Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Gay, religious people... a ? for you please.
- Thread starter Crazier
- Start date
VicTusDeuS
New member
One of the reasons that men of the cloth commit those crimes is because at one point in their life they were abused themselves. For whatever reason they blammed themselves for being abused and decided to devote their lifes to God by becomming a priest etc etc. I guess it is a very terrifying experiance but becomming a priest doesn't solve the progblem. Many of them are still haunted by what happened to them and in turn they pass it on to others. 
huntmaster
New member
HumorMe said:
This is a concept that is very real and evident to me as well. Many do not realize that this process is underway.
gymtime said:
I'll tell you what gymtime... please give me the verse that states 'thall shall not put trees in elevator and then smoke a bowl in a bathtub when he is done.'
It does't happen. I was reading the bible, and ran across this verse and found it interesting. HumorMe is right on when he says that we are slowly being conditioned to accept the idea. However, as Paul mentioned 'And, worse, yet they encourse others to do them, too.' Misery loves company, and so do sinners. Just because you have the majority of people saying now that it is okay because society feels it is, doesn't prove what Paul wrote is not still God's view. To the people that say 'I was born gay.' What if when they die, God rules that out right away, and says he wasn't.' Then what justification is there?
Personally, I understand how one may love someone and live happily with the person. As I stated in my original post, I didn't write this verse, Paul did. I just wanted an opinion from gay men, how they get past this in their religion. It wasn't to offend anyone my friend, and I am sorry if I have. That was not my intent.
I figured most of you had read this line before, and would just explain how they feel about it. That is all.
It surely was not a judgement on my part.
--
--
musclebrains
New member
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........We've discussed that passage a zillion times here. It is not the open-and-shut case you want it to be Crazier. For one of a zillion discussions, from http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibc.htm:
The text reads:
"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another, Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
As stated in 2 Peter 3:15-17, we have to be very careful when interpreting the writings of Paul. "As also in all his [Paul's] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (KJV) As stated by Dr. R.S. Truluck, "Paul's writings have been taken out of context and twisted to punish and oppress every identifiable minority in the world: Jews, children, women, blacks, slaves, politicians, divorced people, convicts, pro choice people, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transsexuals, religious reformers, the mentally ill, and the list could go on and on. Paul is often difficult and confusing to understand. A lot of Paul's writing is very difficult to translate. Since most of his letters were written in response to news from other people, reading Paul can be like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. We know, or think we know, what Paul is saying, but we have to guess what the other side has said." 1
The Greek phrase "para physin" is commonly translated into the English word "unnatural". This is an error. "Unnatural" implies that the act is morally condemned. In Greek, the phrase really means "that which is beyond the ordinary and usual." "Unconventional" would have been a good word to use. In 1 Corinthians 11:14, when Paul refers to long hair on men as unusual and not ordinary, he used the same two words.
It is important to analyze the preamble to the verses quoted above. Together with verses 26 and 27, the passage is concerned with "Paul's vigorous denunciation of idolatrous religious worship and rituals." 1The full passage includes the following statements:
Verses 21-23: The people had once been Christians. But they had fallen away from the faith. They made images of Pagan gods in the form of men, birds, animals and reptiles for their religious rituals. These were probably held in Pagan temples.
Verse 24: Next, they engaged in heterosexual orgies with each other as part of these pagan fertility rituals.
Verse 25: Next, they worshipped the images that they had made, instead of God, the creator. This is a specific condemnation of idol worship
Verse 26: Because of these forbidden practices, God intervened in these fertility sex-rituals and changed the people's behavior so that women started to engage in sexual activities with other women. The Greek term often translated as "vile passions" in this verse does not mean "passions" in its current erotic sense. It seems to refer to the "frenzied state of mind that many ancient mystery cults induced in worshipers by means of wine, drugs and music." 1
Verse 27: describes how God had the men also engage in same-sex ritual activities. They (presumably both the men and women) were then punished in some way for their error. (The NIV substitutes "perversion" for "error.")
Verse 28: Again, because they did not acknowledge God, then He "gave them up" to many different unethical activities and attitudes: evil, covetousness, malice, envy, murder, etc.
Interpretation:
Conservatives frequently concentrate on Verses 26 to 28. All homosexual behavior is condemned as a perversion; it is further linked to all types of evil behavior up to and including murder. One Evangelical authority commented: A. Mohler: "The passage makes it clear that homosexuality is ultimately a rebellion of human nature against the divine creator. It deals with the heart of homosexuality, the passion of man for man or woman for woman." 5
Liberals hold a variety of views on this passage. Some comments from a forum of liberal and conservative authorities: J. Nelson: "Paul didn't write it as a condemnation of homosexuality, but as a criticism of Greek behavior in temple worship. Greeks often incorporated sexual behavior in temple worship." 2
"D. Bartlett: "This is the tough one. I think one doesn't get around this. It's the only place in the New Testament where there's any extensive discussion of homosexual relations. In Romans, there's no question that Paul thinks certain kinds of homosexual behavior are a result of the idolatry of the pagan world."
Civil rights workers might reject the concept of Paul's that homosexuality is beyond the normal -- particularly when one considers Paul's support for the oppression of women in 1 Corinthians 14:34 to 35, and his acceptance of slavery as a normal social practice in Philemon 1:15 to 16.
Other liberal interpretations include: The complete passage describes how the ex-Christians engaged in orgiastic, presumably heterosexual sexual activities. Later God "gave them over" to something new: homosexual behavior. This implies that throughout their lifetime they had had a heterosexual orientation and had engaged only in heterosexual sex. God influenced them so that they engaged in homosexual sex. This was, for them, an unnatural activity. They were criticized because they were engaged in sexual activity which was unnatural for them. For a person with a heterosexual orientation, homosexual behavior is "shameful," "unnatural," "indecent," and a "perversion." The passage in Romans is not a condemnation of homosexual behavior. Rather, it disapproves of sexual behavior that is against a person's basic nature (i.e. homosexual behaviors by people whose orientation is heterosexual). Presumably this would condemn heterosexual behavior by gays and lesbians -- activity which is equally against their nature. 3 For the vast majority of adults, those who are heterosexual, it is indecent for them to engage in homosexual activities. For the small minority of humans who are homosexual, it would be indecent for them to engage in heterosexual activities.
Some question whether the word "perversion" in Verse 27, and "such things" in Verse 30 are related to only certain gay and lesbian behavior. e.g.: casual homosexual activities outside of a committed, monogamous two person relationship, or
group homosexual practices of any type, or
group homosexual practices in a religious setting. This was a common practice among Pagans at the time; e.g. in the temples dedicated to the Goddess Aphrodite)
These probably were the only forms of same-sex activity that Paul was familiar with. Paul may well have not been thinking of gays and lesbians in committed relationships when he wrote this passage. He never referred to such couples in his writings, and probably never encountered any during his lifetime. He might simply have been condemning homosexual orgies in Pagan sexual rituals.
Many English translations render the end of Verse 27 as "due penalty of their error." Their basic error was to leave Pauline Christianity, and engage in idolatry. That is the main theme of the argument. From the idolatry flowed sexual orgies, sexual behavior against their nature, wickedness, greed, murder, etc. The intent of the passage is to show how idolatry leads to complete degeneration of behavior: to evil, envy, treachery, spite, gossiping, etc. The reference to what was, for them, unnatural homosexual behavior seems almost incidental, to the story. It was merely one symptom of the results of Pagan idolatry.
In Greek and Roman society of the time, bisexuality was regarded as quite natural; people in some walks of society were expected to engage in bisexual relations. Since most of them were heterosexual, bisexual activity would be against their personal nature. This behavior would be condemned because it is against their nature. One source states
"...God created each of us with a sexual orientation. To attempt to change it is, in effect, telling God that He created us wrong. The creation (us) does not have the right to 're-create' itself."
Some interpret the "men...with other men" clause to be a translation of the original Greek word for "pederasty" which was commonly practiced at the time by adult males with male children (often slaves). Thus Paul might have been criticizing child sexual abuse.
From Paul's era, until today, many people have believed that the only natural, normal sexual activity was between one man and one woman for the purpose of procreation. Thus "unnatural" sex would include: anyone engaging in sex for pure enjoyment
married couples who engaged in intercourse even though one partner was sterile
married couples who had sex even though the woman was not in the fertile part of her cycle, or was past childbearing years
Perhaps Paul's use of the phrase "para physin" simply meant that the people engaged in same-sex practices that had no procreative function.
Writer Richard Summerbell suggests that this passage may refer to men who are predominantly heterosexual, but who are involved in "dominant/submissive relationships or casual sex with younger men or older teens...Most of the men taking up such relations are married and actively heterosexual at the same time. The male-male relationships are diversions or, when taken up by single men, substitutes for heterosexuality. It became clear to me that surrogate heterosexuality, a type of male- male sex which in our societies is common in prisons but nowhere else (it is sometimes referred to as "prison homosexuality") can become so common in some societies that its practitioners greatly outnumber and also influence the behaviour of those who are actually of a homosexual orientation." 4 Thus, St. Paul may be writing of men involved in dominant/submissive relationships and/or of heterosexuals involved in sex with male youths. Neither has any connection to consensual, committed gay or lesbian relationships.
Roman Catholic: Pope Paul VI added a footnote to his 1975 declaration "Persona Humana" 4 which includes a very different rendering of Romans 1:26-27:
"...why their women have turned from natural intercourse to unnatural practices and why their menfolk have given up natural intercourse to be consumed with passion for each other, men doing shameless things with men and getting an appropriate reward for their perversion"
Most versions of the Bible start Verse 27 with an expression like: "In the same way" (NIV, NRSV, NAS) or "in like manner" (Rhiems New Testament). or "The men also turned" (KJV). Since the men were engaging in homosexual activities, the "in the same way" phrase would imply that the women were engaging in lesbian sex. But the version that the Pope quoted omits the phrase. This gives a completely different slant to the entire passage. The men are still having homosexual relationships, but the women were merely engaging in some unspecified "unnatural practices". One can speculate whether these practices were simply non-traditional heterosexual activities such as heterosexual oral or anal sex, masturbation, sex with multiple men, etc. They might not have been involved in same-sex practices at all. Thus, one could argue that the entire Bible may be totally silent on lesbianism.
References:
R.S. Truluck, "The six Bible passages used to condemn homosexuals," at: http://www.truluck.com/html/
Fred Tasker, "What does the Bible say about homosexuality?", Philadelphia Inquirer, 1997-JUL-13. The article was based on an earlier survey of religions opinion of 6 theologians and religious leaders covering the range from conservative to liberal thought: David Bartlett, professor at Yale Divinity School
Rev. Timothy Crater of the National Association of Evangelicals
Reuven Kimelman, professor of near Eastern and Judaic studies at Brandeis University.
R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Seminary
The Rev. Jill Nelson, pastor of the Sunshine Cathedral Metropolitan Community Church
Krister Stendahl, ex-dean of Harvard Divinity School.
"How to be true to the Bible and say 'Yes' to same-sex unions," at: http://member.aol.com/DrSwiney/bennett.html
Richard Summerbell, "Homosexuality and the Integrity of Scripture," at: http://members.aol.com/summerbelr/Richard5.htm
Copyright © 1996 to 2002 incl. by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Latest update: 2002-JAN-29
Author: B.A. Robinson
The text reads:
"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another, Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
As stated in 2 Peter 3:15-17, we have to be very careful when interpreting the writings of Paul. "As also in all his [Paul's] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (KJV) As stated by Dr. R.S. Truluck, "Paul's writings have been taken out of context and twisted to punish and oppress every identifiable minority in the world: Jews, children, women, blacks, slaves, politicians, divorced people, convicts, pro choice people, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transsexuals, religious reformers, the mentally ill, and the list could go on and on. Paul is often difficult and confusing to understand. A lot of Paul's writing is very difficult to translate. Since most of his letters were written in response to news from other people, reading Paul can be like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. We know, or think we know, what Paul is saying, but we have to guess what the other side has said." 1
The Greek phrase "para physin" is commonly translated into the English word "unnatural". This is an error. "Unnatural" implies that the act is morally condemned. In Greek, the phrase really means "that which is beyond the ordinary and usual." "Unconventional" would have been a good word to use. In 1 Corinthians 11:14, when Paul refers to long hair on men as unusual and not ordinary, he used the same two words.
It is important to analyze the preamble to the verses quoted above. Together with verses 26 and 27, the passage is concerned with "Paul's vigorous denunciation of idolatrous religious worship and rituals." 1The full passage includes the following statements:
Verses 21-23: The people had once been Christians. But they had fallen away from the faith. They made images of Pagan gods in the form of men, birds, animals and reptiles for their religious rituals. These were probably held in Pagan temples.
Verse 24: Next, they engaged in heterosexual orgies with each other as part of these pagan fertility rituals.
Verse 25: Next, they worshipped the images that they had made, instead of God, the creator. This is a specific condemnation of idol worship
Verse 26: Because of these forbidden practices, God intervened in these fertility sex-rituals and changed the people's behavior so that women started to engage in sexual activities with other women. The Greek term often translated as "vile passions" in this verse does not mean "passions" in its current erotic sense. It seems to refer to the "frenzied state of mind that many ancient mystery cults induced in worshipers by means of wine, drugs and music." 1
Verse 27: describes how God had the men also engage in same-sex ritual activities. They (presumably both the men and women) were then punished in some way for their error. (The NIV substitutes "perversion" for "error.")
Verse 28: Again, because they did not acknowledge God, then He "gave them up" to many different unethical activities and attitudes: evil, covetousness, malice, envy, murder, etc.
Interpretation:
Conservatives frequently concentrate on Verses 26 to 28. All homosexual behavior is condemned as a perversion; it is further linked to all types of evil behavior up to and including murder. One Evangelical authority commented: A. Mohler: "The passage makes it clear that homosexuality is ultimately a rebellion of human nature against the divine creator. It deals with the heart of homosexuality, the passion of man for man or woman for woman." 5
Liberals hold a variety of views on this passage. Some comments from a forum of liberal and conservative authorities: J. Nelson: "Paul didn't write it as a condemnation of homosexuality, but as a criticism of Greek behavior in temple worship. Greeks often incorporated sexual behavior in temple worship." 2
"D. Bartlett: "This is the tough one. I think one doesn't get around this. It's the only place in the New Testament where there's any extensive discussion of homosexual relations. In Romans, there's no question that Paul thinks certain kinds of homosexual behavior are a result of the idolatry of the pagan world."
Civil rights workers might reject the concept of Paul's that homosexuality is beyond the normal -- particularly when one considers Paul's support for the oppression of women in 1 Corinthians 14:34 to 35, and his acceptance of slavery as a normal social practice in Philemon 1:15 to 16.
Other liberal interpretations include: The complete passage describes how the ex-Christians engaged in orgiastic, presumably heterosexual sexual activities. Later God "gave them over" to something new: homosexual behavior. This implies that throughout their lifetime they had had a heterosexual orientation and had engaged only in heterosexual sex. God influenced them so that they engaged in homosexual sex. This was, for them, an unnatural activity. They were criticized because they were engaged in sexual activity which was unnatural for them. For a person with a heterosexual orientation, homosexual behavior is "shameful," "unnatural," "indecent," and a "perversion." The passage in Romans is not a condemnation of homosexual behavior. Rather, it disapproves of sexual behavior that is against a person's basic nature (i.e. homosexual behaviors by people whose orientation is heterosexual). Presumably this would condemn heterosexual behavior by gays and lesbians -- activity which is equally against their nature. 3 For the vast majority of adults, those who are heterosexual, it is indecent for them to engage in homosexual activities. For the small minority of humans who are homosexual, it would be indecent for them to engage in heterosexual activities.
Some question whether the word "perversion" in Verse 27, and "such things" in Verse 30 are related to only certain gay and lesbian behavior. e.g.: casual homosexual activities outside of a committed, monogamous two person relationship, or
group homosexual practices of any type, or
group homosexual practices in a religious setting. This was a common practice among Pagans at the time; e.g. in the temples dedicated to the Goddess Aphrodite)
These probably were the only forms of same-sex activity that Paul was familiar with. Paul may well have not been thinking of gays and lesbians in committed relationships when he wrote this passage. He never referred to such couples in his writings, and probably never encountered any during his lifetime. He might simply have been condemning homosexual orgies in Pagan sexual rituals.
Many English translations render the end of Verse 27 as "due penalty of their error." Their basic error was to leave Pauline Christianity, and engage in idolatry. That is the main theme of the argument. From the idolatry flowed sexual orgies, sexual behavior against their nature, wickedness, greed, murder, etc. The intent of the passage is to show how idolatry leads to complete degeneration of behavior: to evil, envy, treachery, spite, gossiping, etc. The reference to what was, for them, unnatural homosexual behavior seems almost incidental, to the story. It was merely one symptom of the results of Pagan idolatry.
In Greek and Roman society of the time, bisexuality was regarded as quite natural; people in some walks of society were expected to engage in bisexual relations. Since most of them were heterosexual, bisexual activity would be against their personal nature. This behavior would be condemned because it is against their nature. One source states
"...God created each of us with a sexual orientation. To attempt to change it is, in effect, telling God that He created us wrong. The creation (us) does not have the right to 're-create' itself."
Some interpret the "men...with other men" clause to be a translation of the original Greek word for "pederasty" which was commonly practiced at the time by adult males with male children (often slaves). Thus Paul might have been criticizing child sexual abuse.
From Paul's era, until today, many people have believed that the only natural, normal sexual activity was between one man and one woman for the purpose of procreation. Thus "unnatural" sex would include: anyone engaging in sex for pure enjoyment
married couples who engaged in intercourse even though one partner was sterile
married couples who had sex even though the woman was not in the fertile part of her cycle, or was past childbearing years
Perhaps Paul's use of the phrase "para physin" simply meant that the people engaged in same-sex practices that had no procreative function.
Writer Richard Summerbell suggests that this passage may refer to men who are predominantly heterosexual, but who are involved in "dominant/submissive relationships or casual sex with younger men or older teens...Most of the men taking up such relations are married and actively heterosexual at the same time. The male-male relationships are diversions or, when taken up by single men, substitutes for heterosexuality. It became clear to me that surrogate heterosexuality, a type of male- male sex which in our societies is common in prisons but nowhere else (it is sometimes referred to as "prison homosexuality") can become so common in some societies that its practitioners greatly outnumber and also influence the behaviour of those who are actually of a homosexual orientation." 4 Thus, St. Paul may be writing of men involved in dominant/submissive relationships and/or of heterosexuals involved in sex with male youths. Neither has any connection to consensual, committed gay or lesbian relationships.
Roman Catholic: Pope Paul VI added a footnote to his 1975 declaration "Persona Humana" 4 which includes a very different rendering of Romans 1:26-27:
"...why their women have turned from natural intercourse to unnatural practices and why their menfolk have given up natural intercourse to be consumed with passion for each other, men doing shameless things with men and getting an appropriate reward for their perversion"
Most versions of the Bible start Verse 27 with an expression like: "In the same way" (NIV, NRSV, NAS) or "in like manner" (Rhiems New Testament). or "The men also turned" (KJV). Since the men were engaging in homosexual activities, the "in the same way" phrase would imply that the women were engaging in lesbian sex. But the version that the Pope quoted omits the phrase. This gives a completely different slant to the entire passage. The men are still having homosexual relationships, but the women were merely engaging in some unspecified "unnatural practices". One can speculate whether these practices were simply non-traditional heterosexual activities such as heterosexual oral or anal sex, masturbation, sex with multiple men, etc. They might not have been involved in same-sex practices at all. Thus, one could argue that the entire Bible may be totally silent on lesbianism.
References:
R.S. Truluck, "The six Bible passages used to condemn homosexuals," at: http://www.truluck.com/html/
Fred Tasker, "What does the Bible say about homosexuality?", Philadelphia Inquirer, 1997-JUL-13. The article was based on an earlier survey of religions opinion of 6 theologians and religious leaders covering the range from conservative to liberal thought: David Bartlett, professor at Yale Divinity School
Rev. Timothy Crater of the National Association of Evangelicals
Reuven Kimelman, professor of near Eastern and Judaic studies at Brandeis University.
R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Seminary
The Rev. Jill Nelson, pastor of the Sunshine Cathedral Metropolitan Community Church
Krister Stendahl, ex-dean of Harvard Divinity School.
"How to be true to the Bible and say 'Yes' to same-sex unions," at: http://member.aol.com/DrSwiney/bennett.html
Richard Summerbell, "Homosexuality and the Integrity of Scripture," at: http://members.aol.com/summerbelr/Richard5.htm
Copyright © 1996 to 2002 incl. by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Latest update: 2002-JAN-29
Author: B.A. Robinson
starfish said:Can I ask why you guys care??? I mean why do people get so worked up over homosexuals... Get worked up over starving children or child molesting...
I personally don't think my God would judge anyone for caring for someone else. Same sex or not.
I can stand it because they have more rights than strait people! It makes me want to vomit when I see them in public.
musclebrains
New member
KA-BAR said:
Let's see. It is legal to discriminate against gay people in hiring and housing. In some states it is still illegal for members of the same gender to be sexual with one another. Gay people cannot marry or openly serve in the armed forces.
Would you care to explain how we have more rights than straight people?
Similar threads
