What Jesus Christ Said About Homosexuality

305 Responses

  1. Bella Roberts says:

    Can I ask you a few things? Do you think couples with fertility problems shouldn’t be allowed to marry? Do you think gay people shouldn’t be allowed to go through a surrogate/sperm donor or adopt so many of the unwanted children in orphanages to give them a fair shot at life? Considering that you want to bring anatomy into this, The only way someone could use the Bible to claim homosexuality is a sin is by ripping verses out of context to defend their own prejudice. (Sorry, but it’s the truth.) Every verse that allegedly ‘condemns’ homosexuality is really referring to shrine prostitutes or gang rape, which would still be sins if they were committed by straight people. Yourself being such a Bible scholar, I assume you have heard of David and Jonathon: http://www.gaychristian101.com/David-Loved-Jonathan.html
    Like budthebeagle was saying, homophobes ARE usually closeted gays: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/homophobic-maybe-youre-gay.html?_r=0 Please don’t delete this, man up and talk to me.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      I edited out some of your post.
      My answer follows your comment in ( )
      Can I ask you a few things? Do you think couples with fertility problems shouldn’t be allowed to marry?
      (Sure they are man and woman and God can always send a baby.
      1Sam 1:5 But unto Hannah he gave a worthy portion; for he loved Hannah: but the LORD had shut up her womb
      1Sam 1:20 Wherefore it came to pass, when the time was come about after Hannah had conceived, that she bare a son, and called his name Samuel, saying, Because I have asked him of the LORD. )

      Do you think gay people shouldn’t be allowed to go through a surrogate/sperm donor or adopt so many of the unwanted children in orphanages to give them a fair shot at life?
      (Homosexuals should never be able to adopt and neither should prostitutes, pimps or pornographers, etc. It is child abuse to put children with them.)

      Considering that you want to bring anatomy into this.
      (The homosexual act is unclean to the body and breeds many diseases and early death. The heterosexual act within marriage, which God ordained, will never breed any disease but life
      homosexuality brings disease and death while heterosexual marriage brings life.
      We put warnings on cigarette packs about health, so should we warn our young about the dangers of the homosexual act.
      The only way someone could use the Bible to claim homosexuality is a sin is by ripping verses out of context to defend their own prejudice. (Sorry, but it’s the truth.) Every verse that allegedly ‘condemns’ homosexuality is really referring to shrine prostitutes or gang rape, which would still be sins if they were committed by straight people.
      (Let the verses speak for themselves:
      Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
      Rom 1:25 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.
      Rom 1:26 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:
      Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
      Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
      1Co 6:9 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,
      1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
      1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
      Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
      1Ti 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 1Ti 1:10 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;
      By lining up with homosexuality according to Romans 1, you have a reprobate mind)

      Yourself being such a Bible scholar, I assume you have heard of David and Jonathon:
      (Because you have a reprobate mind, you filter everything through this sin. It is only an unclean mind that would say David was a homosexual.)

      Like budthebeagle was saying, homophobes ARE usually closeted gays: Please don’t delete this, man up and talk to me.
      (It is sort of a strange compliment that you insinuate I am a sodomite. The reason is, it means that the truth that I proclaim is effective and threatening to you.
      By claiming that I am a sodomite, you hope to intimate me and even silence me. My advice is don’t waste your time with this. The only one I fear is the LORD.
      I am not going to post anymore of your attempts to justify homosexuality or any other sin.
      If you want to be freed from the bondage of sexual sin, I have a prayer team and we will pray with you. The LORD has freed many homosexuals through my team.
      We follow the Lord’s ministry as laid out in Luke 4:18 (KJ Bible).
      If you are not in sexual sin but want to repent of a reprobate mind, I would be delighted to pray with you.)

  2. Pearl says:

    You are translating in your own way. This is a problem across America and every where else. My only question is: Given the tremendous amount of sex trafficking especially how it effects children, pedophilia, and adultery which cause the most distress on individuals and the people involved why doesn’t the church fight this cause. Gay people are making consensual decisions when they come together. I am not gay but I disdain hatred and distraction. The lord gave us the free will to make mistakes and all of us have committed sins one way or the other. We are not and will never be like God meaning in his/her perfection. Instead, shouldn’t the churches movement be against the suffering of children? Specifically, Poverty and Sex Abuse. I know that God loves all of us despite our transgressions. Why was not lot and his daughters condemned for their incest? Why was not David and Solomon damned to hell for their crimes of adultery and idolatry? See these are all accounts of what man did then and how it was dealt with. I just wish church groups would redirect their attention to the things that Jesus cared most about, Acceptance through Love and helping the least among us. I noticed your titles on the side, specifically Anti-Christ. There seems to be as many or equally the same amount of Anti-Christ’s within the church than outside. Everywhere I turn on when I go to a Church it is some hate speech. No one is talking about taking care of the planet that our lord gave us, taking care of the poor, and loving each other despite our sins. Instead, you cherry pick scripture to deal with your own subconscious issues that have nothing really to do with how children are fed and how to elevate the human race beyond our differences and how to establish a community of tolerance, love and forgiveness. Ever heard the term you get more bees with honey….You are making it very hard for people who want to connect with the church very hard then again do we really have to? I know for sure Jesus didn’t give sermons under a roof with his hand held out for tithes. But if you are trying to bring people to the church you should think about focusing on acceptance of differences and less judgment. The lord loved so-called fornicators too.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      What have done is try and deflect from the real issue which is tampering with
      God’s holy institution of marriage between a man and woman.
      We preach truth and lots of people do not like truth but love lies.
      It is not a popularity contest, so if you want to hear truth stay with the ministry, otherwise
      the hirelings are a dime-a-dozen.
      Joh 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

      • PaulPaulJones says:

        I won’t even bother with chapter and verse.

        Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

        • JohnMcTernan says:

          It is one thing to sin but it is another to promote, justify and encourage sin which you are doing.
          You need to repent of supporting sin and come under the authority of Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.
          1Corinthians 6:9 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,
          1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
          1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

        • Benjamin Lawrence Edwards says:

          Paulpaul Jones You are taking that verse out of context!

          Regarding “let he who is without sin cast the first stone” you are not only taking that passage out of context but you are doing so in a very foolish and hypocritical manner.

          What would you say if a person you caught raping a loved one said that to you? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone? What if they said “You claiming you never sinned”? “Jesus ate with sinners” “Dont point your fingures at me” What would you do in that situation?

          Under levitical law when people were punished for Adultery all guilty parties were to be given a fair trial and ALL of them (not just the woman) were to be executed if found guilty and only if there was testimony from two or more witnesses.

          Under levitical law no one could be convicted of a capitol offence unless there was testimony from two or more witnesses.

          If you read that passage you will notice that the mob is sinning in several different ways.

          They were deliberately trying to get Jesus in trouble with the Roman government. The passage explicitly states this! (Under Roman law local governments under Rome could conduct their own trials but only the Roman Government could execute people…….which was the reason for all that back and forth between the Sanhedrine and Pontius Pilate, Rome would have in all likelihood killed the Sanhedrine if they executed Jesus)

          The woman wasn’t given a trial.

          Where was the man she supposedly commited adultery with? He wasnt there and wasnt being accused by the mob.

          Where were the witnesses? There weren’t any and in fact Jesus pointed this out.

          This was unbiblical. They (the mob) were sinning in several different ways.

          Like I said , you took that passage out of context furthermore you are a complete hypocrite.

          You are claiming that it is wrong to judge and yet you are hypocritically judging us for judging.

          Jesus never issued a blanket condemnation against judgment but only forbade hypocritical judgment (LIKE WHAT YOU ARE DOING)

          We are actually commanded to judge in certain circumstances (Matthew 18:15-17, 1 Corinthians 5) and Jesus even said to judge not according to appearance but to judge righteous judgment.

          You are a complete hypocrite. You tell us not to judge and yet you judge us for lovingly trying to warn people about this destructive and dangerous sin and you hypocritically tell us let he who is without sin cast the first stone taking that passage completely out of context in a very hypocritical manner.

  3. CH says:

    There is no female in the Godhead. So since we were made in the image of God and the things on earth are a pattern of the things in Heaven can you explain how the Godhead (all male) relationship of intimacy is similar to that of a heterosexual relationship? Also I don’t want to impose the idea that the Godhead have sex, but why then is consummation necessary to show the love that the Godhead (three male beings) have for each other?

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      It is a spiritual union.
      Just like the believers are call the “bride” and there will be a marriage supper of the Lamb in heaven.

  4. Bella Roberts says:

    Oh, John. I bet you’re so happy that there was a rainbow over the White House on the 26th, just as there was over Dublin when they legalized marriage equality. I’m praying that you can join the 70% of Americans that are on the right side of history, study the Bible enough to realize that it does not justify your hate, and acknowledge the fact that love always wins. Have a nice life, buddy, and good luck with that. 🙂

    P.S. I’ve been blasting ‘Sweet Victory’ and ‘We Are The Champions’ all weekend. Thinking about you and Westboro Baptist Church crying yourselves to sleep on the 26th GAVE ME LIFE! 🙂

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      Please follow my blog. as I document the destruction of America as God moves in holy and righteous judgment against a wicked and rebellious nation.
      This is America’s epitaph: Juud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
      Because you are in league with the homosexual agenda and the attack of marriage, you will receive the same judgment as if you were a homosexual.
      Please repent of your sin and rebellion and confess Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.
      He can cleanse your mind of the satanic stronghold that has your mind.

      Make sure that you follow the blog as I will layout God’s judgment as it unfolds before your eyes.
      You have no hope without repentance and coming under the shed blood of Jesus Christ for your sin.

    • Gale says:

      Bella,
      You are in bondage. You need to let John pray with you. If not John, another Christian.
      God will remove the blinders from your eyes, and only then will you be able to accept or understand anything that the bible has to say about this, or any other subject.
      Satan’s intent is to keep us in bondage and prevent us from understanding what God has for us.
      Satan does not want any of us to know the truth. The only way to counter that is to seek God. If you do this, believe it or not, Satan will flee from you. Satan CAN’T dwell in the light.

      I could quote scriptures to back up my comments, but it would fall on deaf ears at this point.
      The only difference between you and a Christian, is that we have chosen to believe what our Creator has to say. We have chosen to believe truth rather than lies.
      It’s obvious that you believe there is a God, otherwise, you would not be posting to this website.

      Furthermore, you either believe what God has to say, or you reject it. You can’t pick and choose, from His word, which parts you will believe and which parts you will discard.
      That is what we sinners do! Before I was saved, I did the same thing. The Bible warns us about being on the fence. We can’t serve two masters. We cant be luke warm in our faith. Skewing God’s Word to fit into our sinful lifestyle isn’t even practical.
      We have to choose a side. I choose life, and choose to believe the one who gave me life.

      Ask God to come into your heart. Ask Him, who created YOU, to reveal the truth.
      You can’t change the truth no matter what you choose to believe. Why not choose life? Quit believing the lies.

      Again, I wouldn’t even be replying to your post if you didn’t have questions about what God has to say about homosexuality.
      If you really want to know what He has to say about it, and you really want the truth… seek the truth! Once you open your heart and mind to God’s Word, you will be very liberated. You will no longer be confused by the lies that Satan has for you.

      Let me warn you that when you to seek God, Satan will tighten his grip on you. Just remember, he has lost the battle already, which is why he was cast down. God is greater than anything that Satan can dish out.

  5. Jake says:

    Fornication is defined as two people having sex outside of wedlock. If two gay people were married, they wouldn’t be fornicating. 😉

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      There is no such thing as “homosexual marriage”. This is a modern invention.
      All homosexuality is fornication.

    • Michael says:

      Right on!!

      • Ms. Harris says:

        Not so sir. It’s not ordained by man but by God. God sets the standard for marriage. He has already made those parameters very clear in his Word/the Bible. It is to be between a man and a woman only. Anything else is sin and confusion. It’s not our opinions or desires that matter but God’s will. Line up with his will through faith and obedience to Jesus Christ or face judgement and damnation/he’ll.

      • Ms. Harris says:

        I meant to say face damnation/hell.

  6. Hans Stuk says:

    God does not have full jurisdiction over marriage if he doesn’t exist. Besides it’s a civil issue, not a religious one.

    If you want to gather people together and teach the good things of the publication known as the bible that’s great. But using it as a tool to discriminate normal loving humans is wrong.

    If it wasn’t for government the Christian churches would still be murdering people for actions they deemed wrong in the bible. They only did this for over 2000 years in the name of the lord. Now you condemn ISIS for the same thing?

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      Your problem with killing is with the Catholic church, so I suggest that you take it up with the pope and his followers.
      The ones who kill today like ISIS are the atheists and evolutionists. Just look at the French Revolution, Communism and Nazism. Hitler was a big time believer in evolution. The ones to fear are Muslims and atheists.
      You can build a civilization on Christianity which was done in America, even with man’s sinful nature.
      It took a civil war to end slavery, and long time to undo the damage that evolution did to black people in America.
      What is coming, according to the Bible, is WW3, the antichirst, Armageddon and the awesome Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
      Your denial and unbelief cannot stop what is coming.
      You need to repent of sin and confess Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. He died on the cross so you can be reconciled to God.

  7. Hans Stuk says:

    God’s judgement? Is that like all the people you killed during the Crusades to purge other religions?

    You’re only so lucky as to have some of the least intelligent people on this planet following your lead.

    Threats like above are terrorism. Check out what happens to terrorist in America!

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      I warn you and that is terrorism?
      I guess the Holy God of Israel is your enemy right now.
      He only judges in righteousness and His judgments are always just.
      You will be judged by Him with justice and righteousness and therefore you have hope, unless
      to turn to Jesus Christ as your Savor.
      Time is very short as the judgments are on the way.
      Isaiah 26:9 With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early:
      for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.

    • Ms. Harris says:

      The Catholics were guilty of murder and persecution during the Crusades. Catholics are not Christians. True Christians do not force others to believe. It’s not real if you have to force someone to believe. People who have religion as opposed to saving faith in Christ, feel the need to force, murder, and persecute. That’s evil and desperate. The God of the Bible and his followers/Christians are not desperate.

  8. steve says:

    So, you say fornication, which you say Jesus condemned is a sin. You, yourself came to the conclusion that, that meant any sex without marriage. So in your understanding, homosexual sex is no longer a sin once they are married.

    The biggest question in your Christian bible is that homosexual sex is sexually immoral. But, so is prostitution. Yet, Jesus did not condemn Mary Magdeline.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      First, there is no such thing as “homosexual marriage”. It is a recent invention by people who hearts are hardened against God and His holiness.
      All homosexual acts are fornication.
      Second, there is nothing in scripture that Mary Magdeline was a prostitute.
      The closet you come to this is the woman caught in adultery and the Lord forgave her and told her not to sin like this anymore.
      John 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

      You might want to read my full teaching on this called: Homosexuality vs God’s holiness: http://www.defendproclaimthefaith.org/homosexuality_and_god_1.html

  9. Jo says:

    John, Thank you for this explanation. I am giving it to my teen who was confused by a person misusing and misleading others with his explanation of certain passages. I knew the word homosexual was not used in the Bible but also showed her Rom 1:26, 27, 28 You have to not want to see what is contained in those words or be completely illiterate not to understand them.
    Bless you for warning the people above. We will be praying for you and your ministry.

    Romans 1:26,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:
    Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
    Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

  10. Lisa says:

    I just wanted to ask your thoughts on homosexual ministers. Do they really just ignore the scriptures, leviticus 20:13, and romans 1:26, or do they really not know? And is this going to be the new movement, where new lawsuits will begin, forcing the church, out of their places to worship, not wanting to be lead, by a deceiver, who has convinced himself, he is a man of god? Ppl who dont believe, really come up, with some off the wall stuff! My favorite: Jesus said! what did god say? My favorite, your soulless then, no im not. Then what is your soul for? No answer. And my last question, i believe i know the answer, are we to get into debates with the unbelieving, homo defenders? It is hard going to round 100 with an atheist. Just put the word out there, and flee?

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      Many don’t believe the Bible while others love the sin and filter the Bible through this sin.

  11. Richard says:

    I thank God for stepping aside and allowing homosexual marriage. Because you hardened your heart, God said “OK, have your way”. In the next few decades, it will only prove it is NOT the loving relationship it purports to be but an illusion by the master of sin himself. Don’t believe me? Google the lifestyle statistics for yourself. We already know it, we just have to let it prove itself.

    God loves you and wants to bless with a long life, which means follow His ways. The average lifespan of a homosexusl is 20 years shorter than heterosexual. Ask yourself why? Its the dangerous lifestyle that supports risky sexual encounters with over a thousand different partners, many with total strangers.

    Just because its now legal does not mean it is right. Dont believe me? Why stop here? Why not throw out other “social mores” and allow men to marry boys (ala NAMBLA). Its a loving relationship, right? How about having the right to marry my dog, after all a dog is mans best friend? I am just marrying my best friend. Why not allow polygamy, its a loving group – even Hillary says it takes a village!?? Just because it feels good – should you do it? Current culture says YES, but you know deep in your heart and mind, its warning you. Wake up… WAKE UP!!! Wake up before its too late.

    In times like these, when the Christian church is attacked, the church will pray and become stronger than ever before. Understand, we love YOU inspite of your actions and want you to come to the deep knowledge of God.

  12. Dan says:

    anti-Christ! That’s all i have to say regarding your ideologies, thoughts and convictions

  13. Steven says:

    People know that smoking is a bad habit and bad for their health,
    yet they still do it. It’s the same for the practice of homosexuality. For the homosexuals and their supporters I ask, how can you defend the indefensible? There is no excuse for what they do. It is plainly self evident that we were not designed for that purpose, otherwise, how would we procreate?

  14. Gale says:

    Hi John,
    I really liked your article and blog.
    The supporters of homosexuality have really ATTEMPTED to skew God’s word. It CAN’T be done. Their arguments are pretty ridiculous.
    This is nothing new, as all people in bondage to sin attempt to justify it, somehow.

    They like to point their fingers at Christians, and claim we are haters. That is not the case. We are all sinners. God hates the sin, not the sinner.
    We simply can’t embrace the act of homosexuality just because the courts have legalized same sex marriages. Leviticus 18:22 is pretty clear to me!

    The truth is usually not convenient or popular. I am a Christian. I am not a perfect person, however, God’s word convicts me, and pushes me to abandon my sin.
    So, homosexuals and supporters, you CANNOT change God’s word to conveniently fit your lifestyle, but you CAN change your lifestyle to line up with God’s word! .

  15. Tonia says:

    Thank you for clarifying and facing persecution for truth. What I see happening more and more is fear. People have sexual desires they don’t know what to do with. Many times these feelings were forced upon them as children or developed from trauma or confusion as a child. It’s often something the person themselves doesn’t understand and typically starts off hating and feeling afraid they have homosexual desires. Without asking Jesus to deliver and free him/her from this sin, it manifests and develops and the individual begins to accept it instead of fighting it, then they embrace it and celebrate it. I understand. It starts as a painful thing, you’re stuck with these desires, often times a person doesn’t want to have them and finally get tired of being the freak and ashamed. My heart goes out to anyone who suffers this sin. I myself have had sexual sin struggles and its a strong delusion. However, to say this isn’t sin is dangerous. To celebrate it as good is reprobate. The most painful part, is that the person who is bound in this sin is afraid to call it such, because they have already walked that pain years prior. But they are accepting a counterfeit love. God doesn’t condemn a person for being homosexual or having desires when we turn to Him. This is where the confusion happens for so many. Nobody is saying Jesus doesn’t want someone because they have homosexual desires. He does on the cross for everyone. He wants to free us. This is sometimes an instant freedom and sometimes something that happens gradually with time while walking in the Faith of Christ Jesus. It took me a long time to realize the absolute best thing to do is admit your sin to Jesus and ask Him to change your heart and desires. We ABSOLUTELY can’t on our own. Jesus doesn’t WANT to punish people for their sin. John 3:16-20 says: 16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
    17 “For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
    18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
    19 “And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
    20 “For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.

    Ezekial 18:23 “Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord GOD, “and not that he should turn from his ways and live?

    Yes, God is love and so forgiving. He wants us to live! He gave Jesus up to die a horrible death so we could be able to have forgiveness because we are unable to keep ourselves from winnings. Gods nature is that He is also just. He can’t save us if we are I willing to be saved by believing in Jesus. Part of that is believjng that what He says is sin is. God is long suffering, so this doesn’t mean that the minute you sin, as a believer you will be zapped. He is gracious and gives us time and relates to us individually about our sins as we follow Jesus. Be covered by Jesus blood by leaning on and trusting in Him for salvation, not by living a life perfectly without sin. That’s impossoble. But certainly, the first step toward freedom in Jesus is agreeing with what God says about sin. The next steps are asking Jesus to free you from these sins and then walk that new life! Little by little as the Holy Spirit shows a person a sin area in their life, they turn and ask God to change our hearts which cause is to sin. Over and over through a lifetime. This is the Christian walk. Believing in Jesus is believing His blood covers all sin, trusting in Him to remove sin and believing what He says about who you are in Him. Trying to make sin acceptable to God because we believe in Jesus is not trusting God. It’s trusting in self and following a Jesus who is not in the Bible. Jesus said He will wash away our sins, not make our sins acceptable to God.

  16. Kyyuuki says:

    Fornication is defined as 2 unwed individuals haveing sexual intercourse. Strait and homosexuals both do this. Gay marriage is legal in all the United States along with many other countries as long as they’re married it’s not a sin. Look up the definition of a word before you claim it’s meaning pleb.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      The Bible uses fornication to indicate any sexual relations outside of marriage.
      There is no such thing as homosexual marriage. It was just invented by those who have a reprobate mind
      and deny reality of God.
      Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh,
      are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
      2Pet 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; (7) And delivered just Lot,
      vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (8) (For that righteous man dwelling among them,
      in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)

      • Tonia says:

        I agree John. Although, my heart goes out to anyone who has been confused by homosexual attraction. I don’t doubt they experience genuine love feelings for a same sex partner. However, after a study, I learned artiste is deify tell only defined as a one man and one woman. This is what I found:
        In Genesis God created Adam from nothing…from the dust of the earth. Eve was created from Adams rib, not as a stand alone fr the dust of the earth as well. Why did God do this I asked? I found the answer in the picture created. A man is to be the Spiritual Head of the wife, to love her by laying down his life for her, to protect her and provide for her. A woman is to submit to her husband and respect him, obey him and be his helper. Paraphrased from Ephesians 5:23-33. So Adam, the man, is a representation of God. He came from nothing. He loves unconditionally, He provides, supports and laid down His life through Jesus. Eve is a representation of mankind. She was created from Adam. Just as we are created by God in His likeness and image. Genesis 1:27. Just like A wife is to submit and respect her husband, so mankind should do the same toward God. The picture couldn’t be more clear! If God intended for marriage to be more than just one man and one woman, then His intentions were for no good reason. They speak of nothing about Him, which from what I know of God, is not His style. If God intended for a man and a man to be married, then the picture God intended for for God to want only Himself and to care for Himself, mankind isn’t included in that picture. And if God intended for women to marry one another, then mankind would be caring for and saving themselves, and there is no reason for need of God to save us. So you see, through the Biblical picture God gave us for marriage, Gods message is about His salvation and desire for us. Without Gods will and way, it just doesn’t speak the same, remarkable, beautiful message. God loves us, He does all the work, we just have to submit and respect Him. How awesome is that?!

    • Kyyuuki,
      Looking in an English dictionary is not going to give you a complete and accurate understanding of what the word “πορνεία (porneia)” means in the Biblical context. For a complete understanding you would need to survey the historical usage in the original languages, look in various Greek and Hebrew Lexicons, conduct a word study and examining every occurrence of the word, and supplementary words, within various context contexts (historical, cultural, philosophical, theological, etc.). It would also be helpful to check out the various commentaries to consider the studied opinions of Scholars through the ages. Then survey the various English words that could be considered as viable words to accurately translate the finer points and nuances of the conceptual meaning of the word in the original languages.
      Most people do not go through the labors of this process. Most people accept the labor of earlier scholars on these issues. This is what John has done and this is a perfectly acceptable practice.
      It is evident by your comments, that you did not not conduct any adequate study of the word. Your comments evidenced a certain superficiality of understanding on the subject.
      The addition of an ad hominem argument at the end (referring to John as a “pleb”) reveals a lack of honest scholarship and the possible reliance on and emotional plea.
      Pop-philosophy and pop-theology may convince the masses, but those who respect scholarship will not fall to such superficial thinking. However, being the minority, they will probably be ridiculed and persecuted for their beliefs by the masses. “If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also.” John 15:20.
      D Zachary

      • JohnMcTernan says:

        I think that I get the meaning of what you are saying, but it is nonsense.
        I guess that you are trying to refute what I wrote about the judgment on homosexuality as found in Jude 1:7.
        It really is self explanitory and does not need much of an explanation:
        chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
        Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication,
        and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

        If this verse is not enough, then 2 Peter 2:9 ties in very nicely with it:
        2Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow,
        making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

  17. Phillip O'Mara says:

    I just want to point out that people put God in a box. A box to make Him think the way our infinitely finite human minds, prone to erroneous logic, think. When a supreme all-powerful being commands something of His children, don’t you think its in their best interest to listen? And he doesn’t command things of us to place restrictions on us or sap the enjoyment out of life. He does it to protect us from harm that will befall us if we DON’T listen.But you know, people get ideas in their minds about how they think things should be. And what did I say our minds were prone to? Irrationality. Erroneous logic. People just don’t want to answer for their actions, and because of a God who will make us answer for our actions the human race either rejects Him and His commandments, accepts Him on their terms, or believes in Him while attempting to make the Bible say what they want it to say. That being said, I struggle with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx but I’m trying to stop for good and I’m sure not going to call it OK for me to do. If I don’t stop before Christ comes back, I’m not going to inherit the kingdom of God. I think the individuals who are into gay marriage rights should treat it the same way and stop calling the truth a lie.
    Romans 1:25 “They traded the truth about God for a lie…”

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      Phillip, if you would like prayer in the name of Jesus to set you free from this bondage please email me at [email protected]
      I have seen so many set free from bondage.

      Luke 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

  18. Stuart Aitchison says:

    There is one specific point that I would like to make. We generally see God as a relational being, both within the Godhead, and in His interaction and association with us. Marriage seems, from the Scriptures, to have been the pinnacle of relationship, and is representative of the relationship that exists between Christ and His bride, the church.

    It makes sense to me that if anything is going to be attacked by Satan more than anything else, it will be relationship, and we may expect that the thing that will be attacked the most will be that which is at the core of relationship, and that is marriage.

    Anything that Satan can do to mislead, misdirect, warp, twist, distort, pervert and destroy relationship he will do, and one of the misdirections and perversions and distortions is that he presents homosexual relationship as being as valid as the original relationship that God established and ordained between a man and a woman.

    What we are seeing today by way of misdirecting and misleading and perverting and distorting and warping and twisting relationship generally, and marriage specifically, through divorce and “gay” marriage and even that much-vaunted sentiment of being “in love” is entirely what we should expect at the “end times.”

    Christ made one interesting comment, among others, about the “end times,” and that is that they would be “marrying and giving in marriage.” Considering that marriage is a Biblical and God-ordained institution, why would Christ specifically make comment about it in what is essentially a negative context? Clearly there was something unusual and extra-ordinary about what was happening in the time of Noah, and considering the way marriage is being perverted today by so-called “gay” marriages, I think that the answer is unfolding itself as we go along.

    No wonder that Christ rather wryly and possibly sadly commented “Will the Son of Man find any faith left on earth when He returns?” Soli Deo Gloria.

  19. joy says:

    So u sayn forcnation is being gay I tawt it mean rape.u knw wat strait people jus wana find stupid answaz. To things they don’t wana accept,ul think we can’t love n live n be happy becoz accordn to how ull wana understand da bible,listen jesus sed come as u are,he never condemd yet all ul tend to do is condem,n twist what was written in the bible,its called contoll human behaviour

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      1Corinthians 6:9 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,
      1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
      1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

  20. Martin says:

    There is no reference that i can find in the Bible where the actual context is that of defining the meaning of fornication. There are only events of fornication and preaching concerning it but nothing attempting to define it.

    You may not have a Biblical foundation to your theory that it is homosexuality. Thus the fact you prefer your theory despite the lack of any clear Biblical authority tends to imply blind adherence to false tradition or deep prejudice cloaked in plausible but erroneous private interpretation of the Word of God.

    Ezekiel 16 uses the term along with harlotry to describe the behavior of Israel as becoming alienated from God and affectionate toward materialism of other nations. In this case Fornication would be the alienation of the heart of Israel away from God while harlotry would be the dedication of physical resources away from building the Kingdom of God and for spreading the materialistic habits of the gentile genre.

    ISAIAH 23:17-18 We see the land of Tyre committing “fornication” with all the Kingdoms of the Earth, and from these disingenuous relationships her increase shall be counted as holiness unto the Lord “for them that dwell before the Lord, to eat sufficiently, and for durable clothing”. So here we have the fruits of untoward relationships of Tyre to be consecrated to benefit the saints of God.

    In 2 Chronicles 21:11 We have Israel committing fornication and it has to do with establishing high places of worship where the people pay honor to another god. Thus it is implied that “fornication” is alienation of affection from our true Creator to unworthy objects of respect.

    Matt 5:32 and 19:9 We have “fornication” being a legitimate cause for divorce which can only mean alienation of affection.

    Matthew 15:19 “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:” If “adultery” is the destruction of a blessed marriage then “fornication” is the formation of an untoward relationship or one that is not formed by the Holy Spirit. That could be any relationship including many monogamist relationships.

    God always honors the right of free will and the right to contract. His entire Doctrine of Salvation is covenant based through the ceremony of Baptism to formalize discipleship and have it recorded in Heaven. However He insists that our contracts be approved by the Holy Spirit. There is no true principle against persons of the same sex having the greatest of love for each other, and even being willing to die for each other. Jesus said this is the greatest love, that a person can lay down his life for a friend. It is every persons right to contract especially when the Holy Spirit blesses the relationship. Therefore it is not against any teaching of the Bible for persons of the same sex to enter a covenant of companionship when they feel it is blessed by the Lord. The first century Christians were so loving and united that they entered covenants of communal unity and had all things in common. We don’t know what this meant in terms of their sexuality, but it could have included many creative arrangements due to the persecutions and sporadic death they suffered where comforting each other affectionately may have been necessary but condemned by those who have never opened their minds but are set on judging others.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      1Cor 6:9-11 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, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

      I pray for the healing of the brokenhearted. This is what you need to set free from the sin of homosexuality. If you want to freed in the name of Jesus, you can email me at [email protected]

      • Maetin says:

        Try to focus please. There is no Biblical reference where the definition of fornication is the context including 1 Cor 6:9-11. Fornication is only clustered with other indiscretions and is not by any means defined. Maybe you will never be able to face this fact. So be it.

        • JohnMcTernan says:

          Lets try this one more time.
          Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh,
          are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

          The context tells this is about homosexuality because the only sin mentioned is the sin crazed men trying to sodomize God’s angels. The Sodomites
          were offered Lot’s daughters but refused for the men.
          The Bible in this verse shows the fornication includes homosexuality. If you don’t accept this, then it is time to move on.

          • Martin says:

            I am not a homosexual nor am I deprived of a rich relationship with our Lord and Savior. However you are declaring that the Bible says that which it does not. If you study the references I gave which involve fornication events, where it is actually referred to as “fornication”; they all have to do with alienation of affection from God and toward respect for a relationship with a foreign god.

            Furthermore other references named the only excuse for divorcing a blessed marriage is that of “fornication” which could not possibly mean the only excuse for divorce is homosexuality. The same reason fornication was used in the earlier references concerning alienation from the peoples relationship with God is the same reason that can be used for divorce: alienation of affection. I sorry that your many hours of research and writing trying to prove fornication is homosexuality will all collapse around you, but that is the case.

            Sodom and Gomorrah were punished for two reasons:
            “going after strange flesh” that can include their quarterly partying practice of forcefully exchanging their wives and daughters with each other and possibly some homosexual inappropriateness as well. (There can be appropriate affection between same gender and inappropriate.)

            second is “fornication”; which is their alienation from their Creator by turning to worship the money and possessions of others more than the lives and well being of strangers who wander through their land.

            The whole region was not destroyed because a couple angels were assaulted by a couple half drunk idiots.

            You need to understand the background information on their practices before you make this giant leap defending your un-Biblical definition of fornication.

            You do not follow up by acknowledging the reasoning that I bring up; but rather you just go on to quote another reference that does not have the context I have raised. It is not the context of Jude 1:7 to define “fornication”. The context is to define the two reasons for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Your assumption that fornication is the same as homosexuality, and your conclusion; is not intellectually honest.

            If you are not willing to humble yourself and open your mind, I’m sure i understand why you would like me to “move on”.

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            I will try one more time with you.
            I will make this as clear as possible to you.
            Fornication is NOT limited to homosexuality but INCLUDES homosexuality. I will repeat what I just wrote: “Fornication is NOT limited to homosexuality but INCLUDES homosexuality.”
            Here is the Greek definition of fornication from Strong’s Concordance as found in Jude 7: ek-porn-yoo’-o; from G1537 and G4203; to be utterly unchaste:—give self over to fornication.
            Genesis 19 does not mention heterosexual fornication, it focused on a group of men given completely over to homosexuality. Thus, Jude 1:7 shows that homosexuality falls under the Bible definition
            of fornication.

            What you did was try to limit the definition of fornication to spiritual. That is, God views a person giving their emotional heart to idols as fornication. Fornication is not limited to this but includes the physical sexual act which
            God condemns as sinful.
            The following is a partial list of verses which show the fornication INCLUDES the physical act with the body and according to Jude 1:7 includes homosexuality. If you continue to promote your doctrine, you are a false
            teacher.

            1Cor 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.
            1Cor 6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
            1Cor 7:2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
            1Cor 10:8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.
            2Cor 12:21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.
            Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
            Eph 5:3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
            Col m3:5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
            Jud_1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

    • Tonia says:

      Martin, in the beginning God created a world that knew no sin. It was perfect. Nothing was broken or as God did not intend. Literally Heaven on earth. No death, no decay, no oxidation. Everything was perfect. In Mark 10:6 and Matthew 19:4-5 Jesus says, “Haven’t you read the Scriptures?” Jesus replied. “They record that from the beginning ‘God made them male and female.’And he said, ‘This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.
      so if this was pre-sin, why did God make man and a woman if this wasn’t His perfection? Numbers 23:19 states that God is not one to lie. So if you believe Jesus is God in the flesh, then you would know His words wouldn’t be a lie. And if you believe the Bible and it says God spoke (Word) creation into existence, and He isn’t a liar, then why would He speak man and woman into existence as husband and wife of this wasn’t His intention for marriage?
      (I deleted after this)

      Tonia your heart is right, but I did not agree with your approach to responding to the post. This is nothing personal against you and your belief in the Lord.

      • Martin says:

        Tonya: Because God implied the ideal relationship, that does not mean that He is in disapproval of those who choose something slightly different (homosexuals can be in love with God and the Lamb just as strongly as anyone else, and desire to build up the Kingdom of God, but they relate better with same sex for only god knows why. Maybe just to test your Christ-like love.), And here in this imperfect world, does God not have some measure of love and accommodation for those who do not match with the original ideal.
        He also said we are to not judge one another.
        He said we are to love one another.
        He said we are to judge righteously; that means we are to assume others are being faithful to the Holey Spirit until proven otherwise.
        So far no one has offered any proof that God does not give space for homosexuals to live and work out their salvation with fear and trembling just like anyone else.
        Monogamy abounds with injustices, we should fix our own house before we throw stones.

        • JohnMcTernan says:

          Look what you do.
          You promote the sin of homosexuality and then if it is pointed out that the Bible shows it sin, your response is don’t judge.
          You hide behind this to promote this special sin.
          Why is it that the sin of homosexuality is now special and a virtue when the Bible is so clear that it is sin?
          You will ALWAYS get a confrontation from me when you try and justify “homosexual marriage.”
          This is an oxymoron that never existed which is made up now, at the end of time, by people in total rebellion against God and his word.

          • Martin says:

            I do not promote homosexuality. Nor do I lie to the people saying the Bible says it is a sin.

            [You said is in brackets]

            [Fornication is NOT limited to homosexuality but INCLUDES homosexuality.]
            You have not clarified at all where the Bible defines your blind traditional views. You cannot find direct Bible support for your statement. Fornication does not include homosexuality until you show that the Bible clearly states that it is sin.

            You have assumed it is a sin and ran with that. You beg the question by leaping from your assumption about homosexuality to Biblical references that do not state anything of the kind. The Levites were a special exemplary class of priests forbidden to become distracted from natural heterosexual family living by any excessive inclinations toward alternate lifestyles for the purpose of showing an example of basic family structure. That mandate upon the Levites, was never extended to all tribes and all people [even though many generations have assumed it to be a blanket edict over all people].

            Fornication can include any form of spiritual or physical alienation of affection from God or from any blessed relationship. Homosexuality does not necessarily involve alienation of affection from the faithful or from our Lord, any more than any other harmless and consensual lifestyle.

            [Here is the Greek definition of fornication from Strong’s Concordance as found in Jude 7: ek-porn-yoo’-o; from G1537 and G4203; to be utterly unchaste:—give self over to fornication.]
            Strongs Concordance does not establish homosexuality as a sin at all. Stop pretending that it does. And even if it said as much, it is not the Bible. It is completely ambiguous about what it is saying in reference to Jude 1:7; but generally implying that fornication is a category of being unchaste. So what, that clarifies NOTHING. You are attempting to add to the Bible what the Bible has not stated and therefore guilty of leading astray innocent people who trust in your judgment.

            [Genesis 19 does not mention heterosexual fornication, it focused on a group of men given completely over to homosexuality. Thus, Jude 1:7 shows that homosexuality falls under the Bible definition
            of fornication. ] You are boldly lying when you say “Gen 19 is focused on a group of men given completely over to homosexuality.”

            Genesis 19 is not about God destroying a whole land of several communities simply because a few robbers and murderers wanted to assault a couple angels. How much nonsense do you expect truthful disciples to swallow?

            It is historically known that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah violated basic human rights of their women and children by forcing their wives and daughters to have a swap night with the men of the communities, four times a year and on top of that they mockingly and mercilessly abused all traveling strangers who came in their midst until they have robbed them of all they had including their lives. The swapping was mainly heterosexual and was the primary sexual deviation of those communities.

            There is no mention in the Bible that the men of Sodom wanted the visiting angels for homosexual involvement. Once you know their custom of robbery and murder of traveling strangers, your only reasonable assumption is they wanted to rob them of everything they possessed including their very lives. Lot offered to dissuade them by offering his daughters for harlotry. Why would he do that if he thought they were homosexual???? The angels blinded the mob and solved the problem.
            Genesis 19 does not address homosexuality AT ALL.

            [The following is a partial list of verses which show the fornication INCLUDES the physical act with the body.]
            1Cor 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.

            1 Cor 5:1 is not mentioning a sexual act but is teaching that a son is forbidden to take his mother [presumeably after the death of the father] as a wife. While this reference does forbid one from officially making his mother one of his wives and implies that is a form of fornication, there is nothing in this reference to indicate homosexuality is a sin or that sex is the reason the relationship would be fornication. The relationship itself is a form of alienation of affection with or without sex being involved.

            1Cor 6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
            If you read the preceding verse it is referring to “he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.” Therefor the context follows in verse 18 that when you alienate your affection from the Lord, or from your unity with the Lord, you sin against that relationship or against your oneness with the body of Christ, or commit fornication; while all other of your errors you commit while in harmony with the Lord, are separate or without from that united body, showing the difference between the greater seriousness of alienation from God in contrast to all other human weaknesses. Again this reference has NOTHING TO DO WITH ESTABLISHING HOMOSEXUALITY AS A SIN OR NECESSARILY AS A PART OF FORNICATION.

            [1Cor 7:2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.] This does not identify fornication with physical sin. It supports the teaching that fornication has to do with alienation of affection. It is saying, you can avoid alienation of affection [fornication] by being loyal to your own mate. It support the Biblical precedence that fornication is alienation of affection. And IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELATING HOMOSEXUALITY TO SIN.

            [1Cor 10:8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.]
            This has noting to do with homosexuality. It proves fornication is alienation of affection. It is referring to a group of the children of Israel who “bowed down to” the gods of Shittim. God told Moses to “slay every one his man that were joined unto Baalpeor”. God did not mention this punishment was due to any sexual deviations but due to alienation of affection from God to a gentile god. Just this one verse should convince you of the truth, but you are too invested in you own false tradition.

            [2Cor 12:21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.]
            This has NOTHING to do with making homosexuality a sin. It does not even state that fornication necessarily involves sexuality. When you understand the precedence of the Bible that fornication is alienation of affection, then you read this verse as referring to bodily sins in the words, “uncleanliness” and “lasciviousness”, and spiritual sins in the word, “fornication”. The Bible is not redundant. It references separate ideas in the use of separate words; ‘uncleanliness” is eating forbidden/unclean foods; “lasciviousness” is in all other physical indiscretions; and “fornication” is to do with turning your faithfulness away from God and toward any other god or object. Otherwise Paul is not referring to the most hated of all sins, Adultery which is destroying a blessed relationship and fornication which is turning form God to respect another god.

            Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
            When you read the preceding verses you see Paul is speaking about (vs.14) “love thy neighbor as thyself” and (16) “walk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.” And (18) “if ye are lead of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.” So in this context, that ALL sin, is sin of the flesh; and when you have the Spirit as your guide, you could be doing any number of things that others would condemn you over, that are not contrary to Love or the will of the Spirit; it goes on in (19) to list such sins that mortals are inclined to do: “Adultery, Fornication, Uncleanliness, and Lasciviousness.” This context does not prove that fornication is of necessity a sexual sin. The context is that all frailties of the natural man (his spirit and flesh) are inclined to be contrary to the principle of Love and the will of the Holy Spirit. Stop reading just one verse and follow the context and put that with the entire jest of the Bible where true fornication is referenced.

            [Both: Col 3:5 “Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:” and Eph 5:3 “But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;]
            These verse do not condemn homosexuality and where they use, “fornication”; it can and does refer to alienation of affection from God or from one’s blessed relationship. Just apply all other references where real examples of fornication are in the Bible text, and you must conclude these which just name the word, with no examples given, are of necessity referring to alienation of affection.

            You have gone to a lot of trouble, and the references you have chosen only support my holistic perspective, while your point of view conflicts with other references. It is pointless to draw an interpretation that fits with one reference or two, but conflicts with a holistic view of all related references in their particular contexts.

            And all of this has nothing to do with the Bible ever speaking against private homosexuality.

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            Because you willfully promote and defend the homosexual agenda you are a false teacher and will judged as such by the Holy God of Israel.
            It is not only those that preform such unclean sinful acts that are judged but those that agree with them, which is you.
            If you follow Romans 1 to the end, you will that it includes your darkened mind.
            Your only hope is repentance before God and asking the Holy Spirit to heal your mind which is against God’s holiness.
            Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
            Rom 1:25 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.
            Rom 1:26 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:
            Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
            Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
            Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
            Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
            Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
            Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.


            Unless you are willing to repent of supporting the sin of homosexuality, please don’t respond because the discussion is over.

  21. Nathan says:

    Paul in Romans helps us get a better / clearer picture of the big picture.
    all comes down to heart motive + direction of the holy spirit + being mindful not to become a stumbling block for weaker believers.
    1 cor 6:9-11 is a weak reply to people bringing legitimate arguments = we all know we ALL are sinners and SIN is not able to enter heaven yet Satan enters heaven and talks with God.. as illustrated in Job
    I see homosexuality as part of creation, most gay areas are heavily populated (both now and throughout history) this can lead to being better stewards of creation to combat over population.
    YES, God told us to be fruitful and multiply but also to be good stewards over creation and if over population is the single greatest threat to nature then in a round about way homosexuality can help assist in this bigger more important issue.
    Now devils advocate time: marriage is an institute of the family designed by God and ideally should be a man & woman. We live in an in-perfect world were sadly broken families are more often than not the norm.
    I struggle with saying homosexuality can be married as this goes against God’s clear instructions regarding the definition of marriage but am not God so will let His holy spirit convict the hearts of mankind and will pray and love as much as I can.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      What do you think of abortion for population control?
      Homosexuality is not part of God’s creation, it is a result of man rebelling against God and falling into sin.
      Jesus Christ died on the cross to free homosexuals of the sinful bondage they are in.

      • Nathan says:

        Abortion is wrong because it is murder. Homosexuality is perhaps a better form of a planned parenthood than traditional contraceptives.
        All comes down to common sense and good stewardship practices.
        Dont loose site of the big picture.
        Too often we get all caught up in ourselves as if we are important, ONLY God is good, all mankinds heart’s are evil by comparison, only when we look down on others do we trick ourselves into thinking we are good.

        • JohnMcTernan says:

          I have not sight of anything.
          Homosexuality is a sin just like adultery, bestiality etc.
          Those that practice this sin will not inherit the kingdom of God just as adulterers won’t.
          Homosexuality is not a special sin as many now make it out to be.
          1Corithians 6:9 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,
          1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
          1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

          • Nathan says:

            the wages of sin = death
            Sin costs were paid on calvary: past, present, and future
            Yes all bad things are sins but all are now paid for. Granted this gets into hypergrace mess but essentially Jesus paid the costs of sin so we all enter heaven not by our own deeds or lack of but ONLY through the righteousness of Jesus.
            It comes down to personal conviction by the Holy Spirit.
            No need to force your convictions on others unless you want to give the enemy extra ammo to use against others.
            I believe if a person has faith in Jesus and has correct heart motive I dont care what they do or believe so long as it doesnt hurt themselves or others.

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            You preach the current American culture and not the Bible.
            Do you actually believe that because the Lord shed his blood on the cross that all sin is covered if we don’t hurt ourselves or others!
            So, you doctrine is sin if you want as long as you don’t hurt others?
            So based on Titus 2:15 these verses pertain to you. This authentic Christianity and not what you teach.
            Titus 2:1114 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
            Titus 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

  22. Phillip Antone O'Mara says:

    Jude 5-19New Living Translation (NLT)

    5 So I want to remind you, though you already know these things, that Jesus[a] first rescued the nation of Israel from Egypt, but later he destroyed those who did not remain faithful. 6 And I remind you of the angels who did not stay within the limits of authority God gave them but left the place where they belonged. God has kept them securely chained in prisons of darkness, waiting for the great day of judgment. 7 And don’t forget Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring towns, which were filled with immorality and every kind of sexual perversion. Those cities were destroyed by fire and serve as a warning of the eternal fire of God’s judgment.

    8 In the same way, these people—who claim authority from their dreams—live immoral lives, defy authority, and scoff at supernatural beings.[b] 9 But even Michael, one of the mightiest of the angels,[c] did not dare accuse the devil of blasphemy, but simply said, “The Lord rebuke you!” (This took place when Michael was arguing with the devil about Moses’ body.) 10 But these people scoff at things they do not understand. Like unthinking animals, they do whatever their instincts tell them, and so they bring about their own destruction. 11 What sorrow awaits them! For they follow in the footsteps of Cain, who killed his brother. Like Balaam, they deceive people for money. And like Korah, they perish in their rebellion.

    12 When these people eat with you in your fellowship meals commemorating the Lord’s love, they are like dangerous reefs that can shipwreck you.[d] They are like shameless shepherds who care only for themselves. They are like clouds blowing over the land without giving any rain. They are like trees in autumn that are doubly dead, for they bear no fruit and have been pulled up by the roots. 13 They are like wild waves of the sea, churning up the foam of their shameful deeds. They are like wandering stars, doomed forever to blackest darkness.

    14 Enoch, who lived in the seventh generation after Adam, prophesied about these people. He said, “Listen! The Lord is coming with countless thousands of his holy ones 15 to execute judgment on the people of the world. He will convict every person of all the ungodly things they have done and for all the insults that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”[e]

    16 These people are grumblers and complainers, living only to satisfy their desires. They brag loudly about themselves, and they flatter others to get what they want.

    A Call to Remain Faithful
    17 But you, my dear friends, must remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ predicted. 18 They told you that in the last times there would be scoffers whose purpose in life is to satisfy their ungodly desires. 19 These people are the ones who are creating divisions among you. They follow their natural instincts because they do not have God’s Spirit in them.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      It is always best to quote from the King James Bible.

      • Douglas Zachary says:

        Probably better to quote from the NASB or ESV; or better yet, a Greek text with critical apparatus.

        • JohnMcTernan says:

          As I said, it is always best to quote from the King James Bible.
          The modern translation leave out a tremendous amount of words, sentences and paragraphs.

          • Douglas Zachary says:

            Dear John McTernan
            I am not sure how you would support the idea that modern translations leave out portions of Scripture. It would depend on what you consider the standard. Certainly, there is no translation (in any language) that could provide such a standard.
            I wouldn’t consider the KJV the standard, since it is a translation (too many translation errors). I would contend that the KJV has added some portions to the Scriptures. I wouldn’t say it has added “a tremendous amount of words, sentences and paragraphs”. The use of the word “tremendous” in either case would certainly be over exaggerating.
            To have a stand of NT Scripture, we must use the Greek Texts. A Greek text with critical apparatus is the best standard.
            I don’t hate the KJV; I love it (I became a Christian by reading it), but realistically understand it’s limitations.
            DZ

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            I hardly know how to begin with your response.
            You have no idea what is the Bible and can’t trust that God got us his word in English.
            You say go to the Greek Text but the modern texts are radically different from the Textus Receptus which the King James Bibles is based upon.
            You say the King James Bible added text. Please show me what was added, as I can show you what was deleted by the modern translation from the King James Bible.
            Until you settle this issue you are going to weak in the faith because you can’t trust the Bible to be the word of God, and you have no idea what translation to trust.
            The word of God for the English speaking people is the King James Bible.
            1John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

          • Douglas Zachary says:

            John
            I would disagree with some of the accusations you have presented.
            “no idea what is the Bible” ? I do have some understanding of Bibliology. I do trust that the English translation of the Scriptures is reliable, but not perfect. To say that the modern Greek Text is radically different from the Textus Receptus is a far reach, exaggeration. I wouldn’t consider my faith as weak, and to make such a statement without knowing me, could be considered irresponsible. I could never make such a statement about you, because I don’t know you that well. I do assume, by some of the things you have said, that you believe in the death, burial and resurrection of our Lord Jesus and have trusted in His provision of salvation. If so I can consider you as my brother in Christ.
            You quoted a verse (the Comma Johanneum; 1 John 5:7) that clearly was added to the third edition of Erasmus’ Greek Text (It was not in the first two editions). It was added as a result of pressure from the Roman Catholic Church that Erasmus’ text should conform to the Latin Vulgate. None of the the Greek manuscripts Erasmus used to compile His Greek text had that phrase in I John, though the phrase has been used as an early professional statement of the Trinity since the second (maybe the first) Century. It was so commonly used a s a profession of the Trinity, that it was added to the Vulgate, which was why the Roman Church demanded that Erasmus add it to his Text. A Greek text (Codex Montfortianus -61) was constructed that did have this phrase in 1 John 5:7, so Erasmus would have Greek textual support for it. Even today there are only a few, very late, manuscripts that have this phrase in 1 John 5:7. It is significant that the Majority Text Family agrees with the Alexandrian and Western Text Families of this issue. If you contend that the Majority text Family is reliable, then you should follow the vast majority voice of that text of the Scriptures.
            There are many modern Greek Texts. The Majority Text is not as different from the Textus Receptus as you may think because the TR comes from some of the poorer Greek Texts in the Majority Text line.
            I see you favor the Textus Receptus (Greek Text) and the KJV (English Translation). As you know, the KJV was translated from the TR (along with many comparisons of other texts). I would like to know which of those two would you give the priority to ? By this, I mean, if the two texts differed in some places, which would you consider to be reliable, and which would be considered wrong ? I would appreciate your response on this issue.
            In His Honor,
            DZ

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            Douglas,
            You are in incredible unbelief about the Bible and spew nonsense.
            This is very difficult for me to take.
            I see you as a spiritual debilitator attacking the authority of the Bible.
            You are determined to destroy the authority of the King James Bible to justify the ungodly modern translations whether you realize this or not.
            If you keep up what you are saying, you will have NO foundation with God because you have no idea what is the word of God.
            I wrote an article which covers 1John5:7 which you don’t believe is the word of God! http://www.defendproclaimthefaith.org/bible-teachings/the-witness-and-the-record.htm
            After reading it, if you have any questions I will address them.
            Please think through what you are doing as you are undermining your own faith.

          • Douglas Zachary says:

            John, why all the ad hominem remarks ? Let’s carry on a rational discussion without the name calling, and questioning one’s level of spirituality. These kind of statements carry no credibility. You may call me a “spiritual debilitator”, but your name calling does not determine what is true. Lets be Bereans and check things out to see if they are true.
            Apparently, you disagree with some things I have stated. Can you elaborate about what you disagree with, and explain why you disagree with it ?
            You didn’t answer my question. I do have some questions concerning your beliefs about Bibliology. I don’t mind affirming my beliefs in public.
            Questions
            1. What is your Scriptural standard by which all other versions, translations or Scripture is measured against ? (Is the King James Translation your ultimate and final standard ?)
            2. Would you use the KJV to determine if the Greek Text is correct ?
            3. There are places where the Textus Receeptus disagrees with the KJV. In those situations which one is correct the Textus Receptus or the KJV ?
            4. Do you believe the first two editions of Erasmus’ Greek text contained the Comma Johanneum ? (I assume you are aware that later revisions of Erasmus’ Greek text became the Text from which the KJV was translated.)
            5. Do you agree that Erasmus included the Comma Johanneum in his third edition of the Greek text.
            6. Do you believe that at the time Erasmus compiled his first edition of his Greek Text, there where any Greek manuscripts that contained the Comma Johanneum ?
            Very curious about your perceptions of the transmission of the Biblical Scriptures.
            DZ

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            The reason for my actions is I detect that you are a spiritual debilitator.
            The question for you is what Bible today is the word of God for the English speaking people?
            If you are going to attack the Bible, then tell us which Bible is for us and why.
            When you tell us what is the word of God for us and why, then we can talk.

          • Douglas Zachary says:

            Dear John,
            Before one resorts to labeling people and making accusations against them, don’t you think it is wise to try to understand them first ?
            You are truly missing the point in your accusation that I am “attacking the Bible”. I very much disagree with your misinformed, misunderstanding of that point. Your use of that accusation is a logical fallacy called, “poisoning the well”. I have experienced skeptical professors use this fallacy against Christians defending the faith in the college setting.
            I do appreciate your desire and zeal to defend what you believe is true. Many Christians are too timid to attempt to contend for Christian beliefs. You seem a little reluctant to answer any questions I have posed to you, however I am comfortable in answering your questions.
            What Bible (translation) today is the word of God for the English-speaking people ?
            I don’t believe there is a single translation, but instead there are many translations that serve that purpose. True, I have found some better than others, and there are some that I would not recommend. The translation that I use the most for in-depth study are the Greek/English interlinear Bibles. They provide a very literal, word for word translation, and are superior to any mere English translation for Biblical word studies. They do read a little rough and the syntax is unnatural to the English language. I do use the KJV, the NASB and the ESV. ESV seems to be better than the other two when it comes to a good word for word translation. There are others that I use at times for various reasons.

            Some good principles for guiding Christians in this issue.
            1. All Scriptural truth must be determined by the original tongues, the Hebrew (Aramaic) and Greek. The Scriptures in the original language is the standard by which all translations are subject to for correction. I often study the Scriptures in the original language. This is easy for an educated layman to do using tools like biblehub.com.
            2. Scripture can never be appreciated unless it is understood, and it cannot be understood until it is translated into the common tongue. It is very helpful to use a translation that is translated into contemporary language used by the people.
            3. Since the language of the people changes, as word meanings change, it is necessary to often correct and revise our translations so that it keeps up with our changing vocabulary. This is not to be misconstrued to say that the Scriptures and teachings change.
            4. I believe that a student of the Scripture should uses a variety of Translations for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures”. I use a variety of translations utilizing the strengths of each, in awareness of the weaknesses of each.
            5. Obviously some translations are better than other translations, however even some of the poor translations are still the Word of God. Since there are many English translations to choose from, it would be best to use the better ones. (Note: the New World Translation seeks to change the Word of God to fit obvious theological presuppositions, rather than translate it. Hard to consider it as a translation.)
            6. It is important to have a Greek Text or translation with marginal notes to inform the reader of any variants, so that they may research the issue further.

            Please give me your appraisal of these six principles. Do you agree with these principles ? Which do you agree with and which do you disagree with.
            In His Honor
            DZ

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            Douglas,
            I found in the past that when I confronted people with your thinking no fruit came from it.
            As I read your response, you simply do not know what is the Bible for today because you do not receive the Bible by faith.
            You are attacking the Bible and have no idea that you are doing it.
            Because you reject the Textus Receptus and the King James Bible, you are lost in an intellectual attempt to find what is the real Bible which
            you will NEVER find because you rejected the Bible.
            In your thinking unless you know Greek and Hebrew you can’t know what is the word of God. This is pure nonsense and unbelief.
            You asked me about the Johannine coma in 1 John 5:7.
            I have written about this and show how much it was used before Erasmus: http://www.defendproclaimthefaith.org/1_john_57_and_the_record_in_heaven.html
            I suggest that you come back to the faith and rest in the King James Bible and that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God.
            Most of the false modern translation removed only begotten
            John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

            I would rather interact with Muslims and Hindus than you over the Bible. I see what you do as draining the faith out of people as the Bible being the word of God. It is very dangerous road that you are
            going down.

          • Douglas Zachary says:

            Dear John,
            A few comments on your statements.
            “No Fruit” – perhaps there was no fruit because your mind was not open.
            “Receive the Bible by faith” – you seem to imply a blind faith. I do not believe in blind faith; I believe in Biblical faith that is founded on fact; the kind of faith the Apostles taught. A Mormon missionary once told me I should accept the Book of Mormon by faith. I explained that is not the kind of faith the Scriptures describe. You sound like you are encouraging the same blind acceptance that they were endorsing. For the Christian, faith is founded on fact.
            You misunderstand my approach to the Scriptures so you accuse me of attacking the Bible. I have defended the Bible in many settings, particularly in academic setting where the Bible is regularly attacked. I have never deserted the faith as you have made such accusation. I do not read in Scripture that salvation comes by trusting in Jesus Christ, and believing in the KJV, as you seem to imply. Are you adding to the requirements of Biblical Salvation ? Perhaps I should question your understanding of Biblical salvation.
            I understand that you accept the KJV as the inspired, inerrant, completely trustworthy, Word of God for the English speaking people. That sounds very appealing to me and I wish it was true. It would certainly make things easier. However the facts say otherwise.
            I didn’t say you had to know the original languages of the Bible, however it would be better if you did. There are many richer, deeper understandings revealed when you investigate the original words in their linguistic context.
            For example: The KJV uses the term “Holy Ghost” 90 times and “Holy Spirit” 7 times. In the
            Textus Receptus, the Greek word used is, “Pneuma”, for Spirit. Why is it translated “Ghost”
            most of the time, but translated “Spirit “7 times. This is kind of inconsistent. It is the same
            Greek word, in the TR. Also the word, “phantasma,” is the Greek word for “Ghost”. This word
            is never used in the Textus Receptus to refer to the Holy Spirit. Today, the word “ghost” has
            more sinister connotations of referring to the spirit of a deceased person. It would certainly not
            be appropriate to refer to the Holy Spirit as a ghost. In our culture today, it is better to consistently
            translate, “Pneuma Hagion” as “Holy Spirit” instead of “Holy Ghost” to prevent the occult
            implications of deceased beings coming back from the dead to intervene in human affairs. I
            would think that you agree that it would be inappropriate to describe the Holy Spirit with these
            implications.
            I assume by your statements, that you don’t often look to the Greek text for improved enlightenment for Scripture (it’s “nonsense”), so how would you know if it is “nonsense” if you don’t use this resource ? I have a difficult time accepting an argument from ignorance. It’s like a person who has never used a car saying, cars are all nonsense and impractical, it’s best to stick to a horse and buggy. An argument from ignorance is foolish. However, you did employ this “nonsense” in your article, 1 John 5:7 and the Record in Heaven, in Question 1 and Question 2. You also refer to the Greek text in this article, What Jesus Christ Said About Homosexuality, in this blog. If this is “nonsense”, then why are you doing it ? You use it when it benefits your beliefs, but criticize others when they do it. I find this inconsistent and intellectually dishonest.
            The realistic issue in this situation, is that you have a superficial understanding of how the Bible came to be. It is clear that you don’t understand the transmission and translation of the Bible very well. Yet, you are teaching others and spreading this misinformation. As a Christian educator, I weep because of the wide spread Theological and Biblical illiteracy in the Church.
            I asked you your opinion concerning, “which receives the priority”, the KJV or the Textus Receptus ? You didn’t answer. Perhaps you avoided this question because you are aware that they differ in some places. They do actually differ. There are places were the KJV mistranslates the Textus Receptus. If you do not diligently refer to the Greek text when studying Scripture, then you are probably not aware of this, as most KJV only supporters are unaware. Sadly, most do not want to know. Guess they think it would hurt their faith (or lose it) if they were aware of these problems. Apparently they must believe that if you deny the issue, it will go away. They have been taught to close their eyes to any factual evidence, much like the missionaries of the LDS Church (“No need for facts, we have faith, confirmed through this burning in our bosom”).
            This is not to say that I hate the KJV. I love it. It’s not Christmas until I read Luke 2 in the KJV. It stirs my feelings of the celebration of our Lord’s birth because of the tradition in our family. I know it is an emotional desire, based on tradition; to hear it from the translation I have always heard it read from at Christmas. It is truly a great translation. But so is the Geneva Bible, and others.
            It seems to me that most KJV Only supporters do not take 1 Thess. 5:21 very seriously because they are so dedicated to their traditions that they will not risk opening their mind to discover the truth.
            Those six basic principles of Bibliology that I sent you are strong, well accepted principles that guide us in our understanding of the Bible. It is difficult to understand how any knowledgeable, reasonable Christian could deny the usefulness of them. In a way that you probably don’t understand, even you, submit to those principles. I urge you to consider them carefully. They are very important. To deny them places one in a situation were the pseudo-christian cults thrive.
            In Service to My King Lord Jesus.
            DZ

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            Please keep your responses shorter as I have limited time.
            Of course my mind is not open to what you present! It is like asking me to have an open mind about the Koran.
            You still don’t see how you attack the Bible. It is amazing how blind you are.
            You have no idea what Bible is for today as you are lost in endless intellectual arguments, but you know the king James is not he word of God!
            Somehow you know 1John5:7 is not the word of God when you don’t know what is the word of God.
            I classify you with the unbelievers.
            Then you want a gotcha pitting the King James Bible vs the Textus Receptus, so you can prove the King James is wrong which frees you roam free
            with the corrupted modern translations.
            Once again, is 1John5:7 part of the word of God?
            In Luke 4:18 the King James Bibles states “he sent me to heal the brokenhearted” This is out of the modern corrupted translations. Is “he sent me to heal the brokenhearted” the word of God?
            Is Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of God as the word of God says, or is he the “one and only son” or whatever these corrupted modern translations state?
            The more you defend the corrupted translations the deeper of a hole you dig for yourself.
            I would rather interact with a Muslim any day than you who attempts to undermine the word of God. Once again, I am asking you repent of what you are doing as you are
            going down a road to destruction.

            Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

          • Douglas Zachary says:

            Dear John
            Sorry, I’ll keep it shorter. I anyone agrees with me or disagrees I welcome your comments.
            In you ad hominem accusations, you have stated , “I classify you with the unbelievers.” It is my perception that you are a Christian, however, we may have a primary disagreement about salvation. I am going to explain this in my own words, without quoting proof text verses (of course not denying the reality of the verses that confirm these words) to illustrate I understand what what the Bible teaches.
            I believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I Believe all of mankind has sinned and is in need of salvation, and that Jesus Christ’s death on the cross was necessary to pay for, not only my sins, but for any person who receives God’s gift of salvation. Each person has the personal responsibility to accept or reject God’s free gift of salvation. We accept God’s provision of salvation by a trusting faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ’s death on the cross as the propitiation for our sins, and the resurrection is proof of our new life in Christ and our possession of eternal life. The Holy Spirit regenerates us and indwells each Christian, teaching him to live as a new creation in Jesus Christ.
            I do not believe there is genuine salvation by anyone other than Jesus Christ. I do not believe salvation comes by works, or any effort of our own, to earn salvation. In Christ alone comes our provision of salvation.
            I do not believe, that belief in the KJV is necessary for salvation. Any one who adds any other requirements to the Biblical doctrine of salvation is teaching a different Gospel, contrary to the gospel the apostles delivered to the believers.
            Of course much more can be described about our wondrous salvation.
            Do you agree with these points and concepts ? I wonder if you believe it is necessary to believe in the KJV as a part of salvation. Jesus said, “I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:” Jesus didn’t say, “he that believeth in me, and the KJV”. You seem to want to reject my salvation because I don’t believe like you do, in the KJV. Are you adding requirements to salvation, hence adding to the Bible ?
            In my Savior’s honor,
            DZ

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            Douglas, let me be more specific in that when it comes to the Bible, I classify you as an unbeliever.
            It is wonderful that you claim Jesus Christ as Savior which I will not question, but when it comes to the authority of the Bible, you do not know
            what is the Bible. This is why I said what I did. You are dangerous as you can undermine the faith of weak believers.
            One thing about your testimony do you believe that Jesus Christ is the “only begotten Son of God” because this is needed for salvation.
            John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
            If you say yes, would you reject the translations which altered this?
            The problem is not with me but you.
            You attack the KJ Bible and the Textus Receptus and this is why the controversy between us.
            You attack the Bible which demands confrontation as an unbeliever because that is what they do.
            You have chosen to follow Westcott – Hort and the Nestle-Aland Greek Document which is corrupted.
            Now once again:
            Is 1 John 5:7 the word of God?
            Is “he sent me to heal the brokenhearted” found in Luke 4:18 the word of God?
            How about Acts 8:37, is this part of the word of God.
            Mark 9: 44,46 are they the word of God?
            The problem is with you rejecting the KJ Bible/Textus Receptus and then tampering with the word of God.

          • Douglas Zachary says:

            Dear John,
            Thank you for that clarification. Remember, for a Christian, the word “believer”, in it’s primary context, refers to salvation. Be aware that when you change the context without clarifying that you are changing it, causes confusion.
            In John 3:16, I believe that  Jesus is the “Huion ton monogene”. This is by far the most accurate rendering. “Mono” means alone, only, or unique, and “gene” means offspring. In English, I favor the translation “only begotten” as translated by the KJV and the NASV. These two translations (and a few others) appear do the best job of translating this word and it’s meaning, into English. Some of the other translations are not utterly wrong, but I think the those translations don’t bring out the fullness of the Greek word as “only begotten” does. Of course, “begotten” is an old term that is seldom used in contemporary English, so it needs to be explained to people to get the full meaning of the word. That, of course is the duty of the teaching pastors.

            In similar manner, the translation of “Holy Ghost” for the “Pneuma Hagion” by the KJV, was not utterly wrong in 1611, but can be better, and more consistently translated as “Holy Spirit”. This translation (Holy Spirit) better preserves the original understanding and meaning of “Pneuma Hagion” without the negative connotations of the word “Ghost” .

            Your comment, “gotcha pitting the King James Bible vs. the Textus Receptus,” is a misunderstanding. I believe that the source document The (Textus Receptus) generally receives the priority over the translation (The KJV), that came from this source. This is common sense. If the Private said the General said so-and-so, and you questioned the private, you would go directly to the General to see if he really said so-and-so.
            When the KJV varies form the Textus Receptus, we would normally question the translation, not the source from which the translation come from.
            For example, in Gal. 2:21 the KJV says:
            I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law,
            then Christ is dead in vain. (KJV)

            The Textus Receptus says:
            ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν
            Then Christ nor nought died

            The two texts differ. The KJV uses the present tense (is dead) to translated the word “ἀπέθανεν” (“died”). This is a mistranslation because in the TR, the word is in the aorist past tense. The KJV implies (only in this verse) that Jesus Christ is presently dead (this would be considered heresy), however we know that Jesus was resurrected from death and the KJV clearly teaches this in other passages. The KJV fails to accurately translate this phrase. It is wrong grammatically, and it is wrong theologically.
            By principle, I give precedence to the Textus Receptus because it is the source document. The translators of the KJV fully agree with this principle, as does any competent translator.
            John, the accusation of “gotcha pitting” is irrelevant, and appears to be a desperate attempt to question a universally held principle of interpretation. Surely you don’t deny this principle. You seem to be in denial of the fact that the KJV sometimes differs from the Textus Receptus. This information is open and available to anyone willing to give the effort to diligently study the Scriptures. You seem to approach this issue with a preconceived theological premise, that cannot accept this, regardless of the facts. Your tradition stands in the way of truth.
            Tradition or truth ? By principle, traditions submit to truth.
            John, which rendering of Gal. 2:12 do you accept as more trustworthy: that of the KJV or that of the Textus Receptus ? Which rendering has most accurately preserved God’s Word ?
            In honor of His truth
            DZ

          • JohnMcTernan says:

            Douglas,
            I was delighted to read that you agree that John 3:18 is correct in the King James Bible.
            He is the “only begotten Son of God” and not the “one and only”. In fact, the “one and only” is a serious error which automatically shows the translation is not from God.

            You seemed to gloss over a very serious question I asked you about the modern translations tampering with the word of God.
            I am repeating yet once again.

            Is 1 John 5:7 the word of God? I say yes, what do you say?
            Is “he sent me to heal the brokenhearted” found in Luke 4:18 the word of God? I say yes, what do you say?
            How about Acts 8:37, is this part of the word of God. I say yes, what do you say?
            Mark 9: 44,46 are these verse the word of God? I say yes, what do you say?
            I am going to add one more.
            Which of the following are the word of God regarding Revelation 13:1?
            I want to show you the utter confusion of the corrupted modern translations.
            KJ Bible: Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
            NASB: Rev 13:1 And the dragon stood on the sand of the [fn]seashore. Then I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns were ten diadems, and on his heads were blasphemous names.
            Was it John or the Dragon standing? I say it is John, who do you say it is?

            It is these confused false modern translation which have weakened so many people’s faith.
            You should try using the NIV to defend the faith against the Jews anti missionaries and Muslim apologists. They know all the errors in these false translations and use them.
            I’ve stood and the KJ Bible and did just fine.

  23. Phillip Antone O'Mara says:

    And this scripture pertains to people who don’t know what the Bible is really teaching. They defend worldly ideologies and cannot understand what the word of God actually tells us. And notice how homosexuality is grouped together with all of the other abominable sins. And sex outside of marriage along with pornography, pedophilia, bestiality, etc. is defined as sexual immorality, but homosexuality is another thing entirely because men are not meant to marry men and women are not meant to marry women.

    1 Timothy 1:8-11

    8 Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers,[a] liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound[b] doctrine, 11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.

  24. Katelyn says:

    It makes me sad to read your post, John. It really does. But now I’d like to share my thoughts and I sincerely hope that you will respond.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      Your response way too long and I don’t have time to address it.
      If you want me to respond, then do it one point at time.
      Gal 5:19-21 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like:
      of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

      • Katelyn says:

        So you deleted almost my entire comment? And then you respond by hiding behind that verse which I addressed in my previous comment, that you deleted?And, you’re a bible scholar correct?I must say, I’m not very impressed by your actions, John. That’s okay, though. Because you didn’t respond to ANY of my points, I will go ahead and assume that you are scared to be wrong about your view on homosexuality or maybe didn’t have the information to respond to some of the points that I had.

        Thank you very much for your time
        Katelyn

        • JohnMcTernan says:

          I gave you clear instructions on how to respond to my post.
          If you want me to respond follow my instructions.
          Since you refuse to accept the authority of Galatians 5:19-21 how about this verse:
          Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication,
          and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

  25. CHUCK S LEACH says:

    I am fascinated that you are so utterly obsessed with sex, and fail to address the fact that homosexuality, as redefined by you, is only one of a long list that would include the vast majority of your followers. Your logic and facts are problematic: you note that homosexuality “breeds diseases” and heterosexuality does not. Could you please substantiate that? What disease is “bred” by homosexuality that is not also “bred” by heterosexuality?
    And you completely overlook the many forms of marriage that are sprinkle throughout the Bible, yet you have chosen only one and have pronounced it, as is ex cathedra as the Biblical form. What do you do with all the others? What do you do with Levirate marriage? Or do you believe that part of the Bible negates the rest so that you pick the latest description as the best (and only acceptable) form, or perhaps you have some other form of picking which parts of the Bible are inspired and which are not?

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      I am not at all “obsessed with sex” it is our decadent society that is. I would report very little about sodomy except it is ion the news all the time.
      You say I redefined homosexuality, so what is your definition of this act?
      I should have added heterosexual acts within marriage don’t breed disease as fornication of any kind does breed disease like AIDs, anal cancer and host of other disease
      because the homosexual act is unclean for the body.
      Marriage in the New Testament is “one man and one woman” and this is way God ordained it from the beginning. We live in the New Testament now.
      In the Bible, homosexuality falls under fornication and condemned by God.
      No one who practices fornication will inherit the Kingdom of God.
      1Cor 6:9,10 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, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
      1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

  26. Joe Meehan says:

    I’m curious because you seem like a closeted gay man who lives in repression.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      1Corinthians 6:9,10 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, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.(11) And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

  27. MEP says:

    Wow. John, I admire your tenacity after reading so many posts.

    If it is not too much trouble, I do have another question about same sex relations. Note that I have no personal stake in this argument save that I simply wish that all well intentioned people could potentially be considered ‘good’ regardless of what sex they identify with.

    So to my quandary; In the distant future, I can see that man will undoubtedly develop the ability to change his form (in a biologically pure sense) in any way he wishes. He might do so to increase his lifespan (i.e inhabit a new body) or to adapt to his surroundings (e.g. for reproduction; if there were a low ratio of males to females or vice versa)

    In this future, if a man were at death’s door should he then choose to die if he were offered a female body to house his consciousness? This would extend the amount of time he might spend upon the Earth and promote his well being. Has he not taken care to preserve himself by choosing a female form? Should he be allowed to mate as he is now biologically a female?

    For that matter, are souls male or female? Do they retain a level of testosterone or estrogen?

    In the present day, what about hermaphrodites- are they forbidden to associate with either sex- as they, themselves, are representatives of both?

    You see, to me- at this moment, gender seems like an argument over which options a car will come with. At the end of the day, be practical, realize it’s a car – appreciate it for what it is.

    Maybe your point of view will change my mind. If it does, I will consider the writing of this short memo time well spent.

    Cheers,

    M.

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      I would not concern myself with this thought.
      God will destroy this evil system at the Second Coming of Jesus Christ and this
      will put an end to man perverting what God created.
      Revelation 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

    • Bob says:

      M E P
      Please read the New Testament where you will find answers to life’s big questions. God want’s a relationship with each one of us, but we must ask him for forgiveness and accept Jesus as our Lord and Saviour. ‘Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.’ John 8:32

      The answer to your question about the Soul is found in Matthew 22:30 ‘At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.’

  28. David says:

    An interesting article! Quick question, please.

    “The New Testament uses the word fornication to identify homosexuality … The Bible then defines fornication as any sexual activity outside of marriage”.

    Does this mean that the argument that Jesus Christ opposed homosexuality is dependent upon marriage being exclusively between male and female?

    Thank you and best wishes.

  29. Bob says:

    I believe that the NIV is a more accurate translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9 – Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men.

    The ‘men who have sex with men’ is translated from the original greek ἀρσενοκοῖται. This word’s meaning is disputed by homosexual apologists, but the meaning is clear. Ἀρσεν is recognised by scholars as meaning male and κοῖται is derived from κοίτη (marriage bed) meaning sex.

  30. Valentin says:

    I understand that Christians should have the right to condone homosexuality or not because of religious freedom, free taught and free speech but what does your holy book have to do with “constitutional rights”? Aren’t the United States a secular nation?

    • JohnMcTernan says:

      As American were does our Rights come from? The Declaration of Independence tells us that the come from God, our Creator:
      “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
      that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Constitution was created to insure our Rights that come from God, and
      homosexuality is not one of them.

  31. Amy says:

    King James Version what I read and believe.