Same-Sex relationships - and Bible Chrstians - etc

[Rumpelstil]

Just one short question:
Why is it that some Christians think that Same-Sex relationships are an "abomination"?
That was said in the Old Testament.
Jesus never said anything like it.

Do those Christians think they are wiser - or more Christian than Christ himself?

 

[DataPoint]

So-called Christians only worry about it. Real Christians do not.

 

[Rumpelstil]

So-called Christians only worry about it. Real Christians do not.

Wise words! I agree!

 

[Rumpelstil]

Using the Bible against LGBTQ+ people is an abuse of scripture​

Not the Word of God​

The Bible is often used as a source of authority, but it is misleading to call it “the word of God”. In fact, Christianity teaches that the word of God is not scripture, it is Jesus Christ.

As such, Jesus said nothing explicit about same-sex relationships or transgender people. In the New Testament, it is Paul who teaches about sexual morality, not Jesus.

Using the Bible against LGBTQ+ people is an abuse of scripture

By practising double standards, Conservative Christians are missing the point of the scriptures.

theconversation.com

 

[tosca1]

Just one short question:
Why is it that some Christians think that Same-Sex relationships are an "abomination"?
That was said in the Old Testament.
Jesus never said anything like it.

Do those Christians think they are wiser - or more Christian than Christ himself?

Abomination, is just another way of saying it is a sin. Just like adultery is.

Don't forget there's a big age gap between the OT and the NT.
Perhaps, during the time of the OT....people expressed their lingo differently from the "modern" folks of the NT.

Just like the way we don't talk the same way now, as people in the 18th century.


But, indeed - the NT included it among what is sinful in God's eyes.

 

[Rumpelstil]

If God created people that way - how then can it be a sin?
Or else God himself is the sinner.

 

[Rumpelstil]

But, indeed - the NT included it among what is sinful in God's eyes.

Where does the NT say so?

 

[tosca1]

Where does the NT say so?

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.



1 Cor 6
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.



1 Timothy 1
9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,
10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

 

[tosca1]

If God created people that way - how then can it be a sin?

I cannot answer for God.

Anyway - don't we all have the nature to sin We are all prone to sin.......thus the reason for a Messiah.
We all have our own crosses to bear (weaknesses).

 

[Rumpelstil]

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.



1 Cor 6
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.



1 Timothy 1
9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,
10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

That is not Jesus who is speaking here.
It is the same person who said that women should shut up when there are grown men present.
Would you agree with that as well?

 

[tosca1]

That is not Jesus who is speaking here.
It is the same person who said that women should shut up when there are grown men present.
Would you agree with that as well?

You may not like the message - but yes, they're all from Jesus.
They're all consistent with the OT - which Jesus is consistent with, too.

 

[VySky]

You may not like the message - but yes, they're all from Jesus.
They're all consistent with the OT - which Jesus is consistent with, too.

Very consistent. Many examples exist where the Old Testament links to the New Testament.

 

[Rumpelstil]

You may not like the message - but yes, they're all from Jesus.
They're all consistent with the OT - which Jesus is consistent with, too.

From Jesus?
Where did Jesus ever say anything against Same-Sex-Relationships?

------------

Btw: Christianity got its name from Jesus Christ, not from Paulus or Saulus or Saint Paul etc....

 

[tosca1]

From Jesus?
Where did Jesus ever say anything against Same-Sex-Relationships?

------------

Btw: Christianity got its name from Jesus Christ, not from Paulus or Saulus or Saint Paul etc....

Lol - do your home-work.

You shouldn't be writing about things you obviously, hardly know about.



I simply responded to your OP. Explained about "abomination" term.
I'm not here to try to convince you.
I'm outa here.

 

[Rumpelstil]

I'm outa here.

Tschüss! = over and out

 

[Rumpelstil]

Can somebody else show me a line where Jesus condemned same-sex-relationships?

 

[Rumpelstil]

And: Are we Christians or Saint-Paul-ians?

 

[NotreDame]

That is not Jesus who is speaking here.
It is the same person who said that women should shut up when there are grown men present.
Would you agree with that as well?

Paul didn’t state, “women should shut up when there are grown men present.” Distortion of what he did say doesn’t facilitate making a rational point.

And why does it matter if Jesus isn’t speaking in Romans? The letter to the Romans is from Paul, an individual widely recognized as condemning those who believed Jesus was the Messiah and preaching his message, to converting to one of them, and taking that very message to the Gentiles.

 

[it's just me]

That is not Jesus who is speaking here.
It is the same person who said that women should shut up when there are grown men present.
Would you agree with that as well?

If you are going to misquote St. Paul, at least get it right. What kind of Catholic are you?

 

[NotreDame]

Can somebody else show me a line where Jesus condemned same-sex-relationships?

Sure, as soon as you establish what it is necessary to Christians and Christianity to do so.

Paul, in Romans, is speaking of what God personally did, which reasonably the inference is, like the OT, Paul wrote under the inspiration of what God, or as Paul says “God breathed” verses. Peter, in 2nd Peter, 3:15-16, says, “So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters.”

So, the verses in the first chapter of Romans, in part referenced above in prior posts, verses 18-31, is what God did, how God responded, and the sinful conduct he allowed to consume some by their own choices. So, this is as equal as Jesus personally speaking.

 

[it's just me]

Paul didn’t state, “women should shut up when there are grown men present.” Distortion of what he did say doesn’t facilitate making a rational point.

And why does it matter if Jesus isn’t speaking in Romans? The letter to the Romans is from Paul, an individual widely recognized as condemning those who believed Jesus was the Messiah and preaching his message, to converting to one of them, and taking that very message to the Gentiles.

He's just cherry picking scripture to suit his agenda.

 

[it's just me]

From Jesus?
Where did Jesus ever say anything against Same-Sex-Relationships?

------------

Btw: Christianity got its name from Jesus Christ, not from Paulus or Saulus or Saint Paul etc....

I'd show you but I insist that you find it yourself before you keep pontificating.

 

[Rumpelstil]

Sure, as soon as you establish what it is necessary to Christians and Christianity to do so.

Paul, in Romans, is speaking of what God personally did, which reasonably the inference is, like the OT, Paul wrote under the inspiration of what God, or as Paul says “God breathed” verses. Peter, in 2nd Peter, 3:15-16, says, “So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters.”

So, the verses in the first chapter of Romans, in part referenced above in prior posts, verses 18-31, is what God did, how God responded, and the sinful conduct he allowed to consume some by their own choices. So, this is as equal as Jesus personally speaking.

I had asked where JESUS ever spoke such stupid homophobic nonsense.
I did not ask about PAUL.

What do you expect from a fanatic who told all women to shut up?

 

[Marrybore]

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.

That doesn't mean a man having sex with another man is a "shameful act", only that men committed shameful acts with other men. They could commit shameful acts with women, too, surely?

1 Cor 6
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.



1 Timothy 1
9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,
10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

I would be interested to know how the word "homosexuality" was translated from the original.

 

[tosca1]

That doesn't mean a man having sex with another man is a "shameful act", only that men committed shameful acts with other men. They could commit shameful acts with women, too, surely?

I would be interested to know how the word "homosexuality" was translated from the original.

"Shameful act." Like picking each other's noses? Two men mooning other people?

You can spin it anyway you want - a lot of people do.
But in the Bible - that's what it means. Homosexual act.

I would be interested to know how the word "homosexuality" was translated from the original.

men who have sex with men - 1 Cor 6

Does it really matter? Would it change the message?
The description of the act, fits the bill.