TNP: Gays Are Okay in This Church
-
Originally posted by ratinacage:To you,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
....
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Actually I don't know who the "you" is. Probably not me...
"Leviticus 25:44) - "‘As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you."
In the fallen world that mankind had created, slavery was a reality. God permitted its existence and worked within its system. Slaves were more domestic servants than oppressed field workers. Slaves could be the captives of war (Num. 31:25-47), subjects of debt to be worked off (2 Kings 4:1), born into slavery (Gen. 17:12-13), or entered into voluntarily (Exodus 21:5-6). In the Ancient Near East, some slaves were able to own other slaves and even conduct business and in Exodus 25:2 a slave was required to be set free after six years of service. Though slavery carries a very negative connotation here in America, it was not nearly as bad it was here in the first 100 years of our nation's existence.
As I said above, God works within the fallen system to bring about His will. Slavery was permitted by God and rules of treatment of slaves were given so that they would not be mistreated. "
Source: http://www.carm.org/diff/Lev_25_44.htm
If you genuine wish to have answers to your queries, may I suggest a few avenues:
1. Get a good reference Bible. Most of these contain explanation to difficult verses.
2. Speak a reputable and learned church leader. Most of the lesser mortals here in the forum do not have the benefit of theological studies especially in the area of apologetics.
3. May I direct you to: www.carm.org. which contains a huge amount of information on difficult passages.
In view of your questions, most of them pertains to the lifestyle in the middle eastern part of the world and whatever rules and regulations were given were specifically for that period of time and culture. Obviously at this point, someone will point out that since the verse on homosexuality is also found in passages for this era, it is no longer valid. However bear in mind Paul's writing to his young protege Timothy on the character of leadership of which in 2 Timothy 3:2 states A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach.
Another verse further down verse 12 states: Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well
This verse obviously put paid the notion of homosexuality as well as bigamy which was practiced in the OT.
I read from you note that you are genuinely seeking some answers. Let me share that being a Christian does not guarantee answers all the time. The Bible, while written for the masses contains a huge amount of imagery and concepts that penetrates through time, culture and race. So in order to grasp more of it, one almost need to be an expert in the Jewish culture as well as the world events in the OT. -
so the OT is not relevant in todays world??
-
Actually I don't know who the "you" is. Probably not me...
The problem is the scripture itself claims this rule is suppose to act for eternity, not only for tis particular period. In the past, I do not know if there is a real need to label people as slaves and masters but it surely shows god do not support the idea of fairness. He can save the people from egytians yet allow them to treat other people almost the same way egytians treat them before. Isn't tat a form of double standard ? god allowing the master to nearly kill the slave, raping, selling or beating of them. Wat is the difference between u and egytians.
"Leviticus 25:44) - "‘As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you."
In the fallen world that mankind had created, slavery was a reality. God permitted its existence and worked within its system. Slaves were more domestic servants than oppressed field workers. Slaves could be the captives of war (Num. 31:25-47), subjects of debt to be worked off (2 Kings 4:1), born into slavery (Gen. 17:12-13), or entered into voluntarily (Exodus 21:5-6). In the Ancient Near East, some slaves were able to own other slaves and even conduct business and in Exodus 25:2 a slave was required to be set free after six years of service. Though slavery carries a very negative connotation here in America, it was not nearly as bad it was here in the first 100 years of our nation's existence.
As I said above, God works within the fallen system to bring about His will. Slavery was permitted by God and rules of treatment of slaves were given so that they would not be mistreated. "
Source: http://www.carm.org/diff/Lev_25_44.htm
BTW u seems to have failed to answer for the other practices like stoning people to death if she is being raped.However bear in mind Paul's writing to his young protege Timothy on the character of leadership of which in 2 Timothy 3:2 states A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach.
However 2 timothy says
1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work
followed by looking at timothy 3:2, it only shows tat gays cannot be a bishop, not gay is not allowed.Another verse further down verse 12 states: Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well
Tis appears to have been used wrongly again. It is still trying to talk about the conditions to be a deacon, which is a cleric ranking just below a priest in the Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, and Roman Catholic churches. (from dictinary .com)
This verse obviously put paid the notion of homosexuality as well as bigamy which was practiced in the OT.
It never says tat normal folks r not allowed to be gays either. Anyway it just says tat to be a good deacon or bishop, he must rule his family well. Otherwise if he can't rule his life well, how can he lead other people. However the issue now is not on whether should gays be appointed as priest or deacons, but whether r they allowed to be just normal church memebrs. BTW it never states tat homo is a sin either.I read from you note that you are genuinely seeking some answers. Let me share that being a Christian does not guarantee answers all the time. The Bible, while written for the masses contains a huge amount of imagery and concepts that penetrates through time, culture and race. So in order to grasp more of it, one almost need to be an expert in the Jewish culture as well as the world events in the OT.
I thought the bible can be applied to all people for all ages ? Why have strange rules tat only work for certain people at certain timeline ? R they being guineapigs to god incredulous laws ? -
If I may reiterate/add:Originally posted by Chin Eng:I read from you note that you are genuinely seeking some answers. Let me share that being a Christian does not guarantee answers all the time. The Bible, while written for the masses contains a huge amount of imagery and concepts that penetrates through time, culture and race. So in order to grasp more of it, one almost need to be an expert in the Jewish culture as well as the world events in the OT.
While reading the bible, it is good to note:
1) We have prejudices
We are never perfectly neutral. When we read the bible, we will bring our biases into it. If we read it to find loopholes, we certainly can find something to support our claims. If we read it to know the truth, I am confident that we will find it.
2) We are not the first audience of the scripture
The scripture was written to an original audience, then to us. When intepreting the bible, it is beneficial to ask ourselves what the passage meant to the original audience.
In the case of OT laws, there are moral codes, civil laws and ceremonial laws. Not all laws, especially civil and ceremonial laws, are applicable today, though one may extract and follow the principles behind them.
In the case of homosexuality, it should not be condone because teachings against it was reiterated by the apostles (as implied by neontetra and chin eng).
3) The bible can be misintepreted by christians and non-christians
To avoid this, we need to apply sound principles when we are intepreting the bible. A good read would be "How to read the bible for all its worth" by Fee and Stuart.
4) Jesus saves, not some legalistic application of the law (OT and NT) -
....whatever.....
you are obviously not familiar with the concept of "Priesthood of Believers" ie, all are called to be priests for God.... ....never mind.... I wasn't replying to you anyway...
....again it's five o'clock, time to shut down and leave my work behind..... -
Btw, I am not Christian, so I wont argue about the intepretation of the bibles, or about the topic here.Originally posted by Chin Eng:
Actually I don't mind the teaching, as long as person is teachable....
As I had mentioned before many times, the issue is not really about finding out truth or opinion, it is about the individual's dislike for Christians probably because in some previously, unpleasant experience, Christians knocked on his door too many times or some something.
Whatever it is, it has become extremely unpleasant to respond anymore....
Take care, bro.... study hard.
Just wanna highlight the issue in red. I dont think you should put off people not believing in Christianity simply becos of simple irritations. Its a though you implied non believers are lowly or humanistic to be able be to open to God's word, and that you have achieve some Godly or higher status in your belief that you are 'kind' enough to teach people... -
A sinful church.. *Shake head*
Indirect teaching.
-
ChinEng, seems that you are the only on holding the fort here.
With regards to homosexual, this is a outright sin. It brings to mind Sodom and Gohmorrah. There's where the word "sodomy" somes from by the way.
The mentioned church here is totally at the wrong end of Christianity. When i read the article, the onlything that seems right was the statement about "Love the sinner but hate the sin."
However, the sinner, in this case - homosexual, MUST confess and truely repent and stop his/her sin right there and then. It is then that he/she will be welcomed to any of the fundamental churches provided that he truely repent. If he/she returns to his/her vomit then the church must not accomodate this.
As for Old Testament and New Testament, bible-believing churches always hold to the stand that you must understand both testaments because 1) Scripture interpret scriptures. 2) New tstament fulfills old testament.
The laws of the Old Testament are still to be kept. For example the 10 Commandments. Many city , charismatic churches no longer stand by the 10 commandments. - thats very sad because we can see the morale degration in their churches.
The Jews still only holds the Old Testament and disregard Jesus as their Messiah. Thus if you go to Israel or just observe the Jews anywhere, they will keep the Old Testament practices and laws - possibily the stoning and the slavery - i cant say for sure. Nonetheless the point is that the laws must still be followed by Christians but not the practices. -
Not sure if there is a misunderstanding regarding my previous post here. When I use the term "law", I am also referring to the practices that are discontinued by christians. Thus, I said not all laws are to be followed, at least not literally. One good example is the laws concerning diet. Hope this clears the air a bit.Originally posted by fandango:The Jews still only holds the Old Testament and disregard Jesus as their Messiah. Thus if you go to Israel or just observe the Jews anywhere, they will keep the Old Testament practices and laws - possibily the stoning and the slavery - i cant say for sure. Nonetheless the point is that the laws must still be followed by Christians but not the practices.
Stoning and slavery are not practised by Jews in modern Israel.
Sorry for digressing. Back to the topic: homosexuality is a sin. -
Howdy Larry,Originally posted by laurence82:Btw, I am not Christian, so I wont argue about the intepretation of the bibles, or about the topic here.
Just wanna highlight the issue in red. I dont think you should put off people not believing in Christianity simply becos of simple irritations. Its a though you implied non believers are lowly or humanistic to be able be to open to God's word, and that you have achieve some Godly or higher status in your belief that you are 'kind' enough to teach people...
Sorry if it seemed that I implied that non-believers are lowly or humanistic to be able to open to God's word. It is not meant to be seen as such.
Stupidissmart and I (and probably a bunch of other Christians here) has a long on-going "discussion" on religion. SIS had been going on and on about his objections. The issue is NOT ABOUT other genuine seekers or interested party asking questions about Christianity. These non-believers, which may also include yourself, at behave properly and ask polite questions. Even when there is a disagreement, everyone walks away happy. SIS seem to have a feud with Christians by and large and had been incessant with his attacks.
His modus operandi is that he is after the truth and that Christian doctrine are based on lies and inconsistency. So passionate is his "crusade" that he spents a huge amount of his time to research into anti-Christian sites to support his counterarguments. Strangely in the seek for consistency and fact, he only target Christians. Not once did he have any to say about other religion which have their fair share of myths and confusion.
Again please let me apologise to you if you had been offended by my statements. It was directed only at one person.
Not one single person had been so offensive in this forum and it is probably true that most Christians are irritated by his stance.Originally posted by fandango:ChinEng, seems that you are the only on holding the fort here. Not for long. I will probably stop responding to that one individual. Cannot tahan. Vomitting blood..... -
CE, i mustta agree with ya. I dont like people who dwelve or question others beliefs or religions, whether by itself or by comparing with other beliefs. Just dont like actions of certain members of different beliefs, same things goes for Muslims who pretended to be God's matyrs by blowing people apart or Buddhist monks who enriched themselves with gold and cash.
-
My take (which is rather uneducated) is that a huge part of OT is history and while laws were given, it is a mere record of the giving of the law, not that it was sanctioned (approved) by Yahweh or Jehovah.Originally posted by ratinacage:so the OT is not relevant in todays world??
The quotations that you had used were either from Exodus or Leviticus which happened at a time where the Israelites were wandering in the desert (no need to debate on whether it happened or not). Hence the scenario was that there was lawlessness throughout the land. It will be difficult to imagine the NT type of behaviour here as: let's go in and TALK to these strangers. It is more like plunder and pillage. Books ranging from Genesis to possibly Kings are seen more as historical books rather than books of doctrine and should read as such.
Beyond what I'd recommended to you earlier, for Bible knowledge, you will need to look at the history of the region to understand the context of the verses. Even better, understand that the English Bible that you may be reading were in Hebrew as well as Aramaic (think I spelt it wrongly) and Greek. A common example is the word Love: in Greek it has at least 4 similar words: Philieo, Storge, Eros and Agape. So to some uneducated individual who may argue, how can you love the Lord with all your heard, and in his mind he is thinking of Eros, he is totally wrong.
Once the OT reaches the prophets, then you will see more prophecies being pronounced, some even far reaching towards 33BC, the birth of Christ. -
Homosexuality to me, is not okay anywhere, to me it is a psychological disorder resulting from a combination of early development, culture, and other reasons that means, I believe people are not born gay. But I don't go against gay individuals either, like the article stated, the Churches accept the sinner but not the sin. My 2 cents, homosexuality are not alright.
-
You get the sense that the way and the amount he questions, he is not too far from salvation. Well, really we can't judge because only God knows but at least you planted the seed eh.Originally posted by Chin Eng: Not for long. I will probably stop responding to that one individual. Cannot tahan. Vomitting blood.....
Good on ya. -
It's not "i was born this way" because homosexuality it is more of a sickness - mental sickness. God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.Originally posted by gaoyue:Homosexuality to me, is not okay anywhere, to me it is a psychological disorder resulting from a combination of early development, culture, and other reasons that means, I believe people are not born gay. But I don't go against gay individuals either, like the article stated, the Churches accept the sinner but not the sin. My 2 cents, homosexuality are not alright.
But the society is now accepting the vain cries of these homosexuals - even televison (Queer Eyes) are glorifying them. Churches to accept homosexual was just waiting to happen and now this have reached our shores.
What's next? Women pastor. Oops we have that already.
-
Originally posted by fandango:It's not "i was born this way" because homosexuality it is more of a sickness - mental sickness. God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
But the society is now accepting the vain cries of these homosexuals - even televison (Queer Eyes) are glorifying them. Churches to accept homosexual was just waiting to happen and now this have reached our shores.
What's next? Women pastor. Oops we have that already.
I believe there should be equality of the genders bah.... -
If I may reiterate/add:
I thought the scripture should be god breathed ? Since the scripture is so confusing and people can believe either side of the story, how do u know u r interpreting the right one ? How do u know which side is truth or not ?
While reading the bible, it is good to note:
1) We have prejudices
We are never perfectly neutral. When we read the bible, we will bring our biases into it. If we read it to find loopholes, we certainly can find something to support our claims. If we read it to know the truth, I am confident that we will find it.2) We are not the first audience of the scripture
As I said before, scripture r god breath thus should be perfect since god is like a rock. It is not intended for us, then so wat ? U mean, we can pick and choose the one we like lah ? I like tis law then follow it while I do not like tis one and reject it. Then like tat might as well abolish homo law too since it appears to be getting less and less relevant
The scripture was written to an original audience, then to us. When intepreting the bible, it is beneficial to ask ourselves what the passage meant to the original audience.In the case of OT laws, there are moral codes, civil laws and ceremonial laws. Not all laws, especially civil and ceremonial laws, are applicable today, though one may extract and follow the principles behind them.
So who wrote the scripture ? God right ? Since god writes it, then he expect us to follow these laws isn't it ? I thought moses say the rules is everlasting and we can not choose wat we like one... otherwise we may be fried by Yahwen... SO he is wrong, meaning god is wrong lah ?In the case of homosexuality, it should not be condone because teachings against it was reiterated by the apostles (as implied by neontetra and chin eng).
Where ?3) The bible can be misintepreted by christians and non-christians
I thought just interprete the bible literally. god cannot choose his words well ? Reading your so call book will only means asking us not to read it as such
To avoid this, we need to apply sound principles when we are intepreting the bible. A good read would be "How to read the bible for all its worth" by Fee and Stuart.
Saves by aginst his own father ? Wait a minute, he is god so does holy spirit... so he is against himself ?
4) Jesus saves, not some legalistic application of the law (OT and NT) -
....whatever.....
Then in tat case women should be treated the same as they treat gays. Girls can never be the husband of household too isn't it ? According to fandango girls can never be priest either. If u say tat statement justfiy gays r sinners, then it also justify girls r equally sinful
you are obviously not familiar with the concept of "Priesthood of Believers" ie, all are called to be priests for God....
Why do u believe homo r sinners anyway... I thought they had proven tat nature do plays a part for their sexuality. If there is a sinner, it is godWith regards to homosexual, this is a outright sin. It brings to mind Sodom and Gohmorrah. There's where the word "sodomy" somes from by the way.
Where do u find these stories ? tell meThe mentioned church here is totally at the wrong end of Christianity. When i read the article, the onlything that seems right was the statement about "Love the sinner but hate the sin."
Frankly I still can't see why homo is a sin now. Care to elaborateAs for Old Testament and New Testament, bible-believing churches always hold to the stand that you must understand both testaments because 1) Scripture interpret scriptures. 2) New tstament fulfills old testament.
so both must be believed. Then why not believe in stoning women etc ? Wat is the justification for not following them ?Stupidissmart and I (and probably a bunch of other Christians here) has a long on-going "discussion" on religion. SIS had been going on and on about his objections. The issue is NOT ABOUT other genuine seekers or interested party asking questions about Christianity. These non-believers, which may also include yourself, at behave properly and ask polite questions. Even when there is a disagreement, everyone walks away happy. SIS seem to have a feud with Christians by and large and had been incessant with his attacks.
I thought christians ask others to be open minded ? Why r u yourself close minded and not believe u may be wrong. I thought earlier u have come up with 3 conclusions, one of them stating tat u yourself may be wrong. Aren't u interested in finding the truth ? U prefer to cheat yourself and not hear anything against it ? As I said many times, I do not hurl verbal abuses without reasons. I brought my arguments and facts over and talk about it. Instead of pondering on the points, u just came up with answer tat state "I do not know why it seems wrong, but I don't care" Why can't u think tat maybe the whole idea is man made and is just a big lie.His modus operandi is that he is after the truth and that Christian doctrine are based on lies and inconsistency. So passionate is his "crusade" that he spents a huge amount of his time to research into anti-Christian sites to support his counterarguments. Strangely in the seek for consistency and fact, he only target Christians. Not once did he have any to say about other religion which have their fair share of myths and confusion.
Why r u so against me for not talking about other religion ? Why should I ? If u like to talk about them, u do all the talking yourself, don't drag me in.Again please let me apologise to you if you had been offended by my statements. It was directed only at one person.
I guess as much, resorting to personal attacks in the end. Most christian r probably irritated because they r see the ugly side of christainity, tat probably it all is just one big lie.
Not one single person had been so offensive in this forum and it is probably true that most Christians are irritated by his stance. -
-
My take (which is rather uneducated) is that a huge part of OT is history and while laws were given, it is a mere record of the giving of the law, not that it was sanctioned (approved) by Yahweh or Jehovah.
U r right. The scripture r not god breath and people add in their own stories if they like. Actually the whole chunk is just folk stories mixed in as well. How different do u feel stories like adam and eve compared with chinese stories liek nu wa and pang gu ? It is all man made and there is nothing holy about it. U believe in the NT, too bad it agrees on OT. Then doesn't it becomes wrong too since it claims a wrong scripture as the right one.The quotations that you had used were either from Exodus or Leviticus which happened at a time where the Israelites were wandering in the desert (no need to debate on whether it happened or not). Hence the scenario was that there was lawlessness throughout the land. It will be difficult to imagine the NT type of behaviour here as: let's go in and TALK to these strangers. It is more like plunder and pillage. Books ranging from Genesis to possibly Kings are seen more as historical books rather than books of doctrine and should read as such.
First, god bring lawlessness to them and make them lost for many years just because they make a golden cow. Second, god should be omnipotent and probably should educate the people to receive the NT when needed instead of giving them the hellish OT first. Third, u r right, it is your own story and not the bible stance where they claims everything in OT is true, is for everybody and for all ages. If u fail to believe in tat line, then u might as well forget about as many rules as u like. U either believe all totally or u believe non of it. Tat is wat the bible force u to.Beyond what I'd recommended to you earlier, for Bible knowledge, you will need to look at the history of the region to understand the context of the verses. Even better, understand that the English Bible that you may be reading were in Hebrew as well as Aramaic (think I spelt it wrongly) and Greek. A common example is the word Love: in Greek it has at least 4 similar words: Philieo, Storge, Eros and Agape. So to some uneducated individual who may argue, how can you love the Lord with all your heard, and in his mind he is thinking of Eros, he is totally wrong.
So u r sggesting the bible u had read may not be accurate ? MAybe the part on homo is also an inaccurate translation of the original version. Maybe there r many other parts tat had been translated wrongly too. SO how ? U choose the ones u like to believe and throw the rest down the drain ?
Once the OT reaches the prophets, then you will see more prophecies being pronounced, some even far reaching towards 33BC, the birth of Christ. -
oops fell off chair. Ouch! Never mind...
-
-
stupidissmart, i thought you were pretty well versed with the bible?
Sodom and Gohmorrah can be found in Genesis Chapter 18 - 19, go read about it. This is as clear as it gets. God rained brimstone and fire on them for their homosexual sins. -
Thanks for the info, I have read and came to tis passage that will define everything
And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where [are] the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
After reading tis sentence, how do u interpret the meaning ?
1) They want to know the men
2) They want to have sex with the men
If u ask me, I only see their intentions is to know who has came into the houses. I never see any sex or anything tat implied tis meaning here. I am sure all people in some stage of time have said they want to know Peter or Paul or some male person. R they gays ? Does intention to know a male means they want to have sex with him ?
For wanting to know who they r, they r blinded and killed by fire and brimstone.
-
Yes, the word "know", used back then in the Old English time of King James, means "to have sex with".
So you are spot on here, and i hope this will bring to light the message of the passage.