If homosexuality is an abomination (unclean) then wouldn't the concept of being sanctified eternally as stated in Hebrews 10:14 be applicable to homosexuals as well as menstruating women?
I'm still not able to subscribe to this concept of "ceremonial law" being fulfilled. It seems abundantly clear that ALL the Law has been fulfilled in Christ’s unconditional LOVE (Romans 7:6; 2:29; 8:1-10; Matthew 5:17,18; Galatians 3:18-25; 4:4,5; 5:14; John 15:13)
1. I am unaware of any place in the OT, where homosexuality is listed as "unclean." It was in and of itself an abomination (something God hates).
2. Acts of abomination are not stoned today; but instead redemption is possible (1 Cor 6:9-11).
3. I am unaware of any Scripture that speaks of Christ's unconditional love. I do not find it in the Scriptures you cited. In fact, Romans 8:1 specifically says "There is therefore now is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus; who walk NOT after the flesh... "
1. God is a Spirit and all that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. HOWEVER; male and female distinctions; just like bond or free distinctions were not done away with in regards to our lives on earth.
If Paul meant his statement in Galatians to be one of total obliteration of roles on earth; he wouldn't have written Philemon the way he did. Instead he would have said. Hey.... there is no bond or free in Christ Jesus. You must release this slave NOW. But that wasn't what he said...
Paul's words in Galatians were about level ground before the cross but not obliteration of distinction otherwise.
2. Even if this were not so; God doesn't need to know if one is a male or female when engaged in fornication. Fornication is a ticket to hell.
Well, I am standing at the cross because it is at the cross where the blood of Christ is applied. I guess I'm standing in a pretty good place.
brad- Why would God hate and detest something in the OT that would then be ok for the NT?
We don't stone people anymore because the NT ushered in the blood of Christ and redemption for men's sin.
I certainly cannot answer for God and would never try to. However, it is important to understand that the Law was given to the Jews and had specific implications for those people at that time. There appears to be a lot of things in the OT Law that God did not want His people to do. Why He doesn't require those same things now I do not know. All I know is I'm glad we are no longer under the law.
First of all, the OT only refers to homosexual sex. So, if we are still under that part of the OT Law, then sexual acts are all that need to be refrained from. Following your line of thought that the homosexual can be born with with an attraction to the same sex but can refrain from sexually acting on it, one would have to allow for two men who are in love with each other to live together, sleep in the same bed, kiss, hold hands, and basically spend the rest of their lives together as life-long companions as long as they do not have sex.
Also, God created all his creatures with a desire for companionship. That is why he initially created the animals. However, man did not find a help meat in the animals so God created a help meat out of man's own flesh and blood. It is a God-given desire to have life-time companionship. It is not a God-given desire to be an alcoholic. You are comparing apples and oranges when comparing alcoholism to homosexuality. Understand, homosexuality is nothing more and nothing less than human companionship. It is not even about sex as much as it is about intimacy and relationship.
Ever wonder why God created just one man and one woman? Adam and Eve, not Annie and Eve or Adam and Steve?
It wasn't for procreational purposes. He could have created ten people and had plenty of that going on.
And if you think that two people, regardless of gender, can do the above and leave it at that, you live in a different world than I do. It doesn't justify it in any way.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
Whether it was identified as an abomination or not is not important. If one is going to suggest that we are still under the moral law of the OT then anything contained in that law should be followed. In other words, if one is going to advocate that homosexuality is an abomination because the OT law said it was then we must also advocate the OT law teachings on stoning of rebellious children. How can we reconcile only following part of the law in this dispensation of Grace? We can't.
Your problem is that homosexuality isn't just mentioned in the OT.
1 Cor. 6:9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
effeminate
Definition
1. soft, soft to the touch
2. metaph. in a bad sense
1. effeminate
1. of a catamite
2. of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man
3. of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness
4. of a male prostitute
I think that settles that.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
I am unaware of any Scripture that speaks of Christ's unconditional love. I do not find it in the Scriptures you cited. In fact, Romans 8:1 specifically says "There is therefore now is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus; who walk NOT after the flesh... "
If Gods Love had conditions, then they would certainly not be met by our frail humanity. The same holds true with the law, it was never kept or met no matter how hard men tried, until Christ Fulfilled it by understanding that the written letter of the law was only ever supposed to point us back to spiritual things. When He cried, “It is finished,” He met any condition that may have been required…
(1 John 4:9,10,16):
In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. ...
And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Eph. 1:6 -- To the praise of the glory of His grace, wherein
He hath made us accepted in the Beloved.
While we may not see the words “Unconditional Love”. We can be assured that He met the conditions!
Your problem is that homosexuality isn't just mentioned in the OT.
1 Cor. 6:9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
effeminate
Definition
1. soft, soft to the touch
2. metaph. in a bad sense
1. effeminate
1. of a catamite
2. of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man
3. of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness
4. of a male prostitute
I think that settles that.
Strongs definition for effeminate (NT:3120)
malakos (mal-ak-os'); of uncertain affinity; soft, i.e. fine (clothing); figuratively, a catamite:
Vines Expository Dictionary defintion of effeminate (NT:3120)
malakos, "soft, soft to the touch" (Lat., mollis, Eng., "mollify," "emollient," etc.), is used (a) of raiment, Matt 11:8 (twice); Luke 7:25; (b) metaphorically, in a bad sense, 1 Cor 6:9, "effeminate," not simply of a male who practices forms of lewdness, but persons in general, who are guilty of addiction to sins of the flesh, voluptuous.
Linear Mode
