- Fmr. Mentor:
- Hey Ian. I read an essay by Siker discussing both sides of the debate over practicing homosexuality. Again, he discusses what you've already said. He says people do not choose to be homosexual. He reports that many Christians see homosexuality as an aberration comparable to people who have a predisposition to alcoholism. He goes on to argue that some believe that acceptance of those who engage in same-sex relationships is comparable to the issue of Gentile inclusion in the first century church. He also argues that the Greek words in the NT referring to homosexuality deal youth-adult homosexual relations. He also says that Paul had no concept of homosexual orientation.
- Nevertheless, the BIble never uplifts homosexual relationships. The NT carries on the tradition of the OT by never holding up homosexual relationships as in accord with God's intentions. It seems to come down to the authority of Scripture. McKnight, Rodeheaver and Smith see the NT as being in line with the OT tradition. The Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox churches have initially condemned homosexual relations because of the fact that homosexual acts are always portrayed in a negative light (this does not mean that such acts are more damaging than heterosexual acts...I'm just saying that Scripture never presents them as positive). Also, Silker argues that Scripture promotes patriarchal oppression of women and fails to condemn polygamy, etc. But I disagree. Scripture presents different roles for each partner in a heterosexual relationship. This does not mean either role is inferior. It just means that the roles are different. Polygamy etc. are not presented in a positive light in Scripture. (It was an act of doubt that drove Abraham to sleep with Hagar, Tamar posed as a shrine prostitute, obviously prostitution was often connected to idolatry, (as pointed out by Silker who claims that the OT condemns homosexual practices because they're connected to idolatry, not because they are homosexual acts.) Anyways, Scripture does not present polygamy, prostitution etc. in a positive light. So I don't see why Silker tries to argue that the fact that such events are reported in Scripture means that they are endorsed as acceptable. They are acts of disobedience, which anyone can see who reads the full stories, rather than focusing on only slivers of the story. (I'm not saying Silker does this...though it comes across like he does.) The fact that the OT mentions not combining different forms of cloth or sewing seeds together was to distinguish the Israelites from their pagan neighbors. And, you (and several scholars you cite) argue that the condemnation of homosexual acts related to pagan prostitution, NOT loving, committed relationships. Granted. But other scholars argue that the fact that Scripture never upholds loving, homosexual relations as a model for Christians to follow means that it is contrary to God's will of command. More to come.
- Me (Ian):
- With all due respect, this argument is weak. Based soley on the fact that a cultural background which never truly understood or discussed homosexuality as we know it today (or rather in a Godly way) and thus never approaches the topic in Scripture. You have yourself pointed out that the Bible discusses non-loving, non-monogomous acts between men and women. The *utter lack* of condemnation of natural, loving, and monogomous (the same moral standard demanded of heterosexuals) homosexual relationships leaves one to believe that God intended that homosexual relationships to not be [so damned].
- Thus, that reasoning taken into consideration, it is not logical to hold same-sex relationships of a Christian nature as sinful. And demanding that those persons of same-sex attraction should stay abstinent/celibate, is not only not Biblically upheld, but damging to the person so judged. With such prevailing evidence against the concept of homosexuality as a "sinful nature", one (as a Christian) cannot so justify that belief as a Christian one.
- As I pointed out earlier in previous discussions, the idea that homosexuality is totally a sin, regardless of it's nature commited, is an arachaic canon based from the Decree at the Hall of Minerva in 390 by the Bishop of Milan. It was a political tactic, using "eunuchs" as scape goats of civil unrest in that region during that time period. That said, it is an invented sin. Not truly canon of the Scriptures. It is equivalent to the former scape goating of Jews, where Scripture was twisted for racist purposes (and not Biblical). This instance is one of homophobia, where homosexuals (and transsexuals) have been excluded from the Church. OR forced to change their "ways" (EG. Celibacy or ex-gay) for the sake of dogmatism, one of the most poisonous of all docrtines (see Medieval Catholic Church and Martin Luther for examples).
- *This is not to call you unchristian. While you, believing what you do, condemn my refusal to abstinence in accordance with that(and I respect your right to believe that and I'm not offended as you do in a kind, civil manner) I also condemn the notion that homosexuality is a call to abstinence.
You don’t understand how much I love you and appreciate your support. You truly cannot comprehend how much I actually love you.
Gay, Straight, Queer, white, black, off-white beige: I love you. I try to, and do , as Christ does (given my, sadly, limited ability).
I do not post what I do in order to self-vindicate my sexuality, or to feel good about myself, or crusade fer’ JeSuuuusS. No. No I don’t.
I post and support LGBTQ Christians because of the Holy Spirit induced urge to vomit my entire phsycal being when I think of the pale, lifeless faces of young boys who couldn’t live with themselves any longer because of their God-given sexuality being an "an abomination"/"unnatural"/"an affront to God”. To see the bloody and scarred faces of a woman in South Africa who was raped for “corrective” purposes. To have your head ring with the envisioned or imagined, yet almost real SHRIEKS and SCREAMS of men bound together to a pole being cooked alive "in the name of Christ" from almost 1,500 years ago.
Those nightmares, those crimes are not of Christ. It is not Love, it is not God.
They are atrocities, they were begun by the lies of evil, ignorant, corrupt men(while, yes, Christ extends His love to them as He did to Saul/St. Paul) in an attempt to consolidate their power and justify their own predjudices using the veil of “Christianity”. The hurt and gut-wrenching pain they commited then, proliferates still today.
To me, I would be criminal to let it go unaddressed. I feel that it’s every Christian’s duty to defend the oppressed and to love them. Especially, if circumstances had been less kind, you’d be just as miserable.
Yes I am Gay. Yes I am Christian. Yes I love you. Yes I love Christ.
NO, homosexuality is NOT A SIN.
I feel that it is my job, in this tiny respect, to let you know that, LGBT kids and adults, God loves you. Straight friends, He loves you too.
And if I don’t change a single Conservative’s mind on here, so be it. If no one shares about what they read on here, so be it. Thats Christ’s job to touch hearts, I’m just a simple servant. No more.
And if I DO, please tell that I may know!
But my faith doesn’t hang in the balance for it.
Thanks for reading =)
*all info regarding my beliefs can be found in my ‘about me’ section to the left hand side of the screen.
…but God put it in you. Therefore, if anyone should attack it, it must likewise be defended (as graciously as possible). In this case, being homosexual and Christian is often attacked; therefore I take-on the name of ‘Gay Christian’ as a way of standing up for ourselves(the Christian LGBTQ Community), but not defining ourselves.
I hope one day soon, that will be unneccessary in any-given theological forum…