm willing to let you Christians worship God any way you want. It's bigoted Christians who won't give an inch... they insist on condemning homosexuals, even passing laws to persecute them.

No one needs your permission to worship.

No one needs your permission to be a homosexual.

Agreed.

You are only looking at part of the story let us read Matthew Matthew 8:5-13 which says

5 And when Jesus was entered into Ca-per-a-um, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him,

6 And saying, Lord my pais lieth at home sick of palsy grievously tormented.

7 And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him

8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof, but speak the word only, and my pais shall be healed.

9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go and he goeth; and to another Come, and he cometh; and to my doulos, Do this, and he doeth it.

10 When Jesus heard it, he marveled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no not in Israel.

11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his pias was healed in the selfsame hour.

Now in Luke

1 When Jesus had finished saying all this in the hearing of the people, he entered Capernaum.

2 There a centurion's servant, whom his master valued highly, was sick and about to die.

3The centurion heard of Jesus and sent some elders of the Jews to him, asking him to come and heal his servant.

4When they came to Jesus, they pleaded earnestly with him, "This man deserves to have you do this,

5 because he loves our nation and has built our synagogue."

6 So Jesus went with them.
He was not far from the house when the centurion sent friends to say to him: "Lord, don't trouble yourself, for I do not deserve to have you come under my roof.

7 That is why I did not even consider myself worthy to come to you. But say the word, and my servant will be healed.

8 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go,' and he goes; and that one, 'Come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it."

9 When Jesus heard this, he was amazed at him, and turning to the crowd following him, he said, "I tell you, I have not found such great faith even in Israel." 10Then the men who had been sent returned to the house and found the servant well.

Note: Originally servant was not used to describe the sick person the greek word Pias was.

Now I must point out that in the original writting of this part of luke several words were used to describe the Pias.

Luke says this pais was the centurion’s entimos doulos. The word doulos is a generic term for slave, and was never used in ancient Greek to describe a son/boy. Thus, Luke’s account rules out the possibility the sick person was the centurion’s son; his use of doulos makes clear this was a slave. However, Luke also takes care to indicate this was no ordinary slave. The word entimos means “honored.” This was an “honored slave” (entimos doulos) who was his master’s pais. Taken together, the three Greek words preclude the possibility the sick person was either the centurion’s son or an ordinary slave, leaving only one viable option — he was his master’s male lover.

In Matthew the centurion gives a clear emphases on his Pias when he talks about other slaves he uses the word doulos but when he refers to the one he wants healed he uses Pias. Which clearly states the importance to the entimos doulos. Let us also remember that the centurion was a proud Roman at this time the Roman's had conquered and oppressed the jews for this centurion to come and ask politely for help from Jesus shows us just how much the centurion loved his Pias.

I don't understand. Was homosexuality typical of Roman culture at that time? And if so, what effect does it have on official Christian doctrine? Whether or not ancient Rome was a homosexual culture at the time of Jesus I could care less. Also, I wonder if Jesus knew the Pias was the centurion's gay lover (if in fact this was the case). I doubt it would have made a difference one way or the other.

Homosexuality was quite common during the old day especially within Rome, however it was also common among the jews who had nothing against homosexuals. Also Jesus did know that the centurion's pais was his gay lover, the bible makes that very clear.

Perhaps it's just malicious logic that makes those question sexuality.
"Look what happened to Rome!" or "Sodom had fire fall down on it for that kind of lust"
or "He's just trying to be different." No one ever wants to accept difference in kind with a minority. I never received that instructional video on how to kick others who are congenitally different. Can I borrow yours?