REPORT: Coming Out of the Closet - By Bob Enyart

[Antipas]

Re: Re: A Question

Re: Re: A Question

I would suggest going to www.whosoever.org

The site discusses the 7 passages at length, the context of what was said, who it was said to, and the like.

I have walked away with the conclusion that it isn't as clear as people are led to believe.

Beanie, I have partially read the website you informed me about and I disagree. I got only as far as the Genesis scripture because it is there that I realized that this website tends to NOT fully introduce what the scripture actually says and the meanings of words. As I've said before I have friends who are gay so this is "no offense" to any who might be gay.

There are several meanings for the word abomination:
08441 tow`ebah {to-ay-baw'} or to`ebah {to-ay-baw'}
act part of 08581; TWOT - 2530a; n f
AV - abomination 113, abominable thing 2, abominable 2; 117
1) a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
1a) in ritual sense (of unclean food, idols, mixed marriages)
1b) in ethical sense (of wickedness etc)

Leviticus 18:22 states: "Thou shall not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination." The term abomination (to'ebah) is a religious term,

This is false. It can be a religious term but that is NOT always the case, depending on which context the word is presented. See above for definition, emphasis mine.

usually reserved for use against idolatry; it does not mean a moral evil.

In the sense it is used in Leviticus 18:22, it does not refer to a ritual sense but means "a disgusting thing".

The verse seems to refer to temple prostitution

False. Leviticus 18 is a lists the laws of Sexual Morality.

...which was a common practice in the rest of the Middle East at that time. Qadesh referred to male religious prostitutes.

This is dishonest. Just because it was common doesn't mean that it was condoned by God. It only meant that those who partook of this were *sinners*.

Again, the full context of Leviticus 18 lists the Laws of Sexual Morality according to the Laws of Moses. Verses 1-23 lists ordinance by God that the children of Israel were NOT to commit. Everything that was condemned in the sight of God has nothing to do with "idolatry".

Observe Leviticus 18 in it's full context:

Immorality Is Forbidden
1 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,

2"Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: "I am the LORD your God.

3According to the doings of the land of Egypt, where you dwelt, you shall not do; and according to the doings of the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you, you shall not do; nor shall you walk in their ordinances.

4You shall observe My judgments and keep My ordinances, to walk in them: I am the LORD your God.

5You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the LORD.

6"None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness: I am the LORD.

7The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover. She is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness.

8The nakedness of your father's wife you shall not uncover; it is your father's nakedness.

9The nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father, or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home or elsewhere, their nakedness you shall not uncover.

10The nakedness of your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for theirs is your own nakedness.

11The nakedness of your father's wife's daughter, begotten by your father--she is your sister--you shall not uncover her nakedness.

12You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's sister; she is near of kin to your father.

13You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother's sister, for she is near of kin to your mother.

14You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's brother. You shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt.

15You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law--she is your son's wife--you shall not uncover her nakedness.

16You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother's wife; it is your brother's nakedness.

17You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, nor shall you take her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness. They are near of kin to her. It is wickedness.

18Nor shall you take a woman as a rival to her sister, to uncover her nakedness while the other is alive.

19"Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity.

20Moreover you shall not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife, to defile yourself with her.

21And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the LORD.

22You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.

23Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion.

There is NOT one mention of "temple prostitution". It is absent.


Regarding the Angels with Lot prior to the distruction of Sodom & Gomorrah.

To "know them" in the sense of the two Angels who were with Lot

Gen 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

This is the same *word* that is used in Genesis 19.

And it's the same word that used here:

Gen 19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as [is] good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

So, i will have to strongly disagree with the meaning that is put forth on the Website as it clearly distorts the full meaning of scripture without giving a 100% examination of what God thinks of Homosexuality.

Also note that "to know" in the Biblical sense is a Hebrew Idiom which refers to sexual intercourse.

 

[beanieboy]

It's going to be one side of the argument, obviously. Since the word "homosexual" wasn't even in existence until the 1800s, when it appears in the bible, one becomes suspicious. While the bible is very clear about who uncovering whom is wrong, it only has an issue with male with male coupling in Leviticus. While it says it is an abomination, abomination is used for shellfish, men and women wearing the same clothing, and the like. To say that men wanting to gang rape two people (S&G) is the same as homosexuality is to say that rape and intimate heterosex are the same. It wasn't uncommon for soldiers to rape the men. It happens in Midnight Cowboy - it was done as a form of cruelty, not because they were gay. It happens in prison. It happens.

But, as I said, I going to stay out of it. I don't really believe the majority of the bible anyway, so arguing what it does or doesn't say is futile, for me. That's why I suggested the link.

I was just pointing out that it's not 100% black and white. Thus, the controversy. There are points in favor of both.

As a side note, as long as you brought up Lot - you know, the "good one" - after he offers his daughters to be gang raped by an angry mob, and the towns are destroyed, and his wife does something REALLY bad - looks back - later gets drunk with them, has sex with each of them, and impregnates them. The moral? Homosexuality bad, but incest good, and blessed by god.

Sweet story, really.

 

[Projill]

True, you have just described homosexuals perfectly.

Don't knock it till you've tried it, Barbie.

 

[Projill]

I was very much aware of what you meant, I just decided to use what you said for the good.

Good of what? Justification for your prejudices?

 

[Antipas]

No problems....

No problems....

It's going to be one side of the argument, obviously.

I disagree. I feel that the scriptures are quite clear on what God condemns and what he doesn't. I think it only "normal" for Christians who are homosexual who desire that their lifestyle not be condemned. But the fact is that God loves the *person* but hates the *act*. It's just a fact.

Since the word "homosexual" wasn't even in existence until the 1800s, when it appears in the bible, one becomes suspicious.

This is irrelevant. Homosexual is the sexual act between two people of the same sex. The word might not have been in existence however the meaning has been with us since it was written in the Law of Moses.

While the bible is very clear about who uncovering whom is wrong, it only has an issue with male with male coupling in Leviticus.

It all means the same. God created woman for the man and vice versa. The union together is a representation of the *glory* of God. It doesn't work any other way.

While it says it is an abomination, abomination is used for shellfish, men and women wearing the same clothing, and the like.

The scriptures in Leviticus makes it perfectly clear again what God meant. A man shall not lie with another man.

To say that men wanting to gang rape two people (S&G) is the same as homosexuality is to say that rape and intimate heterosex are the same.

No...the people of S&G wanting to *know* the Angels were about to commit a sin which went against the Laws of Sexual Morality as stated in the Law. It doesn't matter if it was gang rape, homosexuality, rape, or intimitate heterosexual sex. God had decreed that the people of S&G were all wicked and sinful so that means that NOTHING they were doing was *good*.

It wasn't uncommon for soldiers to rape the men.

So...that makes it right?

It happens in Midnight Cowboy - it was done as a form of cruelty, not because they were gay. It happens in prison. It happens.

But it's a *sin* and that is the whole point. No matter how you paint it. Anything that goes against the commandment or ordinances of God is a sin.

But, as I said, I going to stay out of it. I don't really believe the majority of the bible anyway, so arguing what it does or doesn't say is futile, for me.

It's understandable. Most homosexuals usually disagree with the bible because they can't reconcile the fact that what they *do* is wrong in God's eyes. What they feel must be right because the feelings are *real* and it's just as good as heterosexual love. But regardless, it's still spoken against and it doesn't change the fact that God doesn't condone it.

I have friends that are gay and we discuss this all the time in a friendly manner, thank God but scripture is clear. I don't condemn them as their life is their own but most gay friends stay away from scripture because they can't get around the Morality Laws.


That's why I suggested the link.

Well thank you. I was always interested in how Homosexuals who are Christian reconcile with scripture. It was enlightening.

I was just pointing out that it's not 100% black and white. Thus, the controversy. There are points in favor of both.

Oh but it is 100% black/white. It's only a controversy because "homosexuality" is becoming more mainstream every day and naturally people who are gay will do anything to get people to recognize that *homosexuality* is acceptable, even defying the ordinances of God. It's just usually the individual only choses to see what he wants to see while ignoring the simple truth.

As a side note, as long as you brought up Lot - you know, the "good one"

Who said that Lot was good. Did you know that Lot was a spiritually weak man? He wasn't good by a landslide.

after he offers his daughters to be gang raped by an angry mob...

Who said that this was good behavior? Do you really think that this was condoned?

and the towns are destroyed, and his wife does something REALLY bad - looks back - later gets drunk with them, has sex with each of them, and impregnates them. The moral?

Yes and that was a sin as well.

Homosexuality bad, but incest good, and blessed by god.

Who said that *incest* was Good? Do you honestly think that God condoned the behavior of Lot's daughters? If I remember correctly, the offspring of this union was *cursed*. Careful bible study will show you that it didn't sit well with God either.

Sweet story, really.

Well if you understood scripture completely and really read between the lines you'd find out that it really wasn't a sweet story.

No offense just because it appears that Lot or his daughters got away with *sin* (which they didn't) doesn't mean that it's any more right for homosexuality. What you are trying to do is say that God condoned gang rape and incest while condemning homosexuality. That's further from that truth than you realize and if that is why you don't believe fully in the Bible then it only means that you need to read the scripture more carefully.

Peace to you
Antipas

 

[kiwimac]

Antipas,

Crock of dung, friend, crock of dung!

Kiwimac

 

[Antipas]

Sorry, I don't think so...

Sorry, I don't think so...

Antipas,

Crock of dung, friend, crock of dung!

Kiwimac

But you are entitled to think however you chose. Scripture speaks for itself.

Peace,
Antipas

 

[Antipas]

Re: Re: Re: A Question

Re: Re: Re: A Question

Rom. 1:18,21-27,29,32

“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness...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. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator.... Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion....They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice.... 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”

 

[beanieboy]

Antipas - when i said it was going to be rather one sided, I was referring to Web site when addressing the issue.

It was explained by a biblical scholar in detail, referring to the time, the audience of the time, the culture, etc. To not look at it in context is irresponsible.

My decision to move away from Christianity has very little to do with my sexual orientation, actually, but rather, christian behavior, and a lot the main tennents that I question.

 

[kiwimac]

Ah, But Beanieboy,

Thats how Christians like Antipas are able to support their oppressive doctrines by taking scripture out of its context, out of its milieu and then insisting on its literality!

Kiwimac

 

[anna]

Antipas - when i said it was going to be rather one sided, I was referring to Web site when addressing the issue.

It was explained by a biblical scholar in detail, referring to the time, the audience of the time, the culture, etc. To not look at it in context is irresponsible.

My decision to move away from Christianity has very little to do with my sexual orientation, actually, but rather, christian behavior, and a lot the main tennents that I question.

Beanieboy, that isn't a good reason to move away from Cristianity. Being a Christian is about having a close relationship with the one who created you and sharing with other people His message. If you aren't a Christian, it's simple. All you have to do is believe in Jesus Christ. Period. No if's and's or but's about it.
I am a Christian. I have problems and fears and bad habits, but the great thing about having faith in Jesus is that he will never leave. No matter how much I want to leave this place, I will NOT because He loves me when nobody else can. Don't go, the Lord want's you to be one of His.
ac

 

[Antipas]

Hey Beannieboy

Hey Beannieboy

Antipas - when i said it was going to be rather one sided, I was referring to Web site when addressing the issue.

Dude, if I misunderstood you then I apologize. Please don't get rattled here.

It was explained by a biblical scholar in detail, referring to the time, the audience of the time, the culture, etc. To not look at it in context is irresponsible.

No, I think it's irresponsible to avoid the plain text of God's word. Despite the audience of the time, the culture, etc., God's word is plain and simple. I'm sure alot was going on at that time but we were told specifically what was right and what was wrong.

My decision to move away from Christianity has very little to do with my sexual orientation, actually, but rather, christian behavior, and a lot the main tennents that I question.

That's definitely understandable. Many Christians do take it upon themselves to be judge/juror which is wrong because as scripture says....no one has that right but Him.

I myself have avoided going to church/ecclesia for a long time because of the very reason you moved away from Christianity.

Just remember, I didn't address this issue to jump on your back and point a finger. I was just curious how people who are homosexual reconcile the Word of God in their lives. That's it.

Peace,
Antipas

 

[Antipas]

Peace to you...

Peace to you...

Ah, But Beanieboy,

Thats how Christians like Antipas are able to support their oppressive doctrines by taking scripture out of its context, out of its milieu and then insisting on its literality!

Kiwimac

Kiwimac, take it to God. I've read his ordinances, I know what's right and wrong according to His word. If you can't deal with it because it puts a *spot* on your lifestyle then take it to Him and not me. I'm not the bad person here. I was simply quoting scripture.

And if you think I'm taking things out of context, let's here it. Your accusation won't hold up in *court* unless you are able to prove it. I'm not here to fight or sling it out. I came in peace but if you are bitter because God doesn't approve of what you *do* then deal with.

Geesh, it's not like I'm making myself out to be perfect. Remember, we're ALL SINNERS and we ALL FALL SHORT of the Glory. I have a few skeletons in my closet as well.

Tell God his doctrines are too oppressive for you.

 

[beanieboy]

Anna - unfortunately, i have seen more christians harrassing gays out of christianity than nonchristians. One of the things I don't quite understand.

I was remembering when I first starting questioning christianity, and some of it's main tennents - Jesus dying for our sins, virgin birth, etc. Around the same time, in the mid 80s, churches began disallowing gays to worship in their churches. While I don't see homosexuality as a sin, I was confused why heterosexuals who had premarital sex were allowed to freely come to the church, but gays were not.

Fortunately, churches formed, like MCC, that had the attitude that we are all god's children, and that no one can decide what does or does not make you a christian except believing in god.

Personally, I've come to understand that god is much more complicated than people want to believe, and by reading about other religions, have come to a better understanding of what I believe.

 

[Antipas]

It's the act...

It's the act...

Anna - unfortunately, i have seen more christians harrassing gays out of christianity than nonchristians. One of the things I don't quite understand.

I know this is for Anna but I thought I jump in anyway. This is the very thing I *tend* to stay away from Christians. My denomination is very NON-mainstream and I get *condemned* for it all the time by Christians who think they are doing the work of the Lord.

I was remembering when I first starting questioning christianity, and some of it's main tennents - Jesus dying for our sins, virgin birth, etc. Around the same time, in the mid 80s, churches began disallowing gays to worship in their churches.

It's a tough subject. Like I mentioned earlier to you there is a person who is gay that attends an ecclesia but he abstains from the homosexual *act* because he feels that it's a sin.

While I don't see homosexuality as a sin,

It's not wrong to be a *homosexual*. God never condemned the person but the act itself. It is a sin simply because God condemns it. The *plan* and purpose for God was to bring man and woman together to manifest his *glory* Man and woman coming together are ONE in unity to the glory of God. Within that union they are able to procreate. This is not done with man-man or woman-woman relationships.

I was confused why heterosexuals who had premarital sex were allowed to freely come to the church, but gays were not.

You are RIGHT. While I don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle, there is a degree of hypocracy within the Christian community. No one should be alloud to throw stones at YOU when they were NOT following the ordinances of God either.

Fortunately, churches formed, like MCC, that had the attitude that we are all god's children, and that no one can decide what does or does not make you a christian except believing in god.

 

[beanieboy]

Re: It's the act...

Re: It's the act...

Anna - unfortunately, i have seen more christians harrassing gays out of christianity than nonchristians. One of the things I don't quite understand.

I know this is for Anna but I thought I jump in anyway. This is the very thing I *tend* to stay away from Christians. My denomination is very NON-mainstream and I get *condemned* for it all the time by Christians who think they are doing the work of the Lord.

Can you clarify this? How is your denomination non-mainstream, and what exactly do you get condemned for?

 

[Antipas]

Re: Re: It's the act...

Re: Re: It's the act...

Can you clarify this? How is your denomination non-mainstream, and what exactly do you get condemned for?

I'm a Christadelphian and we deny the *deity* of Christ. I've been called a "heretic", told I'm going to burn in "hell". I've been called so many names by Christians who claim to do the work of the Lord. But I've never read about Jesus treating people so harshly.

It might not be as "big" an emotional situation as your sexuality but to attack someone's belief is a pretty "harsh" thing regardless. I didn't write what i wrote to attack you in any way. And I understood I was drawing a very fine line because it is a very emotional topic.

I really can't help it if that's what I understand and believe to be true. It doesn't mean I'm intolerant in the least. My best friend is gay and there is nothing I wouldn't do for him. He's Catholic and I have seen how the parents of his friends treat him and it does make me sick to my stomach because these very people are breaking all kinds of commandments.

So, I understand what you mean. I've experienced it and I've been through it.

Antipas.

 

[beanieboy]

Antipas - do you consider yourself Christian, though you don't believe in the deity of Christ?

It seems like that would make you Jewish, actually.

While I'm sorry that people attack you in the way they have, I'm glad that we have a common frame of reference, and can relate to each other.

 

[Antipas]

Let me clarify that...

Let me clarify that...

Antipas - do you consider yourself Christian, though you don't believe in the deity of Christ?

While Christ was here on earth living among us, I believe that he was 100% human. However after his death and resurrection I believe him to be "immortal" and sitting at the right hand of God. So there is a difference between my belief and the Jewish belief.

Do I consider myself Christian? Absolutely but 99.9% of the world doesn't and I'm chastised for it. I'm slandered for it.

While I'm sorry that people attack you in the way they have, I'm glad that we have a common frame of reference, and can relate to each other.

I agree that we have that in common. And I'm sorry that people attack you as well. I think it's really unfair and I do understand how hard it is to have someone pointing a finger at you and condemning you. I really do.

 

[Barbiedoll]

Good of what? Justification for your prejudices?

Yes, I'm very prejudice against SIN, thank you very much for the compliment.