Homosexuality: Wrong or Right?
- Thread starter Pooh Bear
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I would call it homo-adoration. In no way is it an attempt to redefine sexual union.
When he says homosexaulity is defiled, the word "defiled" is being used as a descriptor of what homosexuality is. There is no such thing as "undefiled homosexuality." Homosexuality is intrinsically a sin. Sin is defilement. Homosexuality is a form of defilement.
You mean in the purest sense of the word? I think King David would be too humble, to want to pronounce his love for Jonathan as anything other than love.
A wicked and adulterous generation seeks a sign - that's what Jesus said; but there were nothing wicked or adulterous about David's love for Jonathan (hence no need for a sign).
IOW, you're saying God is wrong. Are you gay maybe?
1 Corinthians 6
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,
Do you think that you love gays while you are leading them to Hell?
You don't have a word for affection between two of the same sex.
If a father loves a son, is that "homosexual"?
Making a relationship that is not about sex, about "sex" - is the same thing as being homosexual.
You don't seem to realise that you are defiling your own speech.
Arthur81
Well-Known Member
Shouldn't we study real reasoning from the scriptures themselves for the answers? Individual opinions and superficial study of Bible verses don't prove very much.
David in describing Jonathan's love in his lament after the death of Jonathan -
"I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women." (2Sam 1:26 KJV)
If this love David mentions is fully platonic, why does it not read "love of brother, or mother, or father, or wife, or wives"?
For what reason did the Latin Vulgate, which is translated into English in the Wycliffe and Douay-Rheims translations read like this -
I grieve for thee, my brother Jonathan: exceeding beautiful, and amiable to me above the love of women. As the mother loveth her only son, so did I love thee. (2Sam 1:26 DRC)
That underlined sentence is not found in the Hebrew, nor in the Septuagint nor is it found in any other translations of today. Now, why would Jerome feel the need to add a totally fake sentence about a mother's love? Again, if the love was any other than women's love, why is that not what it says?
Of course, David had many wives and concubines, so maybe Jonathan's love was better than all those women? Maybe David meant that Jonathan's true love passed the sexual love of all those wives and concubines. But, that would be a rather clumsy way to say it was a higher level, platonic; when he could have said brother or mother or father or wife, etc.
David in describing Jonathan's love in his lament after the death of Jonathan -
"I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women." (2Sam 1:26 KJV)
If this love David mentions is fully platonic, why does it not read "love of brother, or mother, or father, or wife, or wives"?
For what reason did the Latin Vulgate, which is translated into English in the Wycliffe and Douay-Rheims translations read like this -
I grieve for thee, my brother Jonathan: exceeding beautiful, and amiable to me above the love of women. As the mother loveth her only son, so did I love thee. (2Sam 1:26 DRC)
That underlined sentence is not found in the Hebrew, nor in the Septuagint nor is it found in any other translations of today. Now, why would Jerome feel the need to add a totally fake sentence about a mother's love? Again, if the love was any other than women's love, why is that not what it says?
Of course, David had many wives and concubines, so maybe Jonathan's love was better than all those women? Maybe David meant that Jonathan's true love passed the sexual love of all those wives and concubines. But, that would be a rather clumsy way to say it was a higher level, platonic; when he could have said brother or mother or father or wife, etc.
Why are you evading the Word of God? That's a hallway to Hell fire.
Last edited:
I love people who love each other - there is no need for me to defile my speech, in order win over other people that are against "love"?
You said it exactly, pure love between men surpasses sexual love. Unless it is defiled, then it becomes something unfit for Heaven altogether.
Similar threads
