Conservative Christians should reexamine their views on homosexuality.

[Agnostic75]

My Take: Bible condemns a lot, so why focus on homosexuality? – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

The article concludes with "opponents of gay marriage aren’t defending the Bible’s values. They’re using the Bible to defend their own." I would go further by saying that if the Bible condemns homosexuality, those authors defended their own values, not God's values.

Over 1500 species of animals and birds practice homosexuality. From a Christian perspective, why is that? Why does God force many animals and birds to practice homosexuality?

It is so well-established that the Bible contains many errors that it is a wonder that any Christian believes that God inspired and preserved the Bible free of errors except for obvious copyist and scribal errors. If there is some logic to the proposition that a loving God would inspire and preserve his will, wouldn't there also be some logic to the proposition that a loving God would not injure and kill humans and animals with hurricanes? Once Christians start second guessing God, that opens the door to unlimited second guessing by Christians.

 

[Storm]

:clap FRUBALS! :clap

 

[Gjallarhorn]

God condemned homosexuality? He never said anything about lesbians...

 

[Storm]

God condemned homosexuality? He never said anything about lesbians...

Just proof that they're putting words in God's mouth.

:rainbow1:

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

God condemned homosexuality? He never said anything about lesbians...

Queen Victoria did not believe lesbianism was possible.
So she had all mention of them removed from the Bill to make homosexuality illegal.

Good result ...poor reasoning.

 

[Jose Fly]

The culture warriors are losing this battle, and in surprisingly rapid fashion. Public opinion polls now show that a majority of Americans support gay marriage, and the trend towards even greater support is surprisingly strong. And now that more and more states are allowing gay marriage, it becomes more normalized, more people know a gay person, and all the cries of the end of the world as we know it from the religious right are revealed as the bigoted garbage that they are.

I think the religious right has recognized this trend and is shifting to Muslims as the targets of their bigotry (see all the "anti-Sharia law" bills and laws). I listen to right-wing Christian talk radio fairly often, and there's no doubt that the drumbeat is shifting from "the evils of the gay agenda" to "all Muslims are terrorists and want to impose Sharia law". Fundamentalist Christians have always imposed their fears and bigotry on one group or another; it used to be the Jews, then the Catholics, then the blacks, then the gays, and now the Muslims.

 

[sojourner]

The culture warriors are losing this battle, and in surprisingly rapid fashion. Public opinion polls now show that a majority of Americans support gay marriage, and the trend towards even greater support is surprisingly strong. And now that more and more states are allowing gay marriage, it becomes more normalized, more people know a gay person, and all the cries of the end of the world as we know it from the religious right are revealed as the bigoted garbage that they are.

I think the religious right has recognized this trend and is shifting to Muslims as the targets of their bigotry (see all the "anti-Sharia law" bills and laws). I listen to right-wing Christian talk radio fairly often, and there's no doubt that the drumbeat is shifting from "the evils of the gay agenda" to "all Muslims are terrorists and want to impose Sharia law". Fundamentalist Christians have always imposed their fears and bigotry on one group or another; it used to be the Jews, then the Catholics, then the blacks, then the gays, and now the Muslims.

the Big Three boogie-men I find on conservative radio are:
1) Abortion
2) Homosexual marriage
3) Right to die

 

[Jose Fly]

the Big Three boogie-men I find on conservative radio are:
1) Abortion
2) Homosexual marriage
3) Right to die

That's the list I used to hear, say around 10 years or so ago. I haven't heard them complaining about end of life issues for quite a while. The list I hear now (in order of frequency):

1) Abortion
2) Islam
3) President Obama
4) Israel
5) Homosexuals

Granted, there is often some overlap between the topics (e.g. Obama and Israel).

 

[Quiddity]

Jonathan is better versed in Christian history then your everyday evangelical. However, it's incomplete and has some holes. I suppose for the supporter of gay marriage, it's irrelavent that Dale B Martin pretty much disregards foundationalist interpretations of the bible. His hermeneutics is precise and hand picked. It's ironic coming from someone who asks his students to think for themselves. Essentially code word for stay away from anything traditional. His concerns are well placed, with his ultimate objection being that Bible interpretation can be..."ethically dangerous … because it masks the very real interpretive agency of the human interpreter and thus allows the interpreter to avoid responsibility for the … social effect of her or his interpretation" (pg. 16 Sex and the Single Savior: Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation)

Having said that, I can't recall a single sermon on the condenmnation of homosexuality. No doubt, the world knows where my church stands on this issue but it's pointless trying to tell others that it's really not the vast majority of Christians making noise; mostly right-wing evangelicals and LGBT (and it's supporters).

 

[fallingblood]

My Take: Bible condemns a lot, so why focus on homosexuality? – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

The article concludes with "opponents of gay marriage aren’t defending the Bible’s values. They’re using the Bible to defend their own." I would go further by saying that if the Bible condemns homosexuality, those authors defended their own values, not God's values.

We shouldn't just stop at Christians here though. Homosexuality is a minority, is seen to be different, and thus is deemed to be wrong or immoral. We see this happening to many different minorities throughout time.

This phenomena is not just a Christian one though. Even in non-religious communities, one can still see the condemnation of homosexuals. Having a religious text for some, just makes it easier for them to voice their opinions with what they feel to be authority.

This is also a reason why I believe that instead of focusing on Christians persecution of homosexuals, one should look at the underlying motivation for the hatred. Once that is done, than more progress can be had.

Over 1500 species of animals and birds practice homosexuality. From a Christian perspective, why is that? Why does God force many animals and birds to practice homosexuality?

That would easily be explained by the Christians who condemn homosexuality (their really is no official Christian perspective. In fact, more and more Christians are finding nothing wrong with homosexuality). It would be that the devil perverted their true nature.

It is so well-established that the Bible contains many errors that it is a wonder that any Christian believes that God inspired and preserved the Bible free of errors except for obvious copyist and scribal errors. If there is some logic to the proposition that a loving God would inspire and preserve his will, wouldn't there also be some logic to the proposition that a loving God would not injure and kill humans and animals with hurricanes? Once Christians start second guessing God, that opens the door to unlimited second guessing by Christians.

Even with the errors in the Bible, that does not mean that the actual text is not inspired. It means that it is not infallible.

A text can be inspired and still contain errors. That would be in part with the nature of those who are copying down those inspired words.

As for a loving God killing humans and animals with hurricanes? Not really. It would be closer to say that God created the world, and allows certain events to transpire. He is not making those events happen, but because of the nature of the world, they do. There is a difference.

As for second guessing, that is quite common for Christians. In fact, many times, it is encouraged. For instance, seminaries teach exactly that. That one must question.

 

[Agnostic75]

Even with the errors in the Bible, that does not mean that the actual text is not inspired. It means that it is not infallible.

A text can be inspired and still contain errors. That would be in part with the nature of those who are copying down those inspired words.

If a God inspired parts of the Bible, but did not inspire any Bible writer to specifically write about homosexuality, obviously, nothing that the Bible says about homosexuality is inspired, and the original writers, and/or copiers merely wrote about their own prejudices and also attributed their prejudices to God.

 

[Agnostic75]

We shouldn't just stop at Christians here though. Homosexuality is a minority, is seen to be different, and thus is deemed to be wrong or immoral. We see this happening to many different minorities throughout time.

Of course, but since I am an American, and the chief opponents of homosexuality by far in the U.S. are conservative Christians, for purposes of this thread, I wish to discuss conservative Christian theology.

This is also a reason why I believe that instead of focusing on Christians persecution of homosexuals, one should look at the underlying motivation for the hatred. Once that is done, than more progress can be had.

The main motivation for many if not the majority of conservative Christians is "God said it, I believe it, and that is all that there is to it." How do you propose to try to deal with that group of Christians?

Many conservative Christians would like to get divorced, but do not do so because of the Bible. Clearly, the only motivation at all that many conservative Christians need regarding any issue is the Bible.

 

[fallingblood]

If a God inspired parts of the Bible, but did not inspire any Bible writer to specifically write about homosexuality, obviously, nothing that the Bible says about homosexuality is inspired, and the original writers, and/or copiers merely wrote about their own prejudices and also attributed their prejudices to God.

I agree that the authors prejudices would come into play. In the case of homosexuality, it is probably a little more complicated as to why they had those prejudices, but that would be a different discussion.

If the Bible is inspired, then to point out what places are and are not inspired would be quite a difficult task, and really, that was not the point of my post. My point was to simply show the error in your statement. Just because there are errors in the Bible, that does not mean it is not inspired. It simply means that there are errors in it. It being inspired would be a completely different thing.

 

[fallingblood]

Of course, but since I am an American, and the chief opponents of homosexuality by far in the U.S. are conservative Christians, for purposes of this thread, I wish to discuss conservative Christian theology.

However, they are not the only opponents, and as the link you posted suggested, it really isn't based on Christian theology, but deeper prejudices, those prejudices should probably be addressed.

The main motivation for many if not the majority of conservative Christians is "God said it, I believe it, and that is all that there is to it." How do you propose to try to deal with that group of Christians?

The Bible also states not to eat pig or shell fish, yet conservative Christians do that. So, placing this prejudice simply on the idea that "God said it" really doesn't work. Because, as it is quite apparent, they don't follow everything that "God says."

Thus, there must be something deeper. And since we see opponents to homosexuals in both other religions, and even the non-religious, it is quite safe to say that it is not God or the Bible that is fueling this anti-homosexual ideas. I would propose that it is based on the fact that homosexuals are a minority, and thus seen to be different, they are persecuted. This is seen throughout history with various different minorities. Conservative Christians simply hide behind their Bibles.

Many conservative Christians would like to get divorced, but do not do so because of the Bible. Clearly, the only motivation at all that many conservative Christians need regarding any issue is the Bible.

The motivation can't be the Bible as the Bible actually states, in Deuteronomy, that divorce is okay. Paul also states that divorce is okay (of course, both state that there are certain circumstances for that).

So there must be something deeper.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

However, they are not the only opponents, and as the link you posted suggested, it really isn't based on Christian theology, but deeper prejudices, those prejudices should probably be addressed.

Well, if it doesn't come from there, the theology that they adopt doesn't help.

 

[Agnostic75]

However, they are not the only opponents, and as the link you posted suggested, it really isn't based on Christian theology, but deeper prejudices, those prejudices should probably be addressed.

According to many conservative Christians, their opposition to homosexuality is largely based on Christian theology. Would you like for me to post the links to some conservative Christian websites that claim that their opposition to homosexuality is largely based upon the Bible?

The Bible also states not to eat pig or shell fish, yet conservative Christians do that. So, placing this prejudice simply on the idea that "God said it" really doesn't work. Because, as it is quite apparent, they don't follow everything that "God says."

But you must know that not eating pig and shellfish was Old Testament law, not New Testament theology. In the Old Testament, God ordered that anyone who worked on the Sabbath Day, or worshipped other Gods, should be put to death. Surely you would not claim that conservative Christians are not consistent if they do not want people to be put to death today for working on the Sabbath Day, or worshipping other Gods.

Paul says that people can eat whatever they want to eat, and worship on whatever day of the week they want to worship.

Thus, there must be something deeper. And since we see opponents to homosexuals in both other religions, and even the non-religious.......

You keep mentioning that there is something deeper, but you still have not stated what it is.

It is well-known that in the U.S., the chief opponents of homosexuality by far are conservative Chrisitians. The same goes for abortion and physician assisted suicide. For conservatives of many religions, what their religious books say is often all the motivation that they need to believe something. Are you trying to propose that conservatives of all religions do not pay any attention to their religious books, and do not believe that their religious books state what the will of God is.

One poll showed that about 40% of Americans believe that the earth is young, and that creationism is true. Why do you suppose that they believe those things? Surely because they believe that that is what the Bible teaches.

.......it is quite safe to say that it is not God or the Bible that is fueling this anti-homosexual ideas. I would propose that it is based on the fact that homosexuals are a minority, and thus seen to be different, they are persecuted. This is seen throughout history with various different minorities. Conservative Christians simply hide behind their Bibles.

Your arguments are not reasonable. Islam is a very large religion, not a minority religion, but conservative Christians oppose it because they believe that it is a false religion. Deism is a minority religion, and conservative Christians oppose it, but they oppose it because they believe that it is a false religion, not because it is a minority religion.

I am quite surprised that you do not know that for a lot of Christians, the Bible alone is all of the motivation that they need to believe many things.

The motivation can't be the Bible as the Bible actually states, in Deuteronomy, that divorce is okay.

But Jesus basically said that Moses accepted divorce because the hearts of the people were hard, and that his (Jesus') new teaching was that divorce was only acceptable in cases of adultery.

Paul also states that divorce is okay (of course, both state that there are certain circumstances for that).

Where does Paul say that divorce is okay? At any rate, the teachings of Jesus are the most important teachings in the New Testament.

Stanton L. Jones, and Mark A. Yarhouse, wrote a book that is titled Homosexuality, the Use of Scientific Research in the Church’s Moral Debate, copyright 2000. Jones has a Ph.D. in psychology. As of the year 2000, he has been provost of Wheaton College in Wheaton, Illinois, a private, non-denominational Christian college. Mark A. Yarhouse also has a Ph.D. in psychology. As of the year 2000, he has been an assistant professor of psychology at Regent University, Virginia, a Christian school that was founded by Pat Robertson in 1978.

Regarding homosexuality, the authors have a distinguished reputation among many conservative Christians, and are often quoted by conservative Christians. You will find mention of them at many places at the Internet.

Jones and Yarhouse are both conservative Christian inerrantists. Consider the following
excerpts from the book from near the end of chapter 4:

“Finally, we have seen that there has never been any definitive judgment by the fields of psychiatry or psychology that homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle. But what if it were? Such judgment would have little bearing on the judgments of the Christian church. In the days of Nero it was healthy, and adaptive to worship the Roman emperor. By contemporary American stardards a life consumed with greed, materialism, sensualism, selfishness, divorce and pride is judged healthy, but God weighs such a life and finds it lacking.”

How do Jones and Yarhouse believe that God “finds it lacking”? Obviously, by what God says in the Bible.

In chapter 6, the authors spend a good deal of time quoting the Bible as the ultimate authority on sex and marriage.

The authors leave no doubt that they subscribe to “God said it, I believe it, and that is all that there is to it.” If you do not believe me, contact the authors and find out for yourself.

You and I know that many if not most conservative Christians are sometimes inconsistent, but in their minds, they have good reasons for their inconsistencies, and in their minds, God partly uses the Bible to communicate with humans, including what the Bible teaches about homosexuality.

 

[SarahRuth]

What Christians believe the bible teaches changes along with (though at a slower pace than) what society believes is right/acceptable. The bible used to be used to defend slavery. Obviously you won't find many Christians claiming that slavery is okay these days. The bible has also been used to defend the idea that men are superior to women, and we are witnessing the transition now to the idea that women and men are equal and not relagated to particular roles within the family and society. We regularly see bible verses re-interpreted based on what society deems acceptable, so why are we surprised that we are seeing the same pattern with homosexuality?

 

[JacobEzra.]

I do not think my view on homosexuality will change. I will stay lined with the scripture and with my Church. But that said I would like to say something, before I am accused of being hateful or homophobic.

I believe that everyone has a cross to bear that was given to us when we were born to carry through and sanctify us, bringing us to the Lord and his saving grace.

I believe Michael Voris put it very great. I can not post the link though, but PM and I will I guess

 

[Father Heathen]

It is interesting how christian fundamentalists seem to obsess over certain sins while ignoring, downplaying or even making exceptions for others. How can they be so confident that god would abide their blatant hypocrisy? Where is the public outcry over coveting and greed, or wearing mixed fabrics or eating pork and shellfish?
But anyway, given that the bible gives instructions on how to sell ones own daughter into sexual slavery, it makes you wonder what kind of person would actually use that book as a moral compass in the modern world.

 

[MoonWater]

The thing is the bible doesn't even condemn homosexuality when you look at it in it's original language. This is because the original language had no actual word for homosexual. The words that were translated into "homosexual" in various passages are either add-ins or better translated as "male prostitute" or "temple prostitute". The only part of the bible that could truly be seen to condemn homosexuality is the phrase "though shalt not lie with man as with woman" and that is in the old testament in leviticus so at most it really only applies to jews because of their covenant. And even then it's really only condemning male on male sex for jews, not necessarily marriage.