Rethinking the Bible on homosexuality

Rethinking the Bible on homosexuality

There are 22383 comments on the religion.blogs.cnn.com story from Feb 10, 2011, titled Rethinking the Bible on homosexuality. In it, religion.blogs.cnn.com reports that:

We often hears that Christians have no choice but to regard homosexuality as a sin - that Scripture simply demands it.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com.

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#23 Feb 14, 2011
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
"The Rev. Robert Gagnon, a New Testament professor at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, challenged those who argued that Jesus said nothing about homosexuality.
"When Jesus insisted on monogamous marriage, he predicated it on a passage in Genesis which says that 'from the beginning God made them male and female ... In other words, the fact that God had designed two, and only two, sexes for complementary sexual pairing was Jesus' basis for monogamy.'"
Same question Pharisee, was Jesus married?

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#24 Feb 14, 2011
MiddleWay wrote:
... was Jesus married?
If the church is His bride, doesn't that make Him a bridegroom?

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#25 Feb 14, 2011
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
If the church is His bride, doesn't that make Him a bridegroom?
He didn't say that, but since there was no church at that time and marriage is only between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMEN are you suggesting polygamy AND same sex marriages?

LMAO!

Carry on, I love to start my mornings with a good laugh....

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#26 Feb 14, 2011
Women - woman

Don't want to get the moremans all excited.....
Bon

Germany

#27 Feb 14, 2011
MiddleWay wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't say that, but since there was no church at that time and marriage is only between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMEN are you suggesting polygamy AND same sex marriages?
LMAO!
Carry on, I love to start my mornings with a good laugh....
Jesus lived in a polygynist society and said nothing against it. The law he repeated about if your brother's wife was widowed you married her was part and parcel of a polygamist society. There are also apocraphal writings the indicate Jesus was married.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#28 Feb 14, 2011
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
If the church is His bride, doesn't that make Him a bridegroom?
Ha!

You avoid answering his question.

However, in the many accounts and Gospels containing reported history of the ministry of Christ Jesus, one fact is very clear:

Mary Magdalene was very close to Jesus, if not his mate. In my opinion, whether or not he was officially married to her (I do not think she was, but she could have been) is simply academic. In the words employed by scripture, their "souls were knit together" in a way that only they could comprehend.

Actual events are completely saturated with the Holy Spirit, understood to be a living presense. The ultimate significance of actual events is not comprehended by anyone, even God. Otherwise, God cannot claim to have yielded "Free Will." We call actual events "The Will of God" being played out in the realms of cosmic cause and effect. Some things that happen seem to have greater significance or force to modify the future than do others - in fact we can say this is true. The Spirit may well be intensified in certain actions such that compounding events are brought to occur. Through the movement of Grace, some individuals can impart motive force to chosen action.

But, even the smallest and insignificant of actions is a matter of volition, initiated by Christ and manifesting in creation, whether the fusing of proton and neutron or the collision of galaxies or the bite of a flea or the choice of a human.

The "knitting of two souls" as in a man and a woman is an ideal. Do we pair-bond for life like geese? Do we each and all fall inextricably in love at first sight? Some of us do. For others, the bonding begins slowly and becomes like a dance, an engagement of souls likened to the blending and ultimate integration of two constantly rearranging Rubik's cubes of differing color sets. Are all pair-bonds entirely exclusive? No. Do only pair-bonds occur between a man and a woman? Obviously not.

Do these integrations always succeed? Are others of us wrong to split up our pair-bond? What has openly been said is, "What God has brought together, let not man put asunder." What is not openly said, but is equally true is, "What God changes to make incompatible, let not man try to hold together."

This much can be said: For some, and for the sake of their offspring and others around them, it is much better that they split up their pair-bond than to try to maintain it. Likewise, it must be recognized that some pair-bonds are not either just or stereotypical. Yet, they are a righteous configuration.

The ideal is just that: something that is iconic by example, but not always attainable - or even desirable or beneficial - and it may be fleeting. That is, it may only exist for a time, having come into focus, emerging, coinciding, and then retreating out of focus, diverging.

In fact, the uncompromising demand for the ideal is often a recipe for entrenched disagreement, persistent failure and outright disaster.

Even so, the occasional demonstration of the ideal, serendipitous as such demonstration may be, is not to be criticised.

It is all the conscious thermodynamics of the Word of God.

Let them marry and bless them in their challenge to seek the ideal within each other. Allow Love to be fostered.

RK

“Ecce! Sic transit gloria mundi”

Since: Oct 10

I See New Jerusalem From Here.

#29 Feb 14, 2011
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
You have to be first married to get a divorce. Jesus reaffirmed God's intention for marriage as established in creation.
I wonder what service God used. Do you think the Trinity used the LCMS rite or the one found in TEC's Book of Common Prayer?

Since Eve was a part of Adam was sex between them a form of 'self-abuse' and isn't that forbidden in the Law of Moses?

How ever did they get around the incest issue regarding their childrenÂ’s marriages?

I am just wondering.
Think Again

Raeford, NC

#30 Feb 14, 2011
MiddleWay wrote:
<quoted text>
So was Jesus married?
Does it matter?
Listen to the Word

Kingman, AZ

#31 Feb 14, 2011
The good lady's premise is all wrong. It is the same premise which allows her to be a pastor. That false premise is that "scripture can be interpreted in a variety of ways." This disagrees with the Bible itself. It says "No prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation." What the words say are what the words mean. Only a liberal can read Paul's words about not allowing a woman to teach and exercise authority over a man because Adam was created first, then Eve, because Eve was complete deceived in the fall, and because "the law says so" and draw the conclusion that God is thereby okay women parish ministers. By the same token, only a liberal can read all the words the Bible says about homosexuality and draw the conclusion that it is either natural or not sinful. It is the liberals who make the words of the Bible say something other than what they say and they do so "by private interpretation," namely making the words means something other than what they obviously mean and have always meant.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#32 Feb 14, 2011
MiddleWay wrote:
<quoted text>
So was Jesus married?
No dahling
http://www.chicagocbm.com/clinic/wp-content/u...

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#33 Feb 14, 2011
MiddleWay wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't say that, but since there was no church at that time ...
So His Jewish disciples and the others who followed Jesus don't count as a congregation?

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#34 Feb 14, 2011
RevKen wrote:
... Mary Magdalene was very close to Jesus, if not his mate.
John, the "beloved disciple," sat even closer, but is TEC now taking it's theology from Dan Brown's books?

“Queer love is here to stay.”

Since: May 07

Los Angeles

#35 Feb 14, 2011
Listen to the Word wrote:
The good lady's premise is all wrong. It is the same premise which allows her to be a pastor. That false premise is that "scripture can be interpreted in a variety of ways." This disagrees with the Bible itself. It says "No prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation." What the words say are what the words mean. Only a liberal can read Paul's words about not allowing a woman to teach and exercise authority over a man because Adam was created first, then Eve, because Eve was complete deceived in the fall, and because "the law says so" and draw the conclusion that God is thereby okay women parish ministers. By the same token, only a liberal can read all the words the Bible says about homosexuality and draw the conclusion that it is either natural or not sinful. It is the liberals who make the words of the Bible say something other than what they say and they do so "by private interpretation," namely making the words means something other than what they obviously mean and have always meant.
Just because Saul the heretic says something, does not make it true. Even back as far as the days of King Josiah, the Book of Deuteronomy was already revising the older Levitical codes to fit the needs of the times.

Since: Feb 11

Chino, CA

#36 Feb 14, 2011
One thing...if a person was born gay, and god hates gays, why was that person born?
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#37 Feb 15, 2011
Nate Furry wrote:
One thing...if a person was born gay, and god hates gays, why was that person born?
The "God hates gays" thing is just nasty rumors put out by airhead republicans and embittled evangelical douchebags; po'thangs
.
They are afraid of us; pay no attention
.
The Gay Master Race is God's new improved model of homosapien masterpiece
.
God gave us life and filled us to overflowing with HIS Unconditional Love
.
Another improvement is God's Special Reserve Chromosome that triggers our androgynous births
.
Each and every one of us is a one-of-a-kind original; not a cheap reproduction of our old-school hetero parents
http://epistle.us/hbarticles/jesusintersexual...

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#38 Feb 15, 2011
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it matter?
Was Jesus married?

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#39 Feb 15, 2011
Rainbow Kid wrote:
LOL!

Well, a painting sure proves that!

Especially showing the Lat Supper as a TV sitcom pose, all on one side of the table for the camera and all.........

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#40 Feb 15, 2011
The Golem wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because Saul the heretic says something, does not make it true. Even back as far as the days of King Josiah, the Book of Deuteronomy was already revising the older Levitical codes to fit the needs of the times.
This is true. It is also a point of fact that is pertinent to the topic of this thread.

RK
Tony

Gray, GA

#41 Feb 15, 2011
You can just reference here if you need help. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 due to people having issues with translations. the Greek words use the terms for both male partners of a homosexual union, the giver and receiver. Greek word for the latter is malechoi, I can look up the other later but it is pretty clear.

I guess if you do not believe in the bible then you just have other problems all together. It is either right or wrong. People try too hard to get involved in translation too much or just disbelief. If you do not believe in the bible then this forum really is not for you.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#42 Feb 15, 2011
Tony wrote:
You can just reference here if you need help. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 due to people having issues with translations. the Greek words use the terms for both male partners of a homosexual union, the giver and receiver. Greek word for the latter is malechoi, I can look up the other later but it is pretty clear.
I guess if you do not believe in the bible then you just have other problems all together. It is either right or wrong. People try too hard to get involved in translation too much or just disbelief. If you do not believe in the bible then this forum really is not for you.
OK sugar; lets take a look
----------
1 Corinthians 6:9> Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
.
1 Corinthians 6:10> Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
.
1 Corinthians 6:11> And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
----------
.
No mention of homosexuals in 6:9; 6:10; or 6:11

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Music Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Empower women by standing for religious freedom 1 hr Ravenclaw 1
News Turkey post-coup crackdown also targets US Prot... Dec 6 Rockstar 6
News Franklin Graham rebuts pope on Islam: - This is... Nov 29 narako 2
News 'Sanctuary churches' vow to shield immigrants f... Nov 19 WasteWater 23
News Germans consider two Protestant bishops and a M... Nov '16 Parden Pard 1
News Why You Should Not be OK with Sin When Others Are Nov '16 Gays Run the World 4
News Cathedral Criticized for Honoring Confederate G... Oct '16 Listen to the Word 1
More from around the web