Does the bible condemn homosexuality?

But you're still saying that Lot was a rightous man. I question the morality of anyone who sees such a man as rightous. I question Peter's morality as well.At the very least, you are trying to cite a moral principle by using the bible. Since the bible relates that Lot is a coward who stands ready to pimp out his virgin daughters to a mob without offering any condemnation for his actions WHATSOEVER!! and in fact praises him as a rightous man, I don't see why it is that ANYONE should use the bible as a moral guide. You apparently do see the bible as a good moral guide. Therefore I question your morality, and when you cite an immoral book like the bible as the final word on the morality of homosexuality, I want to be sure that everyone sees what a despicable moral standard you hold.

It's obvious that my clear, rational explanation of Lot and the "righteousness" that is spoken of will continue to be ignored because of the bias axiom you hold. I'm sorry you so desperately want to paint me with the brush of immorality that you conveniently ignore rather simple explanations that meet and exceed what the normal person would deem adequate. Perhaps you can further misconstrue my statements and position, but you'll have to do so without further comment on my part.

TrixieI think it's important to not take that verse out of context but to examine 1 Cor. 15:35-58 in its entirety concerning the resurrection. Paul in no way asserts that the resurrection won't be physical, he simply makes the distinction between the flesh/blood, corrupted, sinful bodies we inhabit now which are "terrestrial" and the glorified, sinless, "celestial" body which will be raised in "incorruption." 1 Cor. 15:50 just specifies that the current, earthly bodies we inhabit now aren't suited for the Kingdom. I suggest a deeper reading into the surrounding texts in order to get the idea of what Paul is conveying.

You haven't proffered a "clear, rational explanation" of how it is that a rightous man might offer to pimp out his virgin daughters to a sex-crazed mob, all you've done is say you don't approve of such an action but that Lot is still a rightous man because he "believed in the one true God". That's absurd. You have no sound moral principles because your moral compass is the bible, a book which at least tacitly endorses prostitution and slavery and which enthusiastically promotes genocide, even going so far as having God himself commit genocide.But you're correct, the bible DOES condemn homosexuality. I suppose that's all that's necessary in your small mind to show what a great moral guide the bible is.

Can a righteous man be gay?

So you are saying that the resurrection isn't a bodily resurrection, but a spiritual one? That's what Paul seemed to be saying, yet the early Christian church tore itself apart over this one, with orthodoxy stating that it had to be a physical, bodily resurrection and various gnostic groups saying that it was a spiritual resurrection. Orthodoxy won the day and gnostics were denounced as heretics. Now, that puts orthodoxy at odds with what you are saying that Paul was saying. Who is right, Paul or othodoxy?

TrixieNo, I am saying it IS a bodily resurrection. We will indeed be given new bodies. What I'm saying, and believe Paul conveys, is that the bodies we inhabit now are corrupted because of sin and are therefore only suitable for life on earth as we know it. There is no reason to believe the resurrection will simply be a "spiritual" thing because we are told in Phil. 3:20-21 that our body will be transformed to that of a "glorious body" which Christ also has. We know Christ has a physical body because people not only saw Him after the resurrection, but Thomas himself put his fingers into the holes where the nails had pierced. Our corrupted bodies will inevitably perish and afterwards, we will await the resurrection when our spirit is reunited with our body again, only our bodies will be the "glorious" ones spoken of which will be suited for Kingdom life in eternity. That's my view.

CrashWelcome to this discussion too! I think it all depends on which way we're looking at the word "righteous." I truly believe, as the Bible says, that all of us, as humans, fall short of the glory of God and are sinners. Therefore, I don't think any of us are truly righteous, only God alone is. However, when Christ is accepted as Lord and Savior, His righteousness He gave up in exchange for our sin is therefore alotted to us. Obviously, Christians still sin, but the "righteous" part comes in on the day of judgement where we're seen by God clothed in Jesus' righteousness and not in our own sin. I hope that short explanation makes sense. So, about the question of whether or not a righteous man can be gay. My answer is no. Let me give a quick explanation. Someone who adheres to a sinful lifestyle who, first of all denies the act as sin, but who is unrepentant, I don't believe is "righteous" in the way described above because having accepted Jesus as Lord would not lead someone to continue that sin. However, with that being said, I do believe there are Christians(who would be deemed righteous on the day of judgement because of accepting Christ) who have come out of the homosexual lifestyle or struggle with homosexual lusts, who do not continue or fall into the lifestyle, but who are repentant and are given strength to overcome that sin. As I said earlier, all Christians sin and for some, homosexuality and homosexual lusts could easily be a sin that they struggle with. I hope that clears things up a bit.

How can it be a resurrection if you're bunged into another body? surely the resurrection of Jesus was the resurrection of the very body that was crucified? How else could Thomas put his hand into the spear hole or see the holes in his hands? It was in this form that Jesus ascended into heaven. You seem to be accepting both forms here. You're saying that the actual body isn't resurrected, but the spirit is and is given ANOTHER body. Why didn't Jesus qualify for another body?To keep this on topic I reiterate that Paul seems to talk about bodily resurrection, then claim that the body isn't resurrected, only the spirit. How do we know which version is correct and how can we then know if he was right in his opinions about homosexuality?

I'm sorry if I sounded like I was talking about 2 distinct bodies, that's not what I meant. Basically, to put it simply, our buried, corrupted bodies that die WILL be raised, but they'll be given a "tune-up." However, in the case that you are burned to death, eaten by a shark, or whatever, there's no reason to believe that God, when the resurrection occurs, won't re-create your same body in the "glorious" form. So...when we die, our physical, corrupted body is buried and our spiritual form is with the Lord. When the resurrection occurs, our spiritual form is then reunited with our SAME body, it's just "tuned-up" to be suitable for life in the Kingdom. Meaning no sin, aging, physical infirmities, and the like. Making any sense now, hopefully?

NotAHeroAm I correct in assuming that you believe that you will exist for eternity?

SidelinedYou are correct in your assumption.

NotAHeroWhat a horrible prospect that would be,endless existence.

Well, I know. That's why I was asking, because I was curious about the way you were looking at the word. But you do believe that a righteous man could knowingly offer his daughters to a mob to be raped? Or did I misunderstand your position on Lot's righteousness? I've read your exchanges with B and I didn't come away with much understanding, I must confess. Hence the questions. I hope you don't mind. I must have missed the part in the Bible where Jesus says "thou mayest not follow me and be gay." Do you think you could point me to Jesus's thoughts on homosexuality?

CrashI believe even a man saved by faith who will be seen as righteous before the Lord can indeed make a sinful mistake, such as offering his daughters up to a mob. As I stated above(somewhere, lol), Christians sin daily too. We are not righteous in the sense that we are perfectly holy as God is, but we are righteous in the sense that our faith has been placed in Jesus whose righteousness is given to us in exchange for our sin on the day of judgement. So yes, I do believe a righteous man can sin and make immoral judgement calls. As far as Jesus' thoughts on homosexuality, I'll do my best to point out a few scriptures that will shed light on it. Now, remember, an argument from silence isn't a strong argument at all. So, just because Jesus didn't come right out and say "thou mayest not follow me and be gay," doesn't mean He wasn't opposed to it, because I believe, as I will hopefully show, that He was. Here are a few scriptural references...Matthew 15:19-20 says, "For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man." Homosexuality obviously falls into the category of fornication here.Mark 7:21 says very similar to the above but includes "wickedness" and "lewdness." Sinful acts are often called wicked and the act of homosexuality has been deemed wicked.John 16:8-9 says, in reference to the Spirit, "And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement: of sin, because they do not believe in Me; of righteousness, because I go to my Father and you see Me no more; of judgement, because the ruler of this world is judged." Following this up, Jesus says in John 16:14, "He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you." Now, if the the Spirit is convicting the world of sin and does so while glorifying and declaring what is Jesus', than that, by default, includes the sin of homosexuality.Matthew 19:4-6 says, "And He answered and said to them, "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate." This is a clear description of the original intent of God creating man/woman relationships and what they are supposed to be. Homosexuality, obviously, does not fall into the original design which Jesus most assuredly promotes.Let me just say that simply because we're discussing homosexuality, as sin in the Bible, that I don't love homosexuals, because I do. I do not agree with the sin(nor any sin, for that matter), but, just as Jesus did, I do love the sinner. I don't want any of this to be somehow misconstrued, as some calling themselves Christians often do, to be an open invitation to bash gays or their lifestyle. Hopefully the above scriptures helped out a bit.