Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[SkepticThinker]

I could get colored contacts if changing my eye color is important to you, and I wanted to grant you what is important to y.

Let’s see if you can change your eye color just by willing it, without the use of contact lenses. Do you think you could?

Any person has the ability to refrain from any act.

We’re not talking about an act. (Hence the eye color example.) We’re talking about a sexual orientation.

You maintain that a person is "born, and IS a homosexual" incapable of being anything else.

What I maintain is that people do not consciously choose their sexual orientation.

Even if this were true, they can still refrain from the act if they choose to.

What act?

I had a cousin, who had homosexual tendencies and acted on them. He became a Christian, and chose to live a celibate life, because it was very important to him not to commit an act he considered sinful.

That’s his personal choice and should be up to him.


I don’t expect every person who is attracted to members of the same sex to be celibate for life. I don’t think it’s particularly natural or healthy and I don’t think it’s fair to expect that from anybody.

He may have slipped back on occasion, I don't know and I don't care, we all commit our own particular sin of choice or inclination in moments of weakness, the point is, he did not demand that his church accept him into membership while he was living a flagrant homosexual lifestyle.

He could have also left his church and joined one that is more accepting. Plenty of those types of churches exist.

He and I spoke a few days before his death and his faith was strong. You won';t alter my view, and I won't alter yours, so we can play this game till the end of time. Henceforth you may debate yourself on this issue, continued participation by me serves no purpose

Just because the guy chose not to engage in sexual activity with anyone doesn’t make him any less gay. That’s what I’m talking about. We don’t choose our sexual orientation any more than we choose our skin color or eye color.


Personally, I’m not going to tell anyone that they shouldn’t be allowed to experience as fulfilling a life as anyone else just because they’re not heterosexual.


I’m not sure what game you think is being played here.

 

[viole]

I think probably not. When I was an agnostic, I did many many things I try very hard not to do now. I had some friends during that time who didn';t want to continue our friendship once I became a Christian

So, do you mainly find it inappropriate to start a friendship with a gay person, because you believe in God?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If I choose not to associate with homosexuals, I am not "treating" them in any capacity.

I suppose it's like the saying "deciding not to decide is still deciding." You are treating them differently, and poorly, by the simple act of choosing not to associate with them.

Why is it so important to you for me to have homosexual friends ?

As I said earlier, it's not about having "gay friends," it's that you flat-out refuse to even associate with them.

If it is not important to them, nor me, why is it to you ?

The attitude that you won't even associate with them is an attitude of prejudice. Another Christian member, Jeager, doesn't have this mentality, and has stated he has deeply cherished friendships with friends who were also gay. And it must be asked, on what Christian principle do you base this non-association with? Afterall, Jesus himself hung out with all sorts of people that society didn't like.

I don';t propose "abandoning" a friend. in trouble, I am required to cease association with a friend knowingly and flagrantly living in sin

Ceasing association is pretty much the definition of abandonment.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

As I said earlier, it's not about having "gay friends," it's that you flat-out refuse to even associate with them.

Which is a shame.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I don't guilt them, I don't treat them as less than anything. If they feel guilt, the conviction comes from God, not me.I to have counseled homosexuals, and assured them of Gods love for them and his mercy toward them. I have assured them that any sin they may have committed God will forgive, I have assured them that their sin is no worse than mine or anyone else's.But I have also told them that certain acts (sins), are proscribed by God in the Bible, which is his communication with humanity. Habitually and flagrantly committing those acts will deny them church membership. They are welcome to attend any and all functions of the Church, but they cannot participate in Communion or Baptism. As to shunning, I don't think that that is Christian or acceptable. Shunners do not speak to, or even acknowledge a persons existence, They exclude the shunned from every activity. I nor my Church shuns anyone.

I find it kinda of weird that you would deny someone participation in Communion or Baptism. Wouldn't that be up to the god you worship to decide if "he" will accept such a thing or not?

 

[Ingledsva]

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

BULL! They claim this Bible of theirs is from God - and very obviously from their posts on this site, they believe in and try to use Leviticus law.

Homosexuality laws, and slavery, being just two of these.

You folks can't claim it ain't so, - after you yourselves have used it.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

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

Christians are so funny - quoting Leviticus Law, - when it comes to homosexuality, - and when it doesn't suit you, - slavery for instance, - claiming it ain't so!

*

 

[Ingledsva]

There are those who believe that pedophilia is a condition that people are created to be. They are excluded from my church too. Your question is based upon a theory that is far from universally accepted

And there you go again - equating an actual crime like pedophilia, - to homosexuality which is NOT a crime.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

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.

No it doesn't what? Say they had a right to own slaves of other people?

Lev 25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

Lev 25:46 And you shall take them for inheritance to your sons after you, to hold for a possession; you may enslave them FOREVER. But on your brothers, the sons of Israel, one over another, you shall not rule over him with severity.

*
Exo 21:4 If his master has provided him a woman, and she have born him sons or daughters; the woman and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. (Breeding of slave to pass on.)

That word - strangers - means non-native - foreigner.

Also - Christians are trying to use some Tanakh Laws such as the supposed homosexual laws, - so, - it is ridiculous to say they ignore OT laws.

*

 

[Kueid]

Let’s see if you can change your eye color just by willing it, without the use of contact lenses. Do you think you could?

You think it's impossible? Google a little.

Hint: laser

 

[SkepticThinker]

You think it's impossible? Google a little.

Hint: laser

Are you telling me that someone can change their eye color just by willing it?

 

[sojourner]

So, instead of helping your friend, you'd just ditch him

...Because Jesus ditched sinners all the time...

 

[sojourner]

I don't guilt them, I don't treat them as less than anything. If they feel guilt, the conviction comes from God, not me.I to have counseled homosexuals, and assured them of Gods love for them and his mercy toward them. I have assured them that any sin they may have committed God will forgive, I have assured them that their sin is no worse than mine or anyone else's.But I have also told them that certain acts (sins), are proscribed by God in the Bible, which is his communication with humanity. Habitually and flagrantly committing those acts will deny them church membership. They are welcome to attend any and all functions of the Church, but they cannot participate in Communion or Baptism. As to shunning, I don't think that that is Christian or acceptable. Shunners do not speak to, or even acknowledge a persons existence, They exclude the shunned from every activity. I nor my Church shuns anyone.

If you won't allow them to come to communion or take baptism, you are guilting them and treating them as less than. If you tell them that their very identity is sin, you're doing the same thing. Since homosexuals can now be married, if homosexual spouses habitually and flagrantly have sex with each other, no sin is being committed. You don't shun, but you deny membership based upon something they cannot change. Nice bit of twisted logic and justification there -- assure them that God loves them, but deny them the vehicles of God's grace. Wow.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

And there you go again - equating an actual crime like pedophilia, - to homosexuality which is NOT a crime.

I do wish people wouldn't do this.

 

[sojourner]

One last time, I am tired of typing this stuff out

Then. Stop. Doing. It. Stop being complicit in the systemic violence. Love people for who they are, not for who you think the bible says they ought to be. It's been proven that you can't pray the gay away.

 

[shmogie]

Then. Stop. Doing. It. Stop being complicit in the systemic violence. Love people for who they are, not for who you think the bible says they ought to be. It's been proven that you can't pray the gay away.

Systemic violence. what the hell are you talking about ? You and your ilk love to accuse, the more outrageous the better. Well, f**k you and your judgemental, smug, and debased reasoning.

 

[shmogie]

If you won't allow them to come to communion or take baptism, you are guilting them and treating them as less than. If you tell them that their very identity is sin, you're doing the same thing. Since homosexuals can now be married, if homosexual spouses habitually and flagrantly have sex with each other, no sin is being committed. You don't shun, but you deny membership based upon something they cannot change. Nice bit of twisted logic and justification there -- assure them that God loves them, but deny them the vehicles of God's grace. Wow.

State sponsored marriages are not the same as Christian marriages, homosexual marriages are not recognized within the Church. You don't tell me when sin has or has not been committed, your authority is nil. your reasoning is proven false by one time homosexuals that are thriving with spouses and children. Perhaps, since you are an authority, you should tell them they aren't happy, they really do not love their spouse, they don't deserve natural born children, and they must abandon all, because YOU say they cannot change. Your arrogance is only eclipsed by your ignorance

 

[shmogie]

No it doesn't what? Say they had a right to own slaves of other people?

Lev 25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

Lev 25:46 And you shall take them for inheritance to your sons after you, to hold for a possession; you may enslave them FOREVER. But on your brothers, the sons of Israel, one over another, you shall not rule over him with severity.

*
Exo 21:4 If his master has provided him a woman, and she have born him sons or daughters; the woman and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. (Breeding of slave to pass on.)

That word - strangers - means non-native - foreigner.

Also - Christians are trying to use some Tanakh Laws such as the supposed homosexual laws, - so, - it is ridiculous to say they ignore OT laws.

*

The Old Testament has been by the New Testament. Some OT laws have been reintroduced in the new. You are quoting laws that were abandoned by Israel a century or more before Christ, Jews today don't use the Torah and other parts of the OT , they have been using the Talmud to interpret and define their beliefs for 2,000 years. Slavery is not a Talmudic institution.

 

[shmogie]

The Old Testament has been by the New Testament. Some OT laws have been reintroduced in the new. You are quoting laws that were abandoned by Israel a century or more before Christ, Jews today don't use the Torah and other parts of the OT , they have been using the Talmud to interpret and define their beliefs for 2,000 years. Slavery is not a Talmudic institution.

Sorry, addition; Should read, The Old Testament has been REPLACED by the New Testament

 

[shmogie]

Christians are so funny - quoting Leviticus Law, - when it comes to homosexuality, - and when it doesn't suit you, - slavery for instance, - claiming it ain't so!

*

I don't quote the Levitical law re anything other than history