Scriptures Against Homosexuality

[rick7475]

I don't have any issues with same sex marriage. I live in Ottawa, where men and women hold hands, women and men hold hands, men and men hold hands, and women and women hold hands. But there are scriptures in the New Testament and Old Testament that are pretty clear against homosexuality.

 

Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

 

Since this one is part of the Mosiac Law, I can see how we can get past this one

 

 

However, Paul is preaching here. 

Romans 1:24-28
 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their alust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

 

 

I could see this as a form of fornication. But if there was a lawful marriage between two members of the same sex, would this verse still apply?

 

 

Are there other clear scriptures like these?

 

 

[thesometimesaint]

The Bible preaches against a great many things that if enforced today would land us in very serious legal trouble.

[Damien the Leper]

Be careful with the Pauline citation. Paul, from a historical perspective, would not have believed that all men and women were born heterosexual. That is mere projection. Also, Paul was coming back from a mission in the Mediterranean and he saw temples being erected in honor of Aphrodite. The pagan sex practices are what Paul is protesting. There are two words Paul uses in his letters. Malakoi or malakos literally means soft but Paul uses it to define a feminine male prostitute. Arsenokoitai is defined as offender of oneself but in later translations it was termed sodomite.

[bluebell]

Not to say one way or the other about SSM, but from a more general standard, Paul also taught that women should be silent in the churches, but you don't see many church's that really believe that that's God will on the subject.

 

If we are willing to ignore Paul on other subjects, then it's hard to get people to take us seriously when we want to hold them to his words on this one.

[The Nehor]

Nope, nothing against lesbian relationships. All clear.

[The Nehor]

Not to say one way or the other about SSM, but from a more general standard, Paul also taught that women should be silent in the churches, but you don't see many church's that really believe that that's God will on the subject.

 

If we are willing to ignore Paul on other subjects, then it's hard to get people to take us seriously when we want to hold them to his words on this one.

Is it okay to believe that just some women should be silent in church? Mostly the ones who give a monthly report on their tediously uninteresting lives every Fast Sunday?

[thesometimesaint]

Nope, nothing against lesbian relationships. All clear.

 

From the non-paternalistic view female homosexuality is more accepted than male homosexuality.

[thesometimesaint]

Is it okay to believe that just some women should be silent in church? Mostly the ones who give a monthly report on their tediously uninteresting lives every Fast Sunday?

 

Beats the travelogues of some males.

Edited December 5, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[daz2]

I don't know of any scriptures that expressly address homosexual behavior than those in Leviticus and some of Paul's epistles.  I don't know of any in canonized restoration scripture, nor anything that Joseph Smith said about it.  On the other hand, if the Proclamation is considered binding, it implicitly condemns homosexual behavior, although it does not explicitly address SSM.  Apart from the Proclamation, we have numerous statements from Church leaders and statements in correlated materials that likely qualify as official Mormon doctrine/teachings.

[Damien the Leper]

Not to say one way or the other about SSM, but from a more general standard, Paul also taught that women should be silent in the churches, but you don't see many church's that really believe that that's God will on the subject.

 

If we are willing to ignore Paul on other subjects, then it's hard to get people to take us seriously when we want to hold them to his words on this one.

This kinda reminds me of The Acts of Paul and Thecla.

[rick7475]

I don't know of any scriptures that expressly address homosexual behavior than those in Leviticus and some of Paul's epistles.  I don't know of any in canonized restoration scripture, nor anything that Joseph Smith said about it.  On the other hand, if the Proclamation is considered binding, it implicitly condemns homosexual behavior, although it does not explicitly address SSM.  Apart from the Proclamation, we have numerous statements from Church leaders and statements in correlated materials that likely qualify as official Mormon doctrine/teachings.

 

 

The same could be said about what Church Leaders said about blacks and the priesthood before the ban (if there ever was an official one) was lifted.

 

The Proclamation is clear about pro-creation. It does not say that marriage is exclusive between a man and a woman, but that it is essential for raising children and ordained of God.

Plural Marriage was clarified when it was ordained. I abide by whatever our leaders say, but I don't see a big issue if they allowed gays to marry.  

.

[bluebell]

Is it okay to believe that just some women should be silent in church? Mostly the ones who give a monthly report on their tediously uninteresting lives every Fast Sunday?

 

And rob them of the chance to serve as a bad example?

[JAHS]

Here's a couple more scriptures:

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind," (1 Cor 6: 9)

 

"For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;" (i Tim 1:10)

 

Other Bible translations use the word homosexuality in place of the terms "effeminate" and "defile themselves with mankind"

[rockpond]

I don't know of any scriptures that expressly address homosexual behavior than those in Leviticus and some of Paul's epistles.  I don't know of any in canonized restoration scripture, nor anything that Joseph Smith said about it.  On the other hand, if the Proclamation is considered binding, it implicitly condemns homosexual behavior, although it does not explicitly address SSM.  Apart from the Proclamation, we have numerous statements from Church leaders and statements in correlated materials that likely qualify as official Mormon doctrine/teachings.

 

How is the Proclamation considered binding?

 

And, how does the proclamation implicitly condemn homosexual behavior?

[CV75]

I could see this as a form of fornication. But if there was a lawful marriage between two members of the same sex, would this verse still apply?

take alook at this GC talk from Elder Oaks: http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/no-other-gods?lang=eng

"Our understanding of God’s plan and His doctrine gives us an eternal perspective that does not allow us to condone such behaviors or to find justification in the laws that permit them."

[thesometimesaint]

take alook at this GC talk from Elder Oaks: http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/no-other-gods?lang=eng

"Our understanding of God’s plan and His doctrine gives us an eternal perspective that does not allow us to condone such behaviors or to find justification in the laws that permit them."

 

Fortunately or unfortunately God isn't the one whom gets to determine the laws in this county. But I can think of a few counties where some believe he does. Pretty sure the Saints wouldn't want to live in those countries however.

Edited December 5, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[Bob Crockett]

Not to say one way or the other about SSM, but from a more general standard, Paul also taught that women should be silent in the churches, but you don't see many church's that really believe that that's God will on the subject.

 

If we are willing to ignore Paul on other subjects, then it's hard to get people to take us seriously when we want to hold them to his words on this one.

Joseph Smith corrected that statement in the Inspired Version.

I see a lot of "throw the baby out with the bathwater" arguments. That is, because the Bible is foolish on some other topic, it is foolish on this topic.

[bluebell]

Joseph Smith corrected that statement in the Inspired Version.

I see a lot of "throw the baby out with the bathwater" arguments. That is, because the Bible is foolish on some other topic, it is foolish on this topic.

 

I already said that i wasn't making any specific declaration in regards to SSM.

 

The truth is though that unless someone knows HOW to trust the bible, once they find out that parts of it are foolish, it makes it really hard to take any of it seriously.

 

So just quoting scripture to someone who does not have a testimony of how to understand it, isn't going to hold a lot of water for them.  

[rockpond]

I already said that i wasn't making any specific declaration in regards to SSM.

 

The truth is though that unless someone knows HOW to trust the bible, once they find out that parts of it are foolish, it makes it really hard to take any of it seriously.

 

So just quoting scripture to someone who does not have a testimony of how to understand it, isn't going to hold a lot of water for them.  

 

Even for those who have a testimony... saying that we must broadly interpret and apply this scripture against homosexuality while ignoring these other scriptures written by the same person becomes difficult to swallow.

[bluebell]

Even for those who have a testimony... saying that we must broadly interpret and apply this scripture against homosexuality while ignoring these other scriptures written by the same person becomes difficult to swallow.

 

Oh, i think that Mormons have to learn how to trust the bible just as much as anyone else.

[rockpond]

Oh, i think that Mormons have to learn how to trust the bible just as much as anyone else.

 

Not sure how that changes my point.  Bible or Book of Mormon, my statement still applies.

[The Nehor]

And rob them of the chance to serve as a bad example?

Yes. Hugh Nibley once remarked that the ability to endure boredom is not a virtue yet too often it is cultivated as such every Sunday. I still smile remembering the one lady who would bear testimony every month and tell dull stories *** if they were profound life lessons. When she started to speak one day A little girl stood up on her pew, stuck both her arms straight out in front of her with her thumbs pointed straight down and yelled out: "BOOORING" i gave her candy after the meeting. She had earned it.

[The Nehor]

How is the Proclamation considered binding?

 

And, how does the proclamation implicitly condemn homosexual behavior?

It is binding because the First Presidency and Twelve all endorsed it and proclaimed it. If that is not binding then nothing is binding,

It defines marriage and then states clearly that sexual activity outside of marriage is condemned. Since homosexual marriage is not in an "approved" marriage all homosexual activity is condemned.

[Buzzard]

I would argue that Section 132 implicitly excludes homosexual unions. When it delineates the New And Everlasting Covenant, which is a lot more that polygamy, the only reference is to husbands and wives. If husbands and husbands were part of the plan, he could have included them.  

Seriously, why does this topic get brought up every month? It's grievous sin, we all know it is, the brethren have left no doubt, the Plan of Salvation excludes it from ever happening, And yet, some keep probing, looking for that loophole that would somehow make it acceptable. Isn't going to happen. 

[danielwoods]

Jesus defined marriage:

 

Matt. 19:4  “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’^[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’^[b]? ⁶ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”