Homosexuality In The Bible

[taxme]

19 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Are you saying that with a great deal of levity, taxme, or are you that seriously homophobic?

And I take it Betsy that you don't feel like hearing what you don't want to hear?

I am being serious here. I just pointed out that the only time we see gay people living or kissing together on TV or in commercials are white people, never non-whites. White people are always made to appear as though they are the only people that can and are gay. I only ask as to why this is always so? Can you explain to me as to why this is so, and that why you feel that this is just me trying to be funny? 

Maybe it is you who does not like hearing or reading what others have to say that you do not want to hear or read or agree with? Yes/no?  

[Goddess]

19 minutes ago, taxme said:

I am being serious here. I just pointed out that the only time we see gay people living or kissing together on TV or in commercials are white people, never non-whites. White people are always made to appear as though they are the only people that can and are gay. I only ask as to why this is always so? Can you explain to me as to why this is so, and that why you feel that this is just me trying to be funny? 

Because we live in a predominantly "white" area of the planet, so our TV and advertising is geared towards "white" people.

[betsy]

13 hours ago, bcsapper said:

The issue is just that it's not up to some fictitious supernatural being, or a human invented and written book about same, to decide on whether or not certain human behaviour is wrong.  It's up to other humans.  And as we get more and more enlightened, more and more of us are realising that humans are more complex than we thought, and homosexuality is just another facet of our existence.

A God and/or a book just don't enter into it, except of course, unless an individual wants to use such as a guide for their own, and only their own, behaviour.

The issue of  this thread is clearly stated in its title.

 

Like it or not........the issue here is about what the Bible has to say on homosexuality.  That's pretty much about it.  Whether one disagrees with the Bible, or feels that religion has no place in our society as an authority on behavior, is irrelevant in this thread.

 

Edited March 29, 2018 by betsy

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, betsy said:

Like it or not........the issue here is about what the Bible has to say on homosexuality.  That's pretty much about it.  Whether one disagrees with the Bible, or feels that religion has no place in our society as an authority on behavior, is irrelevant in this thread.

This bizarre thread against homosexuality started by the same person who enthusiastically supports and admires an adulterer, also forbidden by God and the Bible.  How do you reconcile such glaring hypocrisy?

[betsy]

54 minutes ago, dialamah said:

This bizarre thread against homosexuality started by the same person who enthusiastically supports and admires an adulterer, also forbidden by God and the Bible.  How do you reconcile such glaring hypocrisy?

Get a grip.  what you see as "bizarre," is all in your head.  I don't support adultery. 

 

I know you don't get that.....but I'm not in the mood to explain it all again (just for your benefit). 

So, here's an old thread.....scroll down to my posts.  They explain where I'm coming from:

 

 

Edited March 29, 2018 by betsy

[betsy]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

This bizarre thread against homosexuality started by the same person who enthusiastically supports and admires an adulterer,

I was an adulterer. 

But thanks to my merciful God - I've humbly confessed and have been forgiven. 

 

  Jesus died for sinners like me.

Edited March 29, 2018 by betsy

[dialamah]

4 minutes ago, betsy said:

I was an adulterer.  But thanks to my merciful God - I've confessed and have been forgiven.   Jesus died for sinners like me.

And so you support and admire adulterers?   I can understand praying for them, given your beliefs, but not so actively supporting and admiring them.

[betsy]

8 minutes ago, dialamah said:

And so you support and admire adulterers?   I can understand praying for them, given your beliefs, but not so actively supporting and admiring them.

You're deliberately ignoring the link?

 

Your argument is irrelevant on this thread.  Go create your own thread on hypocritical Christians!

Edited March 29, 2018 by betsy

[dialamah]

3 minutes ago, betsy said:

You're deliberately ignoring the link?

 

Your argument is irrelevant on this thread.  Go create your own thread on hypocritical Christians!

Didn't see a link.  Not making an argument, making a comment.  Not all Christians are hypocritical; most who disapprove of adultery/homosexuality/fornication and who believe it's important to follow Biblical principles also disapprove of Trump.   

[betsy]

3 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Didn't see a link.  Not making an argument, making a comment.  Not all Christians are hypocritical; most who disapprove of adultery/homosexuality/fornication and who believe it's important to follow Biblical principles also disapprove of Trump.   

Well....I brought that thread up again.  Just for you.  My relevant responses are on the very first page. 

Let's not derail this thread.  This isn't about Trump.

Edited March 29, 2018 by betsy

[Guest]

5 hours ago, betsy said:

The issue of  this thread is clearly stated in its title.

 

Like it or not........the issue here is about what the Bible has to say on homosexuality.  That's pretty much about it.  Whether one disagrees with the Bible, or feels that religion has no place in our society as an authority on behavior, is irrelevant in this thread.

 

I think I was saying that it's completely irrelevant.  The most important thing about homosexuality in the Bible is that it made it as a thread title on MLW.  Now that's something!

[betsy]

40 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I think I was saying that it's completely irrelevant.  The most important thing about homosexuality in the Bible is that it made it as a thread title on MLW.  Now that's something!

Why's that something?  I didn't want it discussed in another thread.  

Also, this is a forum.  Look how many responses it got.  Obviously, there's interest in the subject.  You, yourself, had responded to it, right?  Have you read the OP? 

Furthermore, I was also rebutting the article given in the OP. 

Edited March 29, 2018 by betsy

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, betsy said:

Why's that something?  I didn't want it discussed in another thread.  

Also, this is a forum.  Look how many responses it got.  Obviously, there's interest in the subject.  You, yourself, had responded to it, right?  Have you read the OP? 

Furthermore, I was also rebutting the article given in the OP. 

Well, when I say it's something I mean it's a lot bigger deal as far as homosexuality goes than any Bible references would be.  At least MLW is relevant.

[taxme]

21 hours ago, Goddess said:

Because we live in a predominantly "white" area of the planet, so our TV and advertising is geared towards "white" people.

Wrong. If we live in a predominantly white area as you say we do then why do we see on TV and on commercials where they seem to have no problem showing more non-whites than whites? If we are suppose to be such a multicultural country than there should be just as many gay non-whites as gay whites shown on TV and in commercials, right?  

[JamesHackerMP]

10 hours ago, betsy said:

The issue of  this thread is clearly stated in its title.

 

Like it or not........the issue here is about what the Bible has to say on homosexuality.  That's pretty much about it.  Whether one disagrees with the Bible, or feels that religion has no place in our society as an authority on behavior, is irrelevant in this thread.

 

Then it's not a discussion thread, Betsy. You should be delivering this from a pulpit inside of a church if you don't want anyone to disagree. My advice is, to write a Christian blog. Don't post on MLW and then get pissed off when people disagree with you. Excuse me, with the Bible. Disagreement is going to happen here, Betsy, that's the nature of a website like this. Otherwise you're behaving like a certain young lady on here whose screen name I shan't mention.

 

8 hours ago, betsy said:

Jesus died for sinners like me.

But not for anyone else, it seems. Like gays. Could it be that you want to expiate the guilt of your sins by condemning that of others you feel are "worse" somehow?

 

23 hours ago, taxme said:

I am being serious here. I just pointed out that the only time we see gay people living or kissing together on TV or in commercials are white people, never non-whites. White people are always made to appear as though they are the only people that can and are gay. I only ask as to why this is always so? Can you explain to me as to why this is so, and that why you feel that this is just me trying to be funny? 

Maybe it is you who does not like hearing or reading what others have to say that you do not want to hear or read or agree with? Yes/no?  

All right, I missed the point of your post; I apologize. You've actually got a point though. There is racism in the  gay community I'll admit. Plenty of it, I'm sure. Most other gays I know aren't racists, but there are plenty of phony "liberals" out there: people who claim to be some kind of social justice warrior---for their own personal cause.

Edited March 29, 2018 by JamesHackerMP

[JamesHackerMP]

Betsy you say that the bible predicted things that we know today to be scientific, correct? You've certainly reiterated something to that effect (Over and over again, unfortunately). It's scientifically confirmed that it's not a mental illness, it just happens. It's the way people are wired. If the bible has predicted otherwise, then prove it. If you refuse to, then I can't be of any assistance.

If you want to brush me off that easily because of a disagreement between us, rather than trying to explain your--or the Bible's--argument, you're little different than the average "snowflake" who can't tolerate someone having a differing view. Disappointing.

MLW is a discussion board. Discussion is not the same as lecture or sermon. You're right, there is "interest' in the subject. Interest does not mean being dictated to, it means they're willing to discuss it.

Now, you've perpetually dodged my request for the verses that actually condemn homosexuality, or indicate that it's actually a sin. If you really believe the Bible speaks for itself, then let it. We're listening.

Edited March 30, 2018 by JamesHackerMP

[betsy]

On 3/29/2018 at 4:37 PM, JamesHackerMP said:

Then it's not a discussion thread, Betsy. You should be delivering this from a pulpit inside of a church if you don't want anyone to disagree. My advice is, to write a Christian blog. Don't post on MLW and then get pissed off when people disagree with you. Excuse me, with the Bible. Disagreement is going to happen here, Betsy, that's the nature of a website like this. Otherwise you're behaving like a certain young lady on here whose screen name I shan't mention.

 

But not for anyone else, it seems. Like gays. Could it be that you want to expiate the guilt of your sins by condemning that of others you feel are "worse" somehow?

 

All right, I missed the point of your post; I apologize. You've actually got a point though. There is racism in the  gay community I'll admit. Plenty of it, I'm sure. Most other gays I know aren't racists, but there are plenty of phony "liberals" out there: people who claim to be some kind of social justice warrior---for their own personal cause.

Disagree and discuss, yes.  But you're bringing arguments up that are irrelevant to this thread.

[betsy]

On 3/30/2018 at 5:45 PM, JamesHackerMP said:

Betsy you say that the bible predicted things that we know today to be scientific, correct? You've certainly reiterated something to that effect (Over and over again, unfortunately). It's scientifically confirmed that it's not a mental illness, it just happens. It's the way people are wired. If the bible has predicted otherwise, then prove it. If you refuse to, then I can't be of any assistance.

If you want to brush me off that easily because of a disagreement between us, rather than trying to explain your--or the Bible's--argument, you're little different than the average "snowflake" who can't tolerate someone having a differing view. Disappointing.

MLW is a discussion board. Discussion is not the same as lecture or sermon. You're right, there is "interest' in the subject. Interest does not mean being dictated to, it means they're willing to discuss it.

Now, you've perpetually dodged my request for the verses that actually condemn homosexuality, or indicate that it's actually a sin. If you really believe the Bible speaks for itself, then let it. We're listening.

The Bible DECLARES some things that science had proven to be true.  Whether it's been scientifically proven or not, is still irrelevant.

This thread is about what the Bible says about homosexuality.  The Bible isn't meant to be a science book......but it just so happens that science had confirmed some of the verses in the Bible can be taken literally.

I've given the verses.  Scroll back and review all my posts - maybe, that's what you need so you'll get on the same page.

 

[JamesHackerMP]

yes, threads on MLW do tend to get a bit off topic now and then. I'll go back and check the verses. I'll also look in the footnotes.

I have a bible that has a dictionary in the back, and an index, and there wasn't any particular entry for "homosexuality". The OT however is full of arcane, sexual rules. (One is particularly hilarious but I won't mention it right now for fear of getting too far off topic, but it's a gem. Unfortunately I forgot to write down where it was otherwise I'd at least drop the chapter & verse.) But to me the NT is far more important to Christians. It mystifies me why Christian preaches, particularly those who rail against homosexuality, will typically quote the OT. It's odd because they're ministers or priests---not rabbis, who would actually be qualified to interpret the OT.

So yes, I'll check back. The only one I had so far was the creation story about Adam & Eve.

(and at the risk of getting off topic again, I do not think science has 'proven" anything that is in the bible is true. This is because--as you yourself agreed---that's it not a scientific text. So if it isn't, then it's pointless trying to point out that verse xyz has been "proven true" by science after the fact. Religion and science are meant to explain two different realms of thought, the unproveable, and the proveable, respectively. Faith, I thought, was supposed to mean you bellieve something that's unproveable or proveable. But I won't spend time on this issue as it doesn't have to do with homosexuality, the topic of this thread.)

[JamesHackerMP]

After reviewing the last 7 pp of this thread, I notice you've only mentioned three things: Matthew 19, about marriage, Genesis 1-2 about Adam & Eve, and some episode from the NT about Jesus & Peter and foot-washing. (I have no idea what part of the gospel that came from so throw me a bone here.) If that's all you're basing your interpretation on that homosexuality is evil, just those three passages from the bible, then it's a weak argument.

As far as Genesis 2 is concerned, that's the part of the OT, genesis particularly, that is essentially the creation myths, the flood, and its aftermath. Prior to Gen. 12 (Abraham's history) it's really nothing more than ancient Hebrew explanations about the world. NONE of it, is meant to explain marriage.

As far as Matthew 19, it doesn't actually PROHIBIT homosexuality, does it? It really doesn't touch on the issue of homosexuality at all.

Edited April 2, 2018 by JamesHackerMP

[betsy]

9 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

After reviewing the last 7 pp of this thread, I notice you've only mentioned three things: Matthew 19, about marriage, Genesis 1-2 about Adam & Eve, and some episode from the NT about Jesus & Peter and foot-washing. (I have no idea what part of the gospel that came from so throw me a bone here.) If that's all you're basing your interpretation on that homosexuality is evil, just those three passages from the bible, then it's a weak argument.

As far as Genesis 2 is concerned, that's the part of the OT, genesis particularly, that is essentially the creation myths, the flood, and its aftermath. Prior to Gen. 12 (Abraham's history) it's really nothing more than ancient Hebrew explanations about the world. NONE of it, is meant to explain marriage.

As far as Matthew 19, it doesn't actually PROHIBIT homosexuality, does it? It really doesn't touch on the issue of homosexuality at all.

The foot-washing was an argument being given by BubberMiley!  He's using that scene as evidence that Jesus is gay (or, indulging in some kind of perversity)!

 

You have the free will - you can choose to ignore the full implication of Genesis 1-2  ( and why God created mankind male and female).  My explanation was a rebuttal to the interpretation of the gay church that the creation of male and female was merely for procreation purposes.  It's not.  Like I've said, there's more to it than just simply to make more children. 

You call it as part of the creation myth - which means, you don't believe it really happened. 

You may choose to believe that creation is only myth - but in Matthew 19, Jesus was preaching it for a fact! 

 

Like I said, your choice.

 

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by betsy

[betsy]

On 3/29/2018 at 4:37 PM, JamesHackerMP said:

But not for anyone else, it seems. Like gays.

You should study the Bible, James.   The most important message of the Scripture - Jesus dying for the sin of mankind -  seems lost to you.

 

There is a caveat to gaining eternal life.  Repentance.

 

John 8

³ Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, ⁴ they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. ⁵ Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned^] But what do You say?” ⁶ This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear.

⁷ So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” ⁸ And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. ⁹ Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. ¹⁰ When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, “Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?”

¹¹ She said, “No one, Lord.”

And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.”

 

 

John 5

¹³ The man who was healed had no idea who it was, for Jesus had slipped away into the crowd that was there.

¹⁴ Later Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, “See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you.” ¹⁵ The man went away and told the Jewish leaders that it was Jesus who had made him well.

[betsy]

On 3/29/2018 at 4:37 PM, JamesHackerMP said:

Could it be that you want to expiate the guilt of your sins by condemning that of others you feel are "worse" somehow?

What guilt?

 

Quote

The moment a person turns from sin to Jesus Christ in faith, his sin is forgiven. Repentance is part of the faith that leads to salvation (Matthew 3:2; 4:17; Acts 3:19).

In Christ, even the most heinous sins are blotted out (see 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 for a list of some unrighteous acts that can be forgiven). Salvation is by grace, and grace forgives. After a person is saved, he will still sin, and when he does, God still promises forgiveness. “But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One” (1 John 2:1).

Freedom from sin, however, does not always mean freedom from guilty feelings. Even when our sins are forgiven, we still remember them. Also, we have a spiritual enemy, called “the accuser of our brothers” (Revelation 12:10) who relentlessly reminds us of our failures, faults, and sins. When a Christian experiences feelings of guilt, he or she should do the following things:

 

Psalm 32 is a very profitable study. Although David had sinned terribly, he found freedom from both sin and guilty feelings. He dealt with the cause of guilt and the reality of forgiveness. Psalm 51 is another good passage to investigate. The emphasis here is confession of sin, as David pleads with God from a heart full of guilt and sorrow. Restoration and joy are the results.

Finally, if sin has been confessed, repented of, and forgiven, it is time to move on.

Remember that we who have come to Christ have been made new creatures in Him. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Part of the “old” which has gone is the remembrance of past sins and the guilt they produced.

 

Sadly, some Christians are prone to wallowing in memories of their former sinful lives, memories which should have been dead and buried long ago. This is pointless and runs counter to the victorious Christian life God wants for us. A wise saying is “If God has saved you out of a sewer, don’t dive back in and swim around.”
 

 

https://www.gotquestions.org/guilt-dealing.html

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by betsy

[betsy]

A poster had given the term catamite in his argument.  It's also given by the gay church.

 

Quote

 

The Jerusalem Bible even translates the term malakos as catamites, those young softprepubescent “pet” boys mentioned earlier. The syntactical and historical context of 1 Timothy 1:10 reveals the meaning of the word arsenokoitai as men who sleep with prostitutes, and the fact this also fits the context of 1 Corinthians 6:9 seems to confirm that we have found the meaning of these obscure words. It makes perfect sense that Paul would rebuke not only the prostitute, but also the “male-bedder” or the man who sleeps with that prostitute.

As we see, these two verses are about this practice of prostitution and possibly pederasty, but what about Romans 1:27. It clearly says, “…and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.” Isn’t this clear enough? There are no obscure Greek words. How are we to understand this?

 

https://www.gaychurch.org/homosexuality-and-the-bible/the-bible-christianity-and-homosexuality/

 

Here's the rebuttal for that:

 

 

Quote

 

How is the Greek word “malakoi” translated in the NIV?

In 1 Corinthians 6:9 Paul uses two words together that the NIV has rendered “men who have sex with men.” The first word, “malakoi”, means “soft.” But this Greek word was often used to refer to the passive partner in a male homosexual relationship.

The standard Greek lexicon for the New Testament defines the word in 1 Corinthians 6:9 as meaning “being passive in a same-sex relationship.”

 

We can be pretty sure this is what this word refers to here because it is used in combination with another Greek word, “arsenokoitai”, that refers to sex between males.

Words always take on particular meanings because of the context in which they are used. The context here makes clear that these two Greek words are being used to depict, respectively, the passive and active partner in a male-with-male sexual relationship. Hence the NIV translation “men who have sex with men.”

 

https://www.thenivbible.com/malakoi/

 

 

Furthermore, Romans 1 negates the argument that this refers to catamites (pre-pubescent boys) .   No.  It's about same-sex relations.  Otherwise why would women be mentioned comparably - lesbian acts -  be described as well?  

 

Romans 1

²⁶ Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. ²⁷ In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by betsy

[betsy]

•  

Quote

 

• Verse 24: “Therefore, God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity.” If we are painting a picture, it begins with the image of LUST.
• Verse 25: “…they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.” Now there is a FALSEHOOD as well as IDOLATRY involved (i.e. worshipping something other than God).
• Verse 26: “God gave them up to dishonorable passions…” Now DISHONORABLE PASSIONS are presented. Looking back at this now we see this as a situation of lust, falsehood, idolatry, and dishonorable passions.
• Verse 26 and 27 continue: “Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another…”
•  

Looking at the men first will help to clarify the passage: “The men likewise gave up natural relations with women…” Stop. Did you see that? They gave up natural relations with women, which implies that these men were heterosexuals by nature. The phrase translated as “gave up” is the Greek word aphente (afenteV) meaning to leave behind, forsake, neglect, or divorce.

 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=NIV

 

Here is the verse.

 

Romans 1

God’s Wrath Against Sinful Humanity

¹⁸ The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, ¹⁹ since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. ²⁰ For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

²¹ For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. ²² Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools ²³ and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

²⁴ Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.

 

²⁵ They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

²⁶ Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. ²⁷ In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

 

 

²⁸ Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.

 

 ²⁹ They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, ³⁰ slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; ³¹ they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. ³² Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

 

 

sinful desires of their hearts.

 

Verses 28 and 29, clearly shows that this is not only about the orgies that take place in worshipping Baal.    It's the lifestyle.  That's the proper context.

 

 

 

Quote

 

Why would men do that? As any biblical scholar will tell you: “Context is everything.” This is a situation of lust, falsehood, idolatry, and dishonorable passions. In this account there are a number or men and a number of women, both plurals. This would most definitely be an orgy…everyone filled with lust and “dishonorable passions” having sex with whomever however. But why would Paul be talking about orgies? A little research uncovers the pagan practice of “sacred sexual orgies.” Baal was the Canaanite deity that was worshipped with sexual orgies on Mount Peor in Moab, with which Paul would have been familiar. With this contextual understanding let us read this story again:

“Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.”

 

 

https://www.gaychurch.org/homosexuality-and-the-bible/the-bible-christianity-and-homosexuality/

 

Whoa.  Let's take a closer look at that argument, and assume for a second that indeed, the whole passage is merely referring to an orgy that celebrates Baal.    Even if it's about orgies - clearly, same-sex relation is still being referred to as unnatural. 

 

  Furthermore, surely an orgy would not limit sexual relations between same-sex only!  Surely, there would've been sex between heterosexuals too in an orgy?   There would've been married people having sex with different partners?

 

 

 

Quote

Anyone who isolates the phrase “natural relations” to declare homosexual relations unnatural is interjecting their own prejudice and reading entirely outside of context.

You're saying, this is supposedly about orgies only, right?  Anything goes with orgies!

So, the question is.....why is same-sex encounter the only one that's vividly pointed out?

 

Yes indeed, context is everything!

Now, check out verses 28 and 29......and see how all those mentioned wickedness have anything to do with orgies!

 

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by betsy