This piece is not about trying to prove or disprove wether homo.se.xuality is a sin. The Bible makes it explicitly clear that it is is a sin. I am a Christian, therefore I believe its a sin also according to the Bible. QED.
What I'm really concerned about is, is it RIGHT to judge another person based on my own beliefs, which he may not be in support of? If a man is atheist, for example, will it be right for me to force him to desist from sex before marriage, or that marrying two wives is prohibited because my Bible forbids it?
My opinion is, if a man feels happy being with another man, why should we stop him? I mean, is Linda actually hurting anyone by chosing to live the rest of her life with Cynthia? These people are not threats to the society in any way, and should be allowed to live their lives in peace.
If we are not okay with seeing them like that, then we should pray for them instead, accept them into our midst, and show them as much love as possible. The Bible says love conquers all, who knows, some might change and become Christians also, but until then, let them be.

They need condemnation as well.

I think they need payers than condemnation. But can prayers really help them?

I was telling someone the same thing the other day. We dont speak out for fear of being labeled 'gays'. Same sex marriage is outrightly disgusting and morally wrong, but that is just my personal conviction, i can't and MUSN'T force it on another person lest i become like the bokoharams. Looking at it critically, we condemn sharia and boko haram for trying to impose their beliefs on others and yet we go through the back channel to do the same, how convenient. Yes! the same way you believe its wrong for a man to marry another man is the same way a muslim feel it is wrong for ladies to go out without properly covering their body. Are we now saying it is proper to jail anybody not properly dressed?

adegwurulez:
I was telling someone the same thing the other day. We dont speak out for fear of being labeled 'gays'. Same sex marriage is outrightly disgusting and morally wrong, but that is just my personal conviction, i can't and MUSN'T force it on another person lest i become like the bokoharams. Looking at it critically, we condemned sharia and boko haram for trying to impose their beliefs on others and yet we go through the back channel to do the same, how convenient. Yes! the same way you believe its wrong for a man to marry another man is the same way a muslim feel it is wrong for ladies to go out without properly covering their body. Are we now saying it is proper to jail anybody not properly dressed?

Spot on! At the end of the day, all it boils down to is personal convictions

firstEVA:
They need condemnation as well.

Harsh

Yeah right ,
the CEO of Apple needs prayers in his 80 feet yatch , vintage wines , limited edition Swiss watches ,numerous private jets and an IQ found in less than .0000000000001% of the human population.
Quarter to madness.
Y'all need treatment .

adegwurulez:
I was telling someone the same thing the other day. We dont speak out for fear of being labeled 'gays'. Same sex marriage is outrightly disgusting and morally wrong, but that is just my personal conviction, i can't and MUSN'T force it on another person lest i become like the bokoharams. Looking at it critically, we condemned sharia and boko haram for trying to impose their beliefs on others and yet we go through the back channel to do the same, how convenient. Yes! the same way you believe its wrong for a man to marry another man is the same way a muslim feel it is wrong for ladies to go out without properly covering their body. Are we now saying it is proper to jail anybody not properly dressed?

Would you be saying the same about iincest?

oduastates:
Yeah right ,
the CEO of Apple needs prayers in his 80 feet yatch , vintage wines , limited edition Swiss watches ,numerous private jets and an IQ found in less than .000000001% of human population.
Quarter to madness.
Y'all need treatment .

You really cracked me up Bros hahahahahaha people who should be praying for a better Nigeria that would guarantee them a better life

Timbuktou:


Would you be saying the same about iincest?

incest is quite different. Apart from the fact that it is morally wrong, it also directly affects the society. Consider a child born from that kind of relationship, the trauma he/she has to go through. I don't see how that is the case in gayism where out of mutual consent, they engage in a relationship that doesn't affect any other person. It might be morally wrong, but who are we to judge? Thats for God right?

adegwurulez:

incest is quite different. Apart from the fact that it is morally wrong, it also directly affects the society. Consider a child born from that kind of relationship, the trauma he/she has to go through. I don't see how that is the case in gayism where out of mutual consent, they engage in a relationship that doesn't affect any other person. It might be morally wrong, but who are we to judge? Thats for God right?

Isn't it on the same moral wavelength as homosexx? Plus, children can be adopted like in homosexx. Bear in mind that in incesst, there can be consent too.

oduastates:
Yeah right ,
the CEO of Apple needs prayers in his 80 feet yatch , vintage wines , limited edition Swiss watches ,numerous private jets and an IQ found in less than .0000000000001% of the human population.
Quarter to pure madness.
Y'all need treatment .

Thanks Bro. I fixed your comment a bit, sha.

After all this ruling, over 170m will experience power outage. Millions of Naija are without job! 2/3 of governors and FG are owing millions of Naija workers. Millions of Naija are going to bed without food. Over 10million Naija kids are not enrolled in school. BH and militants are in ccontrol of over 1/3 of Naija.. Where is the morality in all of these? Don't cry for US but WEEP for Naija!!

On a sidenote @OP,where did the Bible prohibit marrying two wives?.

adegwurulez:

incest is quite different. Apart from the fact that it is morally wrong, it also directly affects the society. Consider a child born from that kind of relationship, the trauma he/she has to go through. I don't see how that is the case in gayism where out of mutual consent, they engage in a relationship that doesn't affect any other person. It might be morally wrong, but who are we to judge? Thats for God right?

the government is also allowed to judge them....these guys cannot give birth..that's the point

modhream:
On a sidenote @OP,where did the Bible prohibit marrying two wives?.

Quoting from the New Testament only because a lot of people now think the old testament no longer applies to us as Christians (not entirely true anyway);

Ephesians 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his WIFE and they TWO shall be one flesh.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of ONE WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
(one might argue here that this one is for the elders of the church - pastors, bishops, deacons etc, but should there actually be one law for the elders and another for the 'floor members'? )

Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of ONE WIFE, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

But then as you say, that's just on a sidenote.

tucky200:
the government is also allowed to judge them....these guys cannot give birth..that's the point

Marriage is not and had never been solely about giving birth......where did you get that from?.
Btw,who said they can't give birth?.Are they infertile or impotent?

tucky200:
the government is also allowed to judge them....these guys cannot give birth..that's the point

How about heterosexual marriages where there are no children either due to mutual agreement not to have children, or due to infertility? Should the couples be arrested?

Juxtified:

Quoting from the New Testament only because a lot of people now think the old testament no longer applies to us as Christians (not entirely true anyway);

Ephesians 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his WIFE and they TWO shall be one flesh.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of ONE WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
(one might argue here that this one is for the elders of the church - pastors, bishops, deacons etc, but should there actually be one law for the elders and another for the 'floor members'? )

Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of ONE WIFE, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

But then as you say, that's just on a sidenote.

I'm not seeing any prohibition there,but exhortations to then church leadership.And no,those weren't laws too.
Oh,if OT no longer apply to Christians,why do most Nigerian church-goers run to it then to back their positions,be it on tithing,homosexuality and the like?.I'm assuming,for the sake of an argument,your personal view of homosexuality as a sin derives from Leviticus 18 & 20.

Timbuktou:


Would you be saying the same about iincest?

Incest is totally different from Gayism. Incest is actually harmful to the society at large as it degrades the gene pool of any animal that engages in it. Ofsprings of incestious relationships are highly prone to genetic diseases and disorders. Even lower animals and plants go to great lengths to avoid in-breeding.

Homosexually actually does not affect the society, only the two people involved. In fact it may an evolutionary attempt at regulating population explosion of a specie. What two people decides to do in the comfort of their bedroom should not cause a third party any head ache.

Nigeria and the blackman always feels like the moral super hero of the universe.

modhream:

I'm not seeing any prohibition there,but exhortations to then church leadership.And no,those weren't laws too.
Oh,if OT no longer apply to Christians,why do most Nigerian church-goers run to it then to back their positions,be it on tithing,homosexuality and the like?.I'm assuming,for the sake of an argument,your personal view of homosexuality as a sin derives from Leviticus 18 & 20.

You're totally right:
1. They're all exhortations, and but not ones we should ignore.
2. I said i chose not to quote OT just to avoid argument not that I believe they're no longer relevant
3. Yes, the verses against homosexuality were mostly from Lev 18, but Romans 1:26-27 was also pretty convincing

Gay people do not need your prayers or condemnations. They just need to be left alone. If you're straight, focus on getting yourself a husband/wife and/or boyfriend/girlfriend of the opposite gender. If you already have one or several, as the case may be, focus on strengthening your relationship with them.

Leave gay people to their devices and stop bothering them with your inane and trivial fancies because they aren't bothering you with theirs. Let them focus on their means of expressing love just as you focus on yours.

Fertilenigeria:
I think they need payers than condemnation. But can prayers really help them?

Nigerians and prayers ? The answer will explain why we are still living in penury after more than 50 years of independence. Singapore and Japan did not adopt the prayer model to achieve social-economic advancement; not even malaysia to mention just a few. Some of us know those who are playing the card of prayer and religion to impoverish the citizenry. Nigerians must wake up and take their lives back from these wicked oppressors of our nation.

wirinet:


Incest is totally different from Gayism. Incest is actually harmful to the society at large as it degrades the gene pool of any animal that engages in it. Ofsprings of incestious relationships are highly prone to genetic diseases and disorders. Even lower animals and plants go to great lengths to avoid in-breeding.

Homosexually actually does not affect the society, only the two people involved. In fact it may an evolutionary attempt at regulating population explosion of a specie. What two people decides to do in the comfort of their bedroom should not cause a third party any head ache.

Nigeria and the blackman always feels like the moral super hero of the universe.

If you wish to be logical, you have to embrace consistency, irrespective of your moral leanings. Comparing in.cest to in-breeding isn't any more rational than those who compare homosexuality to inability to reproduce.
Inbreeding can happen without recourse to in.cest, and in.cest can happen without resulting in conception (imagine gay in.cest, for example). And yes, if someone's sexual preferences is with their siblings, or other relatives, as long as they have attained the age of consent, there is nothing that should stop them from expressing their love to each other.
----------
Note: I have had to modify my comment because this overzealous Nairaland bowdleriser also confuses inbreeding and in.cest

naija1stpikin:
Lekinz is here to bother you all one more time. Let's pls join hands and vote this young, intelligent and cool cutie as Mr NL

Today is the final day of the contest, please come online and vote,
Buy typing ' I VOTE LEKINZ CC NLJEGA'
Without YOU, we wouldn't be here. We need you to help do it this final time
Thanks and God bless as you do so

#TEAMLEKINZ

Chief CaselessHerzumpther
Jambsupport Ebamma emyben princess042 redgem rogerdat royalroy
kelvin0 ionsman isuckpussy fejikudz dahjhi xbladez bestestgirl kinglekon
sinizia danaiks kimento shaboti sweetsoup zeburudaya enoquin prestige48
larablinks bunsky kidaberry yungcyrus horlabhymphy idealis2015
doctornyash
dbest01 djeezy greatbabe ronald4lif tosyne2much tizblink texanomaly eneze
origin101 stephenqeen kanyol finestboi2 firefire johnjon erickthewreck
mavelousabah odunharry babaonechance princesschi halldoran advania
atikubi
laykorn deejavuu chijoy7 mubbyleey amazingangel allosaurus kelvingraphics
nneka123 marieolae odkboy23 halldoran, marieolae, TDonald, stancity,
advania, Katerine7, Donlouise, UnknownT, Senjo, Cmpunk, Kinglekan,
prettythicksme, Erickthewreck, omotayor123, Dahjhi, Jacksparrow0712,
demmy0325, FrancisTony, BlackMaria, brize, hfinest1, bueze046, Sholyzee,
malonphill, kayslimshady, missstella, englishmart, Jollyjoy, Acekidc4,
Suspect33, Unibenstudent, laykorn, mizvee, bloxyboo, Eniqurl, valmunich,
sexymonkey, AriDsexy, Herzumpther, kenneyyice, voltron, vegetables, kwhiz,
Valwezzy, Officialcart3rG, Feranchek, buskie13, YourMain, HizMissy, Faba,
JeffreyJamez, blym, Mrbee21, MuguliciousMUGU, wriswatch, Neplustra,
Odkboy23, donephi, ozoigbondu, greatbaba, Vyolet, Enoquin, 2dice,
trenditee, kwenchypresh, idokojerry, chijoy7, Ferdybaba, Freemanan,
Taleeysun, bueze046 Graccccccccy, olusharp, AmazingAngel, Eneze1, fatito,
BeeBeeOoh, Eveluv, Slimzjoe, Larrey, Melancholy, Emperortj93, nimat158,
shaboti, obontami, safarigirl, Neplusultra, Alkadam, rogerdat, Chanchit,
Mubbyleey, stephenqueen, buoye1, Tolzeal, kingphilip, jaybee3, redgem,
dharay99, Orijin101, Pukka36, chigoizie7, saxwizard, Midehi, chimkaire,
bornmekus, Laggunna1, goldenone, creamish, zealot4me, Chiam5 Armamne
Graccccccccy, olusharp, AmazingAngel, Eneze1, fatito, BeeBeeOoh, Eveluv,
Slimzjoe, Larrey, Melancholy, Emperortj93, nimat158, shaboti, obontami,
safarigirl, Neplusultra, Alkadam, rogerdat, Chanchit, Mubbyleey,
stephenqueen, buoye1, Tolzeal, kingphilip, jaybee3, redgem, dharay99,
Orijin101, Pukka36, chigoizie7, saxwizard, Midehi, chimkaire, bornmekus,
Laggunna1, goldenone, creamish, zealot4me, Chiam55 Armamne uppnepa
mysticgal omotalkie Eyepencil Tolzeal....Kingphilip, jaybee3, redgem, dharay99,
Orijin101, obesemf, ekiloui, Blayzee007, mysticalgal, ronald4life, donphilopus,
permanentgrace, Tricizchic, Princesschi, Slimzybaby, Kizzy21, Pinkiberry,
ebbie9ja, cynthiaokaka, Kizmarty, ggrin, VictoriaBee, dabrowndmf, MzzTega,
manuelpepper, ammyluc2002, Teespice ekiloui
Jambsupport Ebamma emyben princess042 redgem rogerdat royalroy
kelvin0 ionsman isuckpussy fejikudz dahjhi xbladez bestestgirl kinglekon
sinizia danaiks kimento shaboti sweetsoup zeburudaya enoquin prestige48
larablinks bunsky kidaberry yungcyrus horlabhymphy idealis2015 doctornyash
dbest01 djeezy greatbabe ronald4lif tosyne2much tizblink texanomaly eneze
origin101 stephenqeen kanyol finestboi2 firefire johnjon erickthewreck
mavelousabah odunharry babaonechance princesschi halldoran advania atikubi
laykorn deejavuu chijoy7 mubbyleey amazingangel allosaurus blessbunmi (f ), uniquequeen( f ), babe4chi ( f ), kajoula(f ),
babenu (f ), ccaramel (f ), TemmyWon( f ), Glocee (f ),
Joavid(f ), michymeg(f ), binyelum( f ), effie03 ( f ),
dorispray( f ), MirandaPrestly( f ), chimkaire( f ),
Humanbeing1st ( f ), bymigokeph(f ), prettyJoy22 (f ),
Eureka123 (f ), hollandis( f ), Cynluv (f ), olyveoyl( f ),
henryskywalker2003 ( m), vivaciousvivi (f ), prettifaze (f ),
catherineokezie ( f ), opeaceo ( f ), Krinel(f ),
Excellent2010 (f ), Sylvyangel ( f ), Omolite (f ), kpofkpof (f ), Sleekbaby
( f ), Gaborone( f ), sappiebree(f ),
nonnyconcept (f ), octopusfreaky (f ), dozieannabel (f ),
Chimeluv (f ), Dstarst (f ), odufanabasa( f ), Kenfil( f ),
omotoyiwa (f ), Dahmylolar (f ), jumongpan (f ),
Kikyben2 (f ), angieberry (f ), enitey (f ), AirstarKane( f ),
richieroxy( f ), Thelmerh( f ), hapiness44 ( f ), nanzak(f ),
Proudlyayt ( f ), hadeolaikimat ( f ), Freshnex(f ), teenature
(f ), Ligxy (f ), mymah ( f ), Bimcious (f ), JoanJohnson( f ),
Tidoyarak( f ), phrankphum (f ), Benbisco(f ), eipreel ( f ),
chromoleana (f ), adizgal( f ), nnadiug1 , mzlizabelle( f ),
ckizen( m), Medunah (f ), nma24 (f ), BennyQuin (f ),
tolly19( f ), Larablink ( f ), LaDivva (f ), udmydearest (f ),
june007 (f ), folashade0 (f ), nkemdi89 (f ), omah1 (f ),
Snowangel4( f ), portaableg (f ), Hauneg( f ), completey( f ), snowDiva(f ),
AsanwaKC(f ), scorpiogal (f ), pweedyuz(f ), fabuloustee(f ), chubbygal(f ),
exthar87 (f ),
beebeethomas( f ), Baddchristy( f ), Krystalxxx ( f ), funbox
( f ), pouch( f ), oyinsola (f ), ifekemmie(f ), Eveluv (f ),
chijoy7 ( f ), ovalrose(f ), Sharon6 (f ), richyrichlady (f ),
MizFrances(f ), Chykechin(f ), oluwadamilolah ( f ),
samplegirl ( f ), jadelyn007 ( f ), Sexyolori (f ), kaziblake( f ),
queridasally (f ), nekaa (f ), Ayemco (f ), monalicious( f ) izyrach( f ), Kimeto( f ), hahn ( m), Upnepaa ( m), bueze046 ( m ), myrao( f),
networkrecharg ( m ), Blayze007 ( m), divAnnie( f), missstella ( f), Akposy( m ),
vivaciousvivi ( f), pinkiberry ( f ), Trypa( f ), Freemanan( m ), TheSonOfMark( m ),
IamMrNoble ( m), Odkboy23 ( m ), evegran( f ), Creamish ( f), lurlah2014 ( f ),
iamkingzlee ( m), Chiam55 ( f), puregirls ( f), tohpahz( f ), KelvinGraphics( m ),
succipowei , ronald4lif( m ), philismary ( f), marieolae ( f ), Mhizkel ( f), wristwatch
( m), KingTom ( m ), Orijin101 , MznAirA ( f), Shugakay ( f ), missdre( f ), Emyben( m ),
Evathyst ( f), mizkeleke ( f ), jvera( f), yinkus4u2c ( f), naijaboiy( m), grad2012 ( f ),
cutieberie1 ( f), tosyne2much ( m ), farano ( f), marymaria( f ), pinkycute ( f ), ivyy( f ), RomanceLander( f), djeezy( m ), Mzdivacious ( f) nneka123

Here is link
https://www.nairaland.com/2408599/mr-nairaland-contest-2015-final#35200119

Conceit of the highest order. ...and who will pray for those ''mighty beings'' praying for gay people. It is quite possible some of them carry their own spiritual burden much heavier than what a gay person is experiencing.

wirinet:


Incest is totally different from Gayism. Incest is actually harmful to the society at large as it degrades the gene pool of any animal that engages in it. Ofsprings of incestious relationships are highly prone to genetic diseases and disorders. Even lower animals and plants go to great lengths to avoid in-breeding.

Homosexually actually does not affect the society, only the two people involved. In fact it may an evolutionary attempt at regulating population explosion of a specie. What two people decides to do in the comfort of their bedroom should not cause a third party any head ache.

Nigeria and the blackman always feels like the moral super hero of the universe.

Again, I say, iincest is just as harmless if the parties involved decide not to have children.

Juxtified:

You're totally right:
1. They're all exhortations, and but not ones we should ignore.
2. I said i chose not to quote OT just to avoid argument not that I believe they're no longer relevant
3. Yes, the verses against homosexuality were mostly from Lev 18, but Romans 1:26-27 was also pretty convincing

1.That is highly debatable.Your initial position tho,was that polygamy was prohibited by the Bible,an untruth since the only man by whom God swear/swore in the Bible,David,was polygamous n nothing was found wrong with it,but for his adultery.
3.Don't cherrypick,my friend.Start from verse 18 till end.Also,Romans 2:1-2 has very interesting thing to say about those who judge.Btw,Leviticus 18 has only one verse (22) against homosexuality,not verses.Same as chapter 20(13),be more conversant with the Bible before you quote it.
Our back n forth is academic,anyway

AgentOfAllah:


If you wish to be logical, you have to embrace consistency, irrespective of your moral leanings. Comparing in.cest to in-breeding isn't any more rational than those who compare homosexuality to inability to reproduce.
Inbreeding can happen without recourse to in.cest, and in.cest can happen without resulting in conception (imagine gay incest, for example). And yes, if someone's sexual preferences is with their siblings, or other relatives, as long as they have attained the age of consent, there is nothing that should stop them from expressing their love to each other.
----------
Note: I have had to modify my comment because this overzealous Nairaland bowdleriser also confuses inbreeding and in.cest

At times some people argue just for the case of argument. Turning logic on its head. What is in.cest and what is in-breeding. (even Nairaland Bot changes in.cest to in-breeding automatically)Please explain how inbreeding can occur without recourse to in-cest? Please look up the dictionary meaning of in-cest. It is simply sexual relation between close relatives. So what do you call offsprings resulting from sexual intercourse between two close relatives?

You are just throwing the gay in-cest angle as a red herring. Homosexual incestual relationships are extremely rare and inconsiquential. what is usually considered as danger to society are mainly sexual relationships between father and daughter, between mother and son or between siblings. The closer the relationship, the more the danger of genetic disease being introduced into a population.

Meanwhile closeness of family relationships that can be regarded as incestious varies from society to society. In some societies relations between first cousins are not considered incentious (for example the Jews and the Arabs), while in some Nigerian societies relationships between couples of the same clan or kindred is forbidden.

wirinet:


At times some people argue just for the case of argument. Turning logic on its head. What is in.cest and what is in-breeding. (even Nairaland Bot changes in.cest to in-breeding automatically).

Nairaland bots are by no means, the yardstick for definitions. Ever heard of GIGO? It stands for Garbage In Garbage Out. Look it up.

Please explain how inbreeding can occur without recourse to in-cest? Please look up the dictionary meaning of in-cest. It is simply sexual relation between close relatives.

Sure. I'll be using oxford dictionary:
Inbreeding: Breed from closely related people or animals, especially over many generations.
-Breed:Cause (an animal) to produce offspring, especially in a controlled and organized way.
In.cest: Sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other.

From the definitions above, it is clear that in.cest isn't the same as inbreeding. To answer your question as to how inbreeding can occur without in.cest, look up artificial insemination.

So what do you call offsprings resulting from sexual intercourse between two close relatives?

Irrelevant question.

You are just throwing the gay in-cest angle as a red herring. Homosexual incestual relationships are extremely rare and inconsiquential.

Kindly humour me and my "red herring" then, should gay incestuous relationships be allowed, given that the premise of your opposition to in.cest predicates on its supposed catastrophic effect on the human gene pool?

what is usually considered as danger to society are mainly sexual relationships between father and daughter, between mother and son or between siblings. The closer the relationship, the more the danger of genetic disease being introduced into a population.

I repeat, incestuous relationships =/= inbreeding. Drop that faulty line of reasoning!

Meanwhile closeness of family relationships that can be regarded as incestious varies from society to society. In some societies relations between first cousins are not considered incentious (for example the Jews and the Arabs), while in some Nigerian societies relationships between couples of the same clan or kindred is forbidden.

I don't see how this helps your argument. Okay, so you're pointing out that the line differentiating incestuous relationships from non-incestuous ones is arbitrarily defined by society. I agree! In Saudi Arabia, cousin marriage is quite common. This isn't defined as incestuous relationship of course, but your argument about weak gene pool still applies, as this system has been identified to contribute massively to the prevalence of anaemic individuals. This is clearly inbreeding, yet these kinds of diseases do not only surface due to inbreeding. They can also occur between two careless and/or ignorant adults that are not remotely related.
The point I'm making is that sexual relationships between two or more consenting adults should not be regulated. But whatever your sexual preference, have enough medical awareness and sense of responsibility before you decide to raise kids.

modhream:

1.That is highly debatable.Your initial position tho,was that polygamy was prohibited by the Bible,an untruth since the only man by whom God swear/swore in the Bible,David,was polygamous n nothing was found wrong with it,but for his adultery.
3.Don't cherrypick,my friend.Start from verse 18 till end.Also,Romans 2:1-2 has very interesting thing to say about those who judge.Btw,Leviticus 18 has only one verse (22) against homosexuality,not verses.Same as chapter 20(13),be more conversant with the Bible before you quote it.
Our back n forth is academic,anyway

I am not an expert on the Bible. Most of my research on homo.sexuality happened to have led me to the issue of polygamy, hence my mentioning the topic. However, if you actually take time to REFLECT concerning many of the Bible characters, you can't help but notice that the great men (and women) of God in the old testament operated by a different set of rules from those in the new testament. I say this because you mentioned David. David was a man who held a special place in God's heart, a lot of his sins were overlooked or lightly punished, for example the murder of Uriah and subsequent adultery with his wife was only punished by the death of the resulting child. What was the OT punishment for adultery? Is it d death of the resulting child, or the death of both man & woman involved (lev 20:10)?
Same thing happened with another mighty man of God, Samson, who still had enough annointing of God to uproot the city gates even though he was just coming from a prostitutes!
Did you ever hear of any man of God in the NT who had the guts to look a prostitute twice, not to talk of taking another's wife? They were all firebrands, they operated by higher standards. That's why I FEEL the OT's not the best resource on polygamy when it comes to Christianity. Not to mention the obvious fact - None of those in the Old Testament were "Christians"!

Juxtified:

I am not an expert on the Bible. Most of my research on homo.sexuality happened to have led me to the issue of polygamy, hence my mentioning the topic. However, if you actually take time to REFLECT concerning many of the Bible characters, you can't help but notice that the great men (and women) of God in the old testament operated by a different set of rules from those in the new testament. I say this because you mentioned David. David was a man who held a special place in God's heart, a lot of his sins were overlooked or lightly punished, for example the murder of Uriah and subsequent adultery with his wife was only punished by the death of the resulting child. What was the OT punishment for adultery? Is it d death of the resulting child, or the death of both man & woman involved (lev 20:10)?
Same thing happened with another mighty man of God, Samson, who still had enough annointing of God to uproot the city gates even though he was just coming from a prostitutes!
Did you ever hear of any man of God in the NT who had the guts to look a prostitute twice, not to talk of taking another's wife? They were all firebrands, they operated by higher standards. That's why I FEEL the OT's not the best resource on polygamy when it comes to Christianity. Not to mention the obvious fact - None of those in the Old Testament were "Christians"!

Did you say David was lightly punished?.Someone who the sword never left his household for many generations,as prophesied by Nathan?.Who had many sons killed in civil conflicts while he yet lived?.Thank God you said you're no expert on the Bible otherwise we would have turned this thread to Bible study.
And no,the only edge the NT apostles had over the prophets of old was the dispensation of grace we still enjoy today.