Jump to content

Menu

I am a Christian but don't believe homosexuality is a sin.


Recommended Posts

It's not just "we all sin so don't judge". Or "love the sinner hate the sin." it's simply that i dont think it is a sin.

 

Can anyone point me to Christian authors who might help me clarify my thinking on this? I have read a lot of Spong and similar "liberal" authors. I have read a lot about the theory that Paul was himself a gay man.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 229
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm no help here, just wanted to say thank you. This thread will likely meet a quick ending, though. Let me be the first to say, then, that I think you are "real", because someone will surely say a real Christian can not think that way.

Have you ever seen the online Sojourners magazine? It's advertised as faith in action for social justice. I bet they'd have some ideas for you.

 

Thank you! I hope this thread doesnt get pulled, as i really do value the Hive's input. I have considered subscribing and even got a sample issue. I think the cost was a bit high for me, but perhaps it is worth a second look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been contemplating a similar thread, but I always figure it will get pulled. I wish there were a place with such diversity and intelligence where we can go deep and sometimes get ugly but handle it without being shut down.

 

I have been told that all Christians struggle with some sort of sin -- for one, it's alcoholism, for another it's p@rn, for some it's homosexuality.

 

That explanation didn't make sense because the other sins involve choice. I was told that not having fulfilling relationships, then, is part of the curse.

 

I wish I could dialogue with people about this without everyone getting ugly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just "we all sin so don't judge". Or "love the sinner hate the sin." it's simply that i dont think it is a sin.

 

Can anyone point me to Christian authors who might help me clarify my thinking on this? I have read a lot of Spong and similar "liberal" authors. I have read a lot about the theory that Paul was himself a gay man.

 

Thoughts?

I've never heard that before. But, wow, the possibility of it is interesting. He certainly did have issues with teA in whatever for it takes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me too, although I describe myself as clinging to the far liberal end of Christianity, so I may not count. ;)

 

I recognize I might be wrong about this. I've already gone through one major faith upheaval in my life, so it would be silly if I were black-and-white about my current beliefs.

 

And yet, if I am wrong, the side of love and acceptance and focusing on my own issues instead of other people's seems like the right side to err on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just "we all sin so don't judge". Or "love the sinner hate the sin." it's simply that i dont think it is a sin.

 

Thoughts?

 

I think that when you dig deep into this, you will find that the most nuanced, Biblical views are the homosexuality itself is not a sin, but that acting on it is. And this is hard to accept. I wish that this was not the Biblical position, but it is, so I accept it, but reluctantly, and not failing in love for my fellow humans who struggle with this. Some of the most loving relationships I have observed are gay ones. I will not pretend that this is not so.

 

I don't think that expressing extreme repugnance about this issue, as some Christians do, is right or Christian. This is not the 'worst sin' nor the 'unforgivable one'. By the same token, though, I don't think that liberal churches do people any favors when they pretend that it is not a sin at all--that is a spiritually dangerous stance to take, given the Biblical injunctions against this behavior. To paper this over, to pretend that this behavior is not sinful, is to leave people without the call to repentance that they need. That is not right. Not to identify this as wrong is dangerous to those who are thus tempted, because it leaves out what God says about it.

Edited by Carol in Cal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been contemplating a similar thread, but I always figure it will get pulled. I wish there were a place with such diversity and intelligence where we can go deep and sometimes get ugly but handle it without being shut down.

 

I have been told that all Christians struggle with some sort of sin -- for one, it's alcoholism, for another it's p@rn, for some it's homosexuality.

 

That explanation didn't make sense because the other sins involve choice. I was told that not having fulfilling relationships, then, is part of the curse.

 

I wish I could dialogue with people about this without everyone getting ugly.

 

I think one can still struggle with pornography but not view it. One can still struggle with alcoholism and not drink. I'm not sure how much of a choice is involved there either. I think today we tend to gloss over sin and have no understanding of how deep it goes. It's quite offensive to most people and I get that. But that is also what makes the Gospel so incredibly amazing.

 

As far as the theory of Paul being gay, I'd really like to know any proof of that besides an author's wishful thinking. :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just "we all sin so don't judge". Or "love the sinner hate the sin." it's simply that i dont think it is a sin.

 

Can anyone point me to Christian authors who might help me clarify my thinking on this? I have read a lot of Spong and similar "liberal" authors. I have read a lot about the theory that Paul was himself a gay man.

 

Thoughts?

 

I spent a long time researching, praying, and thinking about this issue. I went through a period of time in the space you seem to be.

 

I don't have authors/answers for you ~ but I can say it has been a long, lonely journey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one can still struggle with pornography but not view it. One can still struggle with alcoholism and not drink. I'm not sure how much of a choice is involved there either. I think today we tend to gloss over sin and have no understanding of how deep it goes. It's quite offensive to most people and I get that. But that is also what makes the Gospel so incredibly amazing.

 

As far as the theory of Paul being gay, I'd really like to know any proof of that besides an author's wishful thinking. :confused:

 

There are scholars and "people" who believe that this is the big sin/secret Paul references.

 

It was common at the time for married men (or adult men in general) to believe in and practice pederasty. It's possible this is what Paul was referencing. To me, that would make more sense in terms of "sin".

 

But I'm not a Paul fan, or Paul believer, so feel free to ignore me. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one can still struggle with pornography but not view it. One can still struggle with alcoholism and not drink. I'm not sure how much of a choice is involved there either. I think today we tend to gloss over sin and have no understanding of how deep it goes. It's quite offensive to most people and I get that. But that is also what makes the Gospel so incredibly amazing.

 

As far as the theory of Paul being gay, I'd really like to know any proof of that besides an author's wishful thinking. :confused:

 

So you would agree that people born desiring those of the same sex just have a difficult cross to bear in that they will have to spend their lives denying themselves sexual and emotional satisfaction while the rest of the people who struggle with sins ranging from lying to anger to pride are all free to enjoy relationships which provide sexual and emotional satisfaction?

Edited by nestof3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one can still struggle with pornography but not view it. One can still struggle with alcoholism and not drink. I'm not sure how much of a choice is involved there either. I think today we tend to gloss over sin and have no understanding of how deep it goes. It's quite offensive to most people and I get that. But that is also what makes the Gospel so incredibly amazing.

 

As far as the theory of Paul being gay, I'd really like to know any proof of that besides an author's wishful thinking. :confused:

 

Also, do you believe a person can revert to heterosexuality as part of the putting on the new man as the Bible instructs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just "we all sin so don't judge". Or "love the sinner hate the sin." it's simply that i dont think it is a sin.

 

Can anyone point me to Christian authors who might help me clarify my thinking on this? I have read a lot of Spong and similar "liberal" authors. I have read a lot about the theory that Paul was himself a gay man.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

:iagree:

 

 

The reaction I receive in the Christian community can be shocking. As if I'd declared I sacrifice animals in the backyard. I have to work hard not to let the attitude interfere with my faith.

 

Tori

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been contemplating a similar thread, but I always figure it will get pulled. I wish there were a place with such diversity and intelligence where we can go deep and sometimes get ugly but handle it without being shut down.

 

I have been told that all Christians struggle with some sort of sin -- for one, it's alcoholism, for another it's p@rn, for some it's homosexuality.

 

That explanation didn't make sense because the other sins involve choice. I was told that not having fulfilling relationships, then, is part of the curse.

 

I wish I could dialogue with people about this without everyone getting ugly.

 

Well, i dont think alcholism involves choice as i typically define it. :001_huh: i cant really equate alcholism, porn addiction and being gay. Being in a consenting, loving relationship with another person is just not the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Receiving the Holy Spirit and accepting a servant's heart means we love Him more than we love our own lives...we do not look to our own understanding but to our creator's. I can not choose and pick which part of the Word I 'like'...but I know with a certainty that God is real, alive and present. The more I seek Him the more I understand His ways...that is about all I can share on this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that when you dig deep into this, you will find that the most nuanced, Biblical views are the homosexuality itself is not a sin, but that acting on it is. And this is hard to accept. I wish that this was not the Biblical position, but it is, so I accept it, but reluctantly, and not failing in love for my fellow humans who struggle with this. Some of the most loving relationships I have observed are gay ones. I will not pretend that this is not so.

 

I don't think that expressing extreme repugnance about this issue, as some Chrisitans do, is right or Christian. This is not the 'worst sin' nor the 'unforgivable one'. By the same token, though, I don't think that liberal churches do people any favors when they pretend that it is not a sin at all--that is a spiritually dangerous stance to take, given the Biblical injunctions against this behavior. To paper this over, to pretend that this behavior is not sinful, is to leave people without the call to repentance that they need. That is not right.

 

I spent a lot of time in this space. Eventually, I just couldn't go against what my conscience told me was right and good just because of a handful of Bible verses. The cost in suicides, self-loathing, and other destructive behaviors was too great, especially given the possibility that we are misunderstanding the social context in which those verses were written.

 

(For example, were those NT verses talking about committed homosexual relationships or a certain type of promiscuous homosexual behavior that was common in that time and place?)

 

But I understand and respect this position much more than that of those who seem to view homosexuality as the biggest sin of our time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would agree that people born desiring those of the same sex just have a difficult cross to bear in that they will have to spend their lives denying themselves sexual and emotional satisfaction while the rest of the people who struggle with sins ranging from lying to anger to pride are all free to enjoy relationships which provide sexual and emotional satisfaction?

 

Yes. And I know that this is a very hard saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never heard that before. But, wow, the possibility of it is interesting. He certainly did have issues with teA in whatever for it takes.

 

Spong talks about it in his books. There is an overvoew here:http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2004/04/Was-The-Apostle-Paul-Gay.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one can still struggle with pornography but not view it. One can still struggle with alcoholism and not drink. I'm not sure how much of a choice is involved there either. I think today we tend to gloss over sin and have no understanding of how deep it goes. It's quite offensive to most people and I get that. But that is also what makes the Gospel so incredibly amazing.

 

As far as the theory of Paul being gay, I'd really like to know any proof of that besides an author's wishful thinking. :confused:

 

:iagree: I believe homosexuality is not something a person is born with. I believe it is a response--sometimes subconscious--to environmental stimulus, but a choice nonetheless. Just as a person might struggle with pornography addiction, drug addiction, or alcoholism, he might also struggle with homosexuality. To embrace any of these sins as a lifestyle is wrong. I know that this is not a popular opinion, and it's certainly not politically correct, but I believe it is biblical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent a lot of time in this space. Eventually, I just couldn't go against what my conscience told me was right and good just because of a handful of Bible verses. The cost in suicides, self-loathing, and other destructive behaviors was too great, especially given the possibility that we are misunderstanding the social context in which those verses were written.

 

(For example, were those NT verses talking about committed homosexual relationships or a certain type of promiscuous homosexual behavior that was common in that time and place?)

 

But I understand and respect this position much more than that of those who seem to view homosexuality as the biggest sin of our time.

 

:iagree: this! It seems to me that it was an ugly, pro iscuous, disrespectful sort of sexual behavior that was being condemned here....and at the time, homosexuality fit that bill. I wonder whether a monogamous, gay, committed relationship would come under similar fire (i dont think such relationships were common back then!) also, i dont believe the Bile's meanings are written in stone, and i believe they are in some ways meant to be interpreted more broadly. Specifically, love your neighbour as yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would agree that people born desiring those of the same sex just have a difficult cross to bear in that they will have to spend their lives denying themselves sexual and emotional satisfaction while the rest of the people who struggle with sins ranging from lying to anger to pride are all free to enjoy relationships which provide sexual and emotional satisfaction?

 

Yes. And I know that this is a very hard saying.

 

:iagree:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree: I believe homosexuality is not something a person is born with. I believe it is a response--sometimes subconscious--to environmental stimulus, but a choice nonetheless. Just as a person might struggle with pornography addiction, drug addiction, or alcoholism, he might also struggle with homosexuality. To embrace any of these sins as a lifestyle is wrong. I know that this is not a popular opinion, and it's certainly not politically correct, but I believe it is biblical.

 

I disagree, obviously, but let's jus pretend there was incontrovertible proof that gay people are BORN that way. What would you say then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, i dont think alcholism involves choice as i typically define it. :001_huh: i cant really equate alcholism, porn addiction and being gay. Being in a consenting, loving relationship with another person is just not the same.

 

Well, a 12 year old who never had access to alcohol would never be an alcoholic. I know recovering alcoholics who live perfectly fine lives not drinking anymore. I know people who have stopped looking at p&rn and have good relationships.

 

My question is, are there people who stopped desiring same sex relationships and now prefer hetero? I have met people who accept hetero because it's what you do to be normal but they were never happy and still gay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would agree that people born desiring those of the same sex just have a difficult cross to bear in that they will have to spend their lives denying themselves sexual and emotional satisfaction while the rest of the people who struggle with sins ranging from lying to anger to pride are all free to enjoy relationships which provide sexual and emotional satisfaction?

 

This is what it came to for me, believing a person is born that way, that it is not a choice. I grew up with a few boys who grew into gay men, it was apparent even before relationships were an issue. I'm not talking stereotypical gay either. Being in consensual gay relationship does not harm anyone.

 

Addiction issues are a totally different ballgame, they do harm the individual and others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree: I believe homosexuality is not something a person is born with. I believe it is a response--sometimes subconscious--to environmental stimulus, but a choice nonetheless. Just as a person might struggle with pornography addiction, drug addiction, or alcoholism, he might also struggle with homosexuality. To embrace any of these sins as a lifestyle is wrong. I know that this is not a popular opinion, and it's certainly not politically correct, but I believe it is biblical.

 

I was taugh that as well and always from heterosexual people. Often, the blame is put on a bad relationship with the father. It's funny, because nearly every heterosexual person I know should be gay, then.

 

May I ask how many homosexual people you have talked to? How many of them explained to you when they knew they were gay?

 

I know at least ten. Some people I knew since early teenage years, some family members, some friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's interesting that our entire sexual drive is dependent upon chemicals and hormones. People with hormone imbalances or people taking certain medications like antidepressants are acutely aware of this. Even brain rumors pressing on the wrong part of the brain can change sex drive.

 

I think we think we have so much control over it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In part, this is one of the issues that convinced me I could not longer be a Christian, and one of the many concepts that helped put an end to my faith in Christianity, Jesus, and deities in general.

 

(Sorry, I'm just going to type some here to unjumble my thoughts.) I've been thinking about this more and more. I talked with my friend "Bob" the other day on the phone, and think about it from time to time.

 

I mean to talk more with "Bob" with my former high school boyfriend, about this sometime. We were very devout Christians in high school, and dated (we were the only followers of our faith, and were determined to only date within our faith, and, fortunately, really enjoyed one another). He went to Christian college in another state, and I went to a state school. After a couple of years, and having met several other gay guys, I started thinking my Bob was probably gay.

 

We lost track for many years, and when we finally met up again (we had been searching for one another for a couple of years), I was so glad to find out he had just celebrated his 10th anniversary with his partner. (They met at church, Bob was playing piano and his partner was singing.) I had been worried for a long time that he was miserable and single and trying to get Jesus to fix him.

 

Bob and his partner are still Christians, and very much involved in their church. I'm atheist.

 

I grew up in a very small, very rural, very anti-gay town. The kids I grew up, who are gay and out now, all grew up in religious Christian families in that town (except for one girl, who came from a non-religious background, but was baptized into a Campbellite Church of Christ in high school, and then abandonned the next year.) Two were Mormon, one was Catholic, one was Episcopalian. (We had 13 churches and 13 streets in our town). There are other gay folks I went to school with, of course. These are just the only ones on my FB friends list. :) (Ooh, and Bob and I were Evangelical Baptists)

 

Most of them are non-believers now.

 

Even though I too have read Spong and other "open and affirming" resources about how gays can be Christians, etc. I just can't grasp it. God wanted people who had gay sex to be executed. Now, according to some, that has changed, whether by "New Covenant" or "that was just a civil law for specific people" or "God didn't really want that, that was just people infiltrating God's will and book."

 

To me, it says that the Biblical god was so opposed to loving people consumating a relationship that he wanted them dead. And yet, in his perfect lovingness, he insisted babies and children be killed in the slaughter of the Midianites.

 

I have a hard time making it line up.

 

I never mean to argue with a gay person who is a Christian that they haven't found a way to make it work for them, of course, but on the same side. I'd never argue that the two actually jive. (Except, of course, by the very most liberal versions of Christianity, that don't recognize the very condemnatory aspects of the OT and NT--and, yanno, again then I think "whatever butters your biscuits.")

Edited by Ipsey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would agree that people born desiring those of the same sex just have a difficult cross to bear in that they will have to spend their lives denying themselves sexual and emotional satisfaction while the rest of the people who struggle with sins ranging from lying to anger to pride are all free to enjoy relationships which provide sexual and emotional satisfaction?

 

Exactly. Homosexuality in and of itself is not a sin. People can't help how they are born. Acting on it is.

 

Everyone on this earth has a cross to bear. We ALL do. We all have something that is the proverbial thorn in our side that we will struggle with until the day we die--hopefully we can master it, some never do. And that's OK. Because my lack of patience is the just as much of a sin. It's just as black. When I snap because I'm angry, not being patient, not long-suffering--I mean, I don't get much right, it's just as black.

 

If anything, they need our compassion all the more because they aren't only fighting the battle in private, but in public. And everyone feels free to cast stones. Frankly, I feel a person who struggles with such a cross as that more worthy of sainthood than most. And, within our tradition, lots of people are celibate-it's celebrated as a life affirming choice of the religious, so it's not like there aren't other people who not only struggle with celibacy, they not only were not born with it, they freely chose it. It is a beautiful sacrifice those give for a greater love. Would we all be as selfless. It's also a call to Holy Orders, which is the same as Matrimony.

Edited by justamouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was taugh that as well and always from heterosexual people. Often, the blame is put on a bad relationship with the father. It's funny, because nearly every heterosexual person I know should be gay, then.

 

May I ask how many homosexual people you have talked to? How many of them explained to you when they knew they were gay?

 

I know at least ten. Some people I knew since early teenage years, some family members, some friends.

 

I have several gay friends. Right off the top of my head, I can count about half a dozen with whom I interact on a fairly frequent basis. Obviously, we disagree when it comes to their lifestyle, but they know where I stand, I know where they stand, and we are friends anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, obviously, but let's jus pretend there was incontrovertible proof that gay people are BORN that way. What would you say then?

 

Tough question, because while I believe that homosexuality is biblically wrong, I am not heartless, and I would want to find a way to reconcile these two dichotomies.

 

I do like what this poster said, and I agree with what she says here:

 

I don't think that expressing extreme repugnance about this issue, as some Christians do, is right or Christian. This is not the 'worst sin' nor the 'unforgivable one'. By the same token, though, I don't think that liberal churches do people any favors when they pretend that it is not a sin at all--that is a spiritually dangerous stance to take, given the Biblical injunctions against this behavior. To paper this over, to pretend that this behavior is not sinful, is to leave people without the call to repentance that they need. That is not right. Not to identify this as wrong is dangerous to those who are thus tempted, because it leaves out what God says about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent a lot of time in this space. Eventually, I just couldn't go against what my conscience told me was right and good just because of a handful of Bible verses. The cost in suicides, self-loathing, and other destructive behaviors was too great, especially given the possibility that we are misunderstanding the social context in which those verses were written.

 

(For example, were those NT verses talking about committed homosexual relationships or a certain type of promiscuous homosexual behavior that was common in that time and place?)

 

But I understand and respect this position much more than that of those who seem to view homosexuality as the biggest sin of our time.

 

I wonder also if many of the "relationships"or "behaviors" of that time would even qualify as consensual by today's standards (the consensual aspect is why I put apostrophes in place). I think that the vast majority of people would use different, stronger language for coercion now but if most of a specific type of interaction in the past involved at least some degree of coercion maybe a more general term would have been used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, obviously, but let's jus pretend there was incontrovertible proof that gay people are BORN that way. What would you say then?

 

I actually have no doubt that homosexual people are, at the very least, born predisposed to their sexual preferences. I also believe that we are all born with predisposition to sin in some way. I still don't view it as being ok. I don't hate my gay friends for it though, that would be inconsistent with scripture. Not to mention, I can't hate them for living out something that I myself have struggled with (and still do sometimes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Catholic Church's stance on homosexuality is that it is not a sin to be homosexual, it is only a sin to act on the urges (there are priests who were homosexual but chaste). That is what I believe. I'm not sure how anyone could read the Bible and Christ's words and figure it's perfectly okay to act out sexually outside of the fundamental definition of marriage. :confused:

 

But as far as someone "being" homosexual, no I do not believe that is a sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Catholic Church's stance on homosexuality is that it is not a sin to be homosexual, it is only a sin to act on the urges (there are priests who were homosexual but chaste). That is what I believe. I'm not sure how anyone could read the Bible and Christ's words and figure it's perfectly okay to act out sexually outside of the fundamental definition of marriage. :confused:

 

But as far as someone "being" homosexual, no I do not believe that is a sin.

:iagree: although I'm not Catholic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Catholic Church's stance on homosexuality is that it is not a sin to be homosexual, it is only a sin to act on the urges (there are priests who were homosexual but chaste). That is what I believe. I'm not sure how anyone could read the Bible and Christ's words and figure it's perfectly okay to act out sexually outside of the fundamental definition of marriage. :confused:

 

But as far as someone "being" homosexual, no I do not believe that is a sin.

 

Because not every Christian believes in the Bible in the same way, with the same perspective, that it is intended or developed in the same way you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because not every Christian believes in the Bible in the same way, with the same perspective, that it is intended or developed in the same way you do.

 

Well I am certainly willing to be schooled. I have found the Bible pretty crystal clear on the topic of sexual "sins", even though I may not agree or find it smart or easy to digest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Bible in that they said sex outside of marriage is a sin. But...marriage was very different then. It was not a civil matter, it was consent between two people, and a merging of families and property. So if people do that now, regardless of the legal implications, I consider them married if they consider themselves that way, so their sex would not be sinful.

 

But honestly, I'm going to work on the loving they neighbor thing until I have that down perfectly, then I will worry about the rest of it ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Bible in that they said sex outside of marriage is a sin. But...marriage was very different then. It was not a civil matter, it was consent between two people, and a merging of families and property. So if people do that now, regardless of the legal implications, I consider them married if they consider themselves that way, so their sex would not be sinful.

But honestly, I'm going to work on the loving they neighbor thing until I have that down perfectly, then I will worry about the rest of it ;)

 

Sounds good to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you feel it's a sin, what are the public policy implications of that?

What each of us feels about it only matters to others in terms of how we, collectively, decide to treat people. What do you feel is the appropriate societal response?

 

How should we handle marriage?

The military?

Adoption?

Insurance, inheritance, and other money issues?

Acceptance into church/school/scouts/etc.?

 

These actions/policies are of course formed by our beliefs. How do we as a society handle differing beliefs on this subject, in terms of our actions/policies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Romans 1 is the first thing I think of that states it is a sin. It would also work against the theory that Paul was actively gay, since he wrote it.

 

ETA- I don't believe people are born that way. I believe it's a combination of nature and nurture, like a lot of things. DH does. It doesn't really matter, though. We all have sins we enjoy more than others and weaknesses and strengths. As I recently told a gay, Christian friend, Christ's blood covers every sin, no matter what it is.

Edited by Scuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I am certainly willing to be schooled. I have found the Bible pretty crystal clear on the topic of sexual "sins", even though I may not agree or find it smart or easy to digest.

 

*rolls eyes* about the smart or easy to digest comment.

 

Many thousands of Jesus believers don't frame the Bible the same way you do. Therefore, they would not frame what YOU see as crystal clarity to be the inerrant word of God to be taken literally and stripped of cultural, socio-economic, and human influence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's simply that i dont think it is a sin.

 

--

 

I have read a lot of Spong and similar "liberal" authors.

 

I think that this is the reason why.

 

Spong rejects all claims that the Bible is the Word of God. So, obviously, he is going to reject anything inside the Bible that is a proscription...unless he likes it. I'm sure he's probably good with, "Thou shall not steal", for example.

 

He holds the inexplicable position that the Bible is not God's Word...but it's still a "good book" that is apparently full of untruths and outright lies (not only this one).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just "we all sin so don't judge". Or "love the sinner hate the sin." it's simply that i dont think it is a sin.

 

Can anyone point me to Christian authors who might help me clarify my thinking on this? I have read a lot of Spong and similar "liberal" authors. I have read a lot about the theory that Paul was himself a gay man.

 

Thoughts?

 

Not readings, but I posted this video link on the other thread:

http://www.advocate.com/op-ed/2012/05/01/opinion-do-not-give-christian-gays

 

A gay conservative Christian Harvard student took two years off college to deeply study biblical teachings on homosexuality.

 

Also, the movie "For the Bible Tells Me So" (available on Netflix) has many Christian leaders explaining their views on homosexuality and their interpretations of the relevant biblical passages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never heard that before. But, wow, the possibility of it is interesting. He certainly did have issues with teA in whatever for it takes.

 

I could not disagree more.

 

All the dude says was that it was better to marry than to burn in lust. And if you are single, either get married, or dedicate yourself to God in prayer.

 

Doesn't sound too sexually confused to me. Sounds like pretty practical advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*rolls eyes* about the smart or easy to digest comment.

 

Many thousands of Jesus believers don't frame the Bible the same way you do. Therefore, they would not frame what YOU see as crystal clarity to be the inerrant word of God to be taken literally and stripped of cultural, socio-economic, and human influence.

 

I think you are misunderstanding me. *I* do NOT find it smart or easy to digest. I was speaking solely of myself there. I do not like the fact that the Bible says homosexuality is a sin. That doesn't make sense to me. But at this point, I cannot understand that is not what the Bible says. That is what I meant by "I am willing to be schooled."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are scholars and "people" who believe that this is the big sin/secret Paul references.

 

 

And there are multitudes more scholars that believe that Paul's problem was an eye problem, as he indicates elsewhere that he is writing with very large letters and thanks the people that he felt they loved him enough that they would have plucked out their own eyes and given them to him.

 

Galatians 6:11 See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand

 

Galatians 4:13-15 13As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. 14Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. 15What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. 16Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Edited by TranquilMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...