'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:45 pm Agree: 17   Disagree: 1

<<Oh really, Peter "wrote" what Jesus taught, and that provides enough evidence to suggests that Jesus (who never said anything about homosexuals) was using the Sodom and Gomorrah reference to demoralize homosexuals. >>

I wanted to also add that I don't know how you managed to believe that I said Jesus was using the S/G reference to demoralize homosexuals. You're twisting or misunderstanding what I said to fit your limited knowledgebase of rote answers.

What I'm saying is, you can look at Jesus support for OT law and Peter's, Jude's and Paul's beliefs and writings (all who had contact with Jesus and were taught by/with Jesus' disciples) to arrive at the scholarly conclusion of what Jesus believed about homosexuals and fornication outside of marriage and marriage only being between man and woman.

What do you think Jesus meant by sexual immorality below? What sexual experiences do you think Jesus meant were ok and not included in this?

Matthew 15
16"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17"Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "

You can't believe in Jesus and believe homosexuality is ok. You're simply in denial if you're trying. And, you can't preach to believers about what Jesus said if you don't believe what he said in the first place and are not Christian and don't understand the Bible.

Heck, are we to believe it's ok to do whatever it isn't recorded that Jesus said blindly without looking to the writings of those he himself taught??

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:17 am Agree: 6   Disagree: 1

<<Oh really, Peter "wrote" what Jesus taught, and that provides enough evidence to suggests that Jesus (who never said anything about homosexuals) was using the Sodom and Gomorrah reference to demoralize homosexuals. >>

LOL. So did Paul and Jude. Yes, to the evidence, and no to "demoralization". Just because homosexual sex is a sin doesn't mean Jesus would "demoralize" homosexuals (had we a recounting of such an encounter), just as he didn't demoralize other sinners. Jesus is all about giving sinners hope.

The people who attempt to demoralize homosexuals are not acting as Christ-followers but are happy to confuse their human discomfort with homosexuality with their "false" sense of Christian righteousness in order to wrongly pick out and persecute homosexuals. They're using the sin to make them feel good about persecuting homosexuals whom they do not understand and not want to understand because they're afraid of them. That's human, not Christian, and thanks for bringing me back to my ORIGINAL point!

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:05 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

<<Funny that when one uses any sort of Bible scripture to justify their point of view with authority and relevance, the accusation always turns to "using a GAY site as evidence.">>

Your response doesn't make sense, so I'm not sure if you even understood the comment. No one's saying the pro-homosexual site is evidence of anything...except the proliferation of an incorrect argument about what Jesus thought the sin of S/G was.

Again, Jude and Peter had very close contact to Jesus, and both of them agreed that Sodom's sins included sexual immorality (fornication). Why would they believe and teach this if it were contrary to what Jesus believed? They wouldn't. Paul breaks it down even further based on his learning from Jesus disciples. So, we can believe with confidence that Jesus disciples were spreading the word of Jesus regarding beliefs on sexual immorality. If Jesus believed anything different, the disciples would've let us know, and probably had been GLAD to let us know the good news.

Again, Jesus said he was here not to abolish the law but to fulfill it, etc.

You're hanging onto a vain hope to sway beliefs based on what Jesus didn't say without understanding his complete words or grasping his knowledge of the OT and the teachings of his own disciples.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:16 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

<<I follow the actual teachings of a faith much older than Paul's.

What does that statement mean? What teachings and faith are you talking about? Couldn't be Jesus, since that was only ~25 years before, and Paul shared Jesus belief directly taught by Jesus' disciples.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Thu Mar 20, 2008 2:33 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

My mistake on referring to Jude as a writing before Jesus' time. Obviously, I'm not regurgitating. If I were, I wouldn't make mistakes in my understanding as I research this to tune this argument.

Nevertheless, Jesus, when referring to Sodom, wasn't implying that Sodom's sin was being unkind to strangers, as I've read on some pro-gay sites. That's a gross assumption and incorrect. Again, Jesus was saying that NOT to welcome the disciples would bring harsher judgement than Sodom will receive on judgement day. Jesus wasn't implying anything about what the sin of Sodom was.

Again, Jude and Peter had very close contact to Jesus, and both of them agreed that Sodom's sins included sexual immorality (fornication). Paul breaks it down even further based on his learning from Jesus disciples. So, we can believe with confidence that Jesus disciples were spreading the word of Jesus regarding beliefs on sexual immorality. If Jesus believed anything different, the disciples would've let us know, and probably had been GLAD to let us know the good news.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:36 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Also, I apologize for the "gay watchdog" comment. Not very Christian of me.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:21 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

<<The closest one can come is through PAUL, however Paul received his understanding through what he calls a vision or revelation of Jesus through the Holy Spirit>>

That's incorrect. He didn't recieve his understanding or knowledge of Jesus' word during the revelation, only a command from Jesus to follow a few instructions to get him started.

Acts 9 "19...Saul spent several days with the disciples in Damascus. 20At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God."

So, according to scholars, this is only roughly 45-55AD (~25 years after Jesus' crucifixion), and he's learning directly from the disciples who were with Jesus.

If Paul is preaching about sexual immorality and was taught directly from the disciples who were with Jesus, then Paul wasn't just making it up that homosexuality, etc, was sexual immorality. Paul made it very clear and concrete.

Getting back to Sodom and Gomorrah, Peter and Jude (either Judas a disciple [not Iscariot] or Judas Jesus' own brother) who both had direct contact with Jesus both refer to the sexual immorality of Sodom and Gommorah.

Furthermore, Paul says the only way to overcome our sexual immorality and lust, if we must, is to marry...a woman.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Wed Mar 19, 2008 6:02 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

H. Jesus calls Peter "the rock" on which Jesus would found his church. Peter writes
1 Peter 4:3-4 3For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. 4They think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you.

Jesus taught Peter, and Peter is saying debauchery, lust, orgies are sinful. This provides more insight into Jesus beliefs on sexual immorality.

-------------

I. Whenever Jesus talks about marriage, he always mentions man and woman like it was common sense and why would it be any different.

19:4-6 - "Haven't you read," he answered, "that the one who created them from the beginning 'made them male and female' and said: 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two separate people but one. No man therefore must separate what God has joined together."
-------------

Sorry, though you're intelligent, I'm still not convinced you understand what you're saying and that you're not simply a gay watchdog watching over the Christian Post forums. :) You're possibly only accepting the parts of the Bible that you want to accept. Forgive me if I'm wrong. I'd love to see your responses.

A good debate based on what Jesus said is interesting, though how can we assume too much about what Jesus didn't say?

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Wed Mar 19, 2008 6:01 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

1. I'm not claiming literalism, but that's another topic that is off-topic.
2. If you're a Christ follower, then, let's tune this further to Jesus' words. If you don't even truly believe those, like you say, then we can't really go further:

-------------

A. Jesus says he's here to fulfill the law and that it's right to meet the law's demands. What's he talking about? "You must not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to complete them." What law?

-------------

B. Who said this: "This is my dearly-loved son, in whom I am well pleased" after Jesus was baptised.

-------------

C. Did Jesus believe he was God? Why did he answer yes to being the Christ? Why did he say not to tempt the Lord your God referring to himself?

-------------

D. Do you believe Jesus performed miracles and was raised from the dead? If not, why do you even follow the teachings of Jesus if he's a liar?

-------------

E. Why would Jesus claim that simple lusting over a woman was adultery? What's the harm in that?

-------------

F. Why would a man divorcing make a woman make her an adulteress, according to Jesus?

-------------

G. Jesus, very knowledgeable about past biblical writings, obviously knew of the sins of Sodom when he said a town that didn't welcome the disciples would fare better than "Sodom and Gomorrah" on judgement day. Wouldn't Jesus recognize the sins of Sodom to include fornication as listed in Jude 1 below. What does fornication mean to you? You can search the Greek meaning:

Jude 1.4, 7, 8 "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities."
RE Fornication, here's a good tie in to marriage between man and woman.
1 Corinthians 6:18-20 & 1 Corinthians 7:1-2
"Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband."

-------------

Split post...

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Wed Mar 19, 2008 12:54 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

Let me take a step back. I really only wanted to originally comment to Christians that it's not Christian to lump our human discomfort with homosexuality with homosexuality the sin as an excuse to bash gays. That's not love according to Jesus.

But, I'll leave you with the final word on homosexuality being a sin. First, with marriage only between man and woman, what do you believe sexual immorality includes when warned against in the NT? Do you believe the Bible, or at least what Jesus and his disciples wrote in the Bible? If not, how can you simply regurgitate what you've read on pro-gay sites about what the Bible says about homosexuality and hope to hope to find any real understanding?

Have you prayed for understanding of the following passages?

I Corinthians 6:9-11
9Do 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 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Romans 1:18-32
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Here are a couple of articles by a very thoughtful, celebate, Christian gay man that you'd be interested to read:

http://www.gaychristian.net/rons_view.php
http://www.gaychristian.net/ron_onjesus.php

That's the final word from me. I wish you the best in your search for truth.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:47 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

You're choosing to look at this in B/W without thinking critically about it, probably after reading pro-homosexual sites using these same arguments.

Are you saying rape is implied in this story? If so, then why were they wanting to rape the two males rather than the two virgin females. In fact, Lot considered that more wicked.


------------There is no reference to "sex" in that story. If you mean Lot offering his virgin daughters to the crowd of angry people, then FACTUALLY the reference would be an act of violence RAPE. Rape is a sexual assault, not homosexuality.-------

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:46 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

Jesus said he didn't come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Jesus says any sexuality outside of marriage is immoral, including just the thoughts.

It's in the Bible that any non-married sex is immoral, and there are references specifically to homosexuality, including in Sodom where Lot stayed.

Genesis 19:5-8

5And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

6And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,

7And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

8Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

-----

Leviticus 18:22

22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

-----

Leviticus 20:13

13If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination



If God wanted man to be partnered with man, God would've made a man for Adam and allowed them to reproduce.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:49 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

My last addendum is that marriage is not the solution to magically make homosexuality righteous. We're told that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

I honestly think homosexuals have a more difficult public struggle against their sinful nature than do we heterosexuals who are more accepted by the human nature.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:39 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

I should add that Jesus commands us to love everyone. It's very important. Jesus didn't tell us we must only love non-practicing sinners. No. We have to love like Jesus loved. If we couldn't love practicing sinners, who then could we love? We couldn't love anyone, because no one is perfect.

'Can You Be Gay and Christian?' Poses Conservative Activist

finalword »

Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:35 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

FACT: The Bible condemns all unmarried sexuality.

FACT: The Bible says all sin is of nature.

The proof that homosexuals are born gay is that the Bible says all sin is of nature. By fact that marriage is only to be between a man and woman, means homosexuality as well as unmarried sex or sexual thoughts of any type including heterosexual, are sinful. Based on that, I'm a born heterosexual sinner given my lust issue.

Is homosexual sin worse than adultery or heterosexual lust (also adultery according to Jesus)? Not anywhere I can find in the Bible. Cities were destroyed for widespread sexual immorality of all types, not merely homosexuality.

We're all tempted according to our lusts. God says he gives us a way out of every temptation, including hetero or homosexual. So, while I don't believe a hetero luster or a homesexual luster can change those stripes, I think we'll all have a rough life fighting those natural temptations.

Now, as a hetero luster, I'm not as contemptable to Christians as a homosexual luster. Why? Because we're confusing our human discomfort with homesexuality (considered a weakness) with homosexuality as sin, and our need to have a good reason not to accept homosexuality, I guess. We're lumping the human discomfort together with the sin and calling it "ok to not love the homosexual sinner". But, is it ok to not love the heterosexual sinner or the murderer or the thief? If that's the case, who then can we possibly love, since all of us our sinners, and I dare say we're all immorally sexual sinners thanks to our fleshly nature.

I'm a hetero with a hetero lust problem. Can I be a Christian if I haven't conquered that? Can you be a Christian facing your own non-homosexual immorality?