Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Shadow Wolf]

Hmmm, not being very familiar with MLK's writings, and having black friends gives you very strong reason to doubt my Biblical studies ? If I had no black friends, and read everything MLK wrote, would you then have no reason to doubt my Biblical studies >??>

Is misread after seeing the Martin Luther quote.

 

[shmogie]

Their belief about homosexuals would be wrong.

I guess that is for them to decide

 

[shmogie]

No. We are all created "good."

Christianity, though, doesn't have "a method." Unless you're projecting your church's beliefs on the rest of us, that is. Which goes against what you posted earlier about all of this being an individual thing...


But it IS your job to exegete the texts fully before blithely dismissing what they really say.

I have and millions of others have, including premiere Biblical scholars, translators, ancient Greek and Hebrew linguists. I am none of these,but I respect and have faith in their work. Would you have me stand against the overwhelming majority of these experts and tell them they are wrong ? If I believe, BELIEVE, they are right, why would I do that ? I am not projecting anything on anybody, unlike you

 

[shmogie]

Is misread after seeing the Martin Luther quote.

What ? I don't understand what you wrote, please clarify

 

[SkepticThinker]

I guess that is for them to decide

I guess if they're happy believing inaccurate things about other people.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I have and millions of others have, including premiere Biblical scholars, translators, ancient Greek and Hebrew linguists. I am none of these,but I respect and have faith in their work. Would you have me stand against the overwhelming majority of these experts and tell them they are wrong ? If I believe, BELIEVE, they are right, why would I do that ? I am not projecting anything on anybody, unlike you

If you really have all of this understanding and knowledge and resources, then how are you so very certain of your own translations, when it's a given that no two translations will be the same and there are inherent problems and issues with any translation. Such as, the way we understand homosexuality today being such that it is not known or understand in an ancient context. Even with something far more recent, such as the Divine Comedy, there are numerous English translations alone. And with some of the better translations, and even despite Dante's time being more recent and having far more surviving artifacts, there are parts where the translator can only piece together what something is supposed to mean. Philosophy, even with contemporary philosophers, this is a major issue, and it leads to the occasional word being left untranslated that is accompanied by paragraphs with of foot notes that extend another page or two trying to explain what the word or concept is supposed to mean.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I have read Bonhoffer to some extent, I don't recall him addressing the homosexual issue at all. If he does, please tell me where, I would like to read it. As to MLK, I am not very familiar with his writings, but I have black friends, one a pastor, who assure me that he too wasn;'t about homosexuality. In fact, some of them are quite angry that homosexual apologists use the example of the civil rights movement as applying to them and their agenda

MLK gave advice to a teen that was experiencing gay attractions. His advice was pretty moderate for the time (1958): http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/07/1...ng-told-a-teen-struggling-with-his-sexuality/

King also worked with Bayard Rustin, who was openly gay and a gay rights advocate. He only distanced himself from Rustin, for a time, when Democratic Rep. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. threatened to accuse King and Rustin of being in a gay relationships in order to pressure them to drop their plans to protest at the DNC. But he never said anything bad about Rustin and he still worked with Rustin.

But other than that, homosexuality didn't seem to be much of an issue for King. He didn't insult them, segregate himself from them, threaten them with damnation, etc. For his time, King was actually pretty moderate or even somewhat progressive when it came to gay people. This was over 50 years ago, by the way. He treated gay people more far more respectfully than what was common for his time than you do in 2016. For shame.

 

[shmogie]

No. We are all created "good."

Christianity, though, doesn't have "a method." Unless you're projecting your church's beliefs on the rest of us, that is. Which goes against what you posted earlier about all of this being an individual thing...


But it IS your job to exegete the texts fully before blithely dismissing what they really say.

There is a method for dealing with sin, it goes like this exposure to the Gospel - belief - conviction - faith - repentance - forgiveness- With Gods help, living a Christian life. No one follows these steps unless they choose to. Yes, humanity was created "good". Unfortunately, by the exercise of free choice, humanity fell into a sinful state, and separated itself from God. Paul says that by one man, sin afflicted humanity, and by one man the affliction is removed

 

[sojourner]

I guess that is for them to decide

Personal beliefs about any minority are not cogent to the full humanity of that minority.

 

[shmogie]

If you really have all of this understanding and knowledge and resources, then how are you so very certain of your own translations, when it's a given that no two translations will be the same and there are inherent problems and issues with any translation. Such as, the way we understand homosexuality today being such that it is not known or understand in an ancient context. Even with something far more recent, such as the Divine Comedy, there are numerous English translations alone. And with some of the better translations, and even despite Dante's time being more recent and having far more surviving artifacts, there are parts where the translator can only piece together what something is supposed to mean. Philosophy, even with contemporary philosophers, this is a major issue, and it leads to the occasional word being left untranslated that is accompanied by paragraphs with of foot notes that extend another page or two trying to explain what the word or concept is supposed to mean.

I didn't say I have I have all knowledge or understanding. I said I trust the overwhelming majority of those who have greater knowledge and understanding. First, your statement that "the way we understand homosexuality today being such that is not known or understand in the ancient context" a little awkward, but I know what you are trying to say. If the writers of the Bible were like everyone else, trapped in space and time, and limited to the knowledge available at their point in time, you would be right. However, if these writers were inspired by God to write, and God cannot lie, their writings transcend space and time and are universally applicable for all time, then you are dead wrong. You do not have that faith, and I do. As to your comments about translations, the Bible began being translated into different languages about 500 years ago. Previous to that there was the original texts, or the closest to original there could be, the Latin version, and the Orthodox version, essentially the same. The translators in every case possible used the earliest texts, and through the years various translations in different languages existed. The King James version was translated by a group of scholars of the time, from the earliest texts, in an attempt to have the most definitive English translation available. Since that time, new and earlier texts of the originals have been discovered, and various groups of scholars have produced different versions since the King James. That is why when I run into a difficult word or verse, I compare it to the seven other translations I own, and a Greek/ Hebrew lexicon. Through all the translations the fundamentals are the same, and I am told by those who know that the fundamentals are presented accurately when compared to the original texts

 

[sojourner]

I have

Why do I have a lot of trouble believing that, based upon what you've posted here thus far?

I am none of these,but I respect and have faith in their work.

Do you also respect the many, many, many others who support my position?

Would you have me stand against the overwhelming majority of these experts and tell them they are wrong ?

Jesus did... If people are coming down on the wrong side of love, it's time to speak up against them.

If I believe, BELIEVE, they are right, why would I do that ?

Sounds like a woeful case of proof-texting to me. why not study all evidence and make up your own mind AFTER you've done that, instead of just adhering to the mistaken belief that the bible is infallible?

 

[shmogie]

Personal beliefs about any minority are not cogent to the full humanity of that minority.

Personal beliefs about the actions of anyone are the right of anyone.

 

[sojourner]

There is a method for dealing with sin, it goes like this exposure to the Gospel - belief - conviction - faith - repentance - forgiveness- With Gods help, living a Christian life. No one follows these steps unless they choose to. Yes, humanity was created "good". Unfortunately, by the exercise of free choice, humanity fell into a sinful state, and separated itself from God. Paul says that by one man, sin afflicted humanity, and by one man the affliction is removed

Homosexuality isn't viewed as sin by all of Christianity. Therefore, the can not be, by definition, "A method." Different groups deal with the issue differently. Some are complicit in systemic discrimination. Some break down barriers of misunderstanding and take the path of inclusion.

 

[shmogie]

Why do I have a lot of trouble believing that, based upon what you've posted here thus far?


Do you also respect the many, many, many others who support my position?


Jesus did... If people are coming down on the wrong side of love, it's time to speak up against them.


Sounds like a woeful case of proof-texting to me. why not study all evidence and make up your own mind AFTER you've done that, instead of just adhering to the mistaken belief that the bible is infallible?

I respect them, but I don;t agree with them. I will go with the weight of the evidence. I adhere to the belief that is true. If you are having trouble believing, that is your problem, not mine

 

[sojourner]

If the writers of the Bible were like everyone else, trapped in space and time, and limited to the knowledge available at their point in time, you would be right. However, if these writers were inspired by God to write, and God cannot lie, their writings transcend space and time and are universally applicable for all time, then you are dead wrong.

"Inspired by God" doesn't mean that the writers aren't captive of space and time, like every other human being. Nor does it mean that they aren't limited to the knowledge available at their point in time. Obviously, their writings aren't universally applicable for all time, or else the bible would be scientifically and historically accurate, with no contradictions. And we know that ain't the case.

 

[sojourner]

Personal beliefs about the actions of anyone are the right of anyone.

But those personal beliefs should not infringe on the full humanity of anyone. Plus, these personal beliefs are about more than just actions. They're about identity and humanity.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I didn't say I have I have all knowledge or understanding. I said I trust the overwhelming majority of those who have greater knowledge and understanding. First, your statement that "the way we understand homosexuality today being such that is not known or understand in the ancient context" a little awkward, but I know what you are trying to say. If the writers of the Bible were like everyone else, trapped in space and time, and limited to the knowledge available at their point in time, you would be right. However, if these writers were inspired by God to write, and God cannot lie, their writings transcend space and time and are universally applicable for all time, then you are dead wrong. You do not have that faith, and I do. As to your comments about translations, the Bible began being translated into different languages about 500 years ago. Previous to that there was the original texts, or the closest to original there could be, the Latin version, and the Orthodox version, essentially the same. The translators in every case possible used the earliest texts, and through the years various translations in different languages existed. The King James version was translated by a group of scholars of the time, from the earliest texts, in an attempt to have the most definitive English translation available. Since that time, new and earlier texts of the originals have been discovered, and various groups of scholars have produced different versions since the King James. That is why when I run into a difficult word or verse, I compare it to the seven other translations I own, and a Greek/ Hebrew lexicon. Through all the translations the fundamentals are the same, and I am told by those who know that the fundamentals are presented accurately when compared to the original texts

I don't see any reason to believe that is not the case.

 

[sojourner]

I respect them, but I don;t agree with them. I will go with the weight of the evidence.

The weight of evidence is on the side of modern psychiatry and modern scholarship.

I adhere to the belief that is true.

You adhere to the belief (not evidence) that you believe (not know) to be factual. If you've studied law (as you indicate you have), you should know the distinction.

 

[shmogie]

Homosexuality isn't viewed as sin by all of Christianity. Therefore, the can not be, by definition, "A method." Different groups deal with the issue differently. Some are complicit in systemic discrimination. Some break down barriers of misunderstanding and take the path of inclusion.

It is the same for all churches and denominations, the process of salvation. Some denominations hold to the Biblical standards, some do not. This is not surprising as it was foretold by Christ himself, " in that day some will come to me and say haven't I done great works in your name, and helped the sick and fed the hungry, and I will say, depart from me, I know you not" John speaks of those who feel safe and comfortable in their sin, and are lost. The book of Revelation is all about the corruption of Christianity, and the churches who accept worldly ways and reject the ways of God, and in the end those who profess Christ, but do not show it it their actions will be swept away, and only a remnant of what was will exist. Yes, it was all predicted and is unfolding as it should. The compromise with sin is totally rejected

 

[shmogie]

I don't see any reason to believe that is not the case.

You have every right to believe what you choose