Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Ben Dhyan]

The "actual meaning" is proffered, though, without an understanding of homosexuality as an orientation. If there's no orientation, then of course the acts would seem "wrong." However, if one understands that there is such a thing as a homosexual orientation, the acts are perceived as more "normal." If one understands that the earth is round, one leaves the flat earth model presented in the bible behind, yes?

Too confusing....could you be more concise...like in one sentence...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The passages don't refer to homosexuality. They refer to homosexual acts. Big. Difference. Claiming that thy do refer to homosexuality creates ambiguity in the perceived messages -- no matter what the language.

So who performs homosexual acts if not homosexuals?

 

[Sundance]

Decontextualized means considered in isolation from its context.

1. Obviously that is not the case. Christianity is an Abrahamic religion. They read and followed the Bible. And they used texts that it actually has in it allowing slavery. And again this does not just sit by itself. We have European Christian History - also claiming right to slavery from the Bible.

2. I was showing other examples where they were NOT decontextualized - as you said - "What you've shown me, thus far, is that you can quote particular Bible passages while pulling them out of context (specifically, Old Testament passages), and utilize them in what I perceive to be a critique of the Christian religion or any aspects thereof."

*

Once again, you have dodged my question concerning the verses themselves as written, were they talking about it being justifiable to enslave my ancestors? Or were they merely dealing with situations involving the Ancient Israelites but later misapplied?

 

[Ingledsva]

Once again, you have dodged my question concerning the verses themselves as written, were they talking about it being justifiable to enslave my ancestors? Or were they merely dealing with situations involving the Ancient Israelites but later misapplied?

FOLLOWERS OF YHVH.

Christians consider themselves followers of YHVH.

In fact if you read some of their info - some consider themselves the new Israel, - God's chosen people.

They keep and honor the Bible.

It says the right to own slaves of ALL other people.

*

 

[shmogie]

FOLLOWERS OF YHVH.

Christians consider themselves followers of YHVH.

In fact if you read some of their info - some consider themselves the new Israel, - God's chosen people.

They keep and honor the Bible.

It says the right to own slaves of ALL other people.

*

Christians consider themselves followers of Christ. If one follow's Christ's "golden rule", ignoring everything else, owning slaves would be a serious sin. The Talmud, written approx. 75 AD, is a Jewish reinterpretation of the Torah, it also proscribes slavery, so, you are wrong on both counts

 

[shmogie]

Christians consider themselves followers of Christ. If one follow's Christ's "golden rule", ignoring everything else, owning slaves would be a serious sin. The Talmud, written approx. 75 AD, is a Jewish reinterpretation of the Torah, it also proscribes slavery, so, you are wrong on both counts

BTW, "replacement theology" is not held by the majority of Christians

 

[shmogie]

Asserting that they are sin is not respecting them -- it dehumanizes them. What's being revised is the context in which the meaning is conveyed. To the writers, homosexuality was non-existent, yet you read into the texts a meaning based in your own understanding of homosexuality. That's revisionism.

Nonsense. To the writers sex between two people of the same sex is a sin, therefore wrong. Revisionism is alive and well in those who want homosexuality to be totally acceptable even to those who believe the Bible. So, your mission is clear, deny that the Bible says what it says, and use statements like " to the writers, homosexuality was non existent " grab an assertion, any assertion , as long as it sounds somewhat sophisticated, and throw it against the wall and see if it will stick. The truth of the statement is irrelevant, because the end justifies the means, and because you are right. That is revisionism

 

[shmogie]

In what sense can a person be excluded from the church for being who they were created to be?!?! Where is that written?

Well, legally a person can be excluded for any reason, or no reason at all. it is called "freedom of association", but that is not what we are talking about. You propose a person was created to be a homosexual, I propose they were not. There you go

 

[shmogie]

Please reference the book, chapter, and verse that explicitly says, "homosexuality is a sin."




Srrsly?!

I do not have any friends that smoke, nor do I associate with smokers, therefore, I am dehumanizing them, and practice bigotry against them. The Amish people associate with no one but members of their faith, so they are dehumanizing the rest of humanity and practicing bigotry against the world............... I could go on in the same vein for quite a while, but you practice selective indignation, the particular class of person you have deemed worthy of your protection is the person that is dehumanized because I choose not to have that class of person in my circle of friends. You don't care about smokers, nor the Amish, the weight of your righteousness is focused on demanding that my church accept homosexuals into fellowship, and having me make them my friends. What utter hypocrisy

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The Amish people associate with no one but members of their faith,

They actually do associate with many people who are not of their faith. There are several Amish men around here who are business owners, but even when it's not business they don't avoid the outside world and they are perfectly fine with people who don't give them a reason to shun them.

You don't care about smokers, nor the Amish,

You're trying to project things onto people again. Not everyone hates smokers or the Amish.

 

[Sees]

< pagan smoker who gets along just fine with non-smokers and Amish folks lol

 

[Sundance]

FOLLOWERS OF YHVH.

Christians consider themselves followers of YHVH.

In fact if you read some of their info - some consider themselves the new Israel, - God's chosen people.

They keep and honor the Bible.

It says the right to own slaves of ALL other people.

*

No, it doesn't. Get your eyes checked. Additionally, the vast majority of Christians are Gentiles, not Jewish. As such, they will mostly ignore the Old Testament laws.

 

[JoStories]

Exactly. Homophobia isn't a victimless crime, real people are hurt every day by the propagation of these bigoted views.

It's even worse when this kind of prejudice is condoned and promoted by so-called Christians.

Agreed. Strangely enough, I am one of those who has never tolerated this kind of thing. Years ago, when a colleague at one of the hospitals I traveled to make a comment about me going to work with 'those San Francisco d*ykes,', I reported her and she was censured. Sadly, this was not in the Bible Belt or southeast but in Phoenix, AZ, where one would think they would be more forward thinking. What is worse is that Hawaii was one of the most prejudiced places I worked, albeit gorgeous.

 

[JoStories]

Hi AlphaAlex115,

I'm not a homophobe. I'm not sure; maybe homosexual desires are real, like murderous desires may be real but it is a choice to follow such desires I believe.

Peace to you and may God Bless you,
Noah ("NewChapter")

And yet, science has almost marked down the genomes that are involved with being homosexual. It definitely runs in families. It is not a choice, as I have been gay since I was about 8. A bit young to be able to consider the ramifications of such a lifestyle and trust me, being gay is no picnic. Being ridiculed and having to hide one's self from people such as yourself is a true PIA. Namaste.

 

[JoStories]

\
Well Jo, I can not change the views of any one other than myself.
I do not treat gay persons like they are "less than human".
Perhaps you and others with your attitude should start a movement in your neighborhood
to help people understand your point of view.

That's the thing Jeager, I don't have an attitude. If you met me tomorrow, you would never guess I am gay. Unless I told you of course. I am your typical older woman who is disabled severely, I have no marker that paints me as gay. I respect that you perceive being gay as wrong and perhaps even a choice but that respect ends at the tip of my nose when you inflict your beliefs on me and my life. Would you like someone spitting in your face or calling you inflammatory names due to your beliefs? I doubt it sincerely.

 

[JoStories]

I'm not about to engage in homosexual acts to "prove" I'm accepting of the gay life style.
Homosexual acts are disgusting to me. So is having sex with a horse!
That said I would not persecute a gay person but I WOULD persecute a person
screwing an animal.
Does anyone have an issue with me persecuting an animal #ucker?
Tuff!

That is the thing Jeager, no one is asking you to do anything other than believe as you wish but keep those beliefs away from those of us who are gay. Acceptance simply means that you act toward me as you would act toward your neighbor or an acquaintance. Period. And as for the horse stuff, totally uncalled for here. Are you truly comparing being gay to beastiality?? Dear God...what an insult.

 

[JoStories]

I believe that is fine and dandy as long as God is doing the picking.

And how exactly are you going to prove that assertion? As far as I know, no one has ever proven God. And if you are referring to the Bible, men wrote it. Period. You can believe whatever you like about it but that does not mean that I have to live by what you believe. And that is what is at issue here. You want people to live by your beliefs. To negate being gay or be celibate due to YOUR beliefs. Would you do that for mine?

 

[JoStories]

I am not trying to tell you anything, the discussion was about Christianity, it is a discussion based Christian theological concepts, within the Christian community, so ex post facto it has nothing to do with you if you are not a Christian. So, I am not trying to tell you anything. Paul made it clear, to paraphrase, that what occurred outside of the body of believers was the problem, or not, of those outside. Those within the body are required to forsake sinful practices. So calm down, untwist your panties, and move on, this is not about you or your beliefs

No, its about you forcing your beliefs on my lifestyle. Its about you trying to say that SSM should not be a right for ALL peoples. Its about you indoctrinating children into the YEC claptrap. Or trying to force all children of all faiths to have to pray to your God. So perhaps you can untwist your tightie-whities and see what is really being discussed here. (Mea Culpa but this poster is really irritating the heck out of me).

 

[JoStories]

homophobe, unreasonable fear of homosexuals............... I know of no Christians that fear them, think they are less than human, or discriminates against them, unless it is required in exercising the right to practice ones religion. From the Christian perspective, homosexuality is a sin, an immoral act. But it is no worse than a whole host of other sins, some of which I commit, and seek forgiveness for. The issue is not whether we are all sinners, we are, the issue is not whether we need forgiveness of our sins, we do. The issue is whether a person who cherishes and habitually commits a sin, can be part of the Christian communion. The answer is no. No one can judge a person's soul, that is God's job and I am very happy to leave it to him. We are told that we can judge acts as part of the acceptance of a person into communion, we can and should. That is it ! No judging a persons acceptance by God, no judging a persons worth................... There are alleged Christian churches that accept homosexuals into membership, their theology is nonsense to me, nevertheless they have the right to do as they choose.............................................

Sin is something I do not believe in. So while it may work for you, I have nothing to ask forgiveness for. I have to try to live an enlightened life, one where I harm no one. Yet, your kind would prevent me from marrying my partner, my late partner btw, and that is what you did, by not accepting SSM as a fundamental right of ALL peoples of ANY faith including none. That is where this issue needs to stop. Do not force your beliefs in any way, shape or form on me.

 

[JoStories]

No, Christian morality does not change. I challenge you to find in the NT support for slavery, misogyny or imperialism. As to your comment re ounces, cute, but dumb. You are confusing moral standards with other types of standards, Einstein in either of his theories of relativity wasn't addressing standards of morality, nor was your example of Mozart. There are many absolutes in the universe, absolute cold, the effects of gravity based upon the size of objects, etc. etc. I am nor speaking of "rigid faith", whatever that may mean. The pharisees held the principle that murder, theft, rape, and many other things were wrong. Did he correct them on those MORAL beliefs ? Did he promulgate different moral beliefs on some issues, and if he did, who has the authority today to change his teachings ? The Apostles were given the task of focusing his teachings by him, again who has the authority today to modify those teachings. No one

Seriously? One only meed look at the writings of Paul to see glaring misogyny. Or have you forgotten about women not speaking in church, 1st Timothy 2; 11-14, 1st Corinthians 14; 34-35, Ephesians 5; 22-24. Paul does not only say this once but repeatedly. I see that as a serious problem with women.