follow up to is the bible to be taken literally?

Question

38 people chimed in with the fact that the examples i was bringing up were old testament and do no apply to today's christian religion. If this is true then why do christians quote the old testament when claiming homosexuality is a sin. Jesus never mentions it. it is mentioned in the OT with such horrible crimes as fornicators, drunkards, thieves, revilers, idolaters and extortioners. But then again there were 3 homosexual relationships that go unpunished in the bible
Ruth and Naomi
David and Jonathan
Daniel and Ashpenaz
Homosexual activity in the temple by male prostitutes is clearly prohibited by the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament).
Prostitution, both heterosexual and homosexual is generally condemned.
Sexual abuse of boys by adult males is condemned
St. Paul considered at least some male and female homosexual acts to be forbidden, but it is unclear precisely which acts are included. He may have been referring to:
temple prostitution,
people who are not innately gay, lesbian or bisexual, but who engaged in homosexual acts,
to child sexual abuse, or
group sexual orgies.
Paul was certainly aware of sexual orgies in Pagan temples, including both heterosexual and homosexual encounters. He would have been aware of the practice of male adults keeping a boy for sexual purposes. These may have been the only forms of same gender sex that he knew of. He did not appear to make any references in his writings to consentual, committed homosexual relationships. He probably did not know of any.

One should note that Paul also condemned women preaching (1 Cor 14:34) or wearing gold or pearls (1 Tim 2:11). He also accepted and did not condemn the institution of slavery. Many Christians feel that his writings reflect his own prejudices are not a particularly useful guide for ethics and morals in the 20th Century.

Jesus made many hundreds of statements regarding belief and behavior. However He never mentioned homosexuality.
It is the subject of endless debate whether St. Paul’s prohibition of at least some homosexual acts was:
for the people in the vicinity of the Mediterranean during the 1st Century CE, or
for all people, forever.

Answer 1

The following were not homosexual relationships:

Ruth and Naomi
David and Jonathan
Daniel and Ashpenaz

The Bible does not give them as homosexual, it gives them as friendships.

Whenever someone makes an error like this, it makes me think that the rest of their statements aren't worth reading. You have already altered the Bible to suit you, what else are you capable of?

Answer 2

This is directed extra at imrod and Caitlin than you Nikon (considering the fact that I wholly trust you on your confusion and I shouldn't have an reply haha). What you 2 stated solidifies the query being requested. As imrod placed it: "In quick, Christianity teaches that the Old Testament is interpreted by way of the New Testament." So in a single aspect of the e-book it says "Read this aspect and the relaxation isn't quite announcing what it way to mention." The factor is (which may be the factor you 2 are averting) that the Bible does now not truthfully say whether it is intended to be taken actually or figuratively. It is PEOPLE who're announcing "comply with this, now not that"... now not the Bible. EDIT: To orchidmg, who stated what's literal or symbolic? Did you make a decision that your self, or does the Bible make that rationalization?

Answer 3

If you think the bible cannot apply in the 20th century, then it can be similarly argued that it cannot apply in the 10th century. You might as well write your OWN bible.

Jesus never condemned any specific behaviour except the liars and the hypocrites. Know why? Because these people taught that something is fine when it is not and say something is wrong when it is right. The whole concept of right/wrong has been warped.

But rest assured, John in Revelation did say this.

Revelation 22:18
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

So, the book is 'protected'. Otherwise you may blame the guy who corrupted the book. Only problem is you refuse to accept the book AS IT IS. In which case, then YOU will YOURSELF be responsible for your transgressions.

Answer 4

What you mentioned about drunkards, etc. is logical because no one is going to enter into the Kingdom until they are in incorruptible bodies - bodies that don't sin. Sin is sin, and no sin is "special". We should all strive to not sin, but it is impossible. That's why Jesus Christ died for our sins. The penalty had to be paid because it was demanded by a just and holy God. Christ was sinless, the only exception to the impossibility I mentioned above. Therefore, He was the perfect sacrifice and met God's demand for payment of sin. Peace.

Answer 5

can u explain it with comparing with the NT
u can't speak about parts of the bible
check all
compare with the new testement.
compare with Jesus

Answer 6

I don't think that 'god' would care any more about someone's sexual preference than I do.

Answer 7

yes the christians think its the law on this planet and its not its fairy tale law not true law