>>I seem to recall a text that reads something like "...therefore shall a
man leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife and the two
shall become one flesh ..." That sounds something like monogamy to me.
Again I think that in the NT somewhere, in speaking about leaders in the
young Christian church, there is a text that says something like "...and
the man shall be the husband of one wife ..." This text seems to suggest
that there were marriages at that time in which there was more than one
wife, but to be a leader in the church only one wife was the norm. Again it
sounds like monogamy to me.<<
Yes. It sounds like a man and a woman too. It sure doesn't seem to
give the OK to same sex marriages.
>>Some have expressed their opinion that monogamous relationships between
two committed homosexual persons is injurious to those involved. They refer
to various biological trauma that may result and also refer to the very low
life expectancies that homosexual persons seem to have. I do not know how
homosexual persons express their physical needs. But it seems likely to me
that there may be ways to do this that do not lead to biological trauma.
Part of changed, redemptive behavior then, would be to engage only in those
behaviors that respect the health and well-being of the partner. Then acts
that result in injury to one or both would be avoided.<<
The biological problems that I mentioned are mostly caused by the
insertion of an erect penis (or other objects) into the anus. This is the
usual way that male homosexuals "have sex" and it is decidedly injurious.
Perhaps these injuries could be avoided if insertion was avoided but I
doubt that you could sell the homosexual community on strictly oral sexual
or masturbatory (sp?) relationships.
>>It is just this situation that needs the redemptive gospel message that
results in changed behavior leading to healthier lifestyles.<<
The gospel, if truly accepted, leads to a life in keeping with the
expressed will of God. Depending on where you live that could be a
distinctively unhealthy life.
>>It seems that several persons on this list are very clear that persons
who engage in a homosexual lifestyle can not be saved.<<
I have not seen anyone say that such individuals cannot be saved.
I would doubt that they are saved though if they continue in a lifestyle
that violates God's expressed will.
>>As far as I know there are no ordinances or laws that make it illegal for
two persons of the same gender to share a home or apartment and to live in
a committed relationship with one another. But there are laws against
pedophilia, prostitution, bestiality, and incest. Again, all of these
latter behaviors are destructive to the persons (or animals) involved in
them. And in the case of mutually consenting adult incest, there is also
likely injury to the offspring that may result from such unions. I know of
no such necessary consequences that need result from committed, loving
homosexual unions provided that they respect, in their behavior, the full
integrity of both persons involved.<<
Go back and look at the biological problems I outlined to see the
necessary consequences that need result from committed, loving homosexual
unions. But the problem I see here is this: Do we decide what to accept
as OK and what to view as sin based on which actions we perceive as
damaging? Or do we accept that God is wise when he condemns certain
actions, that He sees more than we do and that He has our best interests at
heart, even if we can't see that so clearly? In other words: Who is the
ultimate arbiter of what is and is not sin? The all knowing God, or the
foolish, limited mortals who made the mess He is working to straighten up?
7245 Balfour Drive
Kalamazoo, MI 49024
firstname.lastname@example.org <---(New e-mail address. Old one still works. This new
one may change again in the next few months.
Eventually it will replace the old address.)
ALAN KEYES FOR PRESIDENT !!!!!!