Dear Allan Austin and csteele,

Luke 17:34 may not be about homosexuality at all. I looked up the passage. I think it refers to the power of God to decide on the fate of human beings. There were a series of vignettes of two people with God taking one and leaving the other.

The Bible was written before the existence of the modern hotel. It has been quite common in inns for people, even strangers, of the same sex to sleep together. I think of the tactic of the Goums in north Africa who would sneak into tents of enemy soldiers and slit the throat of one. The effect would be more demoralising than the slaying of both. It is horrifying to wake up and find your companion dead. Likewise it would leave the surviving man in bed in Luke 17:34 impressed with the power of God. God had decided to take his bedmate and not him. There are passages in literature which reflect the custom of an innkeeper putting two men in a bed with no connotation of sexuality that I could see. One is in 'Moby Dick' where Queequeg and Ishmael share a bed.

Csteele and David F

I agree with David on this one. I’m open to a sympathetic view of gays, but in context it’s clear this is not the intent of the passage. Nor can we read too much into its underlying assumption that there will be occasions when two men would be sharing a bed - as David says, sharing beds was much more common in the past (and still is in poor countries)

Would those who oppose same sex marriage feel any different if the consenting partners were de-sexed ?
Platonic love is highly desirable...and commendable.All religions endorse it.. It is how we express our highest emotion of respect and endearment. I have a male friend and I feel great affection for him and happily he reciprocates. We are both happily married with children. Our wives have a very deep love for each other,too.

Does the love we have for one another and openly demonstrate it make us disgusting or should we be considered sinners before God...whatever that may mean. We dont go to church. We are entirely seculars

You twisted, self-righteous objectors find it hard to cope with your latent homosexuality and take it out on us out of jealousy.

socratease

Dear socratease,

You have found a bit of happiness. Good for you. Grab it. One of the penalties of being 85 and in good heath is that one is left more and alone as friends die. May you, your friend and your wives live long and happy lives.

Dear Alan, davidf and Rhian,

I understand your position on the verse since this was my initial reaction as well, but let me state the case a little more fully, something I had done in an earlier thread.

We first need to look a the words of Jesus in the earlier gospel of Matthew:24 ;

 37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
 40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
 41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Compare this to the later writings of Luke:17;

26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
 28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
 29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
 30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.
 31 In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.
 32 Remember Lot's wife.
 33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.

Dear Csteele, Rhian, and Davidf,
Yes, agree the Luke passage is not about same-sex relationships. So that leaves the curious references in John’s Gospel to ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’. Many regard this as an indication that Jesus was in a same-sex relationship. Any thoughts?
Dear Socratease, Yes, that is an excellent question. Often pondered that myself. The Leviticus passages which most anti-gay religious people use to prohibit same sex relationships actually only mention male penetration. Nothing to say about female gay activity, nor other male homoerotic acts. I suspect you are right suggesting most homophobia derives more from personal insecurity or fear than religious conviction.