Quote: 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV): "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
First off, this was written by Paul (I think), who really can't be used in this argument as to say what is right and wrong.
Paul also believed that slavery was a normal (there's that word again) practice and that women should be oppressed. Or do you take that as gospel too?
But, forgetting that, this is a case of mis-translation. In fact, in about half of the major translations the phrase "Male prostitues nor homosexual offenders" isn't even in the passage at all. It only mentions "Effeminity" and "Abusers of themselves with men". Paul was a Jew. Effeminite Jews are not looked highly upon -- homosexual or not.
"Abusers of themselves with men" is usually seen as meaning either rapists or people who are homosexual perverts or pedophiles. Not those in loving homosexual relationships.
Quote: Genesis 13:13: "But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly."
Don't have ready access to read the story, but if I remember correctly this passage is referring to rape, not homosexuality. Homosexual rape is just as bad as heterosexual rape in the eyes of God.
Quote: Leviticus 20:13: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
And according to some mondern Hebrew and Biblical scholars, the actual text is:
"And a man who will lie down with a male in beds of a woman, both of them have made an abomination; dying they will die. Their blood is on them."
But, lets forget that for now.
Leviticus is ignored by a great many people, heterosexual or not. Most of Leviticus is ignored by today's society (including even the most conservative) because it's rather... extreme in it's ideas. Especially in the punishments.
Also, there is a lot of confusion over what "...with mankind, as lieth with a woman", actually means. This could mean that the man is having sex with a man thinking about a woman, which would be adulterous. Or it means he's violating his own sexual orientation, something that comes up a few times in the Bible and I will mention further in regards to Romans.
Quote: 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
Now if you read this whole passage you find that it's all about heterosexual orgies.
Now, in 1:26, "God gave them up into vile affections". Of course, that is open for many different translations, but many will agree that it means that God influenced themat that moment to engage in homosexual activities. Because all of a sudden the women and men started engaging in activities that were unnatural even to them -- having sex with one another.
It says nothing of the homosexual acts being wrong. It discusses only heterosexual men and women acting in a sexual manner contrary to their nature. Meaning that a heterosexual engaging in homosexuality is just as wrong as someone born homosexual to have heterosexual sex.
This passage can be more easily interpreted one way or the other depending on the particular translation that you read.
And remember, you are reading a translation of a translation of a translation. The phrase "Men with other men", often used throughout the bible especially in passages dealing with homosexuality, is another mistranslation of a Greek word which, while it did mean, "Men with other Men", it was used for pedophilia, not homosexuality.
Most of the passages in the Bible that refer directly to "Homosexuality", or use the harshest language against it, are the newer versions. The New International or King James -- both of which are the ones you quoted from.
Older versions, and especially those in the more original Hebrew or Greek, are FAR closer to the actual wording, and thereby FAR closer to the actual Word of God. And those versions make far less references to any sort of homosexual relationship except abusive ones.
