THen what is the Word of God, im not getting it, what is your thoughts about Lev 18:22, Romans 1:26-27, like are you saying man misunderstood it, help me here
A committed homosexual relationship goes against the Love Command because it elevates desire above God’s will. To love God with all your heart, soul, and mind (Matthew 22:37) is to submit your affections to Him, not redefine them according to your own wants. Persisting in what Scripture calls sin is a failure to honor God, even if one claims to love Him.
It is not that God ceases to love the person—His love is steadfast—but the act itself rejects His design for human love, obedience, and covenantal fidelity. By placing personal desire above God’s law, one does not truly love God as He commands. Likewise, genuine love for neighbor requires living rightly; sin distorts the moral good intended for others, thereby also misaligning the expression of love toward them.
In essence: love without obedience to God is incomplete; it is like claiming to value truth while denying its authority. One can feel affection or care, but Christ’s command demands alignment of will, heart, and action with God’s revealed law.
1 Like
You keep avoiding, side stepping around the fact that a loving committed homosexual relationahip does not break the Love Commandment. Therefore it is perfectly acceptable as any union is acceptable before God until you can prove you or God have been treated wothout love by that couple.
You remain unharmed by them, so you personally have no case against them.
My entire answer, on why I warn them so that they may turn away from sin even though
Ezekiel 33:1–9 speaks directly to the role of a watchman appointed by God. God places a person in a position of responsibility to warn others of coming danger, of sin, of destruction. The watchman is not guilty if the people heed the warning, but if the watchman fails to warn, then the blood of the sinner is on the watchman’s hands.
- Divine Appointment: God calls Ezekiel and says, “Son of man, speak to the house of Israel…” This is not merely advice—it is a divine charge. The watchman is God’s instrument. Likewise, those who know the truth of God’s Word, especially about what is sin, have a responsibility to proclaim it.
- Warning and Accountability: Verses 5–6 make it clear: if the watchman sees the sword coming and warns the people, the sinner who turns away lives, because he heard the warning. But if the watchman remains silent, the sinner dies in their sin, and the watchman is held accountable. The responsibility is real. Knowledge of the truth carries a divine burden.
- Separation of Guilt: God distinguishes between the sinner and the watchman. One who heeds the warning is saved, one who ignores it is lost—but the failure of the watchman to warn is a grievous sin in itself. This shows God’s justice and also His order: each has a role.
- Spiritual Implications for Us Today: Applied to our current discussion, Ezekiel 33 reminds us that if we see sin—such as homosexuality, blasphemy, or any violation of God’s commands—we cannot remain silent. Even if the people think they are unharmed, the spiritual consequences are real, and failing to warn them is failing God’s command. The focus is not personal grievance, but faithfulness to God.
- Love in Action: This is not legalism—it is love. The watchman warns because he loves the people, not to condemn them personally. The warning is an act of mercy. God’s love is proactive: He does not wish for anyone to perish, and those who serve as His watchmen share that love in action.
- Call to Vigilance: Verse 9 concludes with the challenge: “But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil way, he shall die for his iniquity; but you have delivered your soul.” Our responsibility is obedience. Our duty is to speak truth in love. The outcome is in God’s hands, but silence is not acceptable.
Where are the warnings, havent I given enough:
I am that watchman protrcting the city. I fight for justice, balamce, and fair treatment before you and before God.
What I write is honest and true.
You have not proven sin based on the Law of Love. And you have not proven your case against them. No harm has been done to you or God.
1 Like
Yes say I agree with you, I can find no contradictions about the it.
Love Jesus Christ, Love neighbour, yes fine, accepted, no harm has been done to be, yes agreed
But that can only be possible if I ignore Lev 18:22, so if you could explain that
Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.
How do you reconcile a committed homosexual relationship with this clear command from God?
Simple question right, answer it plainly, then I’ll be over the moon
I did. Christ said everything that is actually of God comes down to the Love Command, which is 3 fold.
Christ said, regarding the Law, that when it was given to man it was directly effected by the state of their heart. Thus a dismissal of a wife in the Old Testament is no longer tolerable.
So because man valued power dynamics over Love, the Law reflects this.
Thanks for this anwer, I get what you are saying
But what I cannot understand is:
If committed homosexual relationships are deemed acceptable under the Love Command, how do we reconcile this with the explicit condemnation in Scripture? Christ’s teaching does not nullify God’s moral law but fulfills and clarifies it. Love cannot contradict holiness, and holiness is rooted in God’s revealed will.
Because
- Lev 18 begins with The Lord said to Moses
- Jesus says in Matt 5:17.“Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.”
So if you could help me, it would be good
Thr Law of Love forbids us to murder the children of our enemy, and yet God told the Israelites to kill the children of their enemies when they invaded their enemies.
The same reasoning that makes this acceptable for you also answers your question to me regarding homosexuals.
I see your point about consistency, yet there is a crucial distinction. The commands regarding the Israelites and the conquest of Canaan were specific, historical, covenantal judgments executed under God’s sovereign authority and were not universal moral laws for all people at all times. They were judgments upon nations already corrupt, as part of God’s divine justice and plan (see Deut. 9:4–5).
In contrast, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 describe universal moral prohibitions—acts inherently contrary to God’s created order and will, not contingent historical judgments. These are not situational commands like warfare directives; they reveal God’s design for human sexuality.
Therefore, the moral objection to homosexual acts is rooted in holiness and the created moral order, not arbitrary cultural context, whereas the Canaanite judgments were specific divine sanctions, not a generalizable license to sin.
Regarding your example about the Israelites and the children of their enemies: the nations they encountered were engaged in practices that were abhorrent to God, including homosexuality, child sacrifice, and other detestable sins (see Lev 18:24–25, Deut 12:31). These nations knew the natural law written on their hearts (Rom 2:14–15)—they knew murder and idolatry were wrong—yet they persisted in rebellion.
God’s judgments were not arbitrary; they were a response to persistent, unrepentant sin. Even if one had repented, God’s mercy would have prevailed (cf. Jonah and Nineveh). The point is that God’s commands regarding morality—including prohibitions on homosexual acts—are rooted in His justice and the moral order, not merely cultural preference or arbitrary law.
I have talked about this in:
Did it ever occur to you that Christ spoke to two people. Those who are bound by the Law that sentences them to death. And those bound by the Law of Love, who are greater than John the Baptist despite how great he was.
To some, Christ spoke to them as slaves to the Law. To others, he spoke to as men set free. For the Law is written in their heart. Th Scripture segues between these two perspectives.
One of us preaches to the slave. One of us teachs the free man. These two men we are speaking to will never meet.
OOOO
I forgot about that, yes, your point makes sense. My bad, I mistook you there. Sorry, it’s new to me, so it took some time for me to realize what you are saying.
And again, homosexuality does not break the Love Command in a committed relationship anymore than a committed straight relationship does where two people love each other, themselves, their neighbors, and their God.
1 Like
Homosexual conduct is also a form of sexual immorality, of which the Bible has a lot to say, @anon75384934. You tend to argue from the silence of Scripture, which is no way to interpret the Bible. But the clear, obvious, biblical teaching is that homosexual and immoral sexual lifestyles are wrong in God’s sight. Sex must remain within the marriage of a man with a woman. For example, Jesus says,
Mat_15:19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander.
Of course, Paul says a lot about it:
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;
Rom 1:27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Rom_13:13 Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy.
1Co_5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.
1Co_6:13 “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.
1Co_6:18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.
1Co_7:2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
1Co_10:8 We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day.
2Co_12:21 I fear that when I come again my God may humble me before you, and I may have to mourn over many of those who sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual immorality, and sensuality that they have practiced.
Gal_5:19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality,
Eph_5:3 But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints.
Col_3:5 Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.
1Th_4:3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality;
Jude refers to Sodom and Gomorrah:
Jud_1:7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
Besides, God with his own voice in the Old Testament categorically condemns sex outside of marriage:
Exo 20:14 “You shall not commit adultery.
@anon75384934, the Bible is always countercultural, because the culture develops because of human sin.
@anon75384934, I’ll answer your question.
Your assumption of “love” is (seems) based on some level of “commitment”, mutual pleasure, or on some other metric or feeling that goes by that name. Our society uses the word “love” as a synonym for attraction, commitment, sentiment, sex, etc., but rarely does it use the word the way God uses it when he speaks of Godly love.
God conforms us to His own image of Love when we think and act in the best interest of another, even, and especially when those thoughts and actions are not according to our own desires or pleasures.
I once knew a man, a professor, who in a private conversation told me he was having an affair with one of his students. He said he was willing to leave his wife and three children because “he loved her” so. He defended the high bar of “love” that he felt for this person who was not his wife, and was not willing to deny this powerful love. He was willing to be completely committed to her for the rest of his life. As I prayed for The Lord’s help, I asked him: “Do you think you are the best thing for this other person?”. He said, “Absolutely not. I’m much older, I already have a family, I’m messing up her life too. But we love each other, and that love cannot be denied”. I said, Love does what is in the best interest of the other person. If you love her, and you are not the best for her, then love would compel you to leave her.” He had to agree. He finally admitted he “wanted” her, he “needed” her because she satisfied his needs. She was “good” for him, in the arena of pleasure, and that was substituting for what he was calling “love”. He was “taking” from her, and he suspected she was in the relationship to “take” from him too.
If you ask people in a same-sex intimate relationships if they believe they are the best thing for the other person, and are they in the relationship to provide the best for the other person, an honest person would most likely, like the professor, admit they are in the relationship to “get” something from it. I am VERY familiar with this dynamic; personally familiar, I am not living under any rock. As I listen to people in this situation, their own expressions of what a “good” relationship looks like, ALWAYS focuses on what they get out of it. This is not love (as GOD defines it).
This kind of relationship directly “breaks the Law of Love” that you speak of, because it is rooted in selfishness, not in sacrifice. This is contrary to the Love of God, and if one worships the one True God, they will renounce their selfishness, and give their lives to following God, a faithful husband who is monogamous, and sacrificial to his bride.
Love is not whatever you want it to be. If you are going to speak of God’s Love, you must define it as He defines it.
Love,
KP
2 Likes
No it isn’t. It has defined culture for 2000 years in the West, defining everything acceptable and taboo. Everything that has stood in stark contrast to the Church has been counter culture. And look where the world is, no closer to Christ and set on revenge. Where does the failure lie?
“Your assumption of “love” is (seems) based on some level of “commitment”, mutual pleasure, or on some other metric or feeling…..”
Its based on the Holy Spirit..
“This kind of relationship directly “breaks the Law of Love” that you speak of”
No it doesn’t. If it follows the Love Command.
“Love is not whatever you want it to be. If you are going to speak of God’s Love, you must define it as He defines it.”
I do define it as He does. Love is patient, it does not boast or envy. It always protects, always saves, always trusts, always hopes, and always perseveres. Love heals. Love is the Way. The only Way, embodied in Christ. Just as God is embodied in Christ.
And again, Homosexuality in a loving committed relationship is just as acceptable as a straight union because it does not go against the Command to Love, by which we are all told to abide. And you have no case against them of harm against you personally because they are gay alone or united in union.
You are offended on sight alone, which is no crime.
More to the point, this is God’s way of limiting man’s fruitfullness. Becauae man does not take the innitiative. The world cannot hold you all at the pace you are taking in fruitfulness. And reason can’t seem to guide you. So God effects your attraction and your potency and your drive.
There will be far more homosexuals and infertility in the future until your numbers decline and temps drop.
It should also be noted, God’s Holiness is deeply rooted and intertwined with His Love.
Love is what unites the world and makes it One Creation, Whole and Pure as a newborn. Love alone can bind where all laws fail.
Where as sin, the antihesis of God’s Holiness, breaks apart, corrupts, and introduces death into the world.
I speak from a Spirit of Protection for all people. From what Spirit do you speak when you rally against homosexuals?
And again, a committed homosexual relationship fulfills the Law of Love just as any committed straight relationship does. And a Christian homosexual, single or couple, is just as saved as a Christian heterosexual single or couple, if Christ was accepted as Lord, if the Holy Spirit dwells in them and is actively tranaforming them into a new creation as God works in us all. And they are equally obedient to Christ if they follow the Love Command. There is no law against love, and all things in all creation are suvject to it, for only Love is eternal. And God is Love, as are His children.
That is not a biblical statement at all, because nowhere in Scripture does it define love in terms of human emotions or mutual commitment, but in obedience to God’s commandments. Jesus said, “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). God’s Word is very clear that homosexual practice is a sin: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” (Leviticus 18:22) and the New Testament echoes that sentiment: “For even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature… men with men working that which is unseemly” (Romans 1:26–27). True love does not “rejoice in iniquity, but in the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:6). No matter how “committed” the homosexual relationship, it is still a violation of God’s law because it is against His design of male and female created in His image (Genesis 1:27, Matthew 19:4–6). You cannot say that you love God, while in willful disobedience of His commandments, for “He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:4). True love will never take a position that redefines sin. It must be in accordance with God’s holiness.