Posted on 01/01/2014 7:52:09 PM PST by ReformationFan
Long read and worth every moment.
He came to fulfill the law not destroy it.
Since “The subject of homosexual behavior and Judaism dates back to the Torah. The book of Vayiqra (Leviticus) forbids sexual intercourse between males, classifying it as a to’eivah (something abhorred or detested) that can be subject to capital punishment under halakha (Jewish law).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_and_sexual_orientation
I would think he was in accordance with the Jewish law.
Indeed. I would also add another factor: while the four Gospels do not record a more specific example of Jesus specifically pointing to the sinfulness of homosexual behavior, I would say that was because it is highly doubtful that any 1st century Jew living in Palestine was arguing in favor of it. In other words, all Jews(Jesus, John the Baptist, their followers, Pharisees, Saducees, Essenes, Zealots, etc.) already considered it a sin per the Lev. 18 and 20 passages you referred. Hence, there was no viable argument otherwise.
On the other hand, Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, was dealing with an environment where homosexual behavior was accepted more, i.e., the Greco-Roman world. Hence, he addressed it more specifically and directly and declared it sinful.
“He doesn’t say heterosexuality either. These are psycho Sexual terms inverted by Freud to rationalize sin.”
Good point. And allows the sexuality marxists to come up with the silliness like “there are 5 different genders.”
Agreed. It really demolishes the pro-homosexuality arguments thoroughly.
Good point.
Bookmark.
As if honesty matters to those that make this argument...
They delude themselves. This is more dangerous than the sinful acts they practice, for they deny the infallible word of God and some even preach that the gospel somehow evolves with a “higher state of man.” This is the most dangerous thing I see in the United States. There is no higher authority than God, nor will there ever be. He is, was, and will always be infinitely bigger than us on a scale we will never comprehend.
There are many churches (and professed Christians) and some denominations in the United States that have fallen into this fallacy. They are no longer grounded in the word and therefore are no longer “of God.” They become false prophets and preach false doctrines to those who refuse to study the word themselves. The liberalization of our nation has found it’s way into churches who are more concerned with being “culturally relevant” than being “of Christ.”
This warped logic is the reason so many professed Christians vote for politicians who directly oppose God by promoting sin such as abortion or homosexuality. Too many Christians believe that we are not allowed to promote moral behavior in our nation, even as they acknowledge that they must promote morality in their home. How can one serve God with two faces?
I don’t hate homosexuals for I too am a sinner, but I will never condone that which I know is wrong. When I was young I believed that Christians in America were the silent majority that would stand up when called upon. I now see that is not true, for if the leaders of the church are afraid to stand up, how timid must individual believers be? I am not Catholic, but even when Catholic leaders stand against abortion 50% of them still voted for abortion.
Interesting numbers that are worth studying -
http://www.pewforum.org/2012/11/07/how-the-faithful-voted-2012-preliminary-exit-poll-analysis/
Perhaps the numbers in this poll are the most accurate extrapolation of “who believes what”, but I have never understood how anyone can profess to believe in God on one hand and vote against him on the other. Sadly, too many pastors are afraid to say the same thing.
Before the typical replies - I don’t want a “religious state”, I only want a moral one based on Judeo-Christian values. Each of us have the freewill to believe or not believe in God, but as Adams stated “our constitution was designed for a religious people.” Any wonder our nation (and the Church) is struggling?
Was there ever any doubt? (Major sarc.)
There is no cause to believe that Jesus hated any person, nor that he does not love all. Homosexuals seem programmed to insist that abhorrence of what they do, sexually, can only be motivated by hatred of them, as persons. Utterly fallacious.
It's actually amazing how many so-called believers conveniently forget sex-before-marriage is as deadly a sin as homosexuality, per the Bible. I'd wager the percentage of adults in America meeting the stipulation to be in the single digits.
I am sending this post along to all my friends.
What percentage of atheist Australians would you wager to meet the stipulation? Zero?
True. But Christ came to heal the sick: fornicators, homosexuals, adulterers, murderers, prostitutes, etc. I think this is the other part of the equation that Pope Francis is now emphasizing.
Douay-Rheims Bible
“But before all things have a constant mutual charity among yourselves: for charity covereth a multitude of sins.”
Jesus’ silence on homosexuality is a sign he accepted the traditional Jewish condemnation of the practice. Christians only needed to address the issue when they began to proselytize to the Gentiles, among whom homosexuality had been widely accepted.
“Indeed. I would also add another factor: while the four Gospels do not record a more specific example of Jesus specifically pointing to the sinfulness of homosexual behavior, I would say that was because it is highly doubtful that any 1st century Jew living in Palestine was arguing in favor of it. In other words, all Jews(Jesus, John the Baptist, their followers, Pharisees, Saducees, Essenes, Zealots, etc.) already considered it a sin per the Lev. 18 and 20 passages you referred. Hence, there was no viable argument otherwise.
On the other hand, Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, was dealing with an environment where homosexual behavior was accepted more, i.e., the Greco-Roman world. Hence, he addressed it more specifically and directly and declared it sinful.”
Excellent point, and well worth remembering when we get into these tussles.
Thanks for the ping. I’ll get back to this.
Happy 8th day of Christmas, Reformation Fan!
Maybe not, although I reckon there are plenty who are not shy about revelling in being drunkards and fornicators.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.