.

Home Blog Photos Video Music Calendar Reviews Recipes Links

Apr 15, '08 1:56 PM
for everyone

ive been reading about homosexuality and the bible recently

and i stumbled upon this online resource

THE BIBLE AND HOMOSEXUALITY

i was able to speak with a gay priest and a man who recently finished theological studies.

they both told me that the new testament was written by Christ

and in the new testament, there were a lot of changes made.

in the old testament, all homosexuals should be killed

NIV: (New International Version) "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
KJV: (King James Version): "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
NKJV: (New King James Version) "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
Leviticus 20:13

and now most Christians are rejecting Leviticus 20:13

it says a lot about how society should really understand the meaning of the Bible...

and i learned that in the new testament, Christ wanted everyone to understand that

God is Love

my take on this is, it is never wrong for two men to love each other and be in an intimate relationship with each other as long as the context of intimacy between them is founded on love and never on lust and carnal pleasures of men.

they reminded me that out of all the sins men commit, homosexual love is the least grave of them. they find it bothering that we busy ourselves worrying about "sins" founded on love, when there are greater evil (neglect for the impoverished, ignoring the orphans, engaging in war, killings, corruption) that deprive humanity of the joy God has promised them.

interestingly, they also mentioned that Christ would never even think of the act of sex.

so if Christ never even thought of sex, how then will Christ will think of prohibiting intimacy between men. Unless you are saying that Christ thought of the act of sex and decided what should and what should not be done before during or after sex.

sex, if it was prohibited, would only be against his teaching if it was never based on love, and instead it was a result of men carnal desires.

carnal desires, something Christ is totally against.

I dont think God will deprive me of happiness and joy.

God will only lead me to a man who will truly understand and live by His words.

im not religious. i am spiritual.

i just feel upset that people fail to understand the things and circumstances that entail Love and how ones spiritual maturity affects the happiness and joy one will experience.

i will never let anyone tell me what will make me happy and what will make me joyful.

God is Love. All acts based on love and care for the well being of others will never be sin.

Remember that.

Prev: wala lang... funny and nice at the same time.. ^_^
Next: Ok, so im a Charice fan. so what? ^_^ *giggles*

reply share

26 CommentsChronological Reverse Threaded

kaede18 wrote on Apr 15

Amen. ^_^

frederickbotor wrote on Apr 15

God is love enough said.... i like this blog post.....

densemodesto wrote on Apr 15, edited on Apr 15

whatifikissyou said

it is never wrong for two men to love each other and be in an intimate relationship with each other as long as the context of intimacy between them is founded on love and never on lust and carnal pleasures of men.

where do you draw the lines between lust/carnal pleasure, sex and love?
doesn't lust play some role in sex? just a few questions.

scrpioknight16 wrote on Apr 15

i also agree.lust is a part of a relationship,it's part of sex.

where should the line be?

the line in my opinion should be on the subjective side.the lust should be reasonable.if it is for your partner, for the betterment of the relationship, i guess it's fine.if it goes off at random towards other people, even people we shouldn't be lust-ing about and we acted upon it,i guess that's the time it becomes wrong.

im not rock solid about this.just a thought.open to other opinions =D

noknokdei wrote on Apr 15

whatifikissyou said

i was able to speak with a gay priest and a man who recently finished theological studies.

sino yung gay priest?

yoursanctuary wrote on Apr 15

"my take on this is, it is never wrong for two men to love each other and be in an intimate relationship with each other as long as the context of intimacy between them is founded on love and never on lust and carnal pleasures of men."

~~korek!

kacebiatch wrote on Apr 15

xactly! never wrong for two men to love each other.... it is never wrong for two girls to love each other either... hail Bis, hail homos! lol.

chrisnox wrote on Apr 15

whatifikissyou said

ive been reading about homosexuality and the bible recently

and i stumbled upon this online resource

THE BIBLE AND HOMOSEXUALITY

i was able to speak with a gay priest and a man who recently finished theological studies.

they both told me that the new testament was written by Christ

and in the new testament, there were a lot of changes made.

in the old testament, all homosexuals should be killed

NIV: (New International Version) "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
KJV: (King James Version): "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
NKJV: (New King James Version) "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
Leviticus 20:13

and now most Christians are rejecting Leviticus 20:13

it says a lot about how society should really understand the meaning of the Bible...

and i learned that in the new testament, Christ wanted everyone to understand that

God is Love

my take on this is, it is never wrong for two men to love each other and be in an intimate relationship with each other as long as the context of intimacy between them is founded on love and never on lust and carnal pleasures of men.

they reminded me that out of all the sins men commit, homosexual love is the least grave of them. they find it bothering that we busy ourselves worrying about "sins" founded on love, when there are greater evil that deprive humanity of the joy God has promised them (neglect for the impoverished, war, killings, corruption).

interestingly, they also mentioned that Christ would never even think of the act of sex.

so if Christ never even thought of sex, how then will Christ will think of prohibiting intimacy between men. Unless you are saying that Christ thought of the act of sex and decided what should and what should not be done before during or after sex.

sex, if it was prohibited, would only be against his teaching if it was never based on love, and instead it was a result of men carnal desires.

carnal desires, something Christ is totally against.

I dont think God will deprive me of happiness and joy.

God will only lead me to a man who will truly understand and live by His words.

im not religious. i am spiritual.

i just feel upset that people fail to understand the things and circumstances that entail Love and how ones spiritual maturity affects the happiness and joy one will experience.

i will never let anyone tell me what will make me happy and what will make me joyful.

God is Love. All acts based on love and care for the well being of others will never be sin.

Remember that.

love is universal.. it encompasses all sexual preferences...

whatifikissyou wrote on Apr 15

densemodesto said

where do you draw the lines between lust/carnal pleasure, sex and love?
doesn't lust play some role in sex? just a few questions.

I saw a nice source on what is lust here...

http://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-lust.html

"Lust is a focus on pleasing oneself, and often leads to unwholesome actions to fulfill one's desires with no regard to the consequences. Lust is about possession and greed. The Christian faith is about selflessness."

Lust is when you want to engage in intimacy with a person without thinking of the real essence of the situation/relationship between you. Intimacy with love is about treasuring the situation and having a sense of being one with the person you deeply love. It is never about simply fulfilling your own desire. I dont know how else i can explain it. But i know the difference how it is when im intimate with someone i love and someone i dont love.

whatifikissyou wrote on Apr 15

scrpioknight16 said

im guessing that lust is part of carnal sex, desire is part of a relationships intimacy.

lust and desire. im guessing that these are two different things.

enokie wrote on Apr 16

enlightening!
thanks for the post...:)

clumsiness wrote on Apr 16

thanks for posting this... one of the best post ive seen for homosexuality

eventoughgirlscry wrote on Apr 16

so true. ^^

blackheart0387 wrote on Apr 17

as long as doing the act with love, i think there's nothing wrong doing it.
Its love that should binds two person together, whether its a same sex act or both opposite and not lust.

.............

thanks for the post.
my mom and I used to argue with that issue since she could'nt accept the fact that her son is a homosexual.
btw, my mom's a religious one.

kraizysexychiq2406 wrote on Apr 17

wen it comes to God nothing is impossible db? evryone has th ryt to love and to be loved regardless of the rules as long as ur not hurting anybody's feelings and ur functioning well enough to d society and in life God wil bless u more than anybody else..if it is a sin God will only be the one who'l persecute u db! :):)
ilove homos theyre wonderful..
thanks for the post ive been wandering bout it past few weeks now..

blessedbE!!

tjfozforonda wrote on Apr 18

At the end of the day we are all human beings under one God. Gay or straight, rich or poor... Thanks for an enlightening post.

carcalvin wrote on Apr 18

lahat sila nag agree...ako rin..

mac021 wrote on Apr 19

Hi, I don't think any true Christians would reject anything that is written in the Bible, but you merely pointed out an Old Testament practice which is no longer applicable now that we are living in the New Testament. God's Love was made flesh and was crucified for mankind in the New Testament, and this gives EVERYONE the chance to be saved if he chooses to believe in Jesus and repent from his sins, and make Jesus his Lord and Savior. You might also be surprised to know that man's perception of love is different from God's: http://mac021.multiply.com/journal/item/10/In_response_to_a_post_I_read_on_love...

ricks0n wrote on Apr 21

how can love between two men be a sin if their relationship actually made their faith in God stronger?

whatifikissyou wrote on Apr 22

mac021 said

Hi Monica Mae,

You sound like you know a lot about the Bible... im glad i chanced upon your blog. ^_^

"To summarize, all acts of love which bring glory to God (things that are pure, things that are noble [Philippians 4:8], things that do not violate God's laws) will never be sin. This is the truth."

1) Things that are pure and things that are noble.
Im not familiar with what Philippians said, so i looked it up in the bible. Here is what i found. "Philippians 4:8Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."

With this statement, and with the premises you laid at the start of your post, you clearly stated that humans, like you and everyone else, has a relative perception of how things are based on culture, family background, and life experiences. How then are we going to determine whose perspective is the "right" one? Words like true, noble, pure, lovely and admirable are all relative and subjective. And since men are not perfect, then we are NOT in the position to say which parts of the Bible should be practiced, and which parts of the Bible should be ignored and tolerated. When person A reads the bible and person B doesnt, does that alone give person A the divine and righteous calling from the Lord to subject person B to person A's interpretation of what the Bible says about what is right and wrong? Does that give person A the "moral descendancy" to point at person B and tell her that she is wrong. That what person B is doing will doom her to eternal damnation? I dont think so.

2) Things that do not violate God's laws.
This, im particularly interested in. Because A LOT of people are VERY selective when it comes to following/living the words of the Bible. Here is a list of passages from the Bible that are against women.

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." (I Corinthians 14:34-35)

You see, i dont agree that women should be silenced and women should keep quiet. I dont believe that women are inferior to men. I believe that women are actually good at sharing the words of the Lord. Its sad however, that there are people i met, women in particular, who say that homosexuality is wrong, and that homosexuals are hellbound. Its sad however, that these women preach that homosexuality is wrong and their basis is the Bible. Its sad however, that people who try to live by the words of the Bible, are SELECTIVE when it comes to doing what the Bible says.

Hope you can reply to this, on your soonest convenience.

Much admiration,
Marko

mac021 wrote on Apr 24, edited on Apr 24

Since my response is pretty lengthy, I decided to post it as a new article. hope you don't mind dropping by this page: http://mac021.multiply.com/journal/item/11/In_response_to_a_comment_made_on_my_post...

thank you for taking the time to visit my blog =)

whatifikissyou wrote on Apr 24

mac021 said

im curious. what is your stand on homosexuality? (i.e. sexual intimacy between two men...)

abetpabalate wrote on Apr 27

very well said.

tsicha wrote on May 2

precisely. exactly. absolutely. haven't read such article that clearly says it all. kudos.

hen3k wrote on May 27

love your blog, but tell me.. why is leviticus 20.13 more important than the rest of the book leviticus. whe are not really offering animals? it is an obligation in leviticus...we are eating porc. that is forbidden in leviticus either..

whatifikissyou wrote on May 28

hen3k said

i only cited a part of leviticus which is no longer practiced by Christians.

this is to emphasize my point that there are Christians who are selective when it comes to following what the Bible says. i.e. Christians who are against Homosexuality. They cite passages from the Bible that "prohibit homosexuality", however they dont kill homosexuals saying that it is no longer practiced by Christians. They also have women preachers, when the Bible clearly said that preaching the word of God should be left to men, and that women should shut up and listen to and follow orders of men. I am just wondering why they choose to retain "prohibiting homosexuality" while not practicing other commandments of the Bible.

audio reply video reply

Add a Comment

whatifikissyou

Do you know whatifikissyou?

Who is on Multiply?

Want to learn more?

Already a Member?

.