• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are pro-gay Christians really Christian?

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
In the Gospels, Jesus references many Old Testament books, so it must be assumed that he view those writings as authoritative also.
If you believe that then why don't you follow everything in the OT yourself? Do you abstain from eating pork and shellfish? Do you never mix meat and dairy? Keep your sideburns unshaven? Never wear cloths of mixed fibers? Refrain from working on the Sabbath (which is Saturday, not Sunday)? I could go on....


You really can't say that you believe parts of the Bible are true, but not others, because you run into the problem that most of the individual books reference verses from previous books. Either you believe all the Bible to be true or none of it, there's very little room for an in-between opinion. Of course there are always those who don't care about the blatant contractions of believing only parts of the Bible, or by following other religious writings in addition to the Bible, but their inconsistency is obvious.
And there are those who don't seem to care about the blatant contradictions within the bible itself, and choose to follow only parts of it while claiming to follow all of it.
 

MoonWater

Warrior Bard
Premium Member
I love my parents, but I don't agree with everything they do. I love my friends, I don't agree with everything they do. I love everyone, except for a precious few, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with what they do.

That still doesn't answer the question of why. Why is it a sin? What's so immoral about it?
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
There is such a thing as female homosexuality, more commonly called lesbianism. It is mentioned only once in either testament, in a fairly negative way, and is never prohibited. Anywhere. In the entire Bible. Yes many Christians condemn it as sinful, while at the same time permitting divorced people to remarry in their churches, voting for divorced people, never mentioning divorce as a sin, even though Jesus Christ himself explicitly, with no ambiguity, forbad divorce except under very limited circumstances. In fact, Barna research indicates that the religious group in the U.S. with the highest divorce rate is Protestant Christians. Higher than Jews, who do not prohibit divorce, or atheists.
 

Sonic247

Well-Known Member
That still doesn't answer the question of why. Why is it a sin? What's so immoral about it?
God designed man for woman and woman for man, it's rebellion against God. And a husband and his wife is a picture of Christ and the Church, that's also the reason why people died during the temple rituals when they didn't follow the instructions properly (the high priest would wear a rope on his foot so if he died he could be pulled out without others going in and dying).
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
God designed man for woman and woman for man, it's rebellion against God. And a husband and his wife is a picture of Christ and the Church, that's also the reason why people died during the temple rituals when they didn't follow the instructions properly (the high priest would wear a rope on his foot so if he died he could be pulled out without others going in and dying).

See my tread The low anthropology of women in the New Testament
 

Smoke

Done here.
God designed man for woman and woman for man,
A plain contradiction of your scriptures. "Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man."

Specifically, "the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him." What was meet for Adam may not be meet for me.

(the high priest would wear a rope on his foot so if he died he could be pulled out without others going in and dying).
That's a medieval legend that is not found in either the Bible or the Talmud.
 

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
A plain contradiction of your scriptures. "Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man."

Specifically, "the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him." What was meet for Adam may not be meet for me.
Curse the system that it will not let me frubal when they are so obviously deserved!! Ahhh!!!
 

spiritually inclined

Active Member
I don't understand how anybody can sit down and read the Bible and still believe it's God's inerrant word. What's funny is that believers are always telling me I've been deceived by worldly philosophers into believing the Bible isn't God's inerrant word, but that's not true. The way I learned that the Bible isn't inerrant was by reading the Bible. I suspect that most of those who believe the Bible is inerrant have never read the entire Bible attentively.
Same here. My close reading of the scriptures led me to leave behind fundamentalist views of inerrancy and inspiration by God.

James
 

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
Really? I didn't know that! :biglaugh:

Can you kindly point me to some kind of proof for this?

Did the high priest enter the Holy of Holies with a rope around his ankle? - ChristianAnswers.Net

Dr. W.E. Nunnally, a professor of Hebrew and early Judaism, has reported:
“The rope on the high priest legend is just that: a legend. It has obscure beginnings in the Middle Ages and keeps getting repeated. It cannot be found anywhere in the Bible, the Apocrypha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Josephus, the Pseudepigrapha, the Talmud, Mishna, or any other Jewish source. It just is not there.” [2]​
The Biblical Studies Foundation (loosely associated with Dallas Theological Seminary), similarly reports that their research has put the“the rope around the ankle-or-waist-or-maybe-the-leg” legend “to rest.”
 

Smoke

Done here.
Really? I didn't know that! :biglaugh:

Can you kindly point me to some kind of proof for this?
Short of reading the Bible and the Talmud to you? For the Bible, you could look in your concordance for "rope" and "cord," and you can buy a concordance to the Jerusalem Talmud for about sixty bucks. Or you could ask Sonic to document his assertion from either, but I think you'll be waiting a long time.

Edit: I see doppelgänger has already given an online reference. Thanks!
 

dawny0826

Mother Heathen
There are two issues here:
1) If you don't follow the Bible then you aren't Christian
2) If you follow the Bible then it is necessary to believe that homosexuality is wrong

1) I believe that a Christian is one who chooses to follow the biblical Christ. I don't quite understand how someone can comfortably consider themselves a Christian if they don't follow and apply the teachings within the Bible...at least on some level.

2) Christians interpret biblical text differently. As more of a literalist when it comes to biblical text...I personally believe that homosexual activity isn't smiled upon by God. The world "abomination" is used within the Bible to describe homosexual acts. I personally couldn't biblically justify acting upon my attraction and desires for women.

So for me, yes, it's necessary for me to believe that homosexuality is wrong.

For others, who "read" passages on homosexuality very differently than I do...they may not feel that there's sin in acting upon homosexual desires.

I believe that one can be homosexual AND Christian. I believe that one can be homosexual and still believe and apply the Word to their lives.

I don't believe that TO BE homosexual is a sin. I believe that to act upon homosexual desires is sinful but I don't believe reading that there is a weight to sin. And I believe that all sin...even regarding homosexuality was forgiven on the cross by the blood of Christ. One simply must ask for forgiveness and seek Christ for direction.
 

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
Thanks, Dopp. I'm going to win some money with this little tidbit. The cord on the foot thing is something that I see quite regularly in many contexts - popular as well as scholarly. It's funny how things just become a part of tradition.:yes:

No prob. Did I tell you I've got great tickets to the Cowboys - Patriots game in two weeks? :)
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
1) I believe that a Christian is one who chooses to follow the biblical Christ. I don't quite understand how someone can comfortably consider themselves a Christian if they don't follow and apply the teachings within the Bible...at least on some level.

2) Christians interpret biblical text differently. As more of a literalist when it comes to biblical text...I personally believe that homosexual activity isn't smiled upon by God. The world "abomination" is used within the Bible to describe homosexual acts. I personally couldn't biblically justify acting upon my attraction and desires for women.
Why? Your Bible doesn't have a problem with it.
 
Top