Leviticus and Homo's

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Surely you are aware that there are Christians who believe homosexuality is a sin. And that there are Christians who support ostracizing homosexuals from their church (especially if they are not celibate).

Jesus did not teach either of these things. So these Christians are following the teachings of others - not Jesus.

Those who hold to an orthodox view of the Scriptures consider drunkenness, fornication and general debauchery as sins and follow the commands to cut off fellowship with ones practicing the same. Do you have a problem with that concept, as well?

Originally posted by SwissGambit
"Cult" just means "less popular religious clique". It's an excuse for the bigger groups to pick on the small, even though the big ones hold beliefs that are equally nutty.

I don't think this is entirely true.

There are big cults too. And there are small religious groups that are not cults.
If we google "cults" and its definition, then we get a lot of hits, that shows other properties than not just being small and dispiced.

But you're right that cults are a bad phenomenon in the religious domain. They are always weak in their faith so they cannot stand any critiques, they just don't have the answers.

Originally posted by gtbiking4life
Sure I'm aware of that and that's their choice - I choose to act differently though. I know someone who is homosexual and treat them the same as I treat anyone else - with love and respect.

Yes as a Christain should. We are to love all humans and that is a point that keeps getting missed. That would include someone that comments murder as horrible as it is. And in that case they will answer to God for taking another life. But if that person is truly regretfull and with deep remorse then we have to follow Jesus's example and forgive and leave the rest up to god.
But what if that person keeps that same course and continues to murder? Would you still asociate with them? Welcome them to your church?
The same is true of practicing the act of homosexuality. For some reason some here can't see in written word that God despises that act and condemns it and the scriptures put that act in the same context as one who murders. He hates it and abhors it.
Revelation 21:8 (New King James Version)
8 But the cowardly, unbelieving,[a] abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

"""Homosexuality is Fornication. A point that is continually missed."""

1 Cor 6:9,10 can not be any clearer to the grouping of wicked things that homosexuality is linked to.
New King James Version (NKJV)
1 Corinthians 6:9,10

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

God’s View:
The Bible does not call particular attention to homosexuals as a group to be ostracized or hated by Christians. Moreover, it does not teach that God will punish homosexuals—or any of his creatures—by burning them in a fiery hell forever.—Compare Romans 6:23.
However, the Scriptures do set forth the moral standards of our Creator, which oftentimes run counter to modern-day mores. Homosexual acts, heterosexual sex between unmarried persons, and bestiality are all condemned in the Bible. (Exodus 22:19; Ephesians 5:3-5) God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of such sexual practices.—Genesis 13:13; 18:20; 19:4, 5, 24, 25.
Regarding acts of homosexuality, God’s Word pointedly says: “This is a hateful thing.” (Leviticus 18:22, The New Jerusalem Bible)
God’s Law to Israel stipulated: “When a man lies down with a male the same as one lies down with a woman, both of them have done a detestable thing. They should be put to death without fail.” (Leviticus 20:13) The same punishment was prescribed for those committing bestiality, incest, and adultery.—Leviticus 20:10-12, 14-17.
The apostle Paul was inspired to describe homosexual acts as expressions of “disgraceful sexual appetites” and as “contrary to nature.” He writes: “That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error. And just as they did not approve of holding God in accurate knowledge, God gave them up to a disapproved mental state, to do the things not fitting.”—Romans 1:26-28.
The Scriptures offer no apologies, no concessions, no ambiguity; homosexual practices, adultery, fornication, are all repulsive in God’s sight. Accordingly, true Christians do not water down the Bible’s position on “disgraceful sexual appetites” merely to become more popular or more acceptable to modern culture. Nor do they agree with any movement dedicated to the promotion of homosexuality as a normal life-style.

Originally posted by galveston75
Yes as a Christain should. We are to love all humans and that is a point that keeps getting missed. That would include someone that comments murder as horrible as it is. And in that case they will answer to God for taking another life. But if that person is truly regretfull and with deep remorse then we have to follow Jesus's example and forgive and lea ...[text shortened]... ee with any movement dedicated to the promotion of homosexuality as a normal life-style.

If there is someone who is homosexual and does not want to change or strongly believes change is not possible, that person would still be welcome. Why should I change and not welcome them anymore because they are not changing? Showing someone love and respect should never change. Why should a homosexual stop being welcome in a Church because he is not changing? to answer your question - if a homosexual stays a homosexual, I would without a doubt still associate with them and welcome them. There is no other answer in my opinion.

Originally posted by galveston75
Yes as a Christain should. We are to love all humans and that is a point that keeps getting missed. That would include someone that comments murder as horrible as it is. And in that case they will answer to God for taking another life. But if that person is truly regretfull and with deep remorse then we have to follow Jesus's example and forgive and lea ...[text shortened]... ee with any movement dedicated to the promotion of homosexuality as a normal life-style.

Your God should mind his own business. He's like a creepy cross between a peeping tom and a puritan. What nonsense.

Originally posted by gtbiking4life
If there is someone who is homosexual and does not want to change or strongly believes change is not possible, that person would still be welcome. Why should I change and not welcome them anymore because they are not changing? Showing someone love and respect should never change. Why should a homosexual stop being welcome in a Church because he is not ...[text shortened]... hout a doubt still associate with them and welcome them. There is no other answer in my opinion.

If your view is different then God's as is stated in the Bible then that's your decision.

Originally posted by bbarr
Your God should mind his own business. He's like a creepy cross between a peeping tom and a puritan. What nonsense.

Wow.....

Originally posted by galveston75
Yes as a Christain should. We are to love all humans and that is a point that keeps getting missed. That would include someone that comments murder as horrible as it is. And in that case they will answer to God for taking another life. But if that person is truly regretfull and with deep remorse then we have to follow Jesus's example and forgive and lea ...[text shortened]... ee with any movement dedicated to the promotion of homosexuality as a normal life-style.

Again - a lot of pasting and copying...

Originally posted by FabianFnas
I don't think this is entirely true.

There are big cults too. And there are small religious groups that are not cults.
If we google "cults" and its definition, then we get a lot of hits, that shows other properties than not just being small and dispiced.

But you're right that cults are a bad phenomenon in the religious domain. They are always weak in their faith so they cannot stand any critiques, they just don't have the answers.

I agree that it has specific attributes in its definition, but nevertheless, most people do tend to use it to refer to smaller groups that they don't like. They rarely check the definition then confirm that there is a match.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Again - a lot of pasting and copying...

Sooooo what's your point? Is the material wrong or untruthful? And I admit I'm a slow typist but I'd still say this anyway so what's wrong with pasting? It's still what I would say...

Originally posted by galveston75
Sooooo what's your point? Is the material wrong or untruthful? And I admit I'm a slow typist but I'd still say this anyway so what's wrong with pasting? It's still what I would say...

The point is that you are unable to discuss the issue apart from the say ..."read the cut and paste ..". You cannot debate or discuss, becuase your knowledge is severely limited. Nobody will take your word or the word of the JW Org unless you are able to convince people that your interpretation is correct, and to acheive that you must be able to deal with individual issues.

This problem you have is doubtless the result of your JW indoctrination. As a young JW student you must have been taught not to question what you are told and clearly you think that authoritarian approach will work here.

Originally posted by galveston75
Sooooo what's your point? Is the material wrong or untruthful? And I admit I'm a slow typist but I'd still say this anyway so what's wrong with pasting? It's still what I would say...

Because it shows clearly that you don't know what you're talking about. You don't have an opinion of your own. You don't think for yourself. You rely of others thinking,a nd not your own. That's my point, that's why am against of your copying and pasting. You don't know zilch of what you are talking about. The authors might, but not you. Capisce?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Because it shows clearly that you don't know what you're talking about. You don't have an opinion of your own. You don't think for yourself. You rely of others thinking,a nd not your own. That's my point, that's why am against of your copying and pasting. You don't know zilch of what you are talking about. The authors might, but not you. Capisce?

No the differance is I have not gone out on my own and developed my own ways as you guys have. That goes totally contrary to God's ways. Jesus formed congregations and he said one sign of his followers would be the "unity in beliefs." That is something you can not have out floating in self opinion land.

Originally posted by galveston75
No the differance is I have not gone out on my own and developed my own ways as you guys have. That goes totally contrary to God's ways. Jesus formed congregations and he said one sign of his followers would be the "unity in beliefs." That is something you can not have out floating in self opinion land.

And this is a good example of a non-answer. Avoiding the question at hand and answering another unasked question is a good try, but it just shows clearly that you don't know what we're debating.

Others in your cult may be fooled by this, but not here.

Originally posted by galveston75
No the differance is I have not gone out on my own and developed my own ways as you guys have. That goes totally contrary to God's ways. Jesus formed congregations and he said one sign of his followers would be the "unity in beliefs." That is something you can not have out floating in self opinion land.

I'm afraid you cannot really escape "self opinion land" either. If you have decided that your best tack is to just be some kind of intellectual slave to whatever it is some book tells you; then that bespeaks an opinion as well. Some opinions are well-formed and backed by good reasons, though, whereas others are not. Yours is not only lacking in considered reasons, but it also childish. And I mean that literally: it is characteristic of children and otherwise indicative of stunted moral development to just enslave yourself to rules handed down to you, treating them as inviolable and yet not giving any thought to considerations of justification for them. (Notice throughout here that you keep repeating those mandates handed down, all the while providing no thought or discussion at all to whether they actually have any good reasons behind them.)

I recommend that you do "go out on your own" and consider reasons for/against and come to some honest conclusion that represents your own intellectual property. Isn't that part of what it means to be intellectually responsible? Surely God would not have reason to be mad if you were to exercise, in pursuit of some honest evaluation, the capacities for rational and reflective thought that He Himself supposedly gave you? What justified reason for getting mad could God have if one of his creatures came to some considered opinion? How would it go "totally contrary to God's ways" for one of his creatures to exercise their supposedly God-given capacities as a rational being? You seem terribly frightened of intellectual freedom.

If you actually had some considered reasons on this topic, that would be one thing. But you don't. If you said, look, this is what the bible says AND one should take all this seriously because of all the following reasons:..." that would be one thing. But you have no actual argument.