I can only conclude that your claim is not provable, on the basis of two things: if it were, you would have done so by now (I would think), and it is not possible logically to disprove something that is proven.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
I've tried to keep to facts, on this and related threads, but I have probably crossed the line at least a few times. I apologize for that, and now I think I should step away. I've made my points, and we can now just agree to disagree.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
NotforSale,
You know that various theologians have interpreted that text in several different ways.
First, the way you take it.
Second, the passage is about those who "changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the creator"... idolatry. Some theologians believe that Paul is describing the common practice of homosexual temple prostitution... not necessarily "homosexuality" itself.
Third, some theologians point out that the text says, "for even their women did...", indicating that these women were wives; and that "likewise also the men...", indicating the husbands. Therefore these theologians argue that we have married individuals taking part in idolatrous homosexual practices and that the passage doesn't speak of "homosexuality" itself.
Fourth, the passage must be read in it's context:
Romans 1:26-32 (ESV), & Romans 2:1-5
26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
2 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
These theologians argue that Paul is using pagan practices as a polemic to set the stange to condemn ALL before God, not just homosexuals. Thus, we're all in the same boat and in desperate need of Christ.
Of course... most use the passage only to condemn homosexuality.
The point: There are several ways to interpret the passage.
You know that various theologians have interpreted that text in several different ways.
First, the way you take it.
Second, the passage is about those who "changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the creator"... idolatry. Some theologians believe that Paul is describing the common practice of homosexual temple prostitution... not necessarily "homosexuality" itself.
Third, some theologians point out that the text says, "for even their women did...", indicating that these women were wives; and that "likewise also the men...", indicating the husbands. Therefore these theologians argue that we have married individuals taking part in idolatrous homosexual practices and that the passage doesn't speak of "homosexuality" itself.
Fourth, the passage must be read in it's context:
Romans 1:26-32 (ESV), & Romans 2:1-5
26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
2 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
These theologians argue that Paul is using pagan practices as a polemic to set the stange to condemn ALL before God, not just homosexuals. Thus, we're all in the same boat and in desperate need of Christ.
Of course... most use the passage only to condemn homosexuality.
The point: There are several ways to interpret the passage.
Aquila, you can make the Bible say whatever you want it too. To be honest, I'm tired of this constant "Reading between the lines". This has created more false Religion and confusion on Earth than anything else.
The way I see it (I've been studying Scripture for over 33 years, and I've been a pastor for 16 years), Romans is beyond clear when dealing with this subject.
Sexual perversion is wrong, and Homosexuality is sexual perversion.
Aquila, you can make the Bible say whatever you want it too. To be honest, I'm tired of this constant "Reading between the lines". This has created more false Religion and confusion on Earth than anything else.
The way I see it (I've been studying Scripture for over 33 years, and I've been a pastor for 16 years), Romans is beyond clear when dealing with this subject.
Sexual perversion is wrong, and Homosexuality is sexual perversion.
And there are theologians who know the original languages and customs who have been studying Scripture for 50 or so years.
The Bible has historically been misinterpreted. For example, Trinitarians misinterpret various passages, and their view has been the established view for a little over 2,000 years... it doesn't mean that they are correct.
Now, I had married into a family that was Jewish. I think you'd do well to study what rabbinical scholars have said about the subject, especially when considering the OT and the law of Moses.
I'm NOT saying that it isn't sinful. What I'm saying is that there are various interpretations of the text. Therefore, it would do us well to approach the subject with patience and compassion.
Ultimately, is the point of this topic that the state should take children from a biological parent if they are gay?
I did not read that in the article did you?
I think the point is, homosexuality is high risk behavior - not just for consenting adults but also for minors they have influence over. I did not see comparisons to other high risk behaviors like drug addiction, so I don't know how the numbers might compare.
__________________ "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
Aquila did you ever produce these highly respected theologians that Prax requested in another thread? I understood your schedule was just too tight to do it that day... Yet you again are making reference to these nameless original language experts. Hmmm
...
__________________ "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
I did not read that in the article did you? I think the point is, homosexuality is high risk behavior - not just for consenting adults but also for minors they have influence over. I did not see comparisons to other high risk behaviors like drug addiction, so I don't know how the numbers might compare.
I know what you're trying to say Hoovie. But I don't know how they really came up with that data. I mean, I have a gay uncle that is in a serious long term relationship. My uncle served in the military and is retired. He has a son and a daughter from a previous marriage that are full grown and he did quite well with them as a parent. He loves his kids and would be the first to take anyone out who tried to harm them.
I know maybe two other serious long term gay/lesbian couples that are working class, own decent homes, and even attend church. My ex-uncle-in-law was an Episcopal priest who has performed civil unions in Canada.
Of all those gay people I know, I only know one who worries me. He's a younger guy who is radically obsessed with his "gay identity" and goes through boyfriends like crazy.
As I said before... I'm sure one could find a study that indicates that deeply religious homes are more prone to child abuse than most.
I think it's fine to disagree with gays on a moral and/or spiritual level. I've been in many debates with my ex-uncle-in-law. However, we must be cautious not to demonize anyone or judge them unjustly.
Linear Mode
