 |
|
|
|
 The author argues that the meaning of the Bible's passages on homosexuality have been lost in translation.
May 15th, 2012
05:39 PM ET
My Take: What the Bible really says about homosexuality
By Daniel A. Helminiak, Special to CNN President Barack Obama’s support of same-sex marriage, like blood in the water, has conservative sharks circling for a kill. In a nation that touts separation of religion and government, religious-based arguments command this battle. Lurking beneath anti-gay forays, you inevitably find religion and, above all, the Bible. We now face religious jingoism, the imposition of personal beliefs on the whole pluralistic society. Worse still, these beliefs are irrational, just a fiction of blind conviction. Nowhere does the Bible actually oppose homosexuality. In the past 60 years, we have learned more about sex, by far, than in preceding millennia. Is it likely that an ancient people, who thought the male was the basic biological model and the world flat, understood homosexuality as we do today? Could they have even addressed the questions about homosexuality that we grapple with today? Of course not. CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories Hard evidence supports this commonsensical expectation. Taken on its own terms, read in the original languages, placed back into its historical context, the Bible is ho-hum on homosexuality, unless – as with heterosexuality – injustice and abuse are involved. That, in fact, was the case among the Sodomites (Genesis 19), whose experience is frequently cited by modern anti-gay critics. The Sodomites wanted to rape the visitors whom Lot, the one just man in the city, welcomed in hospitality for the night. The Bible itself is lucid on the sin of Sodom: pride, lack of concern for the poor and needy (Ezekiel 16:48-49); hatred of strangers and cruelty to guests (Wisdom 19:13); arrogance (Sirach/Ecclesiaticus 16:8); evildoing, injustice, oppression of the widow and orphan (Isaiah 1:17); adultery (in those days, the use of another man’s property), and lying (Jeremiah 23:12). But nowhere are same-sex acts named as the sin of Sodom. That intended gang rape only expressed the greater sin, condemned in the Bible from cover to cover: hatred, injustice, cruelty, lack of concern for others. Hence, Jesus says “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 19:19; Mark 12:31); and “By this will they know you are my disciples” (John 13:35). How inverted these values have become! In the name of Jesus, evangelicals and Catholic bishops make sex the Christian litmus test and are willing to sacrifice the social safety net in return. The longest biblical passage on male-male sex is Romans 1:26-27: "Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another." The Greek term para physin has been translated unnatural; it should read atypical or unusual. In the technical sense, yes, the Stoic philosophers did use para physin to mean unnatural, but this term also had a widespread popular meaning. It is this latter meaning that informs Paul's writing. It carries no ethical condemnation. Compare the passage on male-male sex to Romans 11:24. There, Paul applies the term para physin to God. God grafted the Gentiles into the Jewish people, a wild branch into a cultivated vine. Not your standard practice! An unusual thing to do — atypical, nothing more. The anti-gay "unnatural" hullabaloo rests on a mistranslation. Besides, Paul used two other words to describe male-male sex: dishonorable (1:24, 26) and unseemly (1:27). But for Paul, neither carried ethical weight. In 2 Corinthians 6:8 and 11:21, Paul says that even he was held in dishonor — for preaching Christ. Clearly, these words merely indicate social disrepute, not truly unethical behavior. In this passage Paul is referring to the ancient Jewish Law: Leviticus 18:22, the “abomination” of a man’s lying with another man. Paul sees male-male sex as an impurity, a taboo, uncleanness — in other words, “abomination.” Introducing this discussion in 1:24, he says so outright: "God gave them up … to impurity." But Jesus taught lucidly that Jewish requirements for purity — varied cultural traditions — do not matter before God. What matters is purity of heart. “It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles,” reads Matthew 15. “What comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this is what defiles. For out of the heart come evil intentions, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile.” Or again, Jesus taught, “Everyone who looks at a women with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Jesus rejected the purity requirements of the Jewish Law. In calling it unclean, Paul was not condemning male-male sex. He had terms to express condemnation. Before and after his section on sex, he used truly condemnatory terms: godless, evil, wicked or unjust, not to be done. But he never used ethical terms around that issue of sex. As for marriage, again, the Bible is more liberal than we hear today. The Jewish patriarchs had many wives and concubines. David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, and Daniel and the palace master were probably lovers. The Bible’s Song of Songs is a paean to romantic love with no mention of children or a married couple. Jesus never mentioned same-sex behaviors, although he did heal the “servant” — pais, a Greek term for male lover — of the Roman Centurion. Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter Paul discouraged marriage because he believed the world would soon end. Still, he encouraged people with sexual needs to marry, and he never linked sex and procreation. Were God-given reason to prevail, rather than knee-jerk religion, we would not be having a heated debate over gay marriage. “Liberty and justice for all,” marvel at the diversity of creation, welcome for one another: these, alas, are true biblical values. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Daniel A. Helminiak. soundoff (8,832 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 Next » |
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Editor's note:
"There is salvation at the foot of the cross for celibate GLBTQ folk who have rejected fornication!"
The Scriptures were written approximately 2000 or more years ago when there was no knowledge of constitutional homosexuality. The Scripture writers believed that all people were naturally heterosexual so that they viewed homosexuality activity as unnatural. Women today are pointing out that the inferiority of women expressed in the scriptures was a product of culture and the times in which the Bible was written; it should not be followed today, now that we are beginning to appreciate the natural and God-given equality of men and women.
Similarly, as we know that homosexuality is just as natural and God-given as heterosexuality, we realize that the Biblical injunctions against homosexuality were conditioned by the attitudes and beliefs about this form of sexual expression which were held by people without benefit of centuries of scientific knowledge and understanding.
It is unfair of us to expect or impose a twentieth century mentality and understanding about equality of genders, races and sexual orientations on the Biblical writers. We must be able to distinguish the eternal truths the Bible is meant to convey from the cultural forms and attitudes expressed there.
Good News!
There is salvation at the foot of the cross for celibate GLBTQ folk who have rejected fornication!
In Matthew 19 Jesus defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. "Gay marriage" is in
conflict with Jesus' direction to us.
Celibate GLBTQ partnerships are perfectly acceptable and should be encouraged.
Reach out and welcome celibate GLBTQ couples at your place of worship!
Some argue that since homosexual behavior is "unnatural" it is contrary to the order of creation. Behind this pronouncement are stereotypical definitions of masculinity and femininity that reflect rigid gender categories of patriarchal society. There is nothing unnatural about any shared love, even between two of the same gender, if that experience calls both partners to a fuller state of being. Contemporary research is uncovering new facts that are producing a rising conviction that homosexuality, far from being a sickness, sin, perversion or unnatural act, is a healthy, natural and affirming form of human sexuality for some people. Findings indicate that homosexuality is a given fact in the nature of a significant portion of people, and that it is unchangeable.
Our prejudice rejects people or things outside our understanding. But the God of creation speaks and declares, "I have looked out on everything I have made and `behold it (is) very good'." . The word (Genesis 1:31) of God in Christ says that we are loved, valued, redeemed, and counted as precious no matter how we might be valued by a prejudiced world.
There are few biblical references to homosexuality. The first, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, is often quoted to prove that the Bible condemns homosexuality. But the real sin of Sodom was the unwillingness of the city's men to observe the laws of hospitality. The intention was to insult the stranger by forcing him to take the female role in the sex act. The biblical narrative approves Lot's offer of his virgin daughters to satisfy the sexual demands of the mob. How many would say, "This is the word of the Lord"? When the Bible is quoted literally, it might be well for the one quoting to read the text in its entirety.
Leviticus, in the Hebrew Scriptures, condemns homosexual behaviour, at least for males. Yet, "abomination", the word Leviticus uses to describe homosexuality, is the same word used to describe a menstruating woman. Paul is the most quoted source in the battle to condemn homosexuality ( 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11 and Romans 1: 26-27). But homosexual activity was regarded by Paul as a punishment visited upon idolaters by God because of their unfaithfulness. Homosexuality was not the sin but the punishment.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Paul gave a list of those who would not inherit the Kingdom of God. That list included the immoral, idolaters, adulterers, sexual perverts, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, and robbers. Sexual perverts is a translation of two words; it is possible that the juxtaposition of malakos, the soft, effeminate word, with arsenokoitus, or male prostitute, was meant to refer to the passive and active males in a homosexual liaison.
Thus, it appears that Paul would not approve of homosexual behavior. But was Paul's opinion about homosexuality accurate, or was it limited by the lack of scientific knowledge in his day and infected by prejudice born of ignorance? An examination of some of Paul's other assumptions and conclusions will help answer this question. Who today would share Pauls anti-Semitic attitude, his belief that the authority of the state was not to be challenged, or that all women ought to be veiled? In these attitudes Paul's thinking has been challenged and transcended even by the church! Is Paul's commentary on homosexuality more absolute than some of his other antiquated, culturally conditioned ideas?
Three other references in the New Testament (in Timothy, Jude and 2 Peter) appear to be limited to condemnation of male sex slaves in the first instance, and to showing examples (Sodom and Gomorrah) of God's destruction of unbelievers and heretics (in Jude and 2 Peter respectively).
That is all that Scripture has to say about homosexuality. Even if one is a biblical literalist, these references do not build an ironclad case for condemnation. If one is not a biblical literalist there is no case at all, nothing but prejudice born of ignorance, that attacks people whose only crime is to be born with an unchangeable sexual predisposition toward those of their own sex.
What then shall we say about Romans 1: 18-32. God vindicated Paul's ministry by signs and wonders. Question would God vindicate Paul's ministry if he was in error?
than the other way around? It seems as thguoh just continue living their lives if gain weight and act as if nothing happened but just become upset at for gaining weight. I heard that are more shallow because they are visual. But I also heard that initiate 2/3 of the divorces. But are more likely to divorce because of this reason? or are equally as shallow?I don't approve of anyone getting fat but nobody's is perfect so they are going to gain a little weight.
And, in addition, the nautre of the human person flourishes beyond receiving data dumps: Example one: While Jesus Himself taught folks after his resurrection, it was not until they broke bread together face to face, that they recognized Him. Example two: John twice informs the church that though he has much to write to them (data dump, if you will), he would prefer to come and see them face to face. Now, we know that the Lord sanctions the use of the written word, after all he IS the Word, but he is also flesh, and we must be intentional at both: word and deed; digital and proximate.PS Oswald Chambers' devotional is available for iPad too!
reading clear cut debates such as these, i can easily see 1 of 2 things: those who side w/ the LORD and those who side w/ satan. if i, a mere human, can see it, you know youre not fooling GOD for one second.
there are going to be a lot of ppl who are going to hell, bursting it wide open! hope your vain self-worship and self-serving and following the trend and the crowd and the celebs and whatever and whoever other than Jesus is worth it to you when you burn in hell forever and ever and ever where the fire is not quenched and the worm dieth not, where the smoke of your torment will ascend up forever and ever and ever and the ppl who chose to stand firm on the LORD's side will be having a party in the Kingdom of GOD every single day forever and ever and ever
I sin everyday many times a day. To you kaykay please in the name of God stop verbaly slattering the sheep. WE ALL go the wrong way sometimes and the sheppard taps us back on course when we stray to far from the flock. Is what the sheppard does NOT DO is CRACK his cane down with all his force on the sheeps back for being 2 or 3 feet from the flock. I say 2 or 3 feet and if being gay is sinful (and I am not saying it is or is not, God's Place is to pass judgement) but if it is a sin ALL SINS ARE EQUAL IN THE EYES OF THE LORD! So, by your belief WHEN YOU TOLD THAT LIGHT LIE LAST WEEK IT IS THE SAME AS TAKING IT IN THE BACK DOOR, I only scold YOU becuase it is my duty at a follower of Christ to help YOU stay on the path of the Christ. LOVE, compassion, and forgiveness. Sorry to the gay peaple for my brothers and sisters pushing you out of our communities and churchs the lord God and you are the only people qualified to judge YOU! When a christian brother or sister is cruel action or in word the Lord is not with them HE is with you. Cruel words and actions can NEVER come from Jesus.
To my brothers and sisters do not pick up stones to throw them use them to line a path of compassion and understanding to the house of the Lord. Lastly DO NOT JUDGE, IT is antichrist to JUDGE and push people away from God. Talk about going to HELL.
we knw u have included poor jaaisuryya remove him the team for up comming tours give a chance to kulathunga for one days he is suit for no 5 position more than samaraweera but wat;a suprice ashantha de mel remove him from sl A team (0)
GLBTQ folk are trending toward celibate partnerships as they learn more about their role through Bible study.
In Matthew 19 Jesus declares marriage as the union of one man and one woman, who leave their families and are joined
as one to create a new family unit. No provisions exist for "gay marriage" because it falls outside what Jesus instructed us
to do as obedient sons and daughters. We are reminded, throughout the Bible to refrain from gay coitus because it is in conflict with God's will. Some will try to tell you here that Jesus didn't understand terms like "preference and orientation"...but I give him more credit and respect than that. As Alpha and Omega he knew what is, what was, and what is to become.
GLBTQ folk are blessed to live celibate lives, unstained by the sin of fornication. Outreach to GLBTQ folk at your place of worship, in support of strong and enduring GLBTQ celibate partnerships, will help to sustain the efforts of GLBTQ believers to be faithful servants to the Lord.
Thanks for your efforts to support celibate GLBTQ Christians, their salvation depends on it. Release the power of GLBTQ celibacy and take heart...tomorrow brings hope to lost souls.
Keep the trending toward GLBTQ celibacy on track. Together we can make difference for the better.
Actually, we are trending toward marrying and raising kids, but, hey, don't let the facts get in the way!
Homosexuality is not a sin according to the Bible. Any educated Christian would know that. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc....) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, prostitution, and rape, not homosexuality. That’s why Jesus never mentions it as well. There is nothing immoral, wrong, or sinful about being gay. Jesus, however, clearly states he HATES hypocrites. If you preach goodness, then promote hate and twist the words of the Bible, you are a hypocrite, and will be judged and sent to hell. Homosexuals will not go to hell, hypocrites will. This is very similar to the religious bigots of the past, where they took Bible passages to condone slavery, keep women down, and used Bible passages to claim blacks as curses who should be enslaved by the white man. People used God to claim that blacks marrying whites was unnatural, and not of God's will.
Celibacy...why now?
This is a question we hear time and again from GLBTQ Christians making their faith journey to Christ.
After a thorough review of the scriptures, GLBTQ folks begin to comprehend and fulfill their obligation to reject sin and cast aside the life of fornication from the past. Is it easy...no...but it wasn't easy for Christ enduring his time on the cross for
sinners like us, unworthy to look him in the eye.
I know that souls are being won to Christ everyday...and in that number we can count GLBTQ folk who have said enough
to the lies of Satan and rejected outright his urge to fornicate and sin.
Thanks to our GLBTQ couples who are now standing shoulder to shoulder, in defense of their faith, with faces set like a flint
in a sincere commitment to celibate partnerships.
Amen.
"Celibacy...why now?"
The scriptures actually say nothing about homosexuality as a psychosexual orientation. Our understandings of sexual orientation are distinctly modern ones that were not present in the minds of Scripture writers. A few passages of Scripture (seven at the most) object to certain types of same-sex expressions or acts. The particular acts in question, however, are sexual expressions which are exploitative, oppressive, commercialized, or offensive to ancient purity rituals. There is no Scriptural guidance for same-sex relationships which are loving and mutually respecting. Guidelines for these relationships should come from the same general Scriptural norms that apply to heterosexual relationships.
As Christian clergy we proclaim the Good News concerning Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) persons and publicly apologize where we have been silent. As disciples of Jesus, who assures us that the truth sets us free, we recognize that the debate is over. The verdict is in. Homosexuality is not a sickness, not a choice, and not a sin. We find no rational biblical or theological basis to condemn or deny the rights of any person based on sexual orientation. Silence by many has allowed political and religious rhetoric to monopolize public perception, creating the impression that there is only one Christian perspective on this issue. Yet we recognize and celebrate that we are far from alone, as Christians, in affirming that LGBT persons are distinctive, holy, and precious gifts to all who struggle to become the family of God.
In repentance and obedience to the Holy Spirit, we stand in solidarity as those who are committed to work and pray for full acceptance and inclusion of LGBT persons in our churches and in our world. We lament that LGBT persons are condemned and excluded by individuals and institutions, political and religious, who claim to be speaking the truth of Christian teaching. This leads directly and indirectly to intolerance, discrimination, suffering, and even death. The Holy Spirit compels us:
–to affirm that the essence of Christian life is not focused on sexual orientation, but how one lives by grace in relationship with God, with compassion toward humanity;
-to embrace the full inclusion of our LGBT brothers and sisters in all areas of church life, including leadership;
–to declare that the violence must stop. Christ’s love moves us to work for the healing of wounded souls who are victims of abuse often propagated in the name of Christ;
-to celebrate the prophetic witness of all people who have refused to let the voice of intolerance and violence speak for Christianity, especially LGBT persons, who have met hatred with love;
Therefore we call for an end to all religious and civil discrimination against any person based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. All laws must include and protect the freedoms, rights, and equal legal standing of all persons, in and outside the church.
what b/c you proclaim to be 250 strong that makes it right?! ha, more ppl are on the broad path to hell than the narrow strait way that leads to eternal life/GOD. it doesnt matter if its 2000 or 2,000,000 or 2,000,000,000 of you. hell will be bursting at the seams w/ all the ppl satan is gathering up to stand in opposition of GOD and when Jesus comes w/ all His LOVE & GLORY, He is going to cast you all into hell w/ no sweat off His back. your choice
"Height eye color skin color is all found in the dna, none of them are preferences, all these are the physical characteristics you were born with and will not give you a emotional desire but a body part"
Being gay is not a choice science, in fact, is actually not in dispute on this matter.
All major medical professional organizations concur that sexual orientation is not a choice and cannot be changed, from gay to straight or otherwise. The American, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and European Psychological, Psychiatric, and Medical Associations all agree with this, as does the World Health Organization and the medical organizations of Japan, China, and most recently, Thailand. Furthermore, attempts to change one's sexual orientation can be psychologically damaging, and cause great inner turmoil and depression, especially for Christian gays and lesbians.
Reparative therapy, also called conversion therapy or reorientation therapy, "counsels" LGBT persons to pray fervently and study Bible verses, often utilizing 12-step techniques that are used to treat sexual addictions or trauma. Such Christian councilors are pathologizing homosexuality, which is not a pathology but is a sexual orientation. Psychologically, that's very dangerous territory to tread on. All of the above-mentioned medical professional organizations, in addition to the American and European Counseling Associations, stand strongly opposed to any form of reparative therapy.
In my home country, Norway, reparative therapy is officially considered to be ethical malpractice. But there are many countries that do not regulate the practice, and many others that remain largely silent and even passively supportive of it (such as the Philippines). Groups that operate such "therapy" in the Philippines are the Evangelical Bagong Pag-asa, and the Catholic Courage Philippines.
The scientific evidence of the innateness of homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgenderism is overwhelming, and more peer-reviewed studies which bolster this fact are being added all the time. Science has long regarded sexual orientation – and that's all sexual orientations, including heterosexuality – as a phenotype. Simply put, a phenotype is an observable set of properties that varies among individuals and is deeply rooted in biology. For the scientific community, the role of genetics in sexuality is about as "disputable" as the role of evolution in biology.
On the second point, that there is no conclusion that there is a "gay gene," they are right. No so-called gay gene has been found, and it's highly unlikely that one ever will. This is where conservative Christians and Muslims quickly say "See, I told you so! There's no gay gene, so being gay is a choice!"
Take this interesting paragraph I found on an Evangelical website: "The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there's no homosexual "gene" – meaning it's not likely that homosexuals are 'born that way.'"
But that's not at all what it means, and it seems Evangelicals are plucking out stand-alone phrases from scientific reports and removing them from their context. This is known in academia as the fallacy of suppressed evidence. Interestingly, this is also what they have a habit of doing with verses from the Bible.
This idea of sexuality being a choice is such a bizarre notion to me as a man of science. Many of these reparative "therapists" are basing this concept on a random Bible verse or two. When you hold those up against the mountain of scientific research that has been conducted, peer-reviewed, and then peer-reviewed again, it absolutely holds no water. A person's sexuality – whether heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual – is a very deep biological piece of who that person is as an individual.
The fact that a so-called "gay gene" has not been discovered does not mean that homosexuality is not genetic in its causation. This is understandably something that can seem a bit strange to those who have not been educated in fields of science and advanced biology, and it is also why people who are not scientists ought not try to explain the processes in simple black-and-white terms. There is no gay gene, but there is also no "height gene" or "skin tone gene" or "left-handed gene." These, like sexuality, have a heritable aspect, but no one dominant gene is responsible for them.
Many genes, working in sync, contribute to the phenotype and therefore do have a role in sexual orientation. In many animal model systems, for example, the precise genes involved in sexual partner selection have been identified, and their neuro-biochemical pathways have been worked out in great detail. A great number of these mechanisms have been preserved evolutionarily in humans, just as they are for every other behavioral trait we know (including heterosexuality).
Furthermore, there are many biologic traits which are not specifically genetic but are biologic nonetheless. These traits are rooted in hormonal influences, contributed especially during the early stages of fetal development. This too is indisputable and based on extensive peer-reviewed research the world over. Such prenatal hormonal influences are not genetic per se, but are inborn, natural, and biologic nevertheless.
Having said that, in the realm of legal rights, partnership rights, and anti-discrimination protections, the gay gene vs. choice debate is actually quite irrelevant. Whether or not something is a choice is not a suitable criterion for whether someone should have equal rights and protections. Religion is indisputably a choice, but that fact is a not a valid argument for discriminating against a particular religion.
Did you ever really wonder how a Christian should act??
Joh 8:54 Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, 'He is our God';
Joh 8:55 and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word.
Joh 8:56 "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad."
Joh 8:57 So the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?"
Joh 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."
Joh 8:59 Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple.
Joh 2:14 And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables.
Joh 2:15 And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables;
Joh 2:16 and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a place of business."
Joh 2:17 His disciples remembered that it was written, "ZEAL FOR YOUR HOUSE WILL CONSUME ME."
Joh 2:18 The Jews then said to Him, "What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?"
Joh 2:19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
WE forget that the stereotype of Christian not being mad or upset or non confrontational is really a lie. We as Christians have many things to confront, the lies of the enemy the false political correctness of society the attack of the enemy in our own lives. When we sit by and watch what is happening and do nothing about it we participate in and agree with the enemy. How can the two walk as one unless they agree? Agreement comes in many forms inactivity against a lie is one. Prayer being vocal and where we can making sure the way of truth is not maligned will go a long way to making favorable changes. We know who we serve and there is no lack of protection power authority and we know the truth. Let that truth set people free live it spread it and don't let the lies of the enemy distort it or quite it down. IF we dont praise Hime the very rocks will cry out Luk 19:38 shouting: "BLESSED IS THE KING WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD; Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!"
Luk 19:39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Him, "Teacher, rebuke Your disciples."
Luk 19:40 But Jesus answered, "I tell you, if these become silent, the stones will cry out!"
Luk 19:41 When He approached Jerusalem, He saw the city and wept over it,
Luk 19:42 saying, "If you had known in this day, even you, the things which make for peace! But now they have been hidden from your eyes.
Luk 19:43 "For the days will come upon you when your enemies will throw up a barricade against you, and surround you and hem you in on every side,
Luk 19:44 and they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation."
So you have no studies or evidence to back up what you believe? Nothing but the bible?
You haven't yet admitted you were wrong when you claimed that no studies had been done prior to the APA's decision in 1973. Aren't real christians supposed to confess their sins and shortcomings?
Wow I am impressed tom first thing this am did you sleep ok last night??
Did you? Even though you continue to violate the ten commandments and fail to admit you were wrong?
All sins are equal, boob. That's what you say.
Christians are increasingly divided over the issue of the acceptance and inclusion of gay persons into the church. The debate itself is usually framed as essentially pitting the Bible, on one hand, against compassion and social justice on the other. Our Christian hearts, runs the (usually impassioned) argument, compel us to grant full moral and legal equality to gay and lesbian people; our Christian faith, comes the (usually impassioned) rebuttal, compels us to cleave, above all, to the word of God.
Compassion for others is the fundamental cornerstone of Christian ethics; the Bible is the bedrock of the Christian faith. What Christian can possibly choose between the two?
The answer is that no Christian is called upon to make that choice. The text of the Bible on one hand, and full equality for gay and lesbian people on the other, is a false dichotomy. God would not ask or expect Christians to ever choose between their heart and their faith.
Reconciling the Bible with unqualified acceptance and equality for LGBT people does not necessitate discounting, recasting, deconstructing or reinterpreting the Bible. All it takes is reading those passages of the Bible wherein homosexuality is mentioned with the same care we would any other passage of the book.
We can trust God; we can trust that God is loving.
And we can trust that we can - and that we certainly should - take God, in this matter, as in all things, at his Word.
If there is no clearly stated directive in the Bible to marginalize and ostracize gay people, then Christians continuing to do so is morally indefensible, and must cease.
What cannot be denied is that Christians have caused a great deal of pain and suffering to gay persons, by:
Banning their participation in the church, thus depriving them of the comforts and spiritual fruits of the church;
Banning their participation in the sacrament of marriage, thus depriving them of the comforts and spiritual fruits of marriage;
Damaging the bonds between gays and their straight family members, thus weakening the comforts and spiritual fruits of family life for both gays and their families; and
Using their position within society as spokespersons for God to proclaim that all homosexual relations are disdained by God, thus knowingly contributing to the cruel persecution of a minority population.
Christians do not deny that they have done these things. However, they contend that they have no choice but to do these things, based on what they say is a clear directive about homosexuals delivered to them by God through the Holy Bible. They say that the Bible defines all homosexual acts as sinful, instructs them to exclude from full participation in the church all non-repentant sinners (including gay people), and morally calls upon them to publicly (or at least resolutely) denounce homosexual acts.
Without an explicit directive from God to exclude and condemn homosexuals, the Christian community's treatment of gay persons is in clear violation of what Jesus and the New Testament writers pointedly identified as the most important commandment from God: to love one's neighbor as one's self.
The gay community has cried out for justice to Christians, who have a biblically mandated obligation to be just. Because the mistreatment of gay persons by Christians is so severe, the directive from God to marginalize and ostracize gay people must be clear and explicit in the Bible. If there is no such clearly stated directive, then the continued Christian mistreatment of gay and lesbian people is morally indefensible, and must cease.
The Bible is not a contract, or a set of instructions, with each passage spelling out something clear and specific. It is not a rulebook for being Christian. It is instead a widely varying collection of poetry, history, proverbs, moral directives, parables, letters and wondrous visions. We would be foolish to fail to understand that not everything in the Bible is a commandment, and that Christians cannot take any small section of the Bible out of its own context, and still hope to gain a clear understanding of its meaning.
We can be confident that Paul was not writing to, or about, gay people, because he simply could not have been, any more than he could have written about smart phones or iPads. We do not know what Paul might write or say today about gay people. All we know is that in the New Testament he wrote about promiscuous, predatory, non-consensual same-sex acts between heterosexuals.
If we are to rely on the Bible, then we must take its text as it is. It does condemn homosexual (and heterosexual) sex that is excessive, exploitive and outside of marriage. It does not, however, address the state of homosexuality itself - much less the subject of homosexual acts between a married gay couple. Christians therefore have no Bible-based moral justification for themselves condemning such acts.
Because there was no concept of gay marriage when the Bible was written, the Bible does not, and could not, address the sinfulness of homosexual acts done within the context of gay marriage.
The Bible routinely, clearly and strongly classifies all sex acts outside of the bonds of marriage as sinful. But, because there was no concept of gay people when the Bible was written, the Bible does not, and could not, address the sinfulness of homosexual acts done within the context of marriage. Christians therefore have no biblical basis for themselves condemning such acts.
In fact, by denying marriage equality to gay people, Christians are compelling gay couples to sin, because their intimacy must happen outside of marriage, and is therefore, by biblical definition, sinful.
Being personally repelled by homosexual sex doesn't make homosexual sex a sin.
Christians cite as additional evidence of the inherent sinfulness of homosexual acts their raw emotional response to such acts. It is understandable that many straight people find homosexual sex repugnant (just as many gay people find heterosexual sex repugnant). It is normal for any one of us to be viscerally repelled by the idea of sex between, or with, people for whom we personally have no sexual attraction. It may feel to a straight Christian that their instinctive negative reaction to homosexual sex arises out of the Bible. But, all of us necessarily view the Bible through the lens of our own experiences and prejudices, and we must be very careful to ensure that lens does not distort our vision or understanding of God's sacrosanct word.
"The greatest of these is love."
The overriding message of Jesus was love. Jesus modeled love; Jesus preached love; Jesus was love. Christians desiring to do and live the will of Jesus are morally obliged to always err on the side of love.
Can we all just forget about our selves and love Jesus. Love God with all you heart and your brother with all your heart. We ar free. We all have something. Jesus saved us.
"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! " Isaiah 5:20-21
a Christians place, a disciple of Jesus's place is to preach repentance unto GOD and faith towards Jesus Christ. we should be telling all hellbound ppl to repent and glorify GOD or there's no way you belong to Him. no way does someone who loves someone stand on the sidelines and cheer them on as they march to hell. that is not love. genuine love for GOD works out in strict obedience unto Him, period.
A totally rubbish article. A lie!!!
LIKE YOU, I TAKE THE BIBLE SERIOUSLY! Many good people build their case against homosexuality almost entirely on the Bible. These folks value Scripture, and are serious about seeking its guidance in their lives. Unfortunately, many of them have never really studied what the Bible does and doesn’t say about homosexuality.
We gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Christians take the Bible seriously, too. Personally, I’ve spent more than 50 years reading, studying, memorizing, preaching, and teaching from the sacred texts. I earned my master’s and doctoral degrees at a conservative biblical seminary to better equip myself to “rightly divide the word of truth.” I learned Hebrew and Greek to gain a better understanding of the original words of the biblical texts. I studied the lives and times of the biblical authors to help me know what they were saying in their day so I could better apply it to my own.
We must be open to new truth from Scripture.
Even heroes of the Christian faith have changed their minds about the meaning of various biblical texts.
It took a blinding light and a voice from heaven to help the apostle Paul change his mind about certain Hebrew texts. A sheet lowered from the sky filled with all kinds of animals helped the apostle Peter gain new insights into Jewish law.
Jerry Falwell believed the Bible supported segregation in the church until a black shoeshine man asked him, “When will someone like me be allowed to become a member of your congregation?” Through those simple words, the Holy Spirit spoke new truth about the ancient biblical texts to the Rev. Falwell, and in obedience he ended segregation at Thomas Road Baptist Church.
Even when we believe the Scriptures are “infallible” or “without error,” it’s terribly dangerous to think that our understanding of every biblical text is also without error. We are human. We are fallible. And we can misunderstand and misinterpret these ancient words — with tragic results.
What if someone asked you, “Is there a chance you could be wrong about the way you’ve interpreted the biblical texts sometimes used to condemn homosexual orientation?” How would you respond? What does it say about you if you answer, “No, I could NOT be wrong”? I am asking you to re-examine these texts — carefully and prayerfully. Lives hang in the balance.
If heroes of the Christian faith could change their minds about the meaning of certain biblical texts, shouldn’t we be prepared to reconsider our own interpretations of these ancient words when the Holy Spirit opens our minds and hearts to new truth? That’s why we study the Bible prayerfully, seeking the Spirit of Truth, God’s loving Spirit, to help us understand and apply these words to our lives.
On the night he was betrayed, Jesus told his disciples he was going away from them for a while, but that the Father would send them a “Comforter,” an “Advocate,” the “Holy Spirit” who would “teach them all things.”
I believe with all my heart that the Holy Spirit is still teaching us. When we reconsider the texts that are used by some people to condemn God’s gay children, we must fervently seek the Holy Spirit’s guidance, or we risk being misled by our own prejudices.
The Bible is a book about God – not a book about human sexuality.
The Bible is the story of God’s love for the world and the people of the world. It tells the history of God’s love at work rescuing, renewing, and empowering humankind. It was never intended to be a book about human sexuality. Certainly, you will agree.
In fact, the Bible accepts sexual practices that we condemn and condemns sexual practices that we accept. Lots of them! Here are a few examples.
DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
DEUTERONOMY 22:22
If a married person has sex with someone else’s husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
MARK 10:1-12
Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
LEVITICUS 18:19
The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman’s period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
MARK 12:18-27
If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy’s genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.
I’m certain you don’t agree with these teachings from the Bible about sex. And you shouldn’t. The list goes on: The Bible says clearly that sex with a prostitute is acceptable for the husband but not for the wife. Polygamy (more than one wife) is acceptable, as is a king’s having many concubines. (Solomon, the wisest king of all, had 1,000 concubines.) Slavery and sex with slaves, marriage of girls aged 11-13, and treatment of women as property are all accepted practices in the Scriptures. On the other hand, there are strict prohibitions against interracial marriage, birth control, discussing or even naming a sexual organ, and seeing one’s parents nude.
Over the centuries the Holy Spirit has taught us that certain Bible verses should not be understood as God’s law for all time periods. Some verses are specific to the culture and time they were written, and are no longer viewed as appropriate, wise, or just.
Often, the Holy Spirit uses science to teach us why those ancient words no longer apply to our modern times. During the last three decades, for example, organizations representing 1.5 million U.S. health professionals (doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors, and educators) have stated definitively that homosexual orientation is as natural as heterosexual orientation, that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of yet unknown pre- and post-natal influences, and that it is dangerous and inappropriate to tell a homosexual that he or she could or should attempt to change his or her sexual orientation.
While there are some people now living in heterosexual marriages who once perceived themselves to be gay, there are millions of gay and lesbian persons who have accepted their sexual orientation as a gift from God and live productive and deeply spiritual lives . The evidence from science and from the personal experience of gay and lesbian Christians demands that we at least consider whether the passages cited to condemn homosexual behavior should be reconsidered, just as other Bible verses that speak of certain sexual practices are no longer understood as God’s law for us in this day.
Mar_3:29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"
Pro 23:26 Give me your heart, my son, And let your eyes delight in my ways.
Pro 23:27 For a harlot is a deep pit And an adulterous woman is a narrow well.
Pro 23:28 Surely she lurks as a robber, And increases the faithless among men.
Cindi and Don are posts from yeah and the original posters are gay and yeah is a atheist so he doesnt care or really know what the Bible says just like these 2 long gone posters.
"Cindi and Don are posts from yeah and the original posters are gay and yeah is a atheist so he doesnt care or really know what the Bible says just like these 2 long gone posters."
More lies from Bob proving he can't even understand the basics of the ten commandments. LOL!
The most beautiful word in the Gospel of Jesus Christ is "whosoever." All of God's promises are intended for every human being. This includes gay men and lesbians. How tragic it is that the Christian Church has excluded and persecuted people who are homosexual! We are all created with powerful needs for personal relationships. Our quality of life depends upon the love we share with others; whether family or friends, partners or peers. Yet, lesbians and gay men facing hostile attitudes in society often are denied access to healthy relationships. Jesus Christ calls us to find ultimate meaning in life through a personal relationship with our Creator. This important spiritual union can bring healing and strength to all of our human relationships
Biblical Interpretation and Theology also change from time to time. Approximately 150 years ago in the United States, some Christian teaching held that there was a two-fold moral order: black and white. Whites were thought to be superior to blacks, therefore blacks were to be subservient and slavery was an institution ordained by God. Clergy who supported such an abhorrent idea claimed the authority of the Bible. The conflict over slavery led to divisions which gave birth to some major Christian denominations. These same denominations, of course, do not support slavery today. Did the Bible change? No, their interpretation of the Bible did!
Genesis 19:1-25
Some "televangelists" carelessly proclaim that God destroyed the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of "homosexuality." Although some theologians have equated the sin of Sodom with homosexuality, a careful look at Scripture corrects such ignorance. Announcing judgment on these cities in Genesis 18, God sends two angels to Sodom, where Abraham's nephew, Lot, persuades them to stay in his home. Genesis 19 records that "all the people from every quarter" surround Lot's house demanding the release of his visitors so "we might know them." The Hebrew word for "know" in this case, yadha, usually means "have thorough knowledge of." It could also express intent to examine the visitors' credentials, or on rare occasions the term implies sexual intercourse. If the latter was the author's intended meaning, it would have been a clear case of attempted gang rape. Several observations are important.
First, the judgment on these cities for their wickedness had been announced prior to the alleged homosexual incident. Second, all of Sodom's people participated in the assault on Lot's house; in no culture has more than a small minority of the population been homosexual. Third, Lot's offer to release his daughters suggests he knew his neighbors to have heterosexual interests. Fourth, if the issue was sexual, why did God spare Lot, who immediately commits incest with his daughters? Most importantly, why do all the other passages of Scripture referring to this account fail to raise the issue of homosexuality?
Romans 1:24-27
Most New Testament books, including the four Gospels, are silent on same-sex acts, and Paul is the only author who makes any reference to the subject. The most negative statement by Paul regarding same-sex acts occurs in Romans 1:24-27 where, in the context of a larger argument on the need of all people for the gospel of Jesus Christ, certain homosexual behavior is given as an example of the "uncleanness" of idolatrous Gentiles.
This raises the question: Does this passage refer to all homosexual acts, or to certain homosexual behavior known to Paul's readers? The book of Romans was written to Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome, who would have been familiar with the infamous sexual excesses of their contemporaries, especially Roman emperors. They would also have been aware of tensions in the early Church regarding Gentiles and observance of the Jewish laws, as noted in Acts 15 and Paul's letter to the Galatians. Jewish laws in Leviticus mentioned male same-sex acts in the context of idolatry.
The homosexual practices cited in Romans 1:24-27 were believed to result from idolatry and are associated with some very serious offenses as noted in Romans 1. Taken in this larger context, it should be obvious that such acts are significantly different from loving, responsible lesbian and gay relationships seen today.
What is "Natural"?
Significant to Paul's discussion is the fact that these "unclean" Gentiles exchanged that which was "natural" for them, physin, in the Greek text, for something "unnatural," para physin. In Romans 11:24, God acts in an "unnatural" way, para physin, to accept the Gentiles. "Unnatural" in these passages does not refer to violation of so-called laws of nature, but rather implies action contradicting one's own nature. In view of this, we should observe that it is "unnatural," para physin, for a person today with a lesbian or gay sexual orientation to attempt living a heterosexual lifestyle.
I Corinthians 6:9
Any consideration of New Testament statements on same-sex acts must carefully view the social context of the Greco-Roman culture in which Paul ministered. Prostitution and pederasty (sexual relationships of adult men with boys) were the most commonly known male same-sex acts. In I Corinthians 6:9, Paul condemns those who are "effeminate" and "abusers of themselves with mankind," as translated in the King James version. Unfortunately, some new translations are worse, rendering these words "homosexuals." Recent scholarship unmasks the homophobia behind such mistranslations.
The first word – malakos, in the Greek text-which has been translated "effeminate" or "soft," most likely refers to someone who lacks discipline or moral control. The word is used elsewhere in the New Testament but never with reference to sexuality.
The second word, Arsenokoitai, occurs once each in I Corinthians and I Timothy (1:10), but nowhere else in other literature of the period. It is derived from two Greek words, one meaning, "males" and the other "beds", a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Other Greek words were commonly used to describe homosexual behavior but do not appear here. The larger context of I Corinthians 6 shows Paul extremely concerned with prostitution, so it is very possible he was referring to male prostitutes. But many experts now attempting to translate these words have reached a simple conclusion: their precise meaning is uncertain. Scripture Study Conclusion…No Law Against Love
The rarity with which Paul discusses any form of same-sex behavior and the ambiguity in references attributed to him make it extremely unsound to conclude any sure position in the New Testament on homosexuality, especially in the context of loving, responsible relationships. Since any arguments must be made from silence, it is much more reliable to turn to great principles of the Gospel taught by Jesus Christ and the Apostles. Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. Do not judge others, lest you be judged. The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love . . . against such there is no law. One thing is abundantly clear, as Paul stated in Galatians 5:14: "....the whole Law is fulfilled in one statement, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself".
The Bible is unambiguous about the role and status of GLBTQ folk in terms of marriage and coitus.
GLBTQ marriage and coitus are strictly prohibited.
There are repeated attempts here at "revisionist" interpretations of scripture...where you are led to believe that the Bible says nothing about the prohibition of GLBTQ relationships and the prospects for marriage.
Gay marriage is not approved in the Bible. In Matthew 19, Jesus defines marriage as the solemn union of one man and one woman. Jesus makes it clear that some people will remain celibate for the kingdom of heaven. This is the role for GLBTQ folk. If GLBTQ folk have no desire to marry in accordance with Jesus' one man-one woman directive, then the only alternative is celibacy, an honorable and blessed alternative.
Bless celibate GLBTQ brothers and sisters who are in step with Jesus' directions to them.
I support and encourage GLBTQ celibacy. Please consider forming a support group at your place of worship for GLBTQ celibates. They are under tremendous pressure to backslide into sinful conduct and act out the behaviors of a reprobate mind. With prayer, they will prevail as celibates, setting an example for GLBTQ and straight folk alike.
Thanks for your continuing support of our efforts to educate believers on the power of celibacy for GLBTQ Christians.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Douglas
"The Bible is unambiguous about the role and status of GLBTQ folk in terms of marriage and coitus.
GLBTQ marriage and coitus are strictly prohibited.
There are repeated attempts here at "revisionist" interpretations of scripture...where you are led to believe that the Bible says nothing about the prohibition of GLBTQ relationships and the prospects for marriage."
The scriptures actually say nothing about homosexuality as a psychosexual orientation. Our understandings of sexual orientation are distinctly modern ones that were not present in the minds of Scripture writers. A few passages of Scripture (seven at the most) object to certain types of same-sex expressions or acts. The particular acts in question, however, are sexual expressions which are exploitative, oppressive, commercialized, or offensive to ancient purity rituals. There is no Scriptural guidance for same-sex relationships which are loving and mutually respecting. Guidelines for these relationships should come from the same general Scriptural norms that apply to heterosexual relationships.
Well said, Douglas. Ravi Zacharias answered this dilemma brilliantly as well when he drew a distinction between desire and practice. People are born with proclivities to certain types of sin. If I struggle with thoughts of lust for someone other than my wife, I cannot justify acting on those desires, as it would be adultery and clearly wrong by anyone's standards. The same is true for the GLTB community.
Jud 1:7 And don't forget Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring towns, which were filled with immorality and every kind of x perversion. Those cities were destroyed by fire and serve as a warning of the eternal fire of God's judgment.
2Pe 2:7 But God also rescued Lot out of Sodom because he was a righteous man who was sick of the shameful immorality of the wicked people around him.
2Pe 2:8 Yes, Lot was a righteous man who was tormented in his soul by the wickedness he saw and heard day after day.
2Pe 2:9 So you see, the Lord knows how to rescue godly people from their trials, even while keeping the wicked under punishment until the day of final judgment.
2Pe 2:10 He is especially hard on those who follow their own twisted xual desire, and who despise authority. These people are proud and arrogant, daring even to scoff at supernatural beings without so much as trembling.
Gen 19:5 They shouted to Lot, "Where are the men who came to spend the night with you? Bring them out to us so we can copulate with them!"there is no approval for gay marriage
""Where are the men who came to spend the night with you? Bring them out to us so we can copulate with them!"there is no approval for gay marriage"
This is how silly this poster his he can't even comprehend ra<b.pe and compares that to being gay. Duh!
I love it another lie from the atheists and gays that's what the problem is they want to equate a preference to a physical attribute which is a total lie. Height eye color skin color is all found in the dna, none of them are preferences, all these are the physical characteristics you were born with and will not give you a emotional desire but a body part. That’s like saying the gene in your body didn't know how to make a male or female and went haywire and made you physically a man or woman but gave you the desire for the same gender. Not one shred has been proven to be true it just has not been disputed and the facts let out. The gay agenda pr machine has been working overtime to secure marriage in this society and to say being gay is normal. The phycs have given up to define deviant behavior with much bullying by the gay community and I do mean physically bullying read the transcripts of the APA meetings and basically said they don’t have the ability to determine deviant behavior, Not that its not deviant behavior, just they don’t have a basis to determine it.
@Bob
Keeping up the fight, I see.
Hope that you are having a good night, Bob.
Peace...
More conspiracy bullshit with absolutely no sources for your idiocy.
Post by 'Bob" contains instances of several common fallacies. These include:
Willful Ignorance
Argumentum ad Consequentiam
Ad Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Ad Hominem
and others, as well as a Conspiracy Theory.
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html
You love to tell lies, don't you, Bob? You claimed that NO studies of gays were done prior to the 1973 decision. You lied about that.
You claim you have studies to back up your opinions. You lie about that, too, apparently, since you've posted not a single one.
Hey what ever happened to George Micheals ??? Did you hear about the 18 arrested for s@x in the bathroom in Cal? There were supposedly holes in the stalls men standing around and all kinds of nasty drawings on the walls.
Nice try at deflection, Boob. I guess you have no studies to cite or anything that proves that you are more than a boil on the butt of humanity, do you?
Bob, the problem with your argument is that it's not just the APA that has declared being gay as normal. There are numerous other countries with their own independent studies that have reached the same conclusions, they have proven that the APA made the right decision. In addition, the past 35 years of research and study of gays has also proven that the decision the APA made back in 1973 was the correct one.
Funny, isn't it, how Bob is able to continue to post lies and ignore facts, like the point made above?
It's true; the APA is not the only organization, nor is the US the only nation, that recognized that gays are not mentally ill and that hom0s3xuality is not abnormal.