Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
2,414
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 4:
Line 4: − Historically, all the way through medieval times, there was no discussion of homosexuality per se, only condemnation of those sexual acts, whether heterosexual or homosexual, that were not natural to procreation. The practices were condemned based upon being [[Natural Law|unnatural]].<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A7715315</ref>+ + + + +
Arguments Against Homosexuality (view source)
Revision as of 03:21, October 3, 2011
, 03:21, October 3, 2011correct liberal attempts to impugn Scriptural morality
<blockquote>"A man shall not lie with man as with a woman."</blockquote>
<blockquote>"A man shall not lie with man as with a woman."</blockquote>
Some liberals argue that only condemnation of those sexual acts was historically based on them being unnatural to procreation, and thus a definition of [[Natural Law|unnatural]], inferring such condemnation is invalid due to ignorance of sexuality.<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A7715315</ref>
However, as seen in dealing with [[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]], the union of man and women in marriage is based upon them being created as uniquely compatible and and complementary, and the sanction of sexual union (via marriage) as only between opposite genders extends beyond procreation, with romantic sexual attraction between married couples being honored outside the context of children in such books as the [[Song of Solomon]], and with marital sexual relations being enjoined in 1 Cor. 7:5 on the basis of desire.
Motive can be a moral factor in who to marry among lawful partners, and within marriage, but is never a determinative factor in the Scriptural prohibitions of illicit partners, from fornication between heterosexuals to adultery to homosexual unions to bestiality, while grace is offered for salvation to all who will come to faith in Christ with a repentant heart.
==References==
==References==