New User? Register Today!
Registered Users, LOGIN
What we believe (Eng) What we believe (Mal) About Us Contact Us
Forums Home General Forum Youth Forum Sisters Forum Archives (2005-2007) Archives (2001-2004)
Listing of Brides Listing of Grooms
Assemblies in Kerala Evangelists in India Instituitions in India
Christian Albums Christian Songs
Audio Sermons Bible Wallpapers Brethren Links KB History (Eng) KB History (Mal)

K E R A L A  B R E T H R E N
General Forum

Forums Home ::
This Message Forum is to discuss spiritual topics only. Please avoid personal or assembly matters.
Let us use this facility for our spiritual enrichment and for bringing glory to our Lord almighty.
Webmasters reserve the right to delete any topic or posting partly or completely from this forum.
View Topics :: :: Post new topic General Forum: Homosexuality vs. Heterosexuality

Post Reply
Go to bottom of the page

# 09383 :  Homosexuality vs. Heterosexuality

Homosexuality vs. Heterosexuality


I am starting this thread to discuss about homosexuality verses heterosexuality. I plan to make a series of posting on this subject. Therefore, please refrain from asking questions to deviate from the subject of interest. When I make the final posting, I will indicate that for your convenience. In the meantime, those who are led by the Holy Spirit may contribute using the Scriptures to enhance what I write.


We live in a world that is constantly and consistently recedes from God and call it ‘progressive.’ If any say that they have the same right to differ from their ‘progressive’ trend, then they will be ridiculed to such extend only a few may dare to differ from the ‘progressive’ mass. One such area of the new ‘progressive’ regression is in the ethical and moral matters of sexual preference.


I am strictly confining myself to the Scriptures as demanded by God for His children to conduct in this world. If a group of people who calls themselves ‘Christians’ and decides to act against what is demanded by God in His Word, then I leave it for them to face the Lord Jesus Christ—the Lamb of God—at the Great White Throne judgment.


When considering the sexual preferences, all human beings could be classified into one of the two groups—Homosexuals or Heterosexuals. In this, though I will be limiting my writing from New Testament, I may refer to the Old Testament also.




The word ‘homosexual’ comes being formed out of two words, ‘homo’ and ‘sexual.’ The meaning of ‘homo’ is ‘one and the same’ and is also used as abbreviation for the word ‘homosexual.’ The word ‘sexual’ is used in association with having or involving sex; may or may not be for reproduction. Therefore, a ‘homosexual’ is the one who is inclined towards or practices his/her sexual desires towards another person of their own sex. That is a male preferring another male for having sex and a female having the desire with another female.


It appears that, at present, the homosexuals do not like to be known as ‘homosexuals.’ On the other hand they have invented new terminologies and demand that the new terminologies must be used to identify them. The male homosexuals prefer to be known as ‘gay,’ the females as ‘lesbians.’ They may be thinking that the word ‘homosexual’ have a bad connotation, while the newly invented words to designate the same does not carry such stigma.


The word ‘gay’ could be derived from the French word ‘gai.’ In English, it could mean ‘happily excited,’ ‘keenly exuberant,’ ‘brilliant in color,’ ‘given to social pleasures—licentious.’ When considering the last meaning of the word ‘gay,’ we could understand how and why the homosexual would like to be called ‘gay.’


There could be another reason, which I consider as more apt and it is that the word ‘gay’ is derived from the Greek word ασελγεια (ASELGEIA = excess lasciviousness). It appears in the New Testament eight (8) times: Mark 7:21-22; Romans 13:13; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:20; Ephesians 4:19; 1 Peter 4:3; 2 Peter 2:18; and Jude 4.




Romans 1:27 speaks against homosexuality known as sodomy and is mentioned in the Old Testament. Its origin could be traced to Sodom and Gomorrah. That was the sin that brought God’s judgment on those cities during the days of Abraham and Lot and is written in Genesis 19. The law regarding sodomy and sodomites is in Deuteronomy 23:17. We also read about sodomites in 1 Kings 14:24; 13:12; 22:46 and 2 Kings 23:7. 




However, the word ‘lesbian’ is derived after a famous French homosexual group associated with Sappho of Lesbos, who practiced homosexuality between females.


The unmistakable statement against them is in Romans 1:26 – “For this reason God gave them up to vile lusts; for both their females changed the natural use into that contrary to nature; …




This is the latest term that is added by the people of homosexual persuasion to indicate that there is a difference among them. However, such differences are of modern inventions and in the Word of God all these groups are mentioned together as one.


Transgender behavior is the first indication that the persons are homosexuals. They may start to exhibit their tendencies by cross dressing. It may progress to the level of surgically altering their sex organs to the opposite to what they were born with.




This is the latest sub-classification of homosexuals. This group considers that sex with all, including animals, are to be acceptable. In the Old Testament, we read against such activities. Such a prohibition in the Old Testament indicates that this is not a new activity, but is as old as Sodom and Gomorrah’s sinful days.


I am quoting the New Testament verses that deal with these homosexual tendencies below and may not be exhaustive.


Mark 7:21-22 – “For from within, out of the heart of men, go forth evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness (ASELGEIA = lasciviousness -- KJV), a wicked eye, injurious language, haughtiness, folly; all these wicked things go forth from within an defile the man.


Romans 13:13 – “As in the day, let us walk becomingly, not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and lasciviousness (ASELGEIA = wantonness -- KJV), not in strife and emulation


2 Corinthians 12:21 – “Lest my God should humble me as to you when I come again, and that I shall grieve over many of those who have sinned before, and have not repented as to the uncleanness and fornication and licentiousness(ASELGEIA = lasciviousness -- KJV) which they have practiced.


Galatians 5:19-21 – “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, licentiousness (ASELGEIA = lasciviousness -- KJV), idolatry, sorcery, hatred, strifes, jealousies angers contentions, disputes, schools of opinion, envying murders, drunkenness, revels, and things like these; as to which I tell you beforehand, even as I also have said before, that they who do such things shall not inherit God’s kingdom.


Ephesians 4:19 – “Who having cast off all feeling, have given themselves up to lasciviousness (ASELGEIA = lasciviousness -- KJV), to work all uncleanness with greedy unsatisfied lusts.


1 Peter 4:3 – “For the time past is sufficient for us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, walking in lasciviousness (ASELGEIA = lasciviousness -- KJV), lusts, wine-drinking, revels, drinkings, and unhallowed idolatries.


2 Peter 2:18 – “For while speaking great highflown words of vanity, they allure with the lusts of the flesh, by dissoluteness (ASELGEIA – wantonness -- KJV), those who have just fled those who walk in error, promising them liberty, while they themselves are slaves of corruption;…


Jude 4 – “For certain men have got in unnoticed, they who of old were marked out beforehand to this sentence, ungodly persons, turning the grace of our God into dissoluteness (ASELGEIA = lasciviousness -- KJV), and denying our only Master and Lord Jesus Christ.


Apostle Paul wrote in Romans 1:27 about homosexuality, “And in like manner the males also, leaving the natural use of the female, were inflamed in their lust towards one another; males with males working shame, and receiving in themselves the recompense of their error which was fit.


I provided nine Scriptures from the New Testament that tell us that homosexuality is not according to God’s will and should not be practiced by a believer or even condoned by him/her. The first verse from Mark’s Gospel was uttered by the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ told His disciples—later the disciples were called Christians by God—that the sign of their love towards Him is their obedience to His commands. The others were from epistles written by the inspiration of God by apostles—Peter, Paul, and Jude. In Romans 1:27, Apostle Paul wrote it clearly and succinctly against homosexuality.  




This is the sexual activity between opposite sexes. However, the Scripture clearly indicates that this activity should be limited to a husband and his wife or vis-s-versa. The Scripture also tells that the husband and wife must be of opposite sexes.


This was taught to Adam—the Man—by God at creation and the Creator explained it to man in Matthew 19. Thus, it is a command from the Lord Jesus Christ and all His disciples—Christians—have no choice of interpretation other than what He told and written in the Word of God. It is the words of God.


[Note: In the future we will look into the fact that practicing homosexuality of any kind is destroying the process of evolution, if you believe in the Theory of Evolution of any kind.]


Shalom Malekim!!!

Post by : George P. Koshy  View Profile    since : 11 Dec 2018

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 18 Dec 2018 2:55:19 PM Close

Empirical Evidences Show That

The Evolutionists Do Not Believe In Evolution


            Some of you may think that this posting may be deviation from the original title of the thread. It is not. This is a continuation of the original intent and scope of this thread. It will become clear as we go.


            The title may appear to many as self-contradictory. However, a closer examination will provide the fact of this statement. It all depends on who is an evolutionists and what they eagerly support to reform the society.


            We are pursuing the modern day evolutionists in their agenda in social reforms. We have already known that the modern day scientists are accusing the believers who are not ashamed of the creation account in Genesis 1 and 2. The intent of this article is to further equip believers to face those who are making fun of our unwavering faith in God and His Word. Let us stand firm on God’s revelation and show to those who want to make fun of us about their folly by exposing their illogical and unscientific arguments. We are concentrating on the account of the creation of the Man and the Woman in Genesis 1 and 2 and we do this in connection with the evolutionists’ support of abortion, homosexuality, and transsexuality. Before we go into the Bible, we will pursue why the evolutionists do not believe in evolution.


The Evolutionists’ Worldview:


It is well known that the evolutionists, in general, support abortion of unborn babies, homosexuality, and transgender activities. They may make rhetorical questions to intimidate those who oppose them. At their rhetorical questions, many believers are intimidated and surrender their will and make compromising excuses. They may even say that the Bible is not a scientific book, therefore the creation account in Genesis should not be believed as a historical fact. This is one of the greatest travesties on behalf of the Devil who is walking as a roaring lion to devour whom he could. When are we going to stop this excuse-making-business for God? God is not in need of our excuses before this world because He rules the world and He knows all things. I am not asking to face their rhetorical question with another rhetorical question. I am asking the believers to stand up to them and ask them logically derived questions that are not rhetorical.


1. The Evolutionists’ Worldview on Abortion:


The often asked rhetorical question to a person who opposes abortion is about the health of the mother as the main reason for abortion. When faced with this rhetorical question about the health of the mother and the right of woman, many believers cow down before them. When are we going to stop doing this? Why we are not asking the logically derived questions that are not rhetorical in nature.


One of the logically derived questions could be as follows: If the theory of evolution is true as claimed by evolutionists, we should consider the underlying assumptions of evolution. The theory of evolution demands long periods of slow evolution to change one ‘kind’ of creature to another ‘kind.’ This theory also emphasizes the theory of fitness to survive—the survival of the fittest theory—as the fundamental reason to evolve.


It is also claimed as fact—though no one has seen any evidence of it—that there are many steps between one ‘kind’ of creature to another ‘kind.’ When some of these in-between steps are not observable, then the evolutionists call them missing links. According to their reasoning these missing links are essential and they are searching for the missing link between humans and their assumed predecessors. It is their responsibility to produce these missing links, if there are any. Instead, they are actively engaged in making of future missing links through abortion.


According to the theory of evolution, the process of evolution is a continuous process and it is still continuing for the human to pass into a new kind of a future ‘kind.’ In this process of improving itself by the actions of nature, the theory of the survival of the fittest also tells us that all babies do not possess this ability to be fittest to survive. The nature bestows that ability to be the fittest only on one, if not a few, in each generation. They in turn are supposed to pass it to the next generation. That is how the evolutionary chain or the ladder of evolution works.


This is where the problem with abortion should have been recognized and made to be the most important part of the evolutionists’ argument against abortion. Since, no one knows who is selected by the nature to be the carrier of the ‘fittest’ for the survival and the propagation of the necessary genes or something like that to the next generation; no one should destroy any embryos that are formed in the womb of a woman as part of the procreation. However, abortion destroys hundreds of thousands of embryos from each generation, if not every year. If we destroy the embryo that was selected by the nature to be on the next rung of the evolutionary ladder, then what happens to the evolution itself?


The whole evolution will come to a halt and the process of evolution has to start from the beginning. Realizing this fact, the evolutionists have successfully championed their cause of not killing or even destroying the habitats of certain creatures. However, they have not championed the cause of the highest and the foremost rung in the evolutionary ladder. If man is the highest of all creation in the evolutionary ladder, then by performing abortion by demand, man is cutting of the next rung in that ladder. Where are the evolutionists to complain about this willful act against the evolutionary process? If the evolution is a scientific fact and not a theory, then who should champion for it? Is it the responsibility of the creationists to care for evolution of man into the next rung of the evolutionary ladder? The answer is a resounding NO! On the other hand, is it the responsibility of the evolutionists to champion their cause?


I could say from an evolutionary point of view, without any doubt, that abortion is killing babies that could be the bridge to the next level of evolution—if the theory of evolution is right—and the evolutionists are should be actively pursuing to stop their evolution by supporting baby killing. On the contrary, the evolutionists are not only trying to stop the willful elimination of the next ladder of their evolutionary ladder, but also are championing for it. When I read about the support of the evolutionists for abortion and their action to intimidate the creationists by asking rhetorical question about the health and wealth of the mother, I could say that the evolutionists do not believe in evolution.


2. The Evolutionists’ Worldview on Homosexuality:


I have discussed about abortion from the worldview point, in the above section. On this section, I wish to discuss about homosexuality from the worldview point and not from the scriptural view point.


I assume that the readers are aware of what is meant by the word ‘homosexuality.’ The Homosexual activity that started in Sodom is known after that city—sodomy. This word, homosexuality, is used to indicate the sexual desire or activities for others of the same sex. Evolutionists in general are in support of this activity. It is not only the evolutionists, but most in the liberal news media are in support of it. Recently their support has become the manifestation of their heterophobia. You may be wondering about the meaning of this word ‘heterophobia.’


Heterosexual is used to designate people who are attracted to the opposite sexes and not of the same sexes. Similarly, ‘bisexuals’ are those who are attracted to opposite as well as same sexes. The proponents of homosexuality have coined a word ‘homophobia,’ ‘homophobic,’ etc. to intimidate heterosexuals who are opposed to them. Therefore, I am proposing the term ‘heterophobia,’ ‘heterophobic,’ etc. in talking about those who want to intimidate those who are determined to uphold the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman and not otherwise.


Some of the evolutionists in the academia published papers stating that homosexuality is in the genes that were inherited naturally from their parents. However, no one has examined the experimental design including their operational definition. In the absence of such a scientific inquiry into the study itself, the conclusions remains questionable and I leave such investigations as the responsibility of the scientific community.


Another reason to question the finding to justify homosexuality based of the genes is to ask them how they collected the data. We should ask the following questions: Did they examine the part of the brain that they are using as their proof, when the baby was born? Did they follow the growth of that baby’s brain portion through its adulthood? Did they analyze the difference between the brain parts of those who practiced heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality? Did they found that the difference is statistically significant? What were the sample sizes for each group? It should be equal, because they should have been starting with babies and not with people who are practicing one or the other. We are interested to know about a forward looking study and not a backward looking explanation. If they collected some data from dead people and made the conclusion, then that is similar to asking all the drivers to drive their cars by looking through the rear-view mirror.  


When a person claims that he was born with the genes propelling him/her to a same sex marriage—homosexuality, then I usually ask that person some simple questions. Those questions are derived from the following reasoning. If the homosexuality was inherited as part of the evolutionary process, then they have an evolutionary responsibility to reproduce to continue the evolutionary process. If they refuse to marry a person of their opposite sex and reproduce, then the evolutionary process comes to a sudden stop as in a train wreck. They are standing on the last rung of the evolutionary ladder and do not do anything to continue that process. All the millions of years of evolution came to a sudden screeching halt. What a disaster that is to their darling theory of evolution! Do you know that the nature has to find this rebellious act of the person it evolved into the evolutionary ladder with the great expectation of producing the next rung in that ladder? All came to a sudden end!!


This sudden end is glorified by the supporters of evolution. What a contradiction! May be it is not a contradiction, but a planned expression of their lack of faith in a theory that they are holding and cherishing with nothing but hatred to destroy it. It is a sure thing for us to say that the evolutionists do not believe in evolution.


Another lack of logic in the part of homosexuals and the evolutionists are that they want those who oppose homosexuality to produce a future generation of homosexuals. When a homosexual marriage takes place, that action does not enable them to procreate any children. Only the heterosexuals could procreate children for them to indoctrinate and the evolutionists are betting their future on this fact. Before they encourage this act of the homosexuals, why don’t the evolutionists champion for the cause of heterosexual marriage as the only marriage to make sure that the evolutionary process will continue. The evolutionists should come out all against homosexual marriage for an uninterrupted continuity of the evolutionary process, if evolution is true. If they do not do that, then it is an admission that the evolutionists do not believe in evolution. 


3. The Evolutionists’ Worldview on Transsexual Activities: 


I have discussed about abortion and homosexuality from the worldview point, in the above sections. On this section, I wish to discuss about transsexuality from the worldview point and not from the scriptural view point.


Transsexuality is the third point in which the evolutionists demonstrate their unbelief in evolution. A transsexual is a person who is predisposed to become a member of the opposite sex. The American man, George William Jorgensen, became a transsexual and became known as a woman, Christine Jorgensen, by the assistance of surgeries. Such surgeries are becoming common in these days and we do not hear anything against it and its impact on the evolutionary process from the evolutionists.


What are the ramifications of such transsexual transformations from a man to a woman or vise-a-vis? First, when a man child is born, he usually has the ability to procreate as he becomes a man and a woman will have the ability to conceive and bear a child when she is of child bearing age. However, when the sex change surgeries are done, such capabilities are removed and the new woman cannot pass on to a next generation what the nature has bestowed upon her, before those surgeries. Similarly the woman who became a man also loses what the nature has bestowed on her for the continuation of the evolutionary process. A true and honest evolutionist must be appalled about this tinkering with the evolutionary process and makes future evolutionary development practically impossible, if not delayed by millions of years. Evolutionists must consider this as serious case of tampering with the natural process. A tampering could be defined as doing our best not knowing what we are doing. Such an action may seem good for a time, but on the long run it will end in disaster for the evolutionary process!


All those who have undergone the transsexual surgeries and changed their sex from one to the other have broken the link to the evolutionary process. In other words, they permanently stopped the building of the next rung of the evolutionary ladder. When the evolutionists are supporting such an action with their research works, then they are indubitably declaring to the world about their world view. That worldview is that they do not believe in evolution. 


Summary on the Worldview of the Evolutionists on Evolution:


In this section, we discussed about three things and they are:

1.      Abortion and its negative impact on evolution;

2.      Homosexuality and its negative impact on evolution; and

3.      Transsexuality and its negative impact on evolution.

These are the three witnesses that cry against the evolutionists and ask them to change their course of action from supporting those activities and encourage them to take corrective actions, if they believe in evolution. If they refuse to do so, then they are admitting that the evolutionists do not believe in evolution.


When we were discussing about abortion, homosexuality, and transsexuality, I strictly used the worldview and did not look into Scripture—the Bible—for forming my reasoning in finding the contradiction of thoughts in the evolutionists. Having done that, I wish to look into the same subjects from the scriptural-view.


[Note: This is not the final posting.]


Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 2 Jan 2019 4:05:52 PM Close

A Believer’s Scriptural View of Marriage.


God defined marriage at creation, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over the whole earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. And God created Man in His image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.” (Genesis 1:26-27)


“And Jehovah Elohim said, it is not good that Man should be alone; I will make him a helpmate, his like. And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim had formed every animal of the field and all fowl of the heavens, and brought them to Man, to see what he would call them; and whatever Man called each living soul, that was its name. And Man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; but as for Adam, he found no helpmate, his like.”


“And Jehovah Elohim caused a deep sleep to fall upon Man; and he slept. And He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh in its stead. And Jehovah Elohim built the rib that He had taken from Man into a Woman; and brought her to Man. And Man said, This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: this shall be called Woman, because this was taken out of a man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:18-24)


“And the Pharisees came to Him tempting Him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?  But He answering said to them, Have you not read that He who made them, from the beginning made them male and female, and said, On account of this a man shall leave father and mother, and shall be united to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh; so that they are no longer two, but one flesh?  What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate. They say to Him, Why then did Moses to give a letter of divorce and to send her away?  He says to them, Moses in view of your hardheartedness, allowed you to put away your wives; but from the beginning it was not thus. But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, not for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:3-9)


The doctrine concerning the marriage-divorce-and-remarriage is given in 1 Corinthians 6 and 7 and also in Ephesians 5. Those who are interested please read them.


From Genesis 1:26-27, we learn that the Man and the Woman were created on the sixth day of creation and they were in the image and likeness of God. From Genesis 2, we learn that Adam was first created on the sixth day of creation, then the Garden of Eden was created and Adam was placed in it to till and to guard it. After that God said that it is not good for Man to be alone and that He should create a helpmate of his like.


From Genesis 2:18-20 we learn that before creating the Woman, God made all the animals and birds to come before the Man. Man understood the nature of each of them and gave names to indicate their nature. The final result was that Man did not find a single creature having his nature or likeness. If evolution was true as the evolutionists or the theistic evolutionists may say, then why Adam did not find a woman or a man of his likeness?  He did not find any, because there was no one of his likeness. None of them were created in the image and likeness of God. Only one Adam was created in the image and likeness of God and there was none beside him to claim such a likeness in all creation. Once Adam came to realize that there is none among the creation in his likeness, the truth sink into him and it is stated, “But as for Adam, he found no helpmate, his like.”


If the Theory of Evolution is a scientific fact, Adam would have seen someone who looked like his mother, if not his father. If he had a non-human mother, as the evolutionists claim, there would have been another one like her among the animals or birds that came before him on that sixth day of creation. There was none, not even a mother for him to say that she looks like him. What a disappointment that was to Adam? All other animals and birds had appropriate helpmates that looked like the other mate. For him, there was none who looked like him. In such a state of confusion of being single and without any recourse of having a helpmate from any of the animals—it is against the theory of evolution, he was desperately looking for a helpmate. When he was at the end of the rope, a matter of factly speaking, God came to his help and we read that in Genesis 2:21-25.


God made Adam to go into a deep sleep. Then God took from the curved thing on his side (we usually consider this as one of the ribs) and formed the Woman out of it. Since she was created from the ‘rib’ of Adam, she was in his likeness, with the same nature. She has her origin in the dust and the life from what was taken from the side of Adam. She was a living soul like Adam. She was brought to the first Man. The first Man, Adam, saw one who looked like him coming with Jehovah Elohim and approaching him.


The likeness of this new person whom he did not saw before when he was looking among the animals and birds for a helpmate, was so striking to that of his. Adam came to realize that it was not from the animals or birds that he should be looking for a helpmate, but he should look to God for a helpmate. When he looked at God, when he awake from his sleep, he saw one who looked like him with God. He might have been jumping with joy of finding a creature that looked exactly like him and she was with his Creator, Jehovah Elohim. So he exclaimed, “This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: this shall be called Woman, because this was taken out of a man” (Genesis 2:23). Then he went on to prophecy that which he never experienced before and it was about the behavior of his successors. He prophesied, “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24).


Regarding this marriage as defined in Genesis, the Son—the Creator, reminded us in Matthew 19 that God defined the marriage of a man cleaving to his woman should be between a man and a woman. God taught Adam that a marriage of cleaving of two opposite sexes should not be between a man and an animal or a bird. God also taught Adam that the marriage should not be between a man and another man or a woman with another woman, because God did not create two men or two women to be helpmates to each other. God created a woman to be helpmates to man. The marriage is defined by God as the union between a man and a woman, where both are in the likeness of the other.


(To be continued)


Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 7 Jan 2019 3:29:03 PM Close

A Believer’s Scriptural-view On Abortion:


                I hope that you have noticed that we have moved away from the ‘world-view’ to ‘scriptural-view.’ This is the second posting on the ‘scriptural-view’ of a believer.


An abortion is not just an act of the termination of a pregnancy, but it is the killing of the unborn child that is in the womb of its mother. It is a medically known fact that a woman provides the egg and a man provides the sperm in having a child being conceived by the woman. The woman also provides the nutrition and safety to the child while it is in her womb. However, the child does not receive a single drop of its mother’s blood. The child’s blood is developed within the fertilized egg and then in the embryo. This development of blood is still remains an interesting field of study for many researchers.


The spirit of a child is given to it by God and it will return to Him when the body, soul, and spirit are separated by death. We read that in Ecclesiastes 12:7, “And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit return unto God who gave it.” The Word of God teaches us that the conception at which a new baby is formed by having all that is needed with a body, soul, and spirit. When these three parts are separated, we say that that person is dead. In an abortion, that separation is what is forced upon a person that is still developing to be born. Abortion has become nothing but genocide, when over 900,000 babies are killed in the USA, every year. This is genocide of unprecedented magnitude in the history of human race.  


In abortion, we are not talking about the health and life of the mother, but we are talking about her preferences over the life of the unborn that is in her. However, when a believer disagrees with this forceful separation of the body, soul, and spirit of a child who cannot express his/her right to be born, we are asked to answer about the unhealthy situation of a mother who is completely healthy but we should assume that she is not. If she is not healthy, how could she make a decision to kill another person?


This is a clever ploy that works well with many and many believers will be intimidated with it. Let us say that we are talking about a mother with a child who is not at all at the brink of dying. When that mother wants to kill a baby who cannot speak, it is not fair to that baby to be killed before he/she gets a chance to take the first breath as a living human being.


Let me add a little discussed fact connected with abortion. By killing the fetus before it get a chance to be born takes away its right to hear the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord. That person, whom God made a soul at the conception should have been born and should have heard the way of salvation. In that case, he would have received the right to be called a child of God as stated in John. By denying that opportunity, they also deny the opportunity of that soul to be a member of the Ekklesia that Christ builds, a part of the body of Christ, a part of the local Ekklesia which is lamp to shine for the Lamb of God that took away the sin of the world, and also to be a part of the Bride of the Lamb. No child of God should support such an action—abortion—or those who champion for it.


(To be continued)


Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 14 Jan 2019 3:23:33 PM Close

A Believer’s Scriptural-view On Homosexuality;


                The early mentioning of homosexuality is in connection with Sodom and Gomorrah and their destruction by God resulting in the origin of the Dead Sea. Therefore, it is also referred to as Sodomy. Those who practiced Sodomy are called Sodomites.


When the law was given through Moses to the children of Israel, it was decreed by God that there should not be any sodomites or homosexuals among them (Leviticus 18:22, 20:23, Deuteronomy 23:17). However, we read in 1 Kings 14:24 that during the days of Rehoboam—son of Solomon—there were sodomites in the land. We also read that Asa king of Judah removed the sodomites form the land (1 Kings 15:12, 22:46). We again read in 2 Kings 23:7 that king Josiah of Judah broke down the houses of the sodomites where women wove tents for Asherah. Therefore, we could say that sodomy was part of the worship of Asherah and women were actively engaged in it. When the children of Israel went away from God and worshipped other gods, sodomy was also practiced as part of their ritual. When they returned to God, they were removed from the land.


                God taught Adam and the Woman, on the sixth day of creation, that mankind should not practice homosexuality. How did He teach this to Adam and the Woman? God taught against the practice of homosexuality not by mentioning it, but by not creating two men or two women, on that day as companions to each other. When God said that it is not good for man to be alone and he should have a help mate of his kind and created a woman instead of another man, He taught Adam that he should not practice homosexuality but should fill the earth with his progenies through the Woman He created. He did not create another man but a woman as his helpmate. So far we discussed from the Old Testament. What about the New Testament teaching on this subject?


                In the Roman Empire, homosexuality was prevalent, especially among the noble class. Therefore, we read in Romans 1:26-27, “For this reason God gave them up to vile lusts; form both their females changed the natural use into that contrary to nature; and in like manner the males also, leaving the natural use of the female, were inflamed in their lust towards one another; males with males working shame, and receiving in themselves the recompense of their error, which was fit.” The practice of homosexuality was equally prevalent among the male and female in that empire. It is mentioned as unacceptable among God’s people, the saints—who are called of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:6-7).


                A believer’s scriptural view on homosexuality is that it is against the law of God and should not be practiced by any. This is not the same as the reason for an evolutionist to oppose it. An evolutionist should oppose it because it stops the evolutionary process for which they have dedicated themselves. For a believer, they are opposed to it because it is against the will of God and we are to obey God’s will as Christ prayed, “Not My will, but Your will be done.”


In Romans 1:21-32, we read that worship of God is manifested in the proper marriage between a man and a woman. It is written, “Because, knowing God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but fell into the folly of their thoughts, and their heart without understanding was darkened: professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of an image of corruptible man and of birds and quadrupeds and reptiles. Wherefore God gave them up also in the lust of their hearts to uncleanness, to dishonor their bodies between themselves: who changed the truth of God into falsehood, and honored and served the creature more than Him who had created it, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to vile lusts; for both their females changed the natural use into that contrary to nature; and in like manner the males also, having the natural use of the female, were inflamed in their lust towards one another; males with males working shame, and receiving in themselves the recompense of their error which was fit. And according as they did not think good to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up to a reprobate mind to practice unseemly things; being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil dispositions; whisperers, backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, proud, boasters, inventers of evil things, disobedient to parents, void of understanding, faithless, without natural affection, unmerciful; who knowing the righteous judgment of God, that they who do such things are worthy of death, not only practice them, but have fellow delight in those who do them.”


In these verses we read that those who practice homosexual/lesbian behavior are against God’s will and “are worthy of death.” The lesbian behavior is in the expression, “For both their females changed the natural use into that contrary to nature.” The homosexual behavior is in the expression, “and in like manner the males also, having the natural use of the female, were inflamed in their lust towards one another; males with males working shame, and receiving in themselves the recompense of their error which was fit.” Those who justify these homosexual and lesbian behavior without practicing them are also found guilty by God for having delight in those who practice them  That is what we read in Romans 1:32, “…that they who do such things are worthy of death, not only practice them, but have fellow delight in those who do them.”


There are those who do them and there are those who delight in such practitioners of unholy behavior. All of them will be judged by God not only being sinners, but also being disobedient and violated God’s law of marriage between a man and a woman. The homosexual practice of sodomy, which could be described as placing the sexual organ into the yesterday’s food of another, is condemned in Scripture. The people of Sodom practiced it and they were burned by fire that came from heaven. Whoever practices it is condemned to everlasting fire in the lake of fire by God.


The world may say that the woman’s place is subordinate to that of a man. We see such a place for woman all around us in various religions. It is not so in the Bible. When the first Woman was introduced to the first Man, she came with the Creator, when the Man was alone and confused. The place of the woman was so significant, because she came with the Creator. She did not come by herself or the Man did not approach her when she was alone. However, Satan entered into the serpent and approached the Woman when God was not with her.


When Man saw her for the first time, she was coming towards him with the Creator. That is the importance of the woman that God prepared for a man. She is not only in his likeness, but also coming with the Creator. When a man accepts such a woman, then he will appreciate his wife. All marriage problems rise from the fact that man does not see that his wife was brought to him by his Creator. On the other hand, if the woman does not see that she was brought to her husband by the Creator, then that also could create marriage problems.


When a husband sees his future helpmate as the one brought to him by his Creator and the woman sees that she was brought to her husband by being led by the Creator, and then what God united will not be put asunder. When both the man and the woman come to this realization, there will not be anything that stands between them from cleaving to each other and becoming one flesh.


Of course we read in 1 Peter 3:7, “You husbands likewise, dwell with them according to knowledge, as with a weaker, even the female, vessels, giving them honor, as also fellow-heirs of the grace of life, that your prayers be not hindered.” Many have used this verse to discredit the place given to woman as a wife—the helpmate—of a man. They emphasize the word “weaker” to intimidate us by saying that the Bible states that the woman is weaker in the sense they are inferior to man. Bible does not say that. On the contrary, the Bible–the Word of God, say that this “weaker” vessel was brought to man by God and she came to man with Him. She did not come to man as a weaker vessel, but as his helpmate being led by the Creator.


Her emotional, psychological, physical, … make up are not the same as that of a man. She complements him and helps him in his life. The man will not to be alone when he is with her as one flesh. This is also stated in the same Bible that states her as a “weaker” vessel. The Greek word that is translated as “weaker” is ASTHENESTEROS, means ‘with less strength.’  The basic Greek word is used in 34 places and it is in connection with those that have less strength. If we read 1 Peter 3:7 along with the first time a woman is brought to a man, we will learn that this ‘weaker vessel’ was brought to that Man by the Creator who is All-In-All.


This is the first time we see the lesser one—the first Man—seeing the Greater One—God—coming to him. When this Greater One came to the lesser one, He brought a physically ‘weaker vessel’ to be his helpmate without whom his life would have been pathetically miserable. Yes, I wrote ‘pathetically miserable’ because the first Man was certain about the fact that he does not have another one like him in all that was created before him. A woman may be a ‘weaker vessel,’ but she came being led by the Greater One—the Creator. She has her place and importance not because of her strength, but with whom she came and who led her to her man.


(To be continued)


Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 21 Jan 2019 4:30:28 PM Close

A Believer’s Scriptural-view On Transsexuality:


The first and foremost reason for a transsexual surgery is anchored upon what they claim as a feeling of an imprisoned other sex inside them. They also try to manifest this feeling by cross-dressing—a man dress as a woman or a woman dress as a man. This cross-dressing was forbidden in the Law of Moses, “There shall not be a man’s apparel on a woman, neither shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever do so is an abomination to Jehovah your God” (Deuteronomy 22:5).


God taught Adam and the Woman, on the sixth day of creation, that mankind should not practice transsexuality, or even cross dressing. At creation, both the Man and the Woman were in the image and likeness of God and they lost that image and likeness when they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil against God’s command. At that time, the Man and the Woman tried to cover themselves with something made from leaves. However God clothed them with clothes made from skin and sent them out the Garden of Eden.


In the New Testament transsexuality is mentioned in Romans 1:26-27. In transsexuality, a man behaves like a woman and a woman behaves like a man by changing their external body parts to look similar to the opposite sex. This changing of appearance goes beyond cross-dressing and it is forbidden by God in the Old and New Testaments.


Let me close by stating that the evolutionists do not believe in evolution because they support abortion, homosexuality, and transsexuality.


(To be continued)


Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Post reply Here

please login to continue..

Registered Users, Login below:

Username Password
Problem Login?

New User? Register Now

Forgot User Name or Password? Click Here

Go to top of the page

All times are GMT -5 Hours
Forums Home ::

Back to Top