Please Explain: "Gay Christian"

[Sonofason]

But if you're in the dark, how would you know?

Because when the light shines in the darkness, the darkness cannot overcome it.

"The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it."
(John 1:5)

 

[SageTree]

I call myself queer because my sexual orientation doesn't fit into the gay, straight or bisexual categories. It's deliberately vague and politically charged and I like that about it.

I wholeheartedly agree with this.

I'm a male, married to a female.... and I identify as queer.

 

[Ingledsva]

A dude that steals a look a some other dude's crotch during church? That might be too gay though. Maybe it's a dude who notices that Mrs. Stevenson didn't accessorize correctly. Maybe it's the pedo in row 5? Who knows.

What are you talking about?



*

 

[ScuzManiac]

No, I believe that every single word of the Bible, as written by it's authors, is the absolute truth.

I believe that Saul hated David. I believe He thought he was going to be giving David an impossible task. There is no way Saul wanted to let David marry his daughter. But David proved Saul to be the idiot. The fact that Saul required a payment of however many foreskins for his daughters hand in marriage just shows that Saul was a depraved man, with depraved intentions. It wasn't about money, and it wasn't about the payment. It was about Saul's disregard for God.

But if you have to dig around and find a meaning that says what you WANT it to rather than what it DOES....

That kind of means that you don't believe it enough to just go with it.

Who are you to decide what is to be taken literally and what isn't?

 

[sojourner]

Because when the light shines in the darkness, the darkness cannot overcome it.

"The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it."
(John 1:5)

If you're in the dark, the light hasn't shined.

 

[Sonofason]

But if you have to dig around and find a meaning that says what you WANT it to rather than what it DOES....

That kind of means that you don't believe it enough to just go with it.

Who are you to decide what is to be taken literally and what isn't?

I am the owner of my own beliefs. So I will take literally anything I choose to take literally, if I am so inclined to do so. And I am the owner of my voice. And so if I feel so inclined as to tell you that you are wrong, I will do so.

 

[Sonofason]

If you're in the dark, the light hasn't shined.

I'm sorry, the KJV makes it much more clear; my mistake.

"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."
(John 1:5)

 

[sojourner]

I'm sorry, the KJV makes it much more clear; my mistake.

"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."
(John 1:5)

You're conflating light as a metaphor for Christ with light as a metaphor for enlightened knowledge. They're not synonymous. Christ is in the world, but you're not enlightened.

 

[El Blimpo]

What are you talking about?



*

My apologies for the clumsy phrasing. The title of the thread struck me as a bit odd, like: "please explain blue-eyed Christian." Also, some less tolerant Christians conflate homosexuality with pedophilia, beastiality, and seek to establish it as depraved. So, I went for a shotgun approach and...failed.

 

[Sonofason]

You're conflating light as a metaphor for Christ with light as a metaphor for enlightened knowledge. They're not synonymous. Christ is in the world, but you're not enlightened.

Okay, please explain.

 

[sojourner]

Okay, please explain.

Srrsly??

 

[Sonofason]

Srrsly??

If you are incapable of it, just say so.

 

[sojourner]

If you are incapable of it, just say so.

I just can't believe you don't get it and need to have the little dots connected for you!

you suggested that you were enlightened. I challenged that suggestion. You countered with biblical verses that allude to the light of Christ -- which has nothing whatsoever to do with cognitive enlightenment. You're confusing one definition of "light" with another, completely different definition of "light." Just because Christ (the Light) has come into the world does not automatically mean that you're cognitively enlightened. So don't try to pretend either that it does mean that, or that you are enlightened. It's obvious to the most casual observer that you're not. the more so because I had to hold your hand and explain it to you.

 

[Sonofason]

I just can't believe you don't get it and need to have the little dots connected for you!

you suggested that you were enlightened. I challenged that suggestion. You countered with biblical verses that allude to the light of Christ -- which has nothing whatsoever to do with cognitive enlightenment. You're confusing one definition of "light" with another, completely different definition of "light." Just because Christ (the Light) has come into the world does not automatically mean that you're cognitively enlightened. So don't try to pretend either that it does mean that, or that you are enlightened. It's obvious to the most casual observer that you're not. the more so because I had to hold your hand and explain it to you.

Actually, I wasn't even talking to you. I was responding to another poster on post 621. You might want to go back and refresh your memory as to what the conversation was all about. I have not even defined light, and neither am I confused about it. But you are certainly confused as to the conversation at hand. If you have a question, I'd be happy to answer it, if I am able.

 

[sojourner]

Actually, I wasn't even talking to you. I was responding to another poster on post 621. You might want to go back and refresh your memory as to what the conversation was all about. I have not even defined light, and neither am I confused about it. But you are certainly confused as to the conversation at hand. If you have a question, I'd be happy to answer it, if I am able.

Post #621:

Actually cutting off body parts as proof of a kill was a standard practice for many thousands of years. Often there was money per part.


In the Saul-David story he definitely gives the foreskins monetary value, as they are the price for his daughter.

Hoping they would kill David first has nothing to do with the FACT that the foreskins were being used as commerce.


Edit - Forgot to add that Rabbinical sites add that the reason Saul asked for foreskins, was because this particular enemy of his, were not circumcised (in an area where most were,) - thus the foreskins were proof that his actual enemy was killed.

Your rebuttal (to which you refer above) #622:

One of us is completely in the dark. And it isn't me.

My response to your assertion that you're not in the dark #623:

But if you're in the dark, how would you know?

Your response to my post #625:

Because when the light shines in the darkness, the darkness cannot overcome it.

"The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it."
(John 1:5)

It's that response I'm commenting on when I maintain that you're conflating the light of Christ with the light knowledge. The two aren't the same thing. At all.

I am not "certainly confused as to the conversation at hand." You can't avoid answering my challenge through misdirection, intimating that I'm, somehow, "confused."

I maintain that you are in the dark cognitively, and therefore do not have enough knowledge to assert that she's wrong and you're right. And no amount of Jesus "shining in the darkness" is going to make any difference on that point.

 

[Sonofason]

Post #621:

Your rebuttal (to which you refer above) #622:

My response to your assertion that you're not in the dark #623:

Your response to my post #625:

It's that response I'm commenting on when I maintain that you're conflating the light of Christ with the light knowledge. The two aren't the same thing. At all.

I am not "certainly confused as to the conversation at hand." You can't avoid answering my challenge through misdirection, intimating that I'm, somehow, "confused."

I maintain that you are in the dark cognitively, and therefore do not have enough knowledge to assert that she's wrong and you're right. And no amount of Jesus "shining in the darkness" is going to make any difference on that point.

If that is true, then so be it.

 

[Freducator]

"And the end of words is to bring men to the knowledge of things beyond what words can utter. So, learn of the Lord to make a right use of the Scriptures: which is by esteeming them in their right place, and prizing that above them which is above them."
— Britain Yearly Meeting, Quaker Faith and Practice 27.27

Or simply put, when Scripture condemns homosexuality, it is wrong. While the Bible is inspired, it was written by men; men are fallible, and so not all of Scripture is the word of God. Some is the misguided word of men.

 

[dgirl1986]

Or simply put, when Scripture condemns homosexuality, it is wrong. While the Bible is inspired, it was written by men; men are fallible, and so not all of Scripture is the word of God. Some is the misguided word of men.

Which was the conclusion I came to as a christian.

 

[Sonofason]

Which was the conclusion I came to as a christian.

Just because a person deserves God's judgement, does not mean that we ourselves must condemn that person whatsoever. However, there is no good reason to lie to anyone about what God requires.

 

[dgirl1986]

Just because a person deserves God's judgement, does not mean that we ourselves must condemn that person whatsoever. However, there is no good reason to lie to anyone about what God requires.

People often do though.
Who said anything about lying?