Do you believe in Jesus Christ?

[Quadrochosis]

I find it funny how hung up most Christians get about this issue. "God loves us all and we all must obey the word! We're all equal under God! Jesus loves us! .. er wait except gay people LOL"

I see this going the same way that most of the other ridiculous issues that racist/bigoted Christians have held onto for way too long (interracial marriage/slavery/etc). Basically enough people realize how fucked up a law is, its changed, and then all the Christians go "up! we we're just reading the Bible wrong the whole time sorry guise!"

[Dr. SeaWolf]

Let's be fair here.  I don't agree with James, but I don't think in his case that it is bigotry.  I think he is earnestly trying to be a good Christian.  I don't think it's fair to pick on him like this.  In my opinion, he's mistaken, not bigoted.

[soundgarden]

I admit it's weird. I don't know, I'm just going by what I believe to be the Word of God.

This statement essentially negates all your arguments prior.  You admit to not having full understanding but accept the words because...well, i dont know....

Religious fanatics terrorize on the same grounds; lack of full understanding but the "belief" that the words are from God.  The facts of reality are irrelevant.

This makes your case against homosexuality all the more displeasing to me.

EDIT

Answer this James:  If god is the creator of all the universe and decrees that homosexuality is sinful, why then is it such a natural, albeit rare, occurrence in nature? Bees, dolphins, all primates for example partake it in.  Hyprocisy?  Error?  

[rumborak]

Whatever happened to "judge not, lest ye be judged"?
Scripture has always been used to suppress "the others",  just as you are doing now.
One of the most striking features of scripture is that you become a better person when you don't use/believe in it.

rumborak

[Perpetual Change]

I think I agree with Jamesman about homosexuals. Homosexuality is pointed out as wrong in both testaments. Those other things that quad mentioned are just from the old testament, and most are made obsolete by Christ's new covenant with us.

I will say, however, that I think the churches single out homosexuality way more than need be. As I understand it, all of the sins of the flesh are equal. Acting on homosexual feelings, I'd assume, is no better or worse than drinking out eating too much. , or having a "one-night stand" with someone.

[rumborak]

Yeah, but a night-out drinking or a one-night stand is what *I* would potentially do, so it can't be that bad. However homosexuality are the others, so it's really, really bad, and I need to tell them.

rumborak

[bosk1]

Yes, I think some churches do single it out, and I think that is just silly.  But I don't think that has anything to do with what you are talking about here.  It only seems singled out here because someone happened to bring it up on an internet discussion forum.  Had adultery, thievery, murder, etc. been brought up, those sins would have received the same response.


@Quad:  To answer a question you posed earlier that I don't believe has been answered, the laws you cited (although you misrepresented some of them) are found in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy.  Moses stated in those books that those laws were specifically for the old testament Jews.  Whether or not you are a Christian, you may have heard the term "the new covenant."  What that refers to is the teaching of Jesus and the apostles that Jesus established a different set of rules, so to speak, to do away with the temporary laws that were specifically for the Jews.  Some of those teachings were specifically carried forward, as James mentioned (I'm not sure I necessarily agree with this description that "moral laws" were carried forward, and others were not, but I suppose that general principle is generally right enough for our purposes), and are thus part of the new covenant teaching as well.  This is explicitly explained in the Bible, but a detailed discussion is beyond the scope of this thread and what I have time for at the moment.  But hopefully, this explains the general principle for you.

[Jamesman42]

I find it funny how hung up most Christians get about this issue. "God loves us all and we all must obey the word! We're all equal under God! Jesus loves us! .. er wait except gay people LOL"

I see this going the same way that most of the other ridiculous issues that racist/bigoted Christians have held onto for way too long (interracial marriage/slavery/etc). Basically enough people realize how fucked up a law is, its changed, and then all the Christians go "up! we we're just reading the Bible wrong the whole time sorry guise!"

That is a really unfair assessment of anything I've said. Do you know how to differentiate between the acts of homosexuality and homosexuality itself? I don't get hung up on this; I am just answering a few questions about where God's Word stands on an issue. God's Word never fails.

I admit it's weird. I don't know, I'm just going by what I believe to be the Word of God.

This statement essentially negates all your arguments prior.  You admit to not having full understanding but accept the words because...well, i dont know....

Religious fanatics terrorize on the same grounds; lack of full understanding but the "belief" that the words are from God.  The facts of reality are irrelevant.

This makes your case against homosexuality all the more displeasing to me.

EDIT

Answer this James:  If god is the creator of all the universe and decrees that homosexuality is sinful, why then is it such a natural, albeit rare, occurrence in nature? Bees, dolphins, all primates for example partake it in.  Hyprocisy?  Error? 

OK...Like I have said, now repeatedly, I trust that the Bible is the Word of God. It's my most logical conclusion that, lo and behold, many Christians also believe. That's the deal as a Christian.

Tell me, do you have a full understanding of the issue? We are all limited in our understanding of these things. It doesn't mean a Christian says "oh well, God knows all so ner ner ner ner". No, He has given us enough in His Word to determine issues such as this. I believe only God has that full understanding.

To your edit: We are born into a sinful world, or a sinful nature. Our way of life is not as should be naturally because of the sin in our world, and corruption of the natural way of life comes and goes. NOW, I am not saying homosexuals are corrupted people. If you read in Genesis, it clearly states that God created them to be one man and one woman. The corruption is desiring someone of the same sex. Again, I am not saying anything like homosexuals are the worst kind of people, or their sin is the worst, or that God doesn't love and that we should hate them; it's that we are ALL corrupted. For me, personally, I am corrupted by some pride and some anger. I'm sure you have your own things you deal with.

"For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard." - Romans 3:23

Let's be fair here.  I don't agree with James, but I don't think in his case that it is bigotry.  I think he is earnestly trying to be a good Christian.  I don't think it's fair to pick on him like this.  In my opinion, he's mistaken, not bigoted.

Thank you. Even if we don't agree, it's good to know that, above ANY of this, it's about love, for Christ desires for us to love God and love our neighbors.

I will say, however, that I think the churches single out homosexuality way more than need be. As I understand it, all of the sins of the flesh are equal. Acting on homosexual feelings, I'd assume, is no better or worse than drinking out eating too much. , or having a "one-night stand" with someone.

I agree. This is probably the second time I've ever really talked about this issue before. All of these issues are not as important as trying to follow the two aforementioned commands.

[j]

Let's be fair here.  I don't agree with James, but I don't think in his case that it is bigotry.  I think he is earnestly trying to be a good Christian.  I don't think it's fair to pick on him like this.  In my opinion, he's mistaken, not bigoted.

This.  The dude's defending his beliefs, not attacking anyone or declaring his hatred for a group of people.

I think I agree with Jamesman about homosexuals. Homosexuality is pointed out as wrong in both testaments. Those other things that quad mentioned are just from the old testament, and most are made obsolete by Christ's new covenant with us.

I will say, however, that I think the churches single out homosexuality way more than need be. As I understand it, all of the sins of the flesh are equal. Acting on homosexual feelings, I'd assume, is no better or worse than drinking out eating too much. , or having a "one-night stand" with someone.

This is a good post too.  Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Christian scriptures.  I've heard many attempts to explain it, but in the end, my understanding *why* Christians believe it's wrong isn't going to change the bottom line.  Personally, I would need to understand to some degree in order to go on believing it.  But I know lots of people aren't that way.

And it's absolutely demonized on a level unequal to most other sins, because it's easy to do so.  I think if this weren't the case, it would be held as no more severe than most other sins of a sexual nature.  Surely not more serious than something like adultery, which inherently entails other sins like dishonesty and betrayal?

Whatever happened to "judge not, lest ye be judged"?

There's also a lot of stuff about "admonishing your brother" when he does wrong.  In a lot of cases, I think there's a fine line.

-J

[Seventh Son]

I've got nothing against you Jamesman, even though I strongly disagree with what you are saying. But hell I even like you. But I'll ask this again because I don't think anyone responded to me before.

Why is homosexuality a sin? What makes it so evil? Things like murder and rape are easy to understand why they are wrong. They hurt those around us a lot. Hell I even get why addiction is sinful, it can control you like very few things can (Like spending your paycheck on booze instead of food for your kid's mouths). But why homosexuality? Who does it hurt? If two guys go at it, I don't feel hurt by it at all. So why is it wrong? And "Because the bible says so" isn't a satisfactory answer for me. I need to hear why it hurts humanity.

[eric42434224]

I've got nothing against you Jamesman, even though I strongly disagree with what you are saying. But hell I even like you. But I'll ask this again because I don't think anyone responded to me before.

Why is homosexuality a sin? What makes it so evil? Things like murder and rape are easy to understand why they are wrong. They hurt those around us a lot. Hell I even get why addiction is sinful, it can control you like very few things can (Like spending your paycheck on booze instead of food for your kid's mouths). But why homosexuality? Who does it hurt? If two guys go at it, I don't feel hurt by it at all. So why is it wrong? And "Because the bible says so" isn't a satisfactory answer for me. I need to hear why it hurts humanity.

I was about to pose the same question.  Of all the "sins", how many of them have no apparent or legitimate reason behind them?

[Adami]

I'm not sure it matters. It goes back to the argument "Is it right because god does it? Or does god do it because it's right?"

[Zook]

Not to change the subject, but to James: do you feel bad for taking pride in what you accomplish?

[Seventh Son]

I'm not sure it matters. It goes back to the argument "Is it right because god does it? Or does god do it because it's right?"

Okay let me rephrase it then. Explain why it's wrong to someone who isn't a Christian. Using the bible as justification doesn't do anything to me because I don't believe in it.

[eric42434224]

I'm not sure it matters. It goes back to the argument "Is it right because god does it? Or does god do it because it's right?"

Okay let me rephrase it then. Explain why it's wrong to someone who isn't a Christian. Using the bible as justification doesn't do anything to me because I don't believe in it.

There is nothing "wrong" with homosexuality or homosexual acts.

[Jamesman42]

Well, I think you're looking at sin as something that has to affect humanity as a whole or even in parts to really see the wrongness in it. Sin is anything that separates us from God and goes against His will for us. It can be personal or involve others..

Why is homosexuality a sin? That's a question for God, not me. I can only offer metaphors and point to parts of the Bible to give any sort of answer. Look:

"Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib, and he brought her to the man.

“At last!” the man exclaimed.

   “This one is bone from my bone,
      and flesh from my flesh!
   She will be called ‘woman,’
      because she was taken from ‘man.’”

This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one." - Genesis 2:22-24

This is before sin is known to have existed, biblically speaking. Thus, for the Christian, the natural and God-ordained way of marriage and all that is one man and one woman. It makes the other verses on homosexuality make perfect sense, doesn't it? It should; it's a strong corollary.

It doesn't hurt humanity in the way you're thinking, just like jealousy and hatred do not hurt humanity. Like you said, if two guys go at it, you don't feel anything. Well, yeah (and thank God). It's like if two people you don't know are jealous of each other's possessions, their sins in doing so don't affect you and probably not anyone else. If any of that does affect anyone else, it's only after the fact or if they're brought into the situation.

Again, though, I am not the expert and I am not God. This answer may not satisfy you because of your beliefs, but that's the discussion for you; a trade-off of what we have come to find out.

[Adami]

Jimmy, what you said is mostly fine, I only have one issue.

You claim that because god make Adam and Eve as he did, it is the model for the ideal marriage. Well....no one else was there. It's not like Adam had an oppurtunity to bang Steve, nor did Eve have a chance to eat someone elses bush of fire. Also, what race were they? They were the same race I assume, whatever it was....can't that also be used as an argument against interracial marriages?

[Seventh Son]

I would argue that jealousy and hatred DO hurt humanity. After all, someone who is envious of what someone else has wishes that particular possession for himself and hates another for it. And hatred only leads to hurting and suffering if negatively acted upon. Homosexuality is the opposite. It is love between two individuals that just happen to share the same kind of junk down under. I fail to see why two people loving each other should be "wrong" but I guess its one of those things that's lost in translation between a believer and a non-believer. My definition of "sin" isn't related to religion, its related to how it hurts humanity, so its like we're speaking two different languages I suppose.

Jimmy, what you said is mostly fine, I only have one issue.

You claim that because god make Adam and Eve as he did, it is the model for the ideal marriage. Well....no one else was there. It's not like Adam had an oppurtunity to bang Steve, nor did Eve have a chance to eat someone elses bush of fire. Also, what race were they? They were the same race I assume, whatever it was....can't that also be used as an argument against interracial marriages?

Coming from someone who lives in the bible belt, I can safely say I've talked with people who have used that argument before.

[Adami]

As have I.

[Jamesman42]

Not to change the subject, but to James: do you feel bad for taking pride in what you accomplish?

I sense a trap in this question because of the word "pride" (not to say that was your intention). There are different levels of pride and you can distinguish between pride, confidence, arrogance, contentedness, and such.

But let's take an example with something that is always deemed one of my best talents by others: mathematics. None of this is to boast, but to illustrate:

I am almost always the first one done with a test in a math class. I usually get one of the highest scores. I usually am the one that has to help everyone else outside of class understand what's going on in what we're learning. They all say I have a bright future ahead if I stick with doing the math thing, which is what I want to do because I love math.

Now, I can very easily become arrogant in this. I WOULD feel bad about this (every once in a while I do get a little arrogant and I try to kill it at once). However, I must KNOW that I have some level of talent in mathematics, some level of confidence that I can succeed. A life without goals such as this specific one would be such an undirected mess.

I honestly don't know what "level" of pride you're asking about, Zook, but I do not feel bad about being confident that I can do things with my God-given talents. I do feel bad when I get arrogant, cocky, and full of myself. It's a balance I must watch out for.

[eric42434224]

I guess you have to take the story of Adam and Eve literally in order to use it as support for homosexuality being a sin.......

[Jamesman42]

Jimmy, what you said is mostly fine, I only have one issue.

You claim that because god make Adam and Eve as he did, it is the model for the ideal marriage. Well....no one else was there. It's not like Adam had an oppurtunity to bang Steve, nor did Eve have a chance to eat someone elses bush of fire. Also, what race were they? They were the same race I assume, whatever it was....can't that also be used as an argument against interracial marriages?

God ordained it to be one man and one woman for life. That set the basis for every other marriage to come. Race doesn't matter: a black woman and a white man are still one man and one woman (and humans, just to cut off any potential joke you may have ). I don't see how that could be used to argue against interracial marriages, that seems pretty ignorant in general.

I fail to see why two people loving each other should be "wrong" but I guess its one of those things that's lost in translation between a believer and a non-believer. My definition of "sin" isn't related to religion, its related to how it hurts humanity, so its like we're speaking two different languages I suppose.

The bolded sums up why you probably cannot perceive some of these things; it's like looking through dirty glasses for you in this case. Remember, we are talking about sin as the Bible sees it, so your definition of sin is going to be different if it's not biblical.

[rumborak]

I don't see where this discussion can go if one side takes the stance that the human population started with two people.
I think there's a line between faith and self-betrayal that's all too easily crossed.

rumborak

[Jamesman42]

Hey, let's choose not to go that route. I gave the biblical basis for it, but it doesn't have to surround that one sentiment. Find one of old threads on literal Genesis stuff if anyone wants to discuss that stuff...

[Seventh Son]

I don't see where this discussion can go if one side takes the stance that the human population started with two people.

rumborak

[Seventh Son]

I fail to see why two people loving each other should be "wrong" but I guess its one of those things that's lost in translation between a believer and a non-believer. My definition of "sin" isn't related to religion, its related to how it hurts humanity, so its like we're speaking two different languages I suppose.

The bolded sums up why you probably cannot perceive some of these things; it's like looking through dirty glasses for you in this case. Remember, we are talking about sin as the Bible sees it, so your definition of sin is going to be different if it's not biblical.
[/quote]

I don't see why it has to be me looking through dirty glasses. Can't it just be a "The Eye of the Beholder" kind of thing?


Meh, I'm just nitpicking, whatever.

[Zook]

I don't know what you mean by 'trap', I just think you should be proud of the things you do best. I don't agree that you should give all the credit of being a math wiz to god though. It's your talent, not his. Furthermore, I think pride as a sin is stupid and just another way to keep people at bay. Same with envy, because damnit, I want an Xbox 360 too!

[Jamesman42]

I fail to see why two people loving each other should be "wrong" but I guess its one of those things that's lost in translation between a believer and a non-believer. My definition of "sin" isn't related to religion, its related to how it hurts humanity, so its like we're speaking two different languages I suppose.

The bolded sums up why you probably cannot perceive some of these things; it's like looking through dirty glasses for you in this case. Remember, we are talking about sin as the Bible sees it, so your definition of sin is going to be different if it's not biblical.

I don't see why it has to be me looking through dirty glasses. Can't it just be a "The Eye of the Beholder" kind of thing?


Meh, I'm just nitpicking, whatever.

I think you know what I'm saying.

I don't know what you mean by 'trap', I just think you should be proud of the things you do best. I don't agree that you should give all the credit of being a math wiz to god though. It's your talent, not his. Furthermore, I think pride as a sin is stupid and just another way to keep people at bay. Same with envy, because damnit, I want an Xbox 360 too!

Oh, I'm a bit proud in the sense that I feel satisfied with my accomplishments. Of course, I do give credit to God because I believe He's the reason we're all here, so, you know...

[Zook]

But of course...

[Perpetual Change]

For me, it's a little bit complicated.

The Christian-- or, at least, the "Catholic"-- explanation for prohibiting homosexuality seems similar to its explanation for prohibiting birth control.  And, like all good Catholic teaching, there seems to be a healthy dose of Aristotelian thinking involved.

Here's the shortened and probably oversimplified version: Sex has a three-sided "purpose" for people, which is intimacy, pleasure and procreation. Any kind of sex that doesn't fully realize the "purpose" of sex-- like sex not open to procreation (using birth control, sex with people of the same gender, casual sex, etc) is missing the point. Or, "sinning," as the word "sin" is defined most accurately as "missing the mark."

Honestly, it's one of the aspects of Christianity I have the most trouble with. I'm straight as an arrow, so it doesn't really matter much to me on that level, but it is a hard trying to explain that position to homosexual friends. Moreover, in Jesus' time, people didn't necessarily have to think about issues like global overpopulation.  Most churches agree that good sex is absolutely essential to healthy, married relationships-- and yet so not having too many children, both for the sake of the family and the earth. I really just don't understand what the problem with two responsible, committed people having "protected" sex is.

But as far as homosexuality goes, I'm also thinking that in Jesus' time there weren't many homosexuals having sex for the sake of expressing mutual love. In those days, a good portion of people in Rome and so on were bisexuals who had families but spent a lot of their time in bathhouses and dens drinking, eating, and boning other dudes. The fact is, the Bible only talks about homosexuality as it appears as a matter of lust, and, as far as I know, never talks about the natural genetic "phenomenon" of homosexuality, or homosexuals who are looking for mutual, exclusive, loving relationships with other people who share that "phenomenon."

To be honest, as much as it goes against Church teachings, and is much as it may be against Scriptural teachings, I'd say that most good straight Christians fall way short of the Christian ideal when it comes to sex, whether it be through pursuing one-night stands, using birth control, "pulling out," viewing pornography, and so on. For that small percentage of Christian homosexuals who are looking to build a relationship with other homosexuals that isn't mired in pure lust, I'd say what matters is what God puts in their hearts-- including whether they're homosexual by nature or by the same kind of desires that led those ancient Romans to screw around in the bathhouses. While there will never be a scriptural defense, scripture doesn't seem reference people who are homosexuals by some reasons other than through their own will. It just doesn't.

(I patiently await someone who actually knows their scripture to tear me in half.  )

[j]

Good post.

-J

[eric42434224]

I just cant get on board with a god that says two people loving each other is a sin.  There should be a reason for this "rule" against homosexuality, and I find it goes against every fiber of my being to think a god would discriminate in this way.  I like my god to be more enlightened than me, not less.  JMO of course.  

[King Postwhore]

I just cant get on board with a god that says two people loving each other is a sin.  There should be a reason for this "rule" against homosexuality, and I find it goes against every fiber of my being to think a god would discriminate in this way.  I like my god to be more enlightened than me, not less.  JMO of course.  

Very well put.

[hefdaddy42]

I think that the OT laws against homosexuality (and lepers, and the deformed/lame, and wearing the wrong kinds of cloth) had nothing whatsoever to do with morality and everything to do with preserving group identity.  In every society known to man, the interaction between society and body is important, but even moreso in cultures like the ancient Israelites, who constantly had to deal with threatened boundaries (whether from the Canaanites, the Philistines, the Assyrians, the Edomites, or whomever).  They legislated heavily to preserve body identity, as a part of legislating heavily to preserve their group identity.  For example, think of how a modern-day U.S. Marine would be treated by his group if he had long hair and an ear ring.  He would be considered impure and sinful within the stated boundaries of that group.  This does not mean that ear rings or long hair are inherently sinful or immoral.

The attacking of artificial boundaries such as these, whether perpetrated by the Roman rulers of the time or the Jewish priestly caste/Temple cult, was a very strong part of Jesus's program of the Kingdom of God.  Paul's clinging to some of these boundaries regardless of his insistence that he was no longer bound by the Law shows how strong such societal programming can be.  The fact that Paul thought that homosexuality was immoral (along with women speaking in church, or women cutting their hair, or men growing their hair) is as irrelevant as the fact that Lot thought it was perfectly moral to pimp out his daughters to the residents of Sodom.

IMHO

[PlaysLikeMyung]

I was watching CNN this morning and there was to be a story on a girl who was being forced to take a 'gay sensitivity training' course. But she doesn't want to.

Oh, and she goes to a christian college.

I'll look for the story, but it seems relevant to this discussion