Homosexuality in the New Testament

[jessejordan419]

Jesse, I know Moses is given credit, but not anywhere in the old or new testament does it say this. all references to moses writing anything was the laws of the chosen people. when Jesus spoke of Moses he was talking about believing in him not following his laws.

And when it comes to diet, I believe Mathew 15:11 says it all.

Now for homosexuality in the bible, (if we choose to go this route)

Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

and then skip to good old Leviticus 20, and we see them killing homosexual men and just about everything else.

but these are the laws of the jews, the chosen people, not Christians. if we are to choose what to keep and what to throw out, wh tells us this? the only authority to do so is Jesus.

so as a Christian, one should follow the teachings of Jesus and not mans interpretation of them. Though it is great to know many sides, and it is wonderful to learn from others, it is still all up to you and only you.

So what does Jesus teach us about homosexuals?

I have yet to find any reference to Jesus talking about homosexuals.

The Jews had the prophets to give them direct instructions from God. The high priest also recieved direction instructions from God in the presence of God's Shickinea(spelling) Glory, through the manorah, and through the 12 stone tablet that hung on the high priests chest. God gave specific instructions on which tribe or tribes that were to be eliminated, and for His specific purpose. It is not the Christian'w purpose to eliminate anyone, it is the Christian's purpose to share Christ with the world. It is not the Christian's intent to eliminate the.homosexual, but to eliminate the sin of homosexuality. Same with any other sexual sin.

The passages I gave that Jesus spoke, show that He specified marriage is between a man and a woman. He didn't have to specifically call out homosexuality, because logic is clear when marriage is between a man and woman.

The Holy Spirit, through Paul, specifically called out the consequences of nations that allow the rampant sexual sins, and though sodomy is taken from the behavior or the Sodomites, it says that Gomorrah and the other cities in the area were guilty of the same sexual sins. This included rape and fornication. The people of Sodom wanted Lot to send out the 2 visitors so that they could gang rape them in the street. Lot offered his daughters instead, but the crowd of men would not have them.


This is all New Testament evidence that Jesus is against homosexuality. Ignore at your peril, and the peril of our country.



When Jesus spoke of Moses in the passage, he does say that Moses wrote of him. Nearly every chapter in the Torah is a reference of prophesy of Jesus, even throughout Leviticus. Moses wrote of Jesus. Jesus is the Word. The.Word was with God in the beginning, and the Word was God.



2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

[jessejordan419]

A very important question to christians:

Why should the U.S government impose your beliefs to 100% of it's citizens?

We built a country that is FREE from religion at the government level, this was done in order to protect the rights of EVERYONE, not just christians, but muslims, jews, atheists, etc.


This is why I speak so hard on you guys, because when you say that you don't want gays to be married, you are imposing YOUR Beliefs on everyone else!

You don't get to dictate what others want to do!


Every day that gays don't have the right to be married it is because the majority of people against it are indeed religious and they are imposing their beliefs on the rest of this country......and just like the thread I made.....there are ZERO good reasons why gays should not marry in a secular society like ours.

This is misinterpretation of the Constitution. Is says Congress shall pass no law concerning the establishment of religion, or the free exercise therof. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and America gave gays the.oppurtunity to have the full rights of marriage in a civil union. That is equality. However, gays rejected equality, and instead want to impose their definition of marriage upon religious people.


As much as you want to believe, this is not a secular country. This is a Christian nation founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs, and the federal government is ONLY prohibited from establishing a nation religion, that is all. Any attempt to twist this is fallacy, and the only evidence you have against it is a treaty by the hapless president John Adams, and it is NOT a founding document.

[mrveggieman]

We pretty much have a defacto national religion.

[Wickabee]

This is misinterpretation of the Constitution. Is says Congress shall pass no law concerning the establishment of religion, or the free exercise therof. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and America gave gays the.oppurtunity to have the full rights of marriage in a civil union. That is equality. However, gays rejected equality, and instead want to impose their definition of marriage upon religious people.


As much as you want to believe, this is not a secular country. This is a Christian nation founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs, and the federal government is ONLY prohibited from establishing a nation religion, that is all. Any attempt to twist this is fallacy, and the only evidence you have against it is a treaty by the hapless president John Adams, and it is NOT a founding document.

Serious questio here. Is it right to impose religious beliefs as law when no national religion can be established? Or does it make more sense to just follow God's law yourself, regardless of secular law?

[Rockman]

This is misinterpretation of the Constitution. Is says Congress shall pass no law concerning the establishment of religion, or the free exercise therof. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and America gave gays the.oppurtunity to have the full rights of marriage in a civil union. That is equality. However, gays rejected equality, and instead want to impose their definition of marriage upon religious people.

Nope....America hasn't. So no, there isn't equality by any definition.

[Star_Cards]

well if you did not believe your religion to e the true religion, why would you believe? is confidence and faith arrogant and selfish? would you not try to help others who are making a wrong decision? why wouldn't someone's religion take precedence?

so it is ok for someone to put their beliefs on someone as long as they are not religious? that sounds arrogant to me.

I feel that a person can believe and be faithful in their religion and still be aware that there are other beliefs out there and be respectful of that. Recognizing that there are other religions and other forms of beliefs and that we shouldn't make laws based on one single way doesn't mean that you compromise your specific belief.

I'm not sure why you say that not having any one single religion form our countries laws is putting a belief over another. I also believe that people void of religion shouldn't make laws that would hinder a specific religious belief.

To me I think this is one of the major hurdles that christians have issue with. They feel that if the laws aren't governed by their religion then they are being forced to live by a different set of religious beliefs. That simply isn't true. Allowing gays to marry will have zero bearing on their lives or their religious beliefs. They will go on the same way as they always have. There are plenty of legal things that different religions have problems with from alcohol, birth control, pork, non kosher food, and so on, but we don't outlaw it because a religion has an issue with it. They just don't take part. If a church doesn't want to marry two men or two women, then they can choose not to. No law recognizing same sex marriage would ever force a specific church to perform wedding services.

[Wickabee]

i feel that a person can believe and be faithful in their religion and still be aware that there are other beliefs out there and be respectful of that. Recognizing that there are other religions and other forms of beliefs and that we shouldn't make laws based on one single way doesn't mean that you compromise your specific belief.

I'm not sure why you say that not having any one single religion form our countries laws is putting a belief over another. I also believe that people void of religion shouldn't make laws that would hinder a specific religious belief.

To me i think this is one of the major hurdles that christians have issue with. They feel that if the laws aren't governed by their religion then they are being forced to live by a different set of religious beliefs. That simply isn't true. Allowing gays to marry will have zero bearing on their lives or their religious beliefs. They will go on the same way as they always have. There are plenty of legal things that different religions have problems with from alcohol, birth control, pork, non kosher food, and so on, but we don't outlaw it because a religion has an issue with it. They just don't take part. If a church doesn't want to marry two men or two women, then they can choose not to. No law recognizing same sex marriage would ever force a specific church to perform wedding services.

church!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[duwal]

Marriage is between a man and a woman, and America gave gays the.oppurtunity to have the full rights of marriage in a civil union. That is equality. However, gays rejected equality, and instead want to impose their definition of marriage upon religious people.

Homosexuals have never been given the full rights and benefits of marriage in a civil union. It is far from it.

And your marriage is between a man and a woman is your opinion (as well as the majority of course), while other have the opinion that marriage is a link for two people in love to agree to spend their lifetime with one another

[JustAlex]

Marriage is between a man and a woman, and America gave gays the.oppurtunity to have the full rights of marriage in a civil union. That is equality. However, gays rejected equality, and instead want to impose their definition of marriage upon religious people.

THAT IS RIDICULOUS!

BTW, did you know that before 1967....it was ILLEGAL to have interracial marriages in many U.S states???

I guess Interracial couples were also "rejecting equality" and wanted to "impose their definition of marriage"?

[*censored*]

Legally recognized same-sex unions (whether marriage, civil unions, domestic partnerships, or reciprocal beneficiary relationships) can be formed in only eighteen states, but none of them are recognized under federal law. Therefore the comment of "America gave gays the.oppurtunity to have the full rights of marriage in a civil union" is incorrect.

Furthermore, 29 states have an outright ban on it via their constitution or a state statute.