Young Avengers question

[Glaken]

Thanks DJ, you've done a pretty good job of clarifying a few of my misconstrued points, but let me see if I can do it too.

 

My intent in mentioning the murder, extra-marital affair, and anything else was to say that we ALL have things that if we gave into them, we know are wrong to do but if we went with our "nature" we'd give into them. We are ALL sinners and have ALL been born with a nature of sin that can only be rectified one way, through the blood of Christ. I'm a sinner and I struggle against my nature every day. Do I always do what I'm supposed to? No, I don't but I keep trying. I see giving into homosexual tendancies as giving into the same temptation as giving into cheating on my wife (I won't say murder this time since I didn't really intend on "equating" the end results but the tempations involved). As a man, my physical desire is still present but I've made a commitment not only to my wife but also to God that I take very seriously. I don't expect someone who hasn't experienced salvation to understand how it's so much more than just a "religion". They haven't yet proved or disproved that homosexuality is "present" at birth, but I know the desire for sex, to protect one's self through lying, violence and most other things are present at birth, but we all learn to control these urges that lead to problems as well. As for those claiming to be Christian yet still practicing homosexuality, I would suggest you actually read the Bible again before making that claim. I don't care WHAT the episocpalian church says, GOD calls it an abomination and if you openly practice it without shame AFTER you claimed to be saved then someone's received some VERY bad counsel. This is no different then a Christian man sleeping around or cheating on his wife. Does God want everyone to experience love? Absolutely. This doesn't necessarily mean everyone is supposed to experience "sexual" love. There are 2 different things. Paul even stated that it is better to remain single than to give into sexual temptation if it causes you to sin. A person who has homosexual tendancies isn't excluded from love by any means, but how they choose to exercise that love is going to make the difference.

 

As for whether I'm "bigoted" or not because I don't approve of a group of people's activity, well I guess that would make everyone on here bigoted. I mean, how is you guys coming down on Christianity different from us coming down on Homosexuality. Yes, we CHOSE to be Christian and I'm completely unapologetic for it, but there's no one in this world that I hate other than those who blapheme Christ knowingly without apology. Do I hate homosexuals? NO, not in the least. Not anymore than I hate the coworker I hear talking about his affairs where he cheats on his wife of 30+ years without restraint. I don't hate him I hate WHAT HE DOES. As I clarified to someone in a PM, I have and have had friends that are gay and I love them dearly but this doesn't mean I condone their lifestyle. I HATE what they do because I know it is wrong the same way I know my coworker's giving into his sexual desires and cheating on his wife is wrong. I don't hide my feelings from those friends and if they choose to continue to be friends then they know where I stand and I know where they stand. I don't beat them over the head with it, but at the same time, when they ask me, I give them my opinion and even scripture if they ask. I don't hate them, I love them and I don't stop associating with them when they "come out" to me. I know that if I reject them, then I've not done what Christ would have done. Christ died for even though I'm a sinner and showed his love for me that way. Who am I to drop a friend because of this. If I drop them, what kind of example is that of the love of Christ. No, I bring them in as close as I can and try to influence them otherwise. Love them to the Cross, not beat them over the head with it. No one will GENUINELY change with force, that's tried in other religions (and unfortunately by some misguided folks that claimed to have done it in the name of Christ) but many have truly repentented and changed because people showed them genuine love and respect. To answer someone's question earlier about "would you still love your kid if he were gay?" The answer, YES, I would still love them but I wouldn't allow them to take part in that sin in my presence. No more so then I would let a child who brought home someone from the opposite sex who expected to have any kind of sexual relations with them outside of marriage. I wouldn't let that child bring a girlfriend/fianceé in and sleep with them and I would tell that child they didn't need to be sleeping with that person or living with them either. I would still love them both but I would also make it clear that I strongly disapproved of their actions. To do otherwise would be to condone the action and I would be failing them and Christ in doing so. I would still love both and would give my life to save both of them, but I wouldn't allow them to do things in my house that are a blaphemy to God and I wouldn't condone the actions in any way.

 

As for what I choose to spend my money, that's my business, as what you spend your money on is your business. As a matter of fact, yes, I have dropped a lot of titles because I didn't agree with the storylines or I didn't see them as something that agreed with my understanding of scripture. There are plenty of things that I have to be very careful of but there are a lot of things that don't contridict the way I believe. Are Superheroes "magic"? Not really (other than the ones like Dr. Strange and the like that specify magic as their power. I see most Superhero books as showing how people can use talents they are given to either do good or do evil and the struggle between the two. It's a modern day morality tale. When those stories choose to push an agenda I don't agree with, I simply choose NOT to take part in purchasing it. I don't stand in the comic shop and say "You're all DAMNED TO HELL if you buy that comic" I simply choose not to FOR MYSELF. Like RH said, my loss. If I miss some of the best writing out, so be it. I'm not going to force anyone else to not enjoy it and I wasn't even going to post anything about it here until I saw DJ getting piled on and I felt that people were GROSSLY mislabeling him and Christianity as a whole. I mostly leave people alone and only get into discussions like this when I feel led to, but most of the time, I will leave people alone to do as they see fit unless they are friends of mine or I feel led to intervene, but when something like this comes up and I leave people alone to pass along disinformation about Christianity or Christ, then I have failed HIM and that I can't let go.

 

Am I preaching now... I guess so, but as a Christian, one of my primary responsibilities is to defend and share Christ when I see the opportunity. Am I telling anyone else to stop buying what you enjoy reading. No, if you feel it's fine that's between you and God, but I will suggest this, do some REAL research and study in the scripture for yourself if you want to know what God has to say about things. Don't take my word for it or anyone elses. If you get into the scriptured GENUINELY seeking, you'll find the answers. I don't expect anyone that detests "religion" to really take a whole lot of heed in what I'm posting now or before since 99% of it makes no sense because they are "of this world" and believe "if it feels good, and I'm not hurting anyone, I'm gonna do it" but anyone who is GENUINELY interested in it, feel free to PM me and I'll do what I can to help answer any questions. Hopefully, if nothing else, this discussion is making people THINK about things.

[RandomHero]

Hmm I guess I see your point Glaken. I mean, I may hate some of the stupid #$## christians say, but that doesn't mean I hate christians.

[Thy Juggalo]

Wow i got my question amswered already within the first 2 replys and this is still going on DAMN!

[Havoc904]

If you detest the Young Avengers because it shows sin, shouldn't you detest all comics since most of them deal with sin. Look at the Civil War storyline, a school full of children dead. Isn't murder a sin?

 

What about Jean and Logan having a connection, doesn't that hint at adultery? Last time I checked adultery was a sin too.

 

The bible also says that slavery is ok in some situations, and its ok for a man to beat his wife to get her in line. The bible says alot.

[Doom Saber]

If you detest the Young Avengers because it shows sin, shouldn't you detest all comics since most of them deal with sin. Look at the Civil War storyline, a school full of children dead. Isn't murder a sin?

 

What about Jean and Logan having a connection, doesn't that hint at adultery? Last time I checked adultery was a sin too.

 

The bible also says that slavery is ok in some situations, and its ok for a man to beat his wife to get her in line. The bible says alot.

 

 

That is so true. There are other sins in there, too such as blastpamy(I am sure the fourhoremen bit is blaspamy.)

 

 

 

Even the Bible shows sin and I am a religious person.

[DarthJoe]

If you detest the Young Avengers because it shows sin, shouldn't you detest all comics since most of them deal with sin. Look at the Civil War storyline, a school full of children dead. Isn't murder a sin?

 

What about Jean and Logan having a connection, doesn't that hint at adultery? Last time I checked adultery was a sin too.

 

No, because it's the manner it which the subject matter is presented that is the determining factor.

 

The spark for the Civil War story line (the destruction of a town and a school full of kids) is not portrayed as something that is right or good. Sure, it deals with murder, but it is not presenting murder as being morally acceptable. That goes for most violence in comics. Actually, the majority of heroes in comics only fight because they have to...not because they want to. I would say comics speak more against violence than anything else, even though a good part of them relate to violence.

 

As for Jean and Logan, their's is more the story of having feelings, and not acting on them (for the most part) due to the fact that it ISN'T the right thing to do. And, I don't ever remember them acting on their feelings, and having it be shown as appropriate.

 

When a comic (or any other form of entertainment) presents something, such as homosexuality, as being okay and morally acceptable, I'm not interested in it.

[revsears]

There are other sins out there, but most of those in comics are protrayed as SINS! you know when nitro mudered those guys it was wrong, in YA it doens't protray the homesexuality of the two chars as wrong.

 

It's also a current hot-topic issue of debate. It's use is almost garunteed to have some political overtones.

 

I in no way have an issue with people who are gay. In all seriousness the best man in my wedding was gay. At the time though he did not act on it! No an attraction probably isn't a choice, i think that is at debate right now, but i know we each choose whom we sleep with.

 

Is it God's fault people are tempted with homesexuality? of course not. Man today is putting all kinds of trash in it's system. It's bound to have some affects on our kids. We also are a apart of a very different soceity than before. Men and women's roles are changing, and that certinatly has an infleunce on behavior.

 

As for comics, they are fantasy super powers and magic in a comic is far different than biblicaly mentioned witchcraft.

 

I don't read young avengers for several reasons, j.l.a. and avengers should be cleaner moral books accessable to the kids. Drugs (like patriot was useing, to be a hero) and homosexuality should be left to other books. I simply dislike the sidekick clone set-up.

 

and one last thing, all sin is equal. I don't care if your homosexual or heterosexual, we've all done something we shouldn't, and it's not my place to judge. I'll do my best to love you the same but alot of christians will stand by that it's not right to have homosexual relationships.

 

Glaken , darthjoe why no pm? lol.

 

 

 

hehe, you posted as i was DarthJoe , we covered some of the same ground.

[DarthJoe]

The bible also says that slavery is ok in some situations, and its ok for a man to beat his wife to get her in line. The bible says alot.

 

If this was something that you had researched on your own, and weren't just regurgitating for the sake of trying to make Christianity look bad, and downplaying my opinions, and Glaken's, as something that are based off of a book full of rubbish and hypocrisy, you may come to a better understanding of what the Bible is actually talking about.

 

hehe, you posted as i was DarthJoe , we covered some of the same ground.

 

[Father Wagner]

I wonder how easy it would be for some of you guys to call homosexuality (and the "acts" associated with it) morally wrong and a sin if you had the desire to be with someone of the same sex. Have you actually had these desires in your lives? You go on and on about it being a choice, but have you ever had to make that choice? You choose to love your wives and girlfriends, but did you choose the aspect of yourselves that made you sexually attracted to them? Did you cut yourself off from those sexual desires?

 

I also notice that some of you find homosexality to be wrong based on religion and morals, two practices that very much involve personal choice. What if the choices you were making regarding religion and morals were sins? I only ask because I don't think that something any of us can judge.

 

I'm also getting a kick out of the fact that Joe and Glaken are continually using the word "hate." I get that Joe doesn't hate the homosexuals, just the acts that make them homosexuals. I get it. I find "hate" to be a very loaded word and kind of scary to be honest. I didn't think the Bible taught anyone that hate was EVER a good thing. Jesus was hated for who he was and what he stood for and was even considered an abomination to God. Did we learn a lesson from what happened to him? Maybe some of us did.

 

How do any of us know what God considers to be abominations? Did you read it in the Bible? Who wrote the bible and approved what was said in it? Religious practices and beliefs have chaged greatly over the years and will continue to change, regardless of what the Bible says. Certain things could very possibly have been omitted based on the popular views of that time. The Bible has gone through many changes throughout the years and could have been altered by individuals who decided, "maybe I don't like this story."

 

If two men lived together monogomously for many years and truly loved one another, acting on their sexual desires to express that love, would you consider that a sin?

 

And I don't think anyone is trying to make Christianity look bad.

 

Revsears, I'm confused by your remark about man putting trash in his system. If your saying the things that go into our bodies affect hetero/homosexuality, how do you explain homosexuality in ancient Greece (which is well documented)? If you're saying something different, then please elaborate. Thanks.

[Grifter]

Wow, Glaken. Did you just equate homesexuality with killing or cheating on a spouse? You're just silly.

 

You know who else didn't like homosexuals? Nazis.

 

Oh, and the KKK.

 

DJ was not refuted because he doesn't want to buy the comic series. He was refuted because he was saying hurtful things. I realize it's his opinion and I welcome the debate it brings.

 

Maybe straight people should start curving their baser insticts so we don't have to worry about the population getting further out of hand. Nothing against straight people. I love heterosexuality and have many friends who are straight. Heck, my parents are straight. I'm kidding of course (except the part about my parents, who are as straight as straight can be), but I hope you get the point.

 

There are chemicals in the body that allow human beings to sense pleasure in various thing (visual, sexual, both, whatever). Maybe those people who seem to think homosexuals can just stop having relationships with people they find attactive should practice what they preach.

 

So isn't religion a CHOICE? I'm certainly not going to tell you that you should turn it off or that your religious choice isn't "normal."

 

And yes, you are being a bigot. According to a good book, a bigot is "one who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ" - the dictionary.

Romans 1:26-27 KJV

For this cause God gave them up unto VILE affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is agains nature.

And likewise also men leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is UNSEEMLY and recieving in themselves that recompence of their ERROR which was meet.

[RandomHero]

So um, I still don't get whats so bad about homosexuality in the first place?

[Father Wagner]

"Romans 1:26-27 KJV

For this cause God gave them up unto VILE affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is agains nature.

And likewise also men leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is UNSEEMLY and recieving in themselves that recompence of their ERROR which was meet."

 

This statement simply means that men and women were engaging in sexual practices that were not the ones people usually engaged in. The practices were not regular, ouside the ordinary, more than the unusual, not the expected.

 

There is no sense whatever in those words that the practices were wrong or against God or contrary to the divine order of creation or in conflict with the universal nature of things. According to Paul's usage, the words only say that the practices were different from what one would generally expect. Rather than "unnatural," the words para physin (Greek for "unnatural") in Romans would more accurately be translated as "unsual" or "peculiar" or "out of the ordinary" or "uncharacteristic."

 

Do you have a personal opinion about homosexuality, Grifter, or are you content with copying and pasting scripture?

[Grifter]

"Romans 1:26-27 KJV

For this cause God gave them up unto VILE affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is agains nature.

And likewise also men leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is UNSEEMLY and recieving in themselves that recompence of their ERROR which was meet."

 

This statement simply means that men and women were engaging in sexual practices that were not the ones people usually engaged in. The practices were not regular, ouside the ordinary, more than the unusual, not the expected.

 

There is no sense whatever in those words that the practices were wrong or against God or contrary to the divine order of creation or in conflict with the universal nature of things. According to Paul's usage, the words only say that the practices were different from what one would generally expect. Rather than "unnatural," the words para physin (Greek for "unnatural") in Romans would more accurately be translated as "unsual" or "peculiar" or "out of the ordinary" or "uncharacteristic."

 

Do you have a personal opinion about homosexuality, Grifter, or are you content with copying and pasting scripture?

 

Homosexuality is a sickness thats my opinion. And if your so familiar with the bible where is the scripture found that compares homesexuality with sleeping with animals?

And when it says "men with men working that which is unseemly " What is that saying Also God destroyed soddom and Gammora(dont know the spelling) Because of homosexuality and yes other things. It even talked of the men trying to get inside to the angel because he was so attractive.

[RandomHero]

Doesn't the bible also say that the world was created in 6 days? That the first woman was made out of a human rib? The bible says a lot of things...

[rupert]

comics are like marvel legends customizing; a hobby. i know if i let it dominate my life, it becomes an idol. i don't let it. everything to me take a distant second to my relationship to Him who saved my wretched soul. i know this topic about homosexuality is touchy and do not in any means endorse it. i like glaken am a Christian.

 

but there is a right and wrong way of reaching others with the truth. i won't get into that because every one has a conscience and know right from wrong, but i will say this, that it's not what goes into a person that makes him bad, it's what comes out of a person (his heart) that makes him bad.

 

we can read comics, but i know it's just fanatasy. i don't endorse anything but the truth. i know hulking and wiccan are 2D comic character on paper. i do not discriminate because they are fictional character. if it angers someone, they crossed that line between reality and fanatasy.

 

p.s. to the gentlemen who bashes the bible, please stop. thanks.

[RandomHero]

 

p.s. to the gentlemen who bashes the bible, please stop. thanks.

 

Using logic is bashing the bible?

[Father Wagner]

"Homosexuality is a sickness thats my opinion. And if your so familiar with the bible where is the scripture found that compares homesexuality with sleeping with animals?

And when it says "men with men working that which is unseemly " What is that saying Also God destroyed soddom and Gammora(dont know the spelling) Because of homosexuality and yes other things. It even talked of the men trying to get inside to the angel because he was so attractive."

 

Congrats on being the first to call homosexality a "sickness." At least Joe and Glaken have kept their cool (even when I have tested their patience and they mine) in this debate and given reasons why they feel the way they do. Too bad you're still citing scripture and not giving any reason why you think it's "a sickness."

 

The sin of Sodom is abuse and offense against strangers. Insult to traveler. Inhospitality to the needy. That is the point of the story understood in its own historical context.

 

When male-male rape becomes part of the story, the additional offense is sexual abuse--gross insult and humiliation in Lot's time and in our own. The whole story and its culture makes clear that the author was not concerned about sex in itself. Lot offered his daugthers without a second thought. The point of the story is not sexual ethics. The story of Sodom is no more about sex than it is about pounding on someone's door. The point of the story is abuse and assault, in whatever form they take. To use this text to condemn homosexuality is to misuse this text.

 

There is a sad irony about the story of Sodom when understood in its own historical setting. People oppose and abuse homosexual men and women for being different, odd, strange, or queer. Lesbian women and gay men are just not allowed to fit in; they are made to be outsiders, foreigners in our society. They are disowned by their families, seperated from their children, fired from their jobs, evicted from apartments and neighborhoods, insulted by public figures, beaten and killed on the streets. All this is done in the name of religion and supposed Judeo-Christian morality.

 

Such oppression is the very sin of which the people of Sodom were guilty. Such behavior is what the Bible truly condemns over and over again. So those who oppress homosexuals because of the supposed "sin of Sodom" may themselves be the real "sodomites," as the Bible understands it. Helmeniak

 

I could refute the others, but this post is already getting too long.

 

Tell me, have you read Samuel 18:1-4, the story of Ruth and Naomi, or Daniel 1:9. Give 'em a read. You might be surprised.

[Grifter]

Father Wagner I found it.

Leviticus 18:22-24 KJV

 

22)Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination.

23)Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.

24)Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you.

 

Now yes I believe homosexuality is wrong. Yes I have friends that are homosexual. I do not look down on someone because they are gay. I am a christian and I believe you should treat all men equal. But that said I will not bring that stuff in my house. I have the Young Avengers set on layaway and now that I know this I will turn it back when I get the lay away out. I am just giving my opinion and gave scripture to show where my belief comes from.

[jcjdotcom]

How does this compare to the interracial relationship of Patriot & Hawkeye? It doesn't. The Bible never declared interracial relationships wrong. The only "mixed" relationship the Bible ever declared wrong was to have a believer wed a non-believer. Solomon, the "wisest" king ever to rule Israel had a Black wife. I've never had a problem with mixing races as long as that included ONE man & ONE woman.

 

Where in the Bible does it forbid a homosexual relationship or gay marriage for that matter? I know that Leviticus mentions gay sex, but it says nothing of a relationship. Also, Solomon is a poor example as he was a polygamist (so was David) - not exactly one man, one woman.

 

Additionally, if you read the entire book of Leviticus, it also restricts sexual intercourse with a menstruating woman, sowing the seeds of two different crops in the same field, eating rare meat, reaping all of the crops in a field, getting tattooed, eating meat of cloven-hoofed animals, eating shellfish, shaving, or even wearing clothing of different fibers.

 

If you continue on in Leviticus (Chapter 20), the code says that the following people should be put to death: anyone who worships Molech (Ba’al, the sacred bull), anyone that curses his father or mother, anyone who commits adultery, anyone who commits an act of incest, engages in bestiality, or that is a witch. Chapter 21 says that prostitutes should be burned.

 

Do you also adhere to these principals and the other tenants of the Old Testament's Holiness code?

 

The Bible and the Pope (if you are Catholic) also expressly forbid sodomy, which includes homo and hetero anal and ORAL sex. I’m certain that no Christian in this country engages in oral sex.

 

I’m really not trying to be a jerk (well maybe a little), but I’m pointing out that the Bible restricts a lot of things that are common practice among Christians. Using one verse out of context as justification for damnation of a group of people who choose to be gay (as much as a straight person chooses to be attracted to someone with red hair, black skin or a big ‘ol butt) is silly.

 

Also, I’m a practicing Christian who regularly attends a wonderful church with my wife and two young boys. I don’t think Jesus would exclude homosexuals from the church, even practicing ones. Frankly, straight people have hurt families and the institution of marriage more than any gay couple ever could.

[Grifter]

How does this compare to the interracial relationship of Patriot & Hawkeye? It doesn't. The Bible never declared interracial relationships wrong. The only "mixed" relationship the Bible ever declared wrong was to have a believer wed a non-believer. Solomon, the "wisest" king ever to rule Israel had a Black wife. I've never had a problem with mixing races as long as that included ONE man & ONE woman.

 

Where in the Bible does it forbid a homosexual relationship or gay marriage for that matter? I know that Leviticus mentions gay sex, but it says nothing of a relationship. Also, Solomon is a poor example as he was a polygamist (so was David) - not exactly one man, one woman.

 

Additionally, if you read the entire book of Leviticus, it also restricts sexual intercourse with a menstruating woman, sowing the seeds of two different crops in the same field, eating rare meat, reaping all of the crops in a field, getting tattooed, eating meat of cloven-hoofed animals, eating shellfish, shaving, or even wearing clothing of different fibers.

 

If you continue on in Leviticus (Chapter 20), the code says that the following people should be put to death: anyone who worships Molech (Ba’al, the sacred bull), anyone that curses his father or mother, anyone who commits adultery, anyone who commits an act of incest, engages in bestiality, or that is a witch. Chapter 21 says that prostitutes should be burned.

 

Do you also adhere to these principals and the other tenants of the Old Testament's Holiness code?

 

The Bible and the Pope (if you are Catholic) also expressly forbid sodomy, which includes homo and hetero anal and ORAL sex. I’m certain that no Christian in this country engages in oral sex.

 

I’m really not trying to be a jerk (well maybe a little), but I’m pointing out that the Bible restricts a lot of things that are common practice among Christians. Using one verse out of context as justification for damnation of a group of people who choose to be gay (as much as a straight person chooses to be attracted to someone with red hair, black skin or a big ‘ol butt) is silly.

 

Also, I’m a practicing Christian who regularly attends a wonderful church with my wife and two young boys. I don’t think Jesus would exclude homosexuals from the church, even practicing ones. Frankly, straight people have hurt families and the institution of marriage more than any gay couple ever could.

Look we could argue this all day. None of those other things are brought out again in the new testament except Homosexuality in the book of Romans.

And to father Wagner in first Samuel it is speaking of Jonathan giving his armor to David not stripping naked for him. Read the New American Standard Version it puts it in english for you. And in Daniel ????????

[bumblebee85]

i have no real say in this but i do have gay friends, but i don't like the fact of being gay...not anything against my friends cause they would still be my friends gay or not!! but like i said i have no real thing to say aboot this!!

[Father Wagner]

Sorry, should have been more specific. Samuel 20:30 reveals Jonathan is potentially gay and has chosen the son of Jesse (David). Also, 1 Samuel 20:41-42 and 2 Samuel 1:26.

 

The Book of Daniel offers "Now God allowed Daniel to receive favor and compassion from the palace master." Another translation reads, "By the grace of God Daniel met goodwill and sympathy on the part of the chief eunuch." This text could also be translated to read that Daniel received "devoted love." Moreover, there is some serious speculation that Daniel received the servants at court or the "eunuches" in the ancient mid-East were not necessarily castrated men but rather homosexual men. For this reason they could be trusted around the harem. So some people suggest that Daniel's role in Nebuchadnezzar's court included homosexual liaison with the palace master. The romantic connection would explain in part why Daniel's career at court advanced so favorably.

 

It is, like everything in the English Bible, an interpretation. That's a beauty of the English language and Bibles interpreted into English (such as, oh, the New American Standard Version) . Words have many interpretations.

[Glaken]

You obviously didn't read anything I posted Wagner or you would have seen where I stated I DO deal with sexual temptation that is not allowed almost on a daily basis. A heterosexual's desire to participate in sex outside marriage is just as strong or stronger than a homosexuals desires. Today's society sees no problem with sex outside of marriage or, in a lot of cases adultery but I resisted sex until I was married and I resist the temptation to pursue it outside of marriage now. I've had plenty of opportunities both before I was married and since to pursue what I "wanted" but by relying on Christ and on his Spirit that lives in me, I have been able to resist.

 

To answer your question, it's that Spirit that enables most Christians (if they let it) to discern good from evil. To discern what scripture means and when it's taken out of context. The Bible, and the passages in it when taken out of context, can mean anything you want to make it mean. Many men and groups have proven that over the years, but when the same scriptures they used to blaspheme are actually put in the context of how they were truly used, there's no basis for what they state.

 

The same with the points you make, just because the Bible has things, like murder, rape, slavery, etc. in it doesn't mean it condones it. The Bible tells history, teaches theology & doctrine, praises God in poetry and illustrates points using stories and in those stories sins happen and the Bible calls the sins SIN and tells of the consequences for those sins.

 

As for reading other comics/books/TV/Movie because they have "sin" in them, like DJ said, it's not that it's in there, it's how it's represented. To use the example you stated between Jean & Logan. That relationship has always been portrayed as wrong and it has never been portrayed as being normal or even good for the parties involved. As a matter of fact, everytime I've seen it represent that particular relationship, nothing but problems have come out of it.

 

Who wrote the Bible? Most Christians will tell you God THROUGH human hands recorded his words as they were needed to be recorded for the purposes he has for them. If you actually RESEARCH, you will find that the more people have tried to DISPROVE the accuracy of the Bible them ore they have wound up proving not only it's accuracy but also it's authenticity. The Old Testament has been set for nearly 3000 years and the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that in over 2000 years, those have not changed. With each older and older manuscript that is discovered, the modern Bible is proven to be more and more accurate to those that were written in the closer and closer to the time of Christ. A lot of people mistake translations for "changes" in the Bible but they are not. Translations (at least good ones) are purely that, taking older manuscripts that are from the time period written in the language it was originally in and translating it to modern languages. Whether Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic. Changes that have come in translations have come from linguists discovering that some of the translations from primitive hebrew, Greek or Aramaic may not have been the best translation due to learning more about the languages from documentation from that time, but there has NEVER been a change in meaning in the 2000 years the Bible has been Canon.

 

 

As for "HATE", No, the Bible doesn't teach people to "HATE" anyone. To the contrary, it teaches to love them. But it DOES tell the God HATES SIN and that he will not tolerate unrepentant Sin. As a Christian we to should not tolerate sin in our own lives or others but we do fail and we do sin. What makes the difference is that we've accepted that God came in the form of Jesus Christ to show us that a sinless life could be lived, but more importantly to pay the ultimate price for that sin by dying on the Cross. God insisted that the Israelites pay for sin with a Blood sacrifice but none were clean enough to wash away ALL sin, so he provided the final sacrifice through Christ. He could have let humanity wallow in sin but he loved us enough to provide a way to him. By accepting what Christ did we repent (not confess only) and TURN AWAY FROM THAT SIN to follow the example he spelled out. What this also means is that we need to love those who are sinners so that they might also see that they need to turn from those sins. The last thing he did on the cross was forgive those who tortured him, so for me to hate the people that are sinners would be to say I'm better than him because I won't forgive those he did. But he did say that someone had to ACCEPT his forgiveness as a gift and part of that acceptance IS repentance and to not do that would not be to truly accept the forgiveness or the salvation it affords. Okay, in layman's terms, I hate what God hates, I love what God loves (at least I try). I love the people but I don't love what they do. There IS a difference.

 

As to what does God think about Homosexuality:

 

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination."

Leviticus 18:22

 

"13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination."

Leviticus 20:13

 

"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,[a] nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God"

1 Corinthians 6:9-12

 

 

Those state pretty clearly that God does not look favorably on homosexuality. As for why the Greeks did it, they were a pagan culture that believed carnality was the most important thing in life. They beilieved sex, no matter with what, was the ultimate expression of pleasure and they partook in it. Paul was referring to Greek culture (and t he Roman culture that sprang from it) in the verse in Corinthians.

 

I'm not perfect nor infallible, only one man was that, but I do know how to seek for that and it's not through doing everything society says is okay. I can't explain completely how I KNOW these things to be true, but I do. It is because of the Holy Spirit that helps me discern these things. Someone who is not saved and sensitive to the Spirit will never fully understand it. I know it sounds cryptic and magical in and of it's self, but to those that ARE saved it makes perfect sense. Sure there are still doctrinal points & theololgical points that get debated, but most Bible believing Christians understand exactly what I'm saying.

 

1 Corinthians 2:14

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

Anyway... I can see we are going in circles and I'm willing to continue or take it to PM or another thread or whatever, but I'm glad to get the opportunity to defend my beliefs. I hope at least someone's gotten something out of it.

 

Rev Sears... Thanks for the help, sorry I hadn't talked to you in a while so I didn't think to PM you. I've stayed off the GenDisc boards so long since they shut it down for a while thanks to Religious & Political discussions...

 

See Juggalo, this is all your fault .... hehe

[Grifter]

You obviously didn't read anything I posted Wagner or you would have seen where I stated I DO deal with sexual temptation that is not allowed almost on a daily basis. A heterosexual's desire to participate in sex outside marriage is just as strong or stronger than a homosexuals desires. Today's society sees no problem with sex outside of marriage or, in a lot of cases adultery but I resisted sex until I was married and I resist the temptation to pursue it outside of marriage now. I've had plenty of opportunities both before I was married and since to pursue what I "wanted" but by relying on Christ and on his Spirit that lives in me, I have been able to resist.

 

To answer your question, it's that Spirit that enables most Christians (if they let it) to discern good from evil. To discern what scripture means and when it's taken out of context. The Bible, and the passages in it when taken out of context, can mean anything you want to make it mean. Many men and groups have proven that over the years, but when the same scriptures they used to blaspheme are actually put in the context of how they were truly used, there's no basis for what they state.

 

The same with the points you make, just because the Bible has things, like murder, rape, slavery, etc. in it doesn't mean it condones it. The Bible tells history, teaches theology & doctrine, praises God in poetry and illustrates points using stories and in those stories sins happen and the Bible calls the sins SIN and tells of the consequences for those sins.

 

As for reading other comics/books/TV/Movie because they have "sin" in them, like DJ said, it's not that it's in there, it's how it's represented. To use the example you stated between Jean & Logan. That relationship has always been portrayed as wrong and it has never been portrayed as being normal or even good for the parties involved. As a matter of fact, everytime I've seen it represent that particular relationship, nothing but problems have come out of it.

 

Who wrote the Bible? Most Christians will tell you God THROUGH human hands recorded his words as they were needed to be recorded for the purposes he has for them. If you actually RESEARCH, you will find that the more people have tried to DISPROVE the accuracy of the Bible them ore they have wound up proving not only it's accuracy but also it's authenticity. The Old Testament has been set for nearly 3000 years and the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that in over 2000 years, those have not changed. With each older and older manuscript that is discovered, the modern Bible is proven to be more and more accurate to those that were written in the closer and closer to the time of Christ. A lot of people mistake translations for "changes" in the Bible but they are not. Translations (at least good ones) are purely that, taking older manuscripts that are from the time period written in the language it was originally in and translating it to modern languages. Whether Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic. Changes that have come in translations have come from linguists discovering that some of the translations from primitive hebrew, Greek or Aramaic may not have been the best translation due to learning more about the languages from documentation from that time, but there has NEVER been a change in meaning in the 2000 years the Bible has been Canon.

 

 

As for "HATE", No, the Bible doesn't teach people to "HATE" anyone. To the contrary, it teaches to love them. But it DOES tell the God HATES SIN and that he will not tolerate unrepentant Sin. As a Christian we to should not tolerate sin in our own lives or others but we do fail and we do sin. What makes the difference is that we've accepted that God came in the form of Jesus Christ to show us that a sinless life could be lived, but more importantly to pay the ultimate price for that sin by dying on the Cross. God insisted that the Israelites pay for sin with a Blood sacrifice but none were clean enough to wash away ALL sin, so he provided the final sacrifice through Christ. He could have let humanity wallow in sin but he loved us enough to provide a way to him. By accepting what Christ did we repent (not confess only) and TURN AWAY FROM THAT SIN to follow the example he spelled out. What this also means is that we need to love those who are sinners so that they might also see that they need to turn from those sins. The last thing he did on the cross was forgive those who tortured him, so for me to hate the people that are sinners would be to say I'm better than him because I won't forgive those he did. But he did say that someone had to ACCEPT his forgiveness as a gift and part of that acceptance IS repentance and to not do that would not be to truly accept the forgiveness or the salvation it affords. Okay, in layman's terms, I hate what God hates, I love what God loves (at least I try). I love the people but I don't love what they do. There IS a difference.

 

As to what does God think about Homosexuality:

 

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination."

Leviticus 18:22

 

"13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination."

Leviticus 20:13

 

"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,[a] nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God"

1 Corinthians 6:9-12

 

 

Those state pretty clearly that God does not look favorably on homosexuality. As for why the Greeks did it, they were a pagan culture that believed carnality was the most important thing in life. They beilieved sex, no matter with what, was the ultimate expression of pleasure and they partook in it. Paul was referring to Greek culture (and t he Roman culture that sprang from it) in the verse in Corinthians.

 

I'm not perfect nor infallible, only one man was that, but I do know how to seek for that and it's not through doing everything society says is okay. I can't explain completely how I KNOW these things to be true, but I do. It is because of the Holy Spirit that helps me discern these things. Someone who is not saved and sensitive to the Spirit will never fully understand it. I know it sounds cryptic and magical in and of it's self, but to those that ARE saved it makes perfect sense. Sure there are still doctrinal points & theololgical points that get debated, but most Bible believing Christians understand exactly what I'm saying.

 

1 Corinthians 2:14

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

Anyway... I can see we are going in circles and I'm willing to continue or take it to PM or another thread or whatever, but I'm glad to get the opportunity to defend my beliefs. I hope at least someone's gotten something out of it.

 

Rev Sears... Thanks for the help, sorry I hadn't talked to you in a while so I didn't think to PM you. I've stayed off the GenDisc boards so long since they shut it down for a while thanks to Religious & Political discussions...

 

See Juggalo, this is all your fault .... hehe

AMEN

[Glaken]

Sorry, should have been more specific. Samuel 20:30 reveals Jonathan is potentially gay and has chosen the son of Jesse (David). Also, 1 Samuel 20:41-42 and 2 Samuel 1:26.

 

The Book of Daniel offers "Now God allowed Daniel to receive favor and compassion from the palace master." Another translation reads, "By the grace of God Daniel met goodwill and sympathy on the part of the chief eunuch." This text could also be translated to read that Daniel received "devoted love." Moreover, there is some serious speculation that Daniel received the servants at court or the "eunuches" in the ancient mid-East were not necessarily castrated men but rather homosexual men. For this reason they could be trusted around the harem. So some people suggest that Daniel's role in Nebuchadnezzar's court included homosexual liaison with the palace master. The romantic connection would explain in part why Daniel's career at court advanced so favorably.

 

It is, like everything in the English Bible, an interpretation. That's a beauty of the English language and Bibles interpreted into English (such as, oh, the New American Standard Version) . Words have many interpretations.

 

Now ALL of this is taken COMPLETELY out of context. Eunuchs WERE castrated, that is what the term means and they were ONLY trusted because they couldn't consumate. Homosexuals were often chosen to be eunuchs but they were still castrated. Also, if you do a word study on the type of love they were referring to, it is a Phileos or Brotherly type love in both cases. Homosexual love is never implied with Daniel and the relationship between Jonathan & David was seen to be as Brothers not lovers. The "choosing" Jonathan makes is to side with David over his father, NOT to Choose him as a partner. The kissing they extend in that verse is common between close friends in that culture, and at that time, family of the same sex were not uncommon to kiss on the lips, but not in a sensual way.

 

The love he refers to in 2 Samuel was that of a brother, CLOSER than that of a woman. He was saying that he loved Jonathan beyond mere friendship to kinship not erotic love.

 

To answer the question about Levitical laws, no, we don't follow them now because we live in the age of Grace, but as Paul pointed out in Romans, Homosexuality is still a sin in the new testament and those who practice it will not inherit the kingdom of God. The New Testament pretty clearly states what is and isn't applicable in the Age of Grace we live in today. Is it unforgiveable, no, but to continue to practice it openly and willingly after seeking that forgiveness implies that it was not repentance but simply guilt, which DOESN'T lead to the forgiveness of it.