How can Christians not condemn homosexual behavior?

[F0uad]

There are many Christians who condemn homosexuals practices, many Christian Africa countries have a death penalty or imprisonment for these acts and this law is supported by the majority of its citizens. What about the Pope?

I think the Western ''Christians'' have been fed up of thinking being an homosexual is normal and everyone should be one nowadays, the problem is that there is no Western-Christians state to actually condemn the act if a Christian in the west says he dislikes homosexuals he or she will get attacked on all fronts what makes no sense since secularism is based on freedom of speech and thinking as you want.

 

[sojourner]

There are many Christians who condemn homosexuals practices, many Christian Africa countries have a death penalty or imprisonment for these acts and this law is supported by the majority of its citizens. What about the Pope?

I think the Western ''Christians'' have been fed up of thinking being an homosexual is normal and everyone should be one nowadays, the problem is that there is no Western-Christians state to actually condemn the act if a Christian in the west says he dislikes homosexuals he or she will get attacked on all fronts what makes no sense since secularism is based on freedom of speech and thinking as you want.

Homosexuality is a normal sexual orientation, confirmed by the DSM. Why should something that is normal human function be condemned?

 

[Kathryn]

Now why would sex outside marriage be wrong, if a man made religion didn't claim that a man made ceremony was the only way to have sex?
Because that is what you are claiming, a man made ceremony is the only justification for sexul relations, sorry I don't see it.

That's fine. It's your right not to see it, and I would work diligently to protect that right.

 

[Kathryn]

Sorry to be a pooty parper but merlot is the red wine drunk by non red wine drinkers. Shiraz, Durif, Cab Sav are red wines. Just sayin'

I like a good shiraz and cab as well. It's just that when I am in the mood for a good, oaky, smoky merlot - well, that's what I want and I don't care whether it's a "serious" wine or not. I'm self confident enough to say "Screw them and the horse they rode in on" and raise the bottle.

Not that I'm saying "Screw you" - unless, of course, you're implying that I'm not a classy broad.

Because I is one.

 

[Revoltingest]

I like a good shiraz and cab as well. It's just that when I am in the mood for a good, oaky, smoky merlot - well, that's what I want and I don't care whether it's a "serious" wine or not. I'm self confident enough to say "Screw them and the horse they rode in on" and raise the bottle.
Not that I'm saying "Screw you" - unless, of course, you're implying that I'm not a classy broad.
Because I is one.

I have really fancy taste in wine.
I drink only red wine, & I'll spend up to $3 per bottle.
On rare occasions, I've paid $4.

 

[Kathryn]

I have really fancy taste in wine.
I drink only red wine, & I'll spend up to $3 per bottle.
On rare occasions, I've paid $4.

I've got a fine bottle of Night Train in the freezer chilling. See you in ten.

 

[sojourner]

I have really fancy taste in wine.
I drink only red wine, & I'll spend up to $3 per bottle.
On rare occasions, I've paid $4.

Me too! But only if the box is really fresh -- or if the cap is screwed on real tight.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

There are many Christians who condemn homosexuals practices, many Christian Africa countries have a death penalty or imprisonment for these acts and this law is supported by the majority of its citizens. What about the Pope?

I am sure the pope is against gay bashing.

I think the Western ''Christians'' have been fed up of thinking being an homosexual is normal and everyone should be one nowadays, the problem is that there is no Western-Christians state to actually condemn the act if a Christian in the west says he dislikes homosexuals he or she will get attacked on all fronts what makes no sense since secularism is based on freedom of speech and thinking as you want.

Lots of Christians still speak out against being gay all over the US. It is sad but true.

 

[Road Warrior]

I think the Western ''Christians'' have been fed up of thinking being an homosexual is normal and everyone should be one nowadays,

Maybe in your neigborhood, but I travel around a good portion of the continental USA and the only people talking about "everyone should be one" are homophobes and the ill-informed. Most educated people know homosexuality is genetic and that we can't "turn gay". Sure, people can commit either heterosexual or homosexual acts, but that doesn't mean they are gay or straight. Prisoners may commit homosexual acts for sexual release or a form of dominance, but they revert to their normal sexual preference when released.

 

[Skwim]

You didn't read my post fully, did you! It adequately refutes everything you've said here.

Hardly. That those who authored the texts may have lacked a specific word for homosexuality, certainly doesn't mean they were unaware of

ho·mo·sex·u·al·i·ty
n.

→1. Sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
→2. Sexual activity with another of the same sex.

(Source: thefreedictionary.com)
​

The biblical authors had no concept of sexual orientation.

And you know this to be a fact because ___________fill in the blank______________ .

What they were referencing had to do with two things:

Sexual acts they considered to be unnatural

Yup. like,

1. Sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
2. Sexual activity with another of the same sex.
​

-- acts which have subsequently been found to be completely normal, for folks who are oriented that way.

Like pedophilia and necrophilia is completely normal, for folks who are oriented that way.

Christians can comfortably not condemn homosexuality, since it is not addressed in the bible,

Really.

Leviticus 20:13 (NLT)

“If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense."
​

in our culture, shame and honor are not sexually embodied.

Whaaaa???

Your head-in-the-sand and grasping at straws is duly noted and have my sympathies.

 

[Skwim]

Would you point out the specific verses that you are thinking of in the NT?

Desfox posted them in post #8

 

[Road Warrior]

Like pedophilia and necrophilia is completely normal, for folks who are oriented that way.

It is fascinating to me why homophobes are so eager to compare homosexuality, sex between two consenting adults, and pedophilia (child rape), necrophilia (rape of a dead person) or bestiality (rape of an animal). None of which involve consent.

When the subject of gay marriage (marriage between two consenting adults) is brought up, they are also wont to toss in "Well then why not just let me marry my cat?" or "Maybe NAMBLA should be allowed to marry their boys". Again, there is the consent issue which they are quick to overlook in favor of inflaming the topic instead of discussing where to draw the line between government and the rights of citizens.

Leviticus 20:13 (NLT)

“If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense."
​

Do you favor the death penalty for gays?

 

[Skwim]

There are many reasons: 1. Jesus told us not to judge or condemn others, to take the "log" out of our eye and forget about the "splinter" out of siblings' eyes. Jesus told us that the greatest commandment from the OT was "Love God" and 2nd was to "Love your neighbor as yourself". 2. If I can't judge my siblings in Jesus and I love everyone else as well, then I can't condone criticizing something- one verse- in the whole OT. I believe we have to 1. Consider the time period 2. And the belief that some of we Christians have that the Law was fulfilled by Jesus' death and resurrection.

1Timothy 1:8-10 (NIV) says

"8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly.9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine "

​

To use the law properly, as verse 8 directs, one must necessarily judge others. Now I recognize this as contrary to the dictum not to judge others, but such is the contradictory nature of the Bible. It DOES allow one to pick and choose which of two opposite ways to go. Convenient? Absolutely. Commendable? Hardly.

 

[Skwim]

It is fascinating to me why homophobes are so eager to compare homosexuality, sex between two consenting adults, and pedophilia (child rape), necrophilia (rape of a dead person) or bestiality (rape of an animal). None of which involve consent.

When the subject of gay marriage (marriage between two consenting adults) is brought up, they are also wont to toss in "Well then why not just let me marry my cat?" or "Maybe NAMBLA should be allowed to marry their boys". Again, there is the consent issue which they are quick to overlook in favor of inflaming the topic instead of discussing where to draw the line between government and the rights of citizens.

Do you favor the death penalty for gays?

Quite the contrary. I unequivocally support gay rights, and over the years have even made monetary contributions to their causes. I think you may have misread me somewhere along the way. The point of my OP is show how Christian Biblical beliefs splinter in the face of modern moral attitudes. The Bible tells one to approach X in a way diametrically opposite to that which our morals point us. . . . . . well, the morals of many of us anyway.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Moreover it is important to distinguish the extent to which:
-God the Father's personal beliefs, commandments to followers and commandments to all
-God the Son's personal beliefs, commandments to followers and commandments to all
-God the Spirit's personal beliefs, commandments to followers and commandments to all (mind you, god the spirit seems more like an errand boy so this is unclear)
Are revealed in the various Abrahamic text's and the degree to which the meaning therein has been preserved to the way intended, be it metaphorical or literal - including the identification of which such interpretation is appropriate.

Clearly there is little God the Son had to say on the matter of homosexuality, abominations and so forth in the words and deeds ascribed to him - God the Father on the other hand is most certainly against homosexuals (as for God the Spirit... who knows).

Can a Christian hold that the books that describe God the Father's position and commandments about homosexuality are intended to be taken as literal truth, that they are reliable records of divine revelation about homosexuality - while those of God the Son's omissions of homosexuality occur because God's position was already apparent and therefore any discussion of love was obviously not including homosexuality - that Paul's later messages merely served to emphasise God's existing position? Absolutely - and there is evidence to support such an interpretation.

Can a Christian hold that the books that describe God the Father's position and commandments about homosexuality were intended to be taken as metaphorical, or the meanings have been distorted or that the people at the time merely made them up and that they are therefore unreliable records of divine revelation about homosexuality - while God the Son's discussion of love was inclusive and being a more recent and direct recording of the words and actions of God the Son, from multiple sources, these are more reliable - that Paul simply got it wrong? Absolutely - and there is evidence to support such an interpretation.

In the end it all comes down to which revelations you choose to accept and which to reject or diminish, which is largely the result of what sort of entity you believe God to be; loving or controlling. There is no way to say which is 'true' if either of them are - for a Christian God does not have to be loving, nor have to be controlling - how you view the concept of God will largely determine which theological positions you adopt with regard to different 'revelations'.

 

[sojourner]

Hardly. That those who authored the texts may have lacked a specific word for homosexuality, certainly doesn't mean they were unaware of

ho·mo·sex·u·al·i·ty
n.

→1. Sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
→2. Sexual activity with another of the same sex.

(Source: thefreedictionary.com)
​

And you know this to be a fact because ___________fill in the blank______________ .

Yup. like,

1. Sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
2. Sexual activity with another of the same sex.
​

Like pedophilia and necrophilia is completely normal, for folks who are oriented that way.

Really.

Leviticus 20:13 (NLT)

“If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense."
​

Whaaaa???

Your head-in-the-sand and grasping at straws is duly noted and have my sympathies.

I love ya, Skwim, but ya gotta get offa the bath salts, m'kay?

 

[Road Warrior]

Quite the contrary. I unequivocally support gay rights, and over the years have even made monetary contributions to their causes. I think you may have misread me somewhere along the way. The point of my OP is show how Christian Biblical beliefs splinter in the face of modern moral attitudes. The Bible tells one to approach X in a way diametrically opposite to that which our morals point us. . . . . . well, the morals of many of us anyway.

That must be it. You are so bent on proving your point that you are overlooking the fact many Christians not only support gay rights as you and I do, but do so in accordance with their beliefs and understandings of the Gospels.

Your intentions seem geared more to refuting Christianity (by using the Old Testament!!!!) than to supporting gay rights. Don't you know that spitting in the face of a friend won't help you fight an enemy?

 

[sojourner]

Quite the contrary. I unequivocally support gay rights, and over the years have even made monetary contributions to their causes. I think you may have misread me somewhere along the way. The point of my OP is show how Christian Biblical beliefs splinter in the face of modern moral attitudes. The Bible tells one to approach X in a way diametrically opposite to that which our morals point us. . . . . . well, the morals of many of us anyway.

I hold Christian biblical beliefs. Because I do, I am ardently in favor of homosexual marriage. Your premise is messed up. Only a cursory reading of the bible -- and a wish to see a certain perspective will yield the result of "approaching X in a way diametrically opposite to that which our morals point us."

Your equation of homosexuality to pedophilia and beastiality is deplorable.

 

[waitasec]

I hold Christian biblical beliefs. Because I do, I am ardently in favor of homosexual marriage. Your premise is messed up. Only a cursory reading of the bible -- and a wish to see a certain perspective will yield the result of "approaching X in a way diametrically opposite to that which our morals point us."

Your equation of homosexuality to pedophilia and beastiality is deplorable.

it's a legitimate question...how can a christian not condemn homosexual behavior

Your equation of homosexuality to pedophilia and beastiality is deplorable.

:redcard:
he was responding to this...

Do you favor the death penalty for gays?

 

[Road Warrior]

it's a legitimate question...

What, specifically, is a "legitimate question"?