Why does the God of the Bible condemn homosexual acts?
Last Updated: 26.06.2025 01:26
Sodom and Gomorrah. Two cities completely filled with Gay men, young and old. Cities who recently had gone to war, who Abraham had rescued, who Lot went back to live among, who tried to rape two angels that they mistook for men … I guess.
Many believe Paul is writing about what he sees, temples that have male and female prostitutes engaged in ritual activities.
(What do you think he would write a line or two about?)
Use of semaglutide linked to doubled risk of neovascular macular degeneration - Medical Xpress
Him and I are good and that’s all I need.
Christ bore that, so, hard pass, thanks.
Men interpret Scriptures certain ways, but Jesus said we make void the Word by our tradition. Groupthink is tradition.
Since Paul is who most homophobes run to in order to support their case, I went to him first, there really isn’t much left.
Last, Leviticus. Two almost identical verses. One sex act (If translated correctly. The Hebrew words are sparse. People debate everything).
Try to break free from the shackles of it and you will find yourself outside the fold Pastor.
Further Musings:
If you embrace the fact that David “embraced” Jonathan and God was cool with it, you find that your concepts about what God “hates” get thrown out.
No. Rape is violence, not sex. The story is about kidnapping into slavery and the abuse of strangers.
Aristo Sham of Hong Kong wins the 2025 Van Cliburn Piano Competition - Dallas News
Does He?
Homophobia is a billion dollar business for Corporate Christianity. Isn’t it?
No one knows.
In Romans chapter 1, verses 26–27 are cherry-picked out of the context which starts in verse 18. The context is Idolatry.
Why is it the Legalists always run to the Law?
What? It’s okay for David to be both a man after God’s own heart and a Bloody Bipolar Adulterer who even desecrated what was holy, as long as he wasn’t Bisexual, right? Lol
'Cheers' star's cause of death released - KSDK
Where?
Answer to: Why does the God of the Bible condemn homosexual acts?
Why can’t some Christians?
Neanderthals Spread Across Asia With Surprising Speed—and Now We Know How - Gizmodo
Mt 19 is about Divorce. Jesus’ reference to Celibacy is that it is a gift from God and that not everyone can receive it.
Christ bringing up Genesis is not Him being exclusionary, it is Him reminding these lecherous men that their wives are bound to their hearts.
(So please, before you enforce celibacy on another, castrate yourself … or leave other people alone?)
Do you think your landlord should have a key to your room?
If anything, Paul was writing about male prostitutes, not LGBT.
Scholars and translators know this. The Greek translation of Arsenokoitace is uncertain. The word was coined by Paul (probably) or a contemporary of his. Any person who says they know exactly what Paul meant is lying (seriously).
Those women were shunned, shamed, casted out and abandoned. The man had all the power and Jesus dared to challenge that. Even His disciples were astounded.
Enhanced Box Score: Cubs 2, Reds 0 – May 31, 2025 - Bleacher Nation
I am not a Jewish man. I’m am not under any part of the Law for my righteousness. To place myself under the Law for my righteous standing with God would be to put myself under the curse of the Law listed in Dt 28.
Didn’t they read Galatians? Romans? James and his “Law of Liberty.” The entire New Testament? You can even find Grace in the Old Testament, some of the Rabbis have.
The truth is, the Old Testament and New Testaments say next to nothing and sexual orientation is a relatively new concept.
Inhospitable, loathsome, yet leave it to homophobia to twist it and miss it (the verse they use in Jude fails the test because of this).
These were common in that culture in Athens, Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, and Crete, all places Paul went. They existed centuries after Paul.
Today we have Divorce courts, protections, child custody, child and spousal support.
Right?
There were Male Shrine Prostitutes in the OT book of Kings, that practice was old in Paul’s time. Many dismiss the idea based what seem to be personal or sociological reasons, not archaeological ones.