Speaking to homosexuals

Hi! If im not wrong theres a verse or some verses in the bible saying that one should not speak to homosexuals cause it may harden ones heart, is this true or has my mind made up scriptures again that isnt there?

No, I don't believe there's a scripture like what you're talking about. We have to associate with all kinds of people in our everyday walk. The thing we're not supposed to do is enter into fellowship with anyone who is an unrepentant sinner or who teaches false doctrine. By "fellowship" I mean giving them the right hand of fellowship as a fellow believer. By doing this we give them the idea that everything's cool when it's not cool. And we get dragged down in the process.

nowhere in the word of God does it say not to speak to sinners it says Christians should not be named among them.

which means there are no such things as homosexual Christian or any other sin identity with salvation. we are saved from sin not in it. The gospel is to be shared with all it is the power of God to save all even those in sexual sin.

There is no such reference, however to teach such is, as inferred above, picking a worst sin to deny entrance into the grace of God. Inother words finger pointing and being superior.

We must love all people. If an individual is unrepentant of sing, pray that person repents. Until then we are to extend the same mercy we have received. Jesus Yeshua ignores no sinner, nor do His followers run away from such people when they are seeking Him. God bless you always... Remember always if you or I wish to be seen as pure and expect mercy, we must be just as our Savior and extend mercy to all who truly seek mercy, otherwise we are not worthy to receive mercy.

Micah 6:8

I don't know of a verse like that. 2 Thessalonians 3:6 does say:
"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us."

No, the Bible doesn’t say one shouldn’t speak to homosexuals.

The Bible does say in Luke 6:31:
“And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭6:31‬ ‭ESV‬‬

https://www.bible.com/bible/59/luk.6.31.esv

And the Scripture tells us to love one another. ( see John 13:34)

The expulsion of a brother
1 Corinthians 5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: (see 1 cor 6) 10Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. 12For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

1 Corinthians 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, (translated as homosexual men)

Avoid homosexual associations for the sake of modern acculturation. (v11)
Avoid breaking bread, or any other activity that may include communion with God. (v11)
To do the great commission or charity, you would have to talk with homosexuals.
When a homosexual becomes a Christian, then he is a brother with a sinful proclivity as we all have, thus the above no longer applies.

Notice the distinction made in 1 Cor. 6:9 -

"Or 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 men," (1Cor 6:9, ASV)

The Greek ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoites, translated as "abusers of themselves with men" in the RV, ASV and KJV, you will notice, is distinguished from "fornicators" or "adulterers". I know of no verse in Scripture that uses the term "fornication" or "fornicator" in condemnation of sexual sins between men.

The 1828 Webster's Dictionary defines this way: "ABU'SER, n. s as z. One who abuses, in speech or behavior; one that deceives; a ravisher; a sodomite. 1 Cor 6."

In English, "sodomite" and "homosexual" are not synonymous. From the Roget's International Thesaurus, 7th Edition 2010 -

Page 60 Sect. 75.14 "homosexual" gay person, homosexualist, homophile, invert;"

Page 60 Sect. 75.16 "sexual pervert; pervert, perve <nf>, deviant, deviate, sex pervert, sex fiend, sex criminal, sexual psychopath; sodomist, sodomite, sob <Brit nf> , bugger, pederast"

There are indeed differences between the words "sodomite" and "homosexual" as seen in the Roget's; and it is interesting how closely the 2010 Roget matches up with the 1828 Websters. It may be that the YLT and NRSV may be closer to the truth by translating ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoites as "sodomites" as it is seen in the Roget's.

But to the OP question, it seems the following verses may be applicable:

"Be not deceived: Evil companionships corrupt good morals." (1Cor 15:33, ASV)

"Abstain from all appearance of evil." (1Thess 5:22, KJV)

"The show of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have done evil unto themselves." (Isa 3:9, ASV)

I think there is a disconnect here and the first premise is the start of the confusion.

arsenokoites is not abuser but as per Strong's 733 Usage: a male engaging in same-gender sexual activity; a sodomite, pederast. How ASV should translate otherwise is not understandable. The consensus translation is as per Strong's 733

Homosexuality as fornication NT verse contrasts sex in marriage with adultery
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage(1a) is honourable in all, and the bed(1b) undefiled: but whoremongers(2) and adulterers(3)God will judge.
κοίτη (1-Strong's 2845) πόρνους (2-4205) μοιχοὺς (3-3432)

OT verse condemns homosexual sex (in the context of marriage)
Leviticus 18:22 (Septuagint Strong's / english - see image)
2532 3326 730 3756 2837 2845 1134 946 1063 1510
And with a man you shall not go to bed in a marriage-bed in the feminine way; an abomination for it is.


Sin of homosexual acts relate G2845 (Septuagint) to G2845 (Heb 13:4) as fornication.

Homosexual vs sodomite - everything points to acting out and thinking in.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sodomite
: one who practices sodomy
First Known Use of sodomite 14th century, in the meaning defined above
History and Etymology for sodomite Middle English sodomyte, sodomit "one who practices a culturally stigmatized form of sexual intercourse," borrowed from Anglo-French & Late Latin;
Anglo-French sodomite, borrowed from Late Latin Sodomita "inhabitant of Sodom, one who practices a culturally stigmatized form of sexual intercourse," borrowed from Greek Sodomítēs "inhabitant of Sodom," from Sódoma sodom + -itēs -ite entry

Whether a homosexual or a pervert, sodomy is sodomy. I think the nuance is small. I always extrapolate Matthew 5:28. Think of something unwholesome and you are doing something unwholesome.

Nice verses.

All have sinned and come short of the glory of God

Why we pick the homosexual to be different than others boggles my mind.
Sin is pleasurable for a time, but it's a snare that brings destruction and death.
Not all have been turned over to a reprobate mind. That fig leaf they have chosen to cover there sin gets uncomfortable as time goes by.

The hardening one heart I recall was about the Pharoah not letting the Hebrews go.
The only other scripture I recall about hardening hearts was when ppl asked Jesus about divorce and he said it was there because peoples hearts were hard.

Nothing to directly to do with homosexuality, though, people MIGHT divorce because of it.

the only thing that hardens the heart today now that salvation is provided for ALL is :

1. rejecting the conviction and plea of the Holy Spirit not to repent and call on the Lord Jesus to be saved
2. disobedience of God's word and calling.

I believe it is you who has introduced confusion here. You claim to quote the Strong's definition of "arsenokoites" but that is not Strong's you have quoted. There are modern Greek dictionaries using the name of Strong's dictionary, but once they tamper with it, it is no longer the 1890 classic Strong's. Here is the true definition as found in Strong's, from my Bible software -
G733
ἀρσενοκοίτης, arsenokoitēs, ar-sen-ok-oy'-taceFrom G730 and G2845; a sodomite: - abuser of (that defile) self with mankind.
Total KJV occurrences: 2

For readers who do not have the Strong's, you can read this online in the Strong's -
http://www.biblerick.com/41G-0700.htm#g0733

By the way, the BDAG 2000 c. does not use the label "homosexual" in its definition of arsenokoites which is: "a male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, pederast". In the discussion is this line: "(on the impropriety of RSV’s ‘homosexuals’ [altered to ‘sodomites’ NRSV] s. WPetersen"

You appear to try connecting Lev. 18:22 to 1 Cor. 6:9 but you have a problem there, unless you are an Israelite under the Old Covenant at Sinai -

"These are the statutes and ordinances and laws, which Jehovah made between him and the children of Israel in mount Sinai by Moses." (Lev 26:46, ASV)
and again in the last verse of the book of Leviticus
"These are the commandments, which Jehovah commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai." (Lev 27:34, ASV)

Leviticus 18:22 is nowhere quoted for us in the NT yet we have Lev. 19:18b quoted for us several times in the NT for New Covenant believers; "thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself". It is for us because it is quoted in the NT for us, not because it is in Leviticus. Scholars know that Lev. 18:22 is speaking of male temple prostitutes because of the religious Hebrew word chuqqah in v4 and the religious word "abomination" in v22 is the Hebrew to`ebah. I'll quote from a scholar:

In the Tyndale Old Testament Commentary series, Leviticus, by Professor R. K. Harrison, the commentary on v22 reads:

"The regulations of Leviticus condemn certain aberrations found among the Egyptians and Canaanites, who went far towards deifying sexual activity, and assigned the title 'holy ones' to cultic prostitutes. Sacro-homosexual practices and female prostitution within the context of the cultus was probably well established throughout the ancient Near East long before the Israelites occupied Canaan. Homosexuality of a non-religious variety is poorly documented in Mesopotamian texts..." page 191

You seem to ignore definitions and synonyms and insist any male on male sex is the sin of homosexuality. By that reasoning, adultery and fornication are the sin of heterosexuality. To rephrase a comment by Daniel Patrick Moynihan:

"You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own definitions."

I'll quote from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy -

"The Church itself started to appeal to a conception of “nature” as the standard of morality, and drew it in such a way so as to forbid homosexual sex (as well as extramarital sex, nonprocreative sex within marriage, and often masturbation). For example, the first ecumenical council to condemn homosexual sex, Lateran III of 1179, stated “Whoever shall be found to have committed that incontinence which is against nature” shall be punished, the severity of which depended upon whether the transgressor was a cleric or layperson (quoted in Boswell, 1980, 277). This appeal to natural law (discussed below) became very influential in the Western tradition. An important point to note, however, is that the key category here is the ‘sodomite,’ which differs from the contemporary idea of ‘homosexual’. A sodomite was understood as act-defined, rather than as a type of person. Someone who had desires to engage in sodomy, yet did not act upon them, was not a sodomite. Also, persons who engaged in heterosexual sodomy were also sodomites."

No... Consider biblehub Strong's Concordance
arsenokoites: a male engaging in same-gender sexual activity
Original Word: ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: arsenokoites
Phonetic Spelling: (ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace)
Definition: a sodomite
Usage: a male engaging in same-gender sexual activity; a sodomite, pederast.

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance By James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D. 1890
733 arsenokoites {ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace} from 730 and 2845; a sodomite:--abuser of (that defile) self with mankind. See Greek-- 730 See Greek-- 2845
730 arrhen {ar'-hrane} or arsen ar'-san probably from 142; male (as stronger for
lifting):--male, man. See Greek-- 142
2845 koite {koy'-tay} from 2749; a couch; by extension, cohabitation; by implication, the male sperm:--bed, chambering, X conceive. See Greek-- 2749

There is sex in the greek word. You omit the (that defile). The consensus translation of homosexual is well within Strong's definition. Your abuse is missing a few phrases.

Using the Septuagint as a rosetta stone does not require one to be an ancient israelite (that is ridiculous!). Question is what greek word was used by the jews used in conjunction with homosexuality? It is the marriage bed G2485. Note also your word G733 arsenokoites is comprised of 2 other words. One is G2485. G2485 implies sex.
I think you are babbling.
Rom 1:27Likewise also the [j]men, leaving the natural use of the [k]woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
The act of homosexuality is a sin. Homosexuality is also fornication and adultery by definition. Adultery and fornication are a sin against the "marriage bed". It is a trifecta of sin.
"Sin of heterosexuality" I think we have an agenda here.

The catholic church is not the bastion of sexual purity. I would not take the advice of hypocrites. You want me to remind you of a few incidents of sexual indiscretion from the clergy?
If God says sex in a marriage is good, I do not need a not-so-celibate clergy to tell me otherwise.
What is your point? It is ok to bugger? What is your agenda? You seem to be arguing against something plainly written.

there are no homosexual chritians. homosexual is not a race of people it is an action that God sees as sin. We do not talk to homosexuals we speak to those who are bound by sin and tell them of the Salvation and liberty in Christ.
FROM ALL SIN.
the context of 1 Corinthians 5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:


Paul is saying do not hang out with them separate yourself to God.

The number one reason why newly saved people fall back into sin they were saved out of, is the unwillingness to separate from those who did the very sin a person was saved from.

9-10 will fall back into drunkness, fornication, homosexuality IF they stay in the current circle of influence as they did before they were saved. YOU cannot save them. You must build your relationship and be disciples in the word of God.

Many young people want what the world has and are unwilling to give it up. Why? because the flesh is needing to be brought under submission to the word of God. They have not yet learned this principle of the sanctification process which is:

• submit to God
• resist devil
• he will flee from you.
• pray and pray again
• study the word of God
• separate from those who are not saved

I first went online in 1995 and found Christian newsgroups. One of the first 'hot button' issues I saw was about the NASB77 using the word "miscarriage" in Ex. 21:22 and the right-wing opposed that. I used the KJV at the time but had the NASB77 and the NKJV on my shelf and indeed the NASB77 translated "miscarriage" and it is how I already understood it in the KJV. A miscarriage is also how the old Wycliffe and the Douay translated. But, quite a stir was raised over it by the religious right, so the NASB95 changed it to "gives birth prematurely". Historically the verse was understood to mean "miscarriage" and it is how the RSV, NRSV, NEB & REB translate, as did the NASB77 before it was seen as damaging to the "human being exists at conception" idea.

The 1946 RSV translated malakos and arsenokoites together as "homosexuals", the first ever use of the word "homosexuals" in the Bible; but then it was understood to be misleading and the 1971 Rev. RSV changed to "sexual perverts", and then the NRSV separated the two words as "male prostitutes" and "sodomites". The NEB read the two words together as "homosexual perversion" and the REB revision rendered it "sexual pervert". Scholarship shows why the change in translations in the revisions after the misleading 1946 RSV.

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, Copyright 2000
"The terms 'homosexuality' and 'homosexual' are coinages of the 19th century C.E. and have no equivalent in ancient Hebrew or Greek. It is debatable whether the modern idea of homosexuality (an erotic attraction focused only or primarily on persons of the same gender) existed at all in antiquity. The Bible does not appear to say anything directly about homosexuality in this modern sense of the term, but a few passages do refer to same-gender genital acts." page 602

New Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, IVP Copyright 1996
"The Bible says nothing specifically about the homosexual condition (despite the rather misleading RSV [1st Ed]translation of 1 Cor. 6:9), but its condemnations of homosexual conduct are explicit. The scope of these strictures must, however, be carefully determined. Too often they have been used as tools of a homophobic polemic which has claimed too much." page 478

Starting with the NASB and NKJV the 'evangelical' translations started using some form of "homosexual" and continues to this day in spite of scholarship to the contrary. I was able to compare the NASB and NKJV rendering of "homosexual" and found out how contrived this is. The NASB translated arsenokoites as "homosexual" but the NKJV translated malakos as "homosexual". They did not even agree on what word is homosexual. That is translation to support an already held conclusion!

So, when you speak of "The consensus translation of homosexual" you are referring to the same translations that change from "miscarriage" to some form of "gives birth prematurely"; both instances translated to support the right-wing political issues. All translations have their translation approach and also biases as well, but I find this blatantly political.

The modern translations using "homosexual" translate malakos as a "catamite", a young male prostitute, therefore they render this as a passive homosexual. I find 3 major problems with that idea, the first of which is, malakos is used only 4 times in the NT and the other 3 times it refers to softness, soft clothing. The 2nd problem is, the Liddell-Scott-Jones Classical Greek has the definition of malakos and it is a very long list, BUT a catamite is not in the list. See it online:

https://lsj.gr/wiki/μαλακός

The 3rd problem is, the Greek had the exact, literal word for a catamite and it is not malakos and you can see it online:

https://lsj.gr/wiki/κίναιδος

The translation "effeminate" has stood for centuries and it does not mean sexual relations, check the English dictionaries. The NJB translates malakos as the "self indulgent"; and the NIV Greek-English Interlinear literal translation renders it "voluptuous ones". Comparing Scripture with Scripture, I must see it as effeminate, self-indulgent or voluptuous.

When you study out the use of koites and arsen as the words are used separately in Paul's writings, you learn that combined the word Paul coined fits "sodomites" but not "homosexuals". You keep insisting that "homosexual" is "fornication", but you have to ignore the Scriptures when you say that:

"Or 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 men(arsenokoites)," (1Cor 6:9, ERV)

"for fornicators, for abusers of themselves with men(arsenokoites), for menstealers, for liars, for false swearers, and if there be any other thing contrary to the sound doctrine;" (1Tim 1:10, ERV)

Both times the word is used in the NT, it is distinguished from fornication, listed separately!

You struck out at the sexual offenses in the RCC, but have you forgotten about Ted Haggard, George A Reker, Eddie Long and 'old trembling lips' Swaggart! Check those out in google search.

The KJV took the right path by translating arsenokoites by phrases instead of a single word. The key word they chose in 1 Cor. 6:9 is "abuser" and the key word in 1 Tim. 1:10 is "defile". Check those out in the 1828 Webster's and then use a concordance and see how the KJV translators used "abuse" and "defile" in the OT. You come up pretty close to the word "sodomite".

This topic is so distorted by using labels, which often are pejorative labels; sinking even lower to name calling. How refreshing it would be to ban the words "homosexual", "homosexuality", "sodomite" and "sodomy" and then be forced to actually study what the sin(s) are being condemned in the pertinent passages. Remember the RCC invented the words "sodomy" and "sodomite" around the 13th century, so what did the saints believe those passages meant before the labels?

This is somewhat hypocritical. Get the beam out before you clear someone's mote. Right wingers twist the meaning "miscarriage", what are you doing with "homosexuality"? I don't see principle here, I see self justification.

Jon-E said:

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, Copyright 2000

Click to expand...

Eerdmans Dictionary on homosexuality. You know when someone has an agenda when he the cherry picks
Definition of homosexuality as per Merriam-Webster
1 now sometimes offensive, see usage paragraph below : sexual or romantic attraction to others of one's same sex : the quality or state of being gay
2 now sometimes offensive, see usage paragraph below : sexual activity with another of the same sex

New Bible Dictionary,...tools of a homophobic polemic... When has a Christian ever used a term homophobic except in defense. I believe the author was more concerned with cultural mores.

It is not convincing when your quotes contradict what you say. One moment Strong's is number one then it is not pertinent Post #14
Strong's 3120 malakos {mal-ak-os'} of uncertain affinity; soft, i.e. fine (clothing); figuratively, a catamite:--effeminate, soft.

When homosexual fashion industry use boyish looking models, it is an indication of .... catamite preference perhaps
The CIA in afghanistan was told ignore their allies fetish for dancing boys... you know like catamites https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/...ld-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html
Homosexuality was not a faux pas in Roman days. Only faux pas was being on the bottom, so they got little weak soft boys like you know catamites. "The conquest mentality and "cult of virility" shaped same-sex relations. Roman men were free to enjoy sex with other males without a perceived loss of masculinity or social status, as long as they took the dominant or penetrative role. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome

πόρνοι pornoi - sexually immoral
Essential Meaning of adultery : sex between a married person and someone who is not that person's wife or husband
idolator εἰδωλολάτρης - Revelation 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication πορνεῦσαι, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols εἰδωλόθυτα.
μαλακοὶ malakoi - Strong's 3120 catamite (sex object to the well to do)
ἀρσενοκοῖται arsenokoitai - abusers of mankind (your translation) - arrhen (man) Koiti (bed, sperm) sex anyone?

All contain sexual activity in their definitions. Does the definition of homosexuality fit in the above classifications? Yes.
Homosexuals are sodomites - your quote "Also, persons who engaged in heterosexual sodomy were also sodomites. " (as with homosexual sodomy). A subclassification does not negate a overarching classification. The marriage is a good thing Proverbs 18:22 . Woman was made for man 1 Corinthians 11:9. There are no references to homosexual bonding, nor Steve for Adam. Not because they can do whatever they like, but because anything outside of this is bad.

I don't take marriage sex advice from them either. You brought out the rcc to convince me that there is no sex in homosexuality. That the sin of homosexuality is like the sin of heterosexuality.

Mark 10:7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

No where was marriage between Adam and steve ever blessed.

Is this virtue signaling? Censorship as the one you are extolling, "over name calling", belongs to the mind of post-modern marxist not in normal society. Labels, if they fit, should be used. Orwellian doublespeak should be avoided. Tainting a source of knowledge (the bible) with your ideology is an abomination.

Sodomites wanted to to get to know Lot's guests (Judges 19:22). The guests were angels in male form. Knowing them as Eve knew Adam Gen 4:1. So the part of the rape gang who were actual homosexuals were different from the part who just did it for cultural purposes? Nuancing the act of rape as that of homosexuals and that of heterosexuals are from the agenda of man wanting make good what is bad.

With the exception of the root, when was a word ever created in a vacuum?

This topic, when it becomes disagreement over definitions of words, becomes unfruitful. This topic is admittedly one that brings a lot of heat and emotions, hence a "hot button issue", but little real biblical truth comes out of it. I hope to start a thread in a day or so addressing the pertinent passages, that studies and examines each in detail to see just exactly what is being condemned. I'm thinking of trying the study banning the use of the words "sodomy" and "sodomite" since they never existed before about the 13th century; and likewise banning the use of "homosexual" and "homosexuality" which were coined in the 19th century and came into English about 1900. Why not stay with actual biblical language more nearly existing before the man created labels that are so easily misused or misapplied. I plan on using the 1885 Revised Version since it is considered quite accurate and it was translated prior to the modern culture wars over abortion and sexual conduct, the changes of Isaiah 7:14, Zech. 12:10, etc.; or the changing genders to be overly inclusive in God's word. I will plan on using the RV rather than the ASV because personally I prefer the standard translation of LORD rather than using Jehovah. Maybe the JW cult has pushed me away from using Jehovah Most scholars today think Yahweh is more nearly correct. If you doubt that using these words or labels can be confusing and misleading, read these two articles about how 30% of the millennials today identify as LGBTQ! This is getting absurd!


https://www.christianheadlines.com/...-percent-identifying-as-lgbtq-study-says.html

https://www.newsmax.com/us/millennials-study-lgbtq-socialism/2021/11/08/id/1043707/

So, I'll end commenting in this thread for I'm concerned it is not being very productive.

the idea that it is as you say over definitions of words, becomes unfruitful. Simply untrue.

" sodomy" is a word that describes a sinful action that God sees as detestable.