Let us begin with this important fact: Ex-Gays are myth. Simply, they do not exist. They were either never gay to begin with (rather bisexual, forced to be acting on their heterosexual tendencies) or they are homosexual who have re-entered the closet.
Second, we should distance all association between Ex-Gays and their heterosexual sponsors from the Christian faith. There are no Biblical prohibitions on homosexuality or marriage equality. The way they construe Scripture for a bigoted end combined with the lasting damage they do to their victims is irreconcilible with the Gospel.
I hope this answer satisfies.
I want to change. and I have been forced to have a girlfriends but it doesn’t seem to happen. i don’t have chemistry … with guys is so simple for me to just talk to them. I feel lonely and I prefer to stay isolated. because I don’t anyone to think I’m gay. I decided to just remain celibate and wait for Jesus to come back. do you think I’m still gonna go to hell, even tho i am not sexually active but I do like and have loved men ??
Well as roman might mean to do, he is misdirected fundamentally. He has some very…interesting interpretations of Scripture that are not Biblically or historically valid. The most important one being that homosexuality is a sin, as well as a disorder, and that homosexual interaction in a loving and committed context is as well. The second most important is that God will change your sexual orientation, He wont (why should He “heal” what is neither a sickness nor a sin?). Even the founders of the most notorious “Ex-Gay” organization, Exodus International, have recanted their earlier claims that they were “healed”. If fact, all professional scientific studies show that homosexuality is not a disorder nor able to be “cured”. The American Psychiatric Association delisted homosexuality as a disease in 1973 (x), and internationally various mental health and medical associations have followed suit since then,
The primary element of your inquiry, however, is not of the scientific and medical aspect of homosexuality; it is the theological aspect.
Many Conservatives believe that homosexuality is a sin and should be harshly rebuke. Conversely, Christians like myself and others strongly reject that stance and in turn rebuke its proponents. Why? Because thoughtful analysis and exegesis of Scripture shows that homosexuality isn’t sinful and as such is not necessitating of “healing” or celibacy. Allow me to insert an excerpt from a piece I have written previously establishing my position:
Genesis 19 is often used to condemn homosexuals (where the term ‘Sodomites’ comes from). Often people assume Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for homosexuality, but this is false. Ezekiel says, “…This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it. (Ezekiel 16:46-50)” Not a word mentioned about homosexual acts (let alone homosexual orientation)! However, we can assume the lust and intent to rape seen in Genesis 19 was one of the ‘abominable’ things mention in Ezekiel.
Then we have the Levitical texts, Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. Both deal with homosexual acts, yes, but within a context! Leviticus 18 is prefaced with “’You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. (Leviticus 18:3)”. This give a further context to the condemnation of the cult of Molech in 18:21, where child sacrifice is forbidden on both an ethical and religious level, and pagan practices in general. But it is also interesting that the Cult of Molech involved cult prostitution and temple rape, which is then condemned in Lev. 18:22 and 20:13. The acts committed within a non-consenting and pagan context were what were (and still are) condemned.
Romans 1:26-27 is unique in that it uses very specific language. This lays out clearly Paul’s view of what was natural for women and men sexually, and is the verse that is most often pointed to when arguing whether or not homosexuality is natural. Or does it? When looking at this passage, we should discuss the verse in its proper context. Paul describes these men and women first as people who have turned their backs on God. Paul says,
“For even though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.”
These people had turned their backs on God, despite having once known him, choosing to worship man and beasts over the one true God. This is why they exchanged what was natural to them—heterosexual desires—for what was unnatural—homosexual desires.
Within its context, we learn that this passage is describing heterosexual men and women who turned their backs on God and then chose to go against their God-given sexualities and fornicate with each other. It takes knowing a gay Christian to really understand the next concept I’m going to platform, but bear with me if you don’t personally know someone who is GLB: It’s that practicing homosexuals do not give up their natural heterosexuality for homosexuality.
Next we see, 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 used to condemn homosexuals. But we that there was no word for “homosexual/ity” in any language until 1868 when it was coined by German Psychiatrist Helmut Thielike in a critical response to a Prussian sodomy law. The word mistranslated as ‘homosexual/homosexual offender’ in certain Biblical translations, is ‘arsenokoitai’. A word meaning ‘man-bed’ (literally). It has been translated throughout history as ‘pervert’ (*the most accurate), ‘child molester’, and ‘masturbator’(during Martin Luther’s era; but that is also a mistranslation). ‘Pervert’ or ‘perversion’ is the best translation as the last time it was used in the Classical era (and specifically by a Classical church leader) in the 2nd Century AD to condemn men who were having anal sex with their wives. Not homosexual acts or homosexuality itself!
In fact it wasn’t until 360 years after Christ [and 330 years after St. Paul] that homosexuality was condemned (specifically against “born/natural eunuchs” in the official document that did so. Also seen in Matt. 19:12, where Christ briefly but does in fact, affirm the nature of male-homosexuals). This was done by St. Athanasius who blamed “natural/eunuchs” for civil unrest in Cisalpine Gaul and Milan. He suggested they be burned alive for their “sin” and, with Emperor Theodosius I under penance to him, had it so. Then the decree was posted to the Roman Hall of Minerva. So began an era of homophobia in the Church for the next 1800 years.
So here is what I suggest to you now: Don’t stay celibate or try to become “ex gay” for fear of living in what is badly misconstrued as a “sin”. Your sexual orientation does not merit your “living sin”. Nor would you being happily dating a member of the same-sex or having sexual relations with a same-sex partner in a loving and selfless marriage be “sinful”. If you were sleeping around and whatnot, then yes, that would be sinful. But all in all, homosexuals are no more sinful than are their heterosexual counterparts.
To that end, even IF homosexuality is a sin (which it clearly isn’t) then who’s to say you’ll go to hell? The blood of Jesus covers all things, and humans are perpetually living in sin no matter how hard we try not too (and you should try, of course)! That’s the whole reason He came! To save humanity from Judgement. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a pharisee and a false-Christian.
I pray that you will learn to accept who you are and live out the life God has planned for you. And never forget He loves you Deeply, and nothing can ever change that!
( I personally didn’t write this however this is exactly how i wanted to put it)(it comes from an excerpt here its in a booklet “When passions are Confused: Understanding homosexuality”)
Some people speculate that the biblical passages indicating homosexual activity as sinful refer to a completely different kind of homosexuality than is practiced today.
For instance, they suggest that Leviticus 18:22, which states, “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable,” is only condemning homosexuality associated with pagan religious practices. A similar claim is made regarding the apostle Paul’s comments about homosexual behavior in Romans 1:24-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and 1 Timothy 1:9-10. Some propose that Paul’s statements referred only to pederasty (sex between men and boys) or prostitution involved in pagan worship. In either case, it is argued that Paul did not have in mind “loving and committed” homosexual relationships.
One of the major shortcomings in this sort of speculation is that there is nothing in the surrounding context of these passages that justifies limiting the meaning of these verses to homosexuality involved with pagan worship or to pederasty. The meaning certainly included such activities, but there’s no evidence to suggest that Paul was referring to these activities exclusively.
Conversely, the context shows, for example, that it’s impossible to restrict the meaning of Romans 1:24-27 to pederasty, given that Paul referred to female homosexuality in the same way as male homosexuality: “Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another” (vv.26-27).
Furthermore, an examination of the Greek word arsenokoites used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 clearly shows that his intent was to condemn all homosexual lust and behavior, including what takes place today.
Biblical scholars have long understood the Greek word arsenokoites translated “homosexual offenders” in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and “perverts” in 1 Timothy 1:10 to mean “one who lies with a male as with a female, a sodomite.”12 It’s also been demonstrated that Jews in the Greek civilization acquired the word arsenokoites from the Greek Old Testament text of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, which condemns homosexual activity in general.13
It’s evident that Paul didn’t restrict the meaning of this word to certain kinds of homosexual behavior. Even ancient Greek writings used it in a broad sense that would include all homosexual behavior.14 Therefore, according to Paul, all forms of homosexual activity are sinful.
Here’s where I feel that this analysis is, while an interesting one, a flawed one. If you are looking towards defining the context of the verses in terms of what The Apostle Paul was saying about what was going on at the time, as well as how it can be applied to today, then the limitation of meaning needs to be done so by the words used. Obviously. However, the use of arsenokoites was not used in the terms of “homosexual offenders” until the 20th century (as the word homosexual didn’t even exist until 1868, and means something completely different now than it did then. If you’re interested in knowing where I got that date look up Jonathan Katz’ The Invention of Heterosexuality.).
Arsenokoites’ appearance in ancient Greek literature was extremely rare, and of the 73 instances that it was used it always referred to the word in the context of rape or sexual coercion. An example of areenokoites/arsenokoitai being used in Greek literature was the myth in which zeus raped ganymede. The Apostle Paul’s use of arsenokoites/arsenokoitai cannot just be chalked up to him magically redefining its usage to include what we know as homosexual relationships in general. That is careless study. Particularly seeing how if he were condemning homosexuality in general, there were far more popular Greek words that would make more sense in the context of these verses.
The other thing I want to suggest is that changing your sexual orientation from x to y or z is the sin that Paul is talking about when he states “and even the women exchanged their lusts”. Forcing oneself to change one’s natural sexual orientation is the sin, not “going gay” (not that one consciously could make that choice to begin with anyways without harming oneself immensely).
As an ex-ex-gay, I have experienced trying to change my sexual orientation and failed miserably. I was extremely depressed thinking that I was failing God, to the point where I was becoming suicidal. I know this is not the case for all ex-gays, but for most it is. And conversion therapies that have been produced by organizations like the Exodus Ministry have not only been proven to be psychologically harmful as well as based on archaic psychotherapies, but also have been proven to fail on a majority level (even their founders now condemn Exodus Ministry). Most people who have “succeeded” in becoming ex-gay (at least from what I’ve noticed) were bisexual or heterosexual (thinking that they might be gay) to begin with, as is the case with Joe Dallas author of Desire in Conflict. So “changing their orientation” is only a minor modification in their behavior, and not changing their orientation.
I’m not saying that you are unhappy or suicidal, or even damaged goods. I don’t know that and don’t want to make that assumption. I also don’t want to assume that you were bisexual or heterosexual and questioning. If you truly think that being ex-gay is what works for you, then by all means. However I cannot condone that or the theological ideology that you prescribe to.
I don’t want to get into an unending debate with you, as you and Ian have already been going at it with each other for a while now. Contentious arguing is going to get nobody anywhere fast, and the Bible is against such arguing, so I won’t partake in any such arguing.
As coals are to burning coals, and wood to fire; so is a contentious man to kindle strife.
I’m not going to point fingers as to who is being contentious, but I’m cutting it off here. If you would like to have a civil conversation with us in the future, that would be welcomed. But for now I think it would be best if we just let this sit for a while till our coals cool off. Lol.
I hope all is well, and God Bless.
SIGN THIS PETITION —- Please Reblog! ——
By signing this petition you help eject “Ex Gay” Proponents who claim a medical license in California and prohibit them from practicing any psycho-medical profession in the state.