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

Re: some of the post in this site

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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.