Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: some of the post in this site

Expand Messages
  • nyguy_1225
    Jay: Yes, I can appreciate that it can appear difficult or confusing sometimes to sift through all the material and doctrines out there and be able to rightly
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 11, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Jay: Yes, I can appreciate that it can appear difficult or confusing
      sometimes to sift through all the material and doctrines out there
      and be able to rightly separate what is true from what is not true.

      I'm sure most Bible-believing Christians who have used the Bible to
      condemn other Christians were (and are) acting in good faith. They
      thought they must defend against an attack of what they believed to
      be the clear teachings of Scripture. In reality, however, what many
      were defending was their presumption of what the Bible teaches, not
      the truth of Scripture.

      What we think the bible teaches and what it teaches can sometimes be
      at odds with one another. That's why to get at the meaning that God
      originally intended His Word to have when it was first spoken, we
      must put the Scriptures in their historical context. How important
      is context? Grant R. Osborne (Ph.D., University of Aberdeen) and
      professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School –
      the premier Evangelical seminary – answers that question in his
      award-winning book, "The Hermeneutical Spiral." Dr. Osborne
      says, "the information we glean from the [historical] sources
      becomes the filter through which the individual [Biblical] passages
      may be passed … Its purpose is to narrow down the interpretive laws
      so that we might ask the proper questions, forcing us back to the
      times and culture of the original writer and the situation behind
      the text. We will therefore have a control against reading
      twentieth-century meaning back into first-century language. Such an
      [historical] approach leads to the proper type of pre-understanding,
      linked as it is to the text and its background."

      Both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible spend page after page
      condemning pagan practices, but most of us have no idea what those
      practices were. For a brief review of the few biblical texts that
      are often used to endorse anti-gay theology and doctrine (and these
      are just BRIEF reviews, for there is much scholarly research
      available on these texts), see posts #3000-3005 on this board.

      -Alex


      --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, "JAy"
      <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
      > I have been reading some of these post here,and I am now more
      > confussed than ever.maybe I have read some of them wrong but what
      I
      > got out of some of these post were a support on the whole gay
      thing
      > and GOD,I also read that thing about "GAY or GOY didnt understand
      > that one but it was sounding like it was supporting it.on behalf
      of
      > one of my good friends I did a reseach that took 1,1/2 to do
      before
      > it almost took my own life if we look at the bible it says in
      today
      > vers. gays will no go to heaven and its wrong but try and go back
      to
      > when it was written there was no word for gay.the sodom thing I am
      > not ure that one some say GOD killed them because they were
      haveing
      > gay sex,some say they were killed because they wanted to have sex
      > with the angles,and some people say sodom was just plain evil and
      > that why GOD wipe them out.I am not a judgment person,but as far
      as
      > the whole gay thing I dont know,its not my place to say if it is
      > wrong or not,for me I took all relationships out of my life so
      that
      > I may worrie about school and family and such.I believe there is a
      > GOD and he died for my sins and he is going to come back to this
      > place and take those with him.what do some of u think is gay right
      > or is wrong?some support it and some dont,I dont know like I said
      my
      > reseach for this subject almost killed me so I am done with it.
    • Jeremy Anderson
      so are u for gay or not for gay?see that is what my best friend told me almost the same thing,he had told me that noboady knows if being gay is wrong because
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 11, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        so are u for gay or not for gay?see that is what my best friend told me almost the same thing,he had told me that noboady knows if being gay is wrong because of the bible not saying that GAY or any other word to match it ,was wrong.maybe I am just out of line and have no idea whats going on,I was raised as a believer in Christ and will die as one.I guess the question is if I wanted to be gay would I go to hell for it? I believe u not born gay nor str. everyone has a choice that they make.it is really sad that the church will fill your head with stuff the bible doesnt even say.or translate it for their own good. I love reading the bible but it has to be the most confussing book I have ever read.I try and be open minded in this area for it is NOT my place to judge but only GOD himself can judge us,this really is a long sought after question and I really dont think anyone will ever know the truth behind this one.

        ~JAY~

        nyguy_1225 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
        Jay: Yes, I can appreciate that it can appear difficult or confusing
        sometimes to sift through all the material and doctrines out there
        and be able to rightly separate what is true from what is not true.

        I'm sure most Bible-believing Christians who have used the Bible to
        condemn other Christians were (and are) acting in good faith. They
        thought they must defend against an attack of what they believed to
        be the clear teachings of Scripture. In reality, however, what many
        were defending was their presumption of what the Bible teaches, not
        the truth of Scripture.

        What we think the bible teaches and what it teaches can sometimes be
        at odds with one another. That's why to get at the meaning that God
        originally intended His Word to have when it was first spoken, we
        must put the Scriptures in their historical context. How important
        is context? Grant R. Osborne (Ph.D., University of Aberdeen) and
        professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School �
        the premier Evangelical seminary � answers that question in his
        award-winning book, "The Hermeneutical Spiral." Dr. Osborne
        says, "the information we glean from the [historical] sources
        becomes the filter through which the individual [Biblical] passages
        may be passed � Its purpose is to narrow down the interpretive laws
        so that we might ask the proper questions, forcing us back to the
        times and culture of the original writer and the situation behind
        the text. We will therefore have a control against reading
        twentieth-century meaning back into first-century language. Such an
        [historical] approach leads to the proper type of pre-understanding,
        linked as it is to the text and its background."

        Both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible spend page after page
        condemning pagan practices, but most of us have no idea what those
        practices were. For a brief review of the few biblical texts that
        are often used to endorse anti-gay theology and doctrine (and these
        are just BRIEF reviews, for there is much scholarly research
        available on these texts), see posts #3000-3005 on this board.

        -Alex


        --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, "JAy"
        <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
        > I have been reading some of these post here,and I am now more
        > confussed than ever.maybe I have read some of them wrong but what
        I
        > got out of some of these post were a support on the whole gay
        thing
        > and GOD,I also read that thing about "GAY or GOY didnt understand
        > that one but it was sounding like it was supporting it.on behalf
        of
        > one of my good friends I did a reseach that took 1,1/2 to do
        before
        > it almost took my own life if we look at the bible it says in
        today
        > vers. gays will no go to heaven and its wrong but try and go back
        to
        > when it was written there was no word for gay.the sodom thing I am
        > not ure that one some say GOD killed them because they were
        haveing
        > gay sex,some say they were killed because they wanted to have sex
        > with the angles,and some people say sodom was just plain evil and
        > that why GOD wipe them out.I am not a judgment person,but as far
        as
        > the whole gay thing I dont know,its not my place to say if it is
        > wrong or not,for me I took all relationships out of my life so
        that
        > I may worrie about school and family and such.I believe there is a
        > GOD and he died for my sins and he is going to come back to this
        > place and take those with him.what do some of u think is gay right
        > or is wrong?some support it and some dont,I dont know like I said
        my
        > reseach for this subject almost killed me so I am done with it.


        Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


        ---------------------------------
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exexgayministry/

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        http://mail.yahoo.com

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • nyguy_1225
        Jay, perhaps this will better help you see where I (and many others here) are coming from: #1: I do not believe that gay people do not choose their orientation
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 11, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Jay, perhaps this will better help you see where I (and many others
          here) are coming from:

          #1: I do not believe that gay people do not choose their orientation
          any more than straight people choose their orientation.

          #2 The Bible contains no such concept as "orientation." In places
          the Bible refers to specific acts which involve the genitals, not an
          orientation. Though many modern Bible translations use the
          word "homosexual" (that word means a person whose sexual orientation
          is toward persons of his or her own gender), the word and the
          concept itself did not exist in Bible times.

          #3: When the Bible talks about homosexual behavior, it is not
          talking about the men and women who are among that tiny minority of
          the population whose orientation is toward same-sex relationships.
          It is talking about the kind of gross pagan behavior described and
          condemned by the ancient Prophets and Apostles.

          #4: If we don't catch the fact that male-on-male pagan rite
          prostitution was a common practice in Bible times, we will miss the
          point of the Biblical condemnation. We will misconstrue Leviticus
          18:22 and 20:13 to forbid all male same-sex behavior.

          #5: Leviticus 18 and 20 are simply a catalog of the Egyptian and
          Canaanite fertility and magic (pagan) practices. The Israelites
          were to avoid those pagan ritual practices. Should we read a
          universal ethical meaning into those prohibitions? No. Should we
          take them to mean that sexual contact between people of the same sex
          is condemned under all circumstances and for all times? No. God
          was telling the Israelites not to engage in pagan rituals – period.
          To read a universal, all-inclusive prohibition into these words is
          to cease to take the Bible literally; to not care what it meant to
          the first readers. It is to put words in God's mouth, or worse yet,
          to pretend that our words are the same as God's.

          #6: Mixing the worship of the One True God with pagan practices
          didn't end in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, Christ
          condemns the early church's tendency to mix Christian faith and
          pagan sexual practices. His condemnations are in the letters to the
          seven churches in the Book of Revelation. Putting an end to male-on-
          male pagan rite and other pagan practices was clearly the intent of
          the Law of Moses and of Jesus' warnings in Revelation, and it is
          what the faithful kings of Israel and The King of Israel were eager
          to do.

          #7: Paul's mission was the same as was the mission of the Prophets
          of old, except that he was sent primarily to the Gentiles. He was
          just as anti-pagan as the Old Testament prophets were. As he told
          his Gentile audience, "Therefore since we are God's offspring, we
          should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or
          stone - an image made by man's design and skill. In the past God
          overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere
          to repent" (Acts 17:29 – 30). Paul was anti-pagan. To assume that
          he was also anti-homosexual is to put words in the Apostle's mouth.
          Public sexual practice was part and parcel of the paganism Paul was
          sent to condemn. What Paul condemns in his letters is what he saw
          on his journey; pagan prostitute-priests and other forms of public
          sexual excess and abuse.

          #8: Paul's reference to the subject of sexual behavior is precisely
          the same as it is condemned in the Old Testament: rape and pagan
          rite.

          #8: Both the Old and New Testament agree. Male-on-male rape and
          male-on-male prostitution are wrong. At the same time, anatomically
          same partnership that does not involve rape, pagan rite, or
          exploitation is not condemned nor commended. There is no warrant
          for reading such a condemnation into Biblical morality and ethics.

          #9: When the Bible identifies forms of male-on-male expression as
          being condemnable, many people miss the fact that contact within the
          context of a quiet, loving, monogamous homosexual relationship is
          omitted from censure.

          #10: There is no proof that the Bible condemns intimate love that is
          between people who have the same anatomy. Nevertheless, people
          believe that it does so. The sad truth is that no number of facts
          and no amount of Biblical exposition will change a mind that is
          unwilling to change. People whose minds are unwilling to change
          have set their presumptions above the Word of God.

          The point is there is absolutely nothing incongruous with being BOTH
          Christian AND gay. The Bible contains no proscriptions against
          homosexuals. It does, however, contain proscriptions against pagan
          prostitution. The fact that the violation of others is strongly
          condemned does not mean that all homosexual behavior warrants such
          censure any more than all heterosexuals are to be condemned for
          their sexual behavior by association with the sins of pedophilia,
          lust, rape, fornication or adultery. The few verses in Scripture
          that proscribe sexual union between men all seek to address sins of
          pagan idolatry, rebellion, self-indulgence, abuse, or grossly
          irresponsible behavior. None refer to gay or straight people, who
          love their partners, are faithful to them and who shun sexual
          immorality, according to biblical definitions.

          -Alex

          --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, Jeremy Anderson
          <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
          > so are u for gay or not for gay?see that is what my best friend
          told me almost the same thing,he had told me that noboady knows if
          being gay is wrong because of the bible not saying that GAY or any
          other word to match it ,was wrong.maybe I am just out of line and
          have no idea whats going on,I was raised as a believer in Christ and
          will die as one.I guess the question is if I wanted to be gay would
          I go to hell for it? I believe u not born gay nor str. everyone has
          a choice that they make.it is really sad that the church will fill
          your head with stuff the bible doesnt even say.or translate it for
          their own good. I love reading the bible but it has to be the most
          confussing book I have ever read.I try and be open minded in this
          area for it is NOT my place to judge but only GOD himself can judge
          us,this really is a long sought after question and I really dont
          think anyone will ever know the truth behind this one.
          >
          > ~JAY~
          >
          > nyguy_1225 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
          > Jay: Yes, I can appreciate that it can appear difficult or
          confusing
          > sometimes to sift through all the material and doctrines out there
          > and be able to rightly separate what is true from what is not
          true.
          >
          > I'm sure most Bible-believing Christians who have used the Bible
          to
          > condemn other Christians were (and are) acting in good faith.
          They
          > thought they must defend against an attack of what they believed
          to
          > be the clear teachings of Scripture. In reality, however, what
          many
          > were defending was their presumption of what the Bible teaches,
          not
          > the truth of Scripture.
          >
          > What we think the bible teaches and what it teaches can sometimes
          be
          > at odds with one another. That's why to get at the meaning that
          God
          > originally intended His Word to have when it was first spoken, we
          > must put the Scriptures in their historical context. How
          important
          > is context? Grant R. Osborne (Ph.D., University of Aberdeen) and
          > professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School –

          > the premier Evangelical seminary – answers that question in his
          > award-winning book, "The Hermeneutical Spiral." Dr. Osborne
          > says, "the information we glean from the [historical] sources
          > becomes the filter through which the individual [Biblical]
          passages
          > may be passed … Its purpose is to narrow down the interpretive
          laws
          > so that we might ask the proper questions, forcing us back to the
          > times and culture of the original writer and the situation behind
          > the text. We will therefore have a control against reading
          > twentieth-century meaning back into first-century language. Such
          an
          > [historical] approach leads to the proper type of pre-
          understanding,
          > linked as it is to the text and its background."
          >
          > Both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible spend page after page
          > condemning pagan practices, but most of us have no idea what those
          > practices were. For a brief review of the few biblical texts that
          > are often used to endorse anti-gay theology and doctrine (and
          these
          > are just BRIEF reviews, for there is much scholarly research
          > available on these texts), see posts #3000-3005 on this board.
          >
          > -Alex
          >
          >
          > --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, "JAy"
          > <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
          > > I have been reading some of these post here,and I am now more
          > > confussed than ever.maybe I have read some of them wrong but
          what
          > I
          > > got out of some of these post were a support on the whole gay
          > thing
          > > and GOD,I also read that thing about "GAY or GOY didnt
          understand
          > > that one but it was sounding like it was supporting it.on behalf
          > of
          > > one of my good friends I did a reseach that took 1,1/2 to do
          > before
          > > it almost took my own life if we look at the bible it says in
          > today
          > > vers. gays will no go to heaven and its wrong but try and go
          back
          > to
          > > when it was written there was no word for gay.the sodom thing I
          am
          > > not ure that one some say GOD killed them because they were
          > haveing
          > > gay sex,some say they were killed because they wanted to have
          sex
          > > with the angles,and some people say sodom was just plain evil
          and
          > > that why GOD wipe them out.I am not a judgment person,but as far
          > as
          > > the whole gay thing I dont know,its not my place to say if it is
          > > wrong or not,for me I took all relationships out of my life so
          > that
          > > I may worrie about school and family and such.I believe there is
          a
          > > GOD and he died for my sins and he is going to come back to this
          > > place and take those with him.what do some of u think is gay
          right
          > > or is wrong?some support it and some dont,I dont know like I
          said
          > my
          > > reseach for this subject almost killed me so I am done with it.
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
          >
          >
          > ---------------------------------
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          > To visit your group on the web, go to:
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exexgayministry/
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
          Service.
          >
          >
          > __________________________________________________
          > Do You Yahoo!?
          > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
          > http://mail.yahoo.com
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jeremy Anderson
          well that does help alot.a Gay person is like a str. person as far as the bible but the laws are the same u cannot be a hooker {str. or gay} or like laws.it
          Message 4 of 7 , Jun 12, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            well that does help alot.a Gay person is like a str. person as far as the bible but the laws are the same u cannot be a hooker {str. or gay} or like laws.it does clear alot up could I ask u to tell me what "Pagan: is? thank-you for your kind help

            nyguy_1225 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Jay, perhaps this will better help you see where I (and many others
            here) are coming from:

            #1: I do not believe that gay people do not choose their orientation
            any more than straight people choose their orientation.

            #2 The Bible contains no such concept as "orientation." In places
            the Bible refers to specific acts which involve the genitals, not an
            orientation. Though many modern Bible translations use the
            word "homosexual" (that word means a person whose sexual orientation
            is toward persons of his or her own gender), the word and the
            concept itself did not exist in Bible times.

            #3: When the Bible talks about homosexual behavior, it is not
            talking about the men and women who are among that tiny minority of
            the population whose orientation is toward same-sex relationships.
            It is talking about the kind of gross pagan behavior described and
            condemned by the ancient Prophets and Apostles.

            #4: If we don't catch the fact that male-on-male pagan rite
            prostitution was a common practice in Bible times, we will miss the
            point of the Biblical condemnation. We will misconstrue Leviticus
            18:22 and 20:13 to forbid all male same-sex behavior.

            #5: Leviticus 18 and 20 are simply a catalog of the Egyptian and
            Canaanite fertility and magic (pagan) practices. The Israelites
            were to avoid those pagan ritual practices. Should we read a
            universal ethical meaning into those prohibitions? No. Should we
            take them to mean that sexual contact between people of the same sex
            is condemned under all circumstances and for all times? No. God
            was telling the Israelites not to engage in pagan rituals � period.
            To read a universal, all-inclusive prohibition into these words is
            to cease to take the Bible literally; to not care what it meant to
            the first readers. It is to put words in God's mouth, or worse yet,
            to pretend that our words are the same as God's.

            #6: Mixing the worship of the One True God with pagan practices
            didn't end in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, Christ
            condemns the early church's tendency to mix Christian faith and
            pagan sexual practices. His condemnations are in the letters to the
            seven churches in the Book of Revelation. Putting an end to male-on-
            male pagan rite and other pagan practices was clearly the intent of
            the Law of Moses and of Jesus' warnings in Revelation, and it is
            what the faithful kings of Israel and The King of Israel were eager
            to do.

            #7: Paul's mission was the same as was the mission of the Prophets
            of old, except that he was sent primarily to the Gentiles. He was
            just as anti-pagan as the Old Testament prophets were. As he told
            his Gentile audience, "Therefore since we are God's offspring, we
            should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or
            stone - an image made by man's design and skill. In the past God
            overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere
            to repent" (Acts 17:29 � 30). Paul was anti-pagan. To assume that
            he was also anti-homosexual is to put words in the Apostle's mouth.
            Public sexual practice was part and parcel of the paganism Paul was
            sent to condemn. What Paul condemns in his letters is what he saw
            on his journey; pagan prostitute-priests and other forms of public
            sexual excess and abuse.

            #8: Paul's reference to the subject of sexual behavior is precisely
            the same as it is condemned in the Old Testament: rape and pagan
            rite.

            #8: Both the Old and New Testament agree. Male-on-male rape and
            male-on-male prostitution are wrong. At the same time, anatomically
            same partnership that does not involve rape, pagan rite, or
            exploitation is not condemned nor commended. There is no warrant
            for reading such a condemnation into Biblical morality and ethics.

            #9: When the Bible identifies forms of male-on-male expression as
            being condemnable, many people miss the fact that contact within the
            context of a quiet, loving, monogamous homosexual relationship is
            omitted from censure.

            #10: There is no proof that the Bible condemns intimate love that is
            between people who have the same anatomy. Nevertheless, people
            believe that it does so. The sad truth is that no number of facts
            and no amount of Biblical exposition will change a mind that is
            unwilling to change. People whose minds are unwilling to change
            have set their presumptions above the Word of God.

            The point is there is absolutely nothing incongruous with being BOTH
            Christian AND gay. The Bible contains no proscriptions against
            homosexuals. It does, however, contain proscriptions against pagan
            prostitution. The fact that the violation of others is strongly
            condemned does not mean that all homosexual behavior warrants such
            censure any more than all heterosexuals are to be condemned for
            their sexual behavior by association with the sins of pedophilia,
            lust, rape, fornication or adultery. The few verses in Scripture
            that proscribe sexual union between men all seek to address sins of
            pagan idolatry, rebellion, self-indulgence, abuse, or grossly
            irresponsible behavior. None refer to gay or straight people, who
            love their partners, are faithful to them and who shun sexual
            immorality, according to biblical definitions.

            -Alex

            --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, Jeremy Anderson
            <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
            > so are u for gay or not for gay?see that is what my best friend
            told me almost the same thing,he had told me that noboady knows if
            being gay is wrong because of the bible not saying that GAY or any
            other word to match it ,was wrong.maybe I am just out of line and
            have no idea whats going on,I was raised as a believer in Christ and
            will die as one.I guess the question is if I wanted to be gay would
            I go to hell for it? I believe u not born gay nor str. everyone has
            a choice that they make.it is really sad that the church will fill
            your head with stuff the bible doesnt even say.or translate it for
            their own good. I love reading the bible but it has to be the most
            confussing book I have ever read.I try and be open minded in this
            area for it is NOT my place to judge but only GOD himself can judge
            us,this really is a long sought after question and I really dont
            think anyone will ever know the truth behind this one.
            >
            > ~JAY~
            >
            > nyguy_1225 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
            > Jay: Yes, I can appreciate that it can appear difficult or
            confusing
            > sometimes to sift through all the material and doctrines out there
            > and be able to rightly separate what is true from what is not
            true.
            >
            > I'm sure most Bible-believing Christians who have used the Bible
            to
            > condemn other Christians were (and are) acting in good faith.
            They
            > thought they must defend against an attack of what they believed
            to
            > be the clear teachings of Scripture. In reality, however, what
            many
            > were defending was their presumption of what the Bible teaches,
            not
            > the truth of Scripture.
            >
            > What we think the bible teaches and what it teaches can sometimes
            be
            > at odds with one another. That's why to get at the meaning that
            God
            > originally intended His Word to have when it was first spoken, we
            > must put the Scriptures in their historical context. How
            important
            > is context? Grant R. Osborne (Ph.D., University of Aberdeen) and
            > professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School �

            > the premier Evangelical seminary � answers that question in his
            > award-winning book, "The Hermeneutical Spiral." Dr. Osborne
            > says, "the information we glean from the [historical] sources
            > becomes the filter through which the individual [Biblical]
            passages
            > may be passed � Its purpose is to narrow down the interpretive
            laws
            > so that we might ask the proper questions, forcing us back to the
            > times and culture of the original writer and the situation behind
            > the text. We will therefore have a control against reading
            > twentieth-century meaning back into first-century language. Such
            an
            > [historical] approach leads to the proper type of pre-
            understanding,
            > linked as it is to the text and its background."
            >
            > Both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible spend page after page
            > condemning pagan practices, but most of us have no idea what those
            > practices were. For a brief review of the few biblical texts that
            > are often used to endorse anti-gay theology and doctrine (and
            these
            > are just BRIEF reviews, for there is much scholarly research
            > available on these texts), see posts #3000-3005 on this board.
            >
            > -Alex
            >
            >
            > --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, "JAy"
            > <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
            > > I have been reading some of these post here,and I am now more
            > > confussed than ever.maybe I have read some of them wrong but
            what
            > I
            > > got out of some of these post were a support on the whole gay
            > thing
            > > and GOD,I also read that thing about "GAY or GOY didnt
            understand
            > > that one but it was sounding like it was supporting it.on behalf
            > of
            > > one of my good friends I did a reseach that took 1,1/2 to do
            > before
            > > it almost took my own life if we look at the bible it says in
            > today
            > > vers. gays will no go to heaven and its wrong but try and go
            back
            > to
            > > when it was written there was no word for gay.the sodom thing I
            am
            > > not ure that one some say GOD killed them because they were
            > haveing
            > > gay sex,some say they were killed because they wanted to have
            sex
            > > with the angles,and some people say sodom was just plain evil
            and
            > > that why GOD wipe them out.I am not a judgment person,but as far
            > as
            > > the whole gay thing I dont know,its not my place to say if it is
            > > wrong or not,for me I took all relationships out of my life so
            > that
            > > I may worrie about school and family and such.I believe there is
            a
            > > GOD and he died for my sins and he is going to come back to this
            > > place and take those with him.what do some of u think is gay
            right
            > > or is wrong?some support it and some dont,I dont know like I
            said
            > my
            > > reseach for this subject almost killed me so I am done with it.
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
            >
            >
            > ---------------------------------
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            > To visit your group on the web, go to:
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exexgayministry/
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            Service.
            >
            >
            > __________________________________________________
            > Do You Yahoo!?
            > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            > http://mail.yahoo.com
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


            Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


            ---------------------------------
            Yahoo! Groups Links

            To visit your group on the web, go to:
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exexgayministry/

            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




            ---------------------------------
            Do you Yahoo!?
            Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • nyguy_1225
            Jay: In answer to your question, pagans are those who worship a god or gods other than the living God to whom the Bible witnesses. Both the Old and New
            Message 5 of 7 , Jun 12, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Jay: In answer to your question, pagans are those who worship a god
              or gods other than the living God to whom the Bible witnesses. Both
              the Old and New Testaments spend page after page condemning pagan
              practices

              Moses repeatedly warns against adopting pagan practices, whether
              they are rape or ritual. The Old Testament is unequivocal in God's
              mind on paganism, not on all same-sex behaviors. God hates paganism
              and all of its corrupt practices.

              Mixing the worship of the One True God with pagan practices didn't
              end in the Old Testament either. Paul was just as anti-pagan as the
              Old Testament prophets were. In addition, in the New Testament
              Christ condemns the early church's tendency to mix Christian faith
              and pagan sexual practices. Those who practiced them apparently did
              so quite blatantly and with many a mocking gesture. The apostate
              [Israelite] people did not pursue their paganism as a kind of
              leisure activity but went to great lengths.

              Pagan fertility rite prostitution was a common feature in both the
              Old and New Testaments. God was telling the Israelites not to
              engage in pagan rituals. Sexual contact as part of pagan ritual is
              never acceptable for God's people.

              I hope that you are beginning to see that when the Bible talks about
              homosexual behavior, it is not talking about the men and women who
              are among that tiny minority of the population whose orientation is
              toward same-sex relationships. It is talking about the kind of
              gross pagan behavior described above and condemned by the ancient
              Prophets and Apostles. The only illustrations provided for us by
              the Bible of male-on-male sexual contact are of rape and pagan
              rite.

              I hope you're also beginning to see how important historical context
              is when one is attempting to properly interpret and understand the
              Bible. What happens when we ignore the historical context of
              Scripture? As the old time radio teacher, Dr. J. Vernon Magee, used
              to say, "A text without a context is a pretext." The dictionary
              defines a pretext as, "An effort or strategy intended to conceal
              something." In other words, unless we consider the context of
              Scripture -- I mean the entire context including the historical
              setting -- we are, purposely or not, engaging in a strategy to
              conceal the teachings of the Bible.

              -Alex

              --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, Jeremy Anderson
              <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
              > well that does help alot.a Gay person is like a str. person as far
              as the bible but the laws are the same u cannot be a hooker {str. or
              gay} or like laws.it does clear alot up could I ask u to tell me
              what "Pagan: is? thank-you for your kind help
              >
              > nyguy_1225 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Jay, perhaps this will
              better help you see where I (and many others
              > here) are coming from:
              >
              > #1: I do not believe that gay people choose their orientation
              > any more than straight people choose their orientation.
              >
              > #2 The Bible contains no such concept as "orientation." In places
              > the Bible refers to specific acts which involve the genitals, not
              an
              > orientation. Though many modern Bible translations use the
              > word "homosexual" (that word means a person whose sexual
              orientation
              > is toward persons of his or her own gender), the word and the
              > concept itself did not exist in Bible times.
              >
              > #3: When the Bible talks about homosexual behavior, it is not
              > talking about the men and women who are among that tiny minority
              of
              > the population whose orientation is toward same-sex
              relationships.
              > It is talking about the kind of gross pagan behavior described and
              > condemned by the ancient Prophets and Apostles.
              >
              > #4: If we don't catch the fact that male-on-male pagan rite
              > prostitution was a common practice in Bible times, we will miss
              the
              > point of the Biblical condemnation. We will misconstrue Leviticus
              > 18:22 and 20:13 to forbid all male same-sex behavior.
              >
              > #5: Leviticus 18 and 20 are simply a catalog of the Egyptian and
              > Canaanite fertility and magic (pagan) practices. The Israelites
              > were to avoid those pagan ritual practices. Should we read a
              > universal ethical meaning into those prohibitions? No. Should
              we
              > take them to mean that sexual contact between people of the same
              sex
              > is condemned under all circumstances and for all times? No. God
              > was telling the Israelites not to engage in pagan rituals –
              period.
              > To read a universal, all-inclusive prohibition into these words is
              > to cease to take the Bible literally; to not care what it meant to
              > the first readers. It is to put words in God's mouth, or worse
              yet,
              > to pretend that our words are the same as God's.
              >
              > #6: Mixing the worship of the One True God with pagan practices
              > didn't end in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, Christ
              > condemns the early church's tendency to mix Christian faith and
              > pagan sexual practices. His condemnations are in the letters to
              the
              > seven churches in the Book of Revelation. Putting an end to male-
              on-
              > male pagan rite and other pagan practices was clearly the intent
              of
              > the Law of Moses and of Jesus' warnings in Revelation, and it is
              > what the faithful kings of Israel and The King of Israel were
              eager
              > to do.
              >
              > #7: Paul's mission was the same as was the mission of the Prophets
              > of old, except that he was sent primarily to the Gentiles. He was
              > just as anti-pagan as the Old Testament prophets were. As he told
              > his Gentile audience, "Therefore since we are God's offspring, we
              > should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or
              > stone - an image made by man's design and skill. In the past God
              > overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people
              everywhere
              > to repent" (Acts 17:29 – 30). Paul was anti-pagan. To assume
              that
              > he was also anti-homosexual is to put words in the Apostle's
              mouth.
              > Public sexual practice was part and parcel of the paganism Paul
              was
              > sent to condemn. What Paul condemns in his letters is what he saw
              > on his journey; pagan prostitute-priests and other forms of public
              > sexual excess and abuse.
              >
              > #8: Paul's reference to the subject of sexual behavior is
              precisely
              > the same as it is condemned in the Old Testament: rape and pagan
              > rite.
              >
              > #8: Both the Old and New Testament agree. Male-on-male rape and
              > male-on-male prostitution are wrong. At the same time,
              anatomically
              > same partnership that does not involve rape, pagan rite, or
              > exploitation is not condemned nor commended. There is no warrant
              > for reading such a condemnation into Biblical morality and ethics.
              >
              > #9: When the Bible identifies forms of male-on-male expression as
              > being condemnable, many people miss the fact that contact within
              the
              > context of a quiet, loving, monogamous homosexual relationship is
              > omitted from censure.
              >
              > #10: There is no proof that the Bible condemns intimate love that
              is
              > between people who have the same anatomy. Nevertheless, people
              > believe that it does so. The sad truth is that no number of facts
              > and no amount of Biblical exposition will change a mind that is
              > unwilling to change. People whose minds are unwilling to change
              > have set their presumptions above the Word of God.
              >
              > The point is there is absolutely nothing incongruous with being
              BOTH
              > Christian AND gay. The Bible contains no proscriptions against
              > homosexuals. It does, however, contain proscriptions against
              pagan
              > prostitution. The fact that the violation of others is strongly
              > condemned does not mean that all homosexual behavior warrants such
              > censure any more than all heterosexuals are to be condemned for
              > their sexual behavior by association with the sins of pedophilia,
              > lust, rape, fornication or adultery. The few verses in Scripture
              > that proscribe sexual union between men all seek to address sins
              of
              > pagan idolatry, rebellion, self-indulgence, abuse, or grossly
              > irresponsible behavior. None refer to gay or straight people, who
              > love their partners, are faithful to them and who shun sexual
              > immorality, according to biblical definitions.
              >
              > -Alex
              >
              > --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, Jeremy Anderson
              > <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
              > > so are u for gay or not for gay?see that is what my best friend
              > told me almost the same thing,he had told me that noboady knows if
              > being gay is wrong because of the bible not saying that GAY or any
              > other word to match it ,was wrong.maybe I am just out of line and
              > have no idea whats going on,I was raised as a believer in Christ
              and
              > will die as one.I guess the question is if I wanted to be gay
              would
              > I go to hell for it? I believe u not born gay nor str. everyone
              has
              > a choice that they make.it is really sad that the church will fill
              > your head with stuff the bible doesnt even say.or translate it for
              > their own good. I love reading the bible but it has to be the most
              > confussing book I have ever read.I try and be open minded in this
              > area for it is NOT my place to judge but only GOD himself can
              judge
              > us,this really is a long sought after question and I really dont
              > think anyone will ever know the truth behind this one.
              > >
              > > ~JAY~
              > >
              > > nyguy_1225 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
              > > Jay: Yes, I can appreciate that it can appear difficult or
              > confusing
              > > sometimes to sift through all the material and doctrines out
              there
              > > and be able to rightly separate what is true from what is not
              > true.
              > >
              > > I'm sure most Bible-believing Christians who have used the Bible
              > to
              > > condemn other Christians were (and are) acting in good faith.
              > They
              > > thought they must defend against an attack of what they believed
              > to
              > > be the clear teachings of Scripture. In reality, however, what
              > many
              > > were defending was their presumption of what the Bible teaches,
              > not
              > > the truth of Scripture.
              > >
              > > What we think the bible teaches and what it teaches can
              sometimes
              > be
              > > at odds with one another. That's why to get at the meaning that
              > God
              > > originally intended His Word to have when it was first spoken,
              we
              > > must put the Scriptures in their historical context. How
              > important
              > > is context? Grant R. Osborne (Ph.D., University of Aberdeen)
              and
              > > professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity
              School –
              >
              > > the premier Evangelical seminary – answers that question in his
              > > award-winning book, "The Hermeneutical Spiral." Dr. Osborne
              > > says, "the information we glean from the [historical] sources
              > > becomes the filter through which the individual [Biblical]
              > passages
              > > may be passed … Its purpose is to narrow down the interpretive
              > laws
              > > so that we might ask the proper questions, forcing us back to
              the
              > > times and culture of the original writer and the situation
              behind
              > > the text. We will therefore have a control against reading
              > > twentieth-century meaning back into first-century language.
              Such
              > an
              > > [historical] approach leads to the proper type of pre-
              > understanding,
              > > linked as it is to the text and its background."
              > >
              > > Both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible spend page after
              page
              > > condemning pagan practices, but most of us have no idea what
              those
              > > practices were. For a brief review of the few biblical texts
              that
              > > are often used to endorse anti-gay theology and doctrine (and
              > these
              > > are just BRIEF reviews, for there is much scholarly research
              > > available on these texts), see posts #3000-3005 on this board.
              > >
              > > -Alex
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, "JAy"
              > > <deamonknights2003@y...> wrote:
              > > > I have been reading some of these post here,and I am now
              more
              > > > confussed than ever.maybe I have read some of them wrong but
              > what
              > > I
              > > > got out of some of these post were a support on the whole gay
              > > thing
              > > > and GOD,I also read that thing about "GAY or GOY didnt
              > understand
              > > > that one but it was sounding like it was supporting it.on
              behalf
              > > of
              > > > one of my good friends I did a reseach that took 1,1/2 to do
              > > before
              > > > it almost took my own life if we look at the bible it says in
              > > today
              > > > vers. gays will no go to heaven and its wrong but try and go
              > back
              > > to
              > > > when it was written there was no word for gay.the sodom thing
              I
              > am
              > > > not ure that one some say GOD killed them because they were
              > > haveing
              > > > gay sex,some say they were killed because they wanted to have
              > sex
              > > > with the angles,and some people say sodom was just plain evil
              > and
              > > > that why GOD wipe them out.I am not a judgment person,but as
              far
              > > as
              > > > the whole gay thing I dont know,its not my place to say if it
              is
              > > > wrong or not,for me I took all relationships out of my life so
              > > that
              > > > I may worrie about school and family and such.I believe there
              is
              > a
              > > > GOD and he died for my sins and he is going to come back to
              this
              > > > place and take those with him.what do some of u think is gay
              > right
              > > > or is wrong?some support it and some dont,I dont know like I
              > said
              > > my
              > > > reseach for this subject almost killed me so I am done with it.
              > >
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
              > >
              > >
              > > ---------------------------------
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > > To visit your group on the web, go to:
              > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exexgayministry/
              > >
              > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              > >
              > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
              > Service.
              > >
              > >
              > > __________________________________________________
              > > Do You Yahoo!?
              > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              > > http://mail.yahoo.com
              > >
              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
              >
              >
              > ---------------------------------
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              > To visit your group on the web, go to:
              > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exexgayministry/
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
              Service.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > ---------------------------------
              > Do you Yahoo!?
              > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • dixibehr@aol.com
              Someone on this ist said this:
              Message 6 of 7 , Jun 12, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Someone on this ist said this:

                <<I guess the question is if I wanted to be gay would
                I go to hell for it? I believe u not born gay nor str. everyone has
                a choice that they make.it is really sad that the church will fill
                your head with stuff the bible doesnt even say.or translate it for
                their own good.>>

                Nobody wants to be gay. Trust me, I've met quite a few who did not want to be
                gay, but wanted to be straight. They chose being straight, and confessed
                being straight, and acted like they were straight--and remaiend just as gay as
                before.

                The whole matter of sexual orientation is a murky one, I will admit. owever,
                there is plenty of evidence that there is an innate predispostion to be gay
                that seems to be genetic. There are quite a few physical characteristics of tay
                men that can NOT be the result of their sexual activities or similar choices;
                for example, the sound-processing abilities of gay men seem to be, oddly
                enough, "hypermasculinzed," in the words of this study.There's a particular shape
                of the hand that most gay men have that is different from most straight men. (I
                recall it's whether the index finger is longer or shorter than the ring
                finger; I can't remember now which is which. Note also that I said, "most", I
                didn't say all.)

                While in Homo sapiens, males are usually XY and women are usually XX, it
                requires a wash of hormones at the right time during gestation for the genitalia
                to conform to the genes. Rarely, there are XY babies who are female according
                to their genitals, and XX babies who have what appear to be male genitals--but
                this does happen. Of course, these are sterile.

                The "dud stud" phenomenon is well known to farmers, even if little talked
                about. About 8-11% of male farm animals have no interest in mating with females,
                but a marked interest in mounting other males. (This seems to correspond with
                the infamous Kinsey statistic of 10%.) In a pet store, I picked up a book on
                mynahs, opened it at randsom, and found out that these birds mate for life, and
                frequently form same-sex pairs. As the sexes are identical externally, you
                will never know if you have a breeding pair until eggs appear that hatch.

                Experiments involving giving male hormones to pregnant lab animas (rats,
                guinea pigs, and the like) during pregnancy frequently caused all male litters
                which, like the dud studs, wil only mount ohter males; some seem rather to
                prefer being mounted.

                I could give other examples, but the charge that "not even animals do that!"
                simply is not true. (Though one woman said, "See how far their corruption has
                spread? Animas didn't used to act that way.")

                <<I love reading the bible but it has to be the most
                confussing book I have ever read.>>

                I understand what you're saying. May I give you some hints on reading the
                Bible?

                1. Don't try to read it all the way straight through the first time. The
                Bible is a collection of books, as the Greek name means (not "o biblios," but "ta
                biblia").

                2. Read the four Gospels first. In fact, read them several times first.

                3. After that, just go though and treat the Bible like a magazine. Read
                things that get your attention or interest and skip over the dull parts.
                Preferably, use a good modern English translation such as the NEW KING JAMES BIBLE; in
                fact, this, in my opinion, is the best. (Never mind why here.)

                4. Anything you don't understand or seems odd or puzzling, or even
                inconsistent with what the Bible says elsewhere, don't worry about it. Just hang it up
                and leave it alone. When you're supposed to understand it, you will.

                5. Remember that some portions of the Bible are poetry and are to be read as
                poetry and not as mere narrative, like a modern newspaper. Most of the Psalms,
                for example, are full of figures that are supposed to be understood
                spiritually or allegorically. When the Psalmist blesses those who "fling little ones
                against a rock," don't think he's advocating child abuse!


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.