eeny meeny miney moe

[Nicole M]

 

 

Again, I apologize for any misinterpretations on my part and for offending you. For that, I am truly sorry. Perhaps if you can forgive me that, you might attempt to listen what I've said in these last two posts. Thank you.

 

HOLY MACKEREL!

 

I'm so sorry! I was shoveling poo all day with a totally wicked headache and nasty nausea from the meds I took for the headache and then completely misread your post, and felt attacked and a bit betrayed (I thought we were friends!) and just lashed out. I'm super sorry.

 

And now I have to get ready to work a 3 hour barbershop quartet concert... and nothing against barbershop quartets at all, but gads, after the day I've had, it's really too much. So in between lights up and lights down and microphone up and microphone down, I'll read more carefully what you posted.

 

I see your point, though, that my question would have seemed odd. My thinking around that one wee sentence was rather more involved, but I had just come inside for water and took a peek at the thread (even though now it's frightening me to do so) and then got busted by my kids - "did you wash your hands? why are you looking at the WTM boards when we've got this mongo poo mountain that needs to be moved out back." So perhaps, or perhaps not, my question would have made more sense if all the other thinking around it had been expressed. I don't think it was a dumb question, but since I've started hanging out on this board I've learned that I'm just a bear of very little brain.

[Alenee]

Tolerance, acceptance, and equality is absolutely necessary.

 

It is very wrong to assume just because someone disagrees with this line of thinking they are not a Christian. There are many many Christians who do not believe homosexuality is a sin, and many churches who welcome people of all sexual orientations.

 

The Bible also says that people who are born with physical deformities, mental illnesses, and disabilities come from sin and are "unclean" and I am completely against discriminating against them also. If my husband dies, I am not going to have sex with his brother until a male heir is produced. I'm anti-slavery, I don't believe my husband is worth more than me, and I wear clothes made from blended fabrics.

 

You've just pulled out parts without looking at the whole bible in context. Read it first please before attacking. Everyone here has stayed respectful...it would be nice if you could do the same.

[Peek a Boo]

Tolerance, acceptance, and equality is absolutely necessary.

 

so you tolerate, accept, and consider equal those actions that you consider criminal, immoral or wrong? or are you willing to qualify your definition of tolerance, acceptance, and equality?

 

It is very wrong to assume just because someone disagrees with this line of thinking they are not a Christian. There are many many Christians who do not believe homosexuality is a sin, and many churches who welcome people of all sexual orientations.

 

I agree that it is wrong to assume whether one is a christian or not --which is why I don't :)

--that's a heart issue, and not my job. i already said that many Christians believe different things about the Bible. It is absolutely possible to be a Christian and have an incorrect interpretation of the Bible [self included].

I only look at what the Bible does and does not say. Romans chapter 1 is clear.

I agree that Churches should welcome all sinners. We all need Christ.

 

 

The Bible also says that people who are born with physical deformities, mental illnesses, and disabilities come from sin and are "unclean" and I am completely against discriminating against them also. If my husband dies, I am not going to have sex with his brother until a male heir is produced. I'm anti-slavery, I don't believe my husband is worth more than me, and I wear clothes made from blended fabrics.

 

The Bible says that we are ALL "unclean" --there is none righteous, no not one. We are to discriminate against -distinguish-call to repentance- ALL who openly sin --even if they are Christians. That's part of Christian accountability. You have things you choose to discriminate against, we have things we are told to discriminate -distinguish- recognize.

 

there's a difference between "distinguish[ing] by discerning or exposing differences" and "to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit." Scripturally, we are to discern when one is committing a sinful act. We are to love everyone as God loves everyone.

 

Your examples from the law demonstrate why we embrace Christ [more at Hebrews- New Covenant- Christ as High Priest]. Context is everything. Christian Liberty is a topic all in itself ;)

[Laura Corin]

Why didn't Jesus ever give a sermon against homosexuality, or even mention it? He condemned tax collectors, money changers, politicians and lawyers, yet Christians never condemn them.

 

Laura

[Kathleen in VA]

Laura

 

Laura,

 

Jesus did not preach against homosexuality per se, but he did affirm the union of a man of woman as God's design for human sexuality when he said in Matthew 19:4-6:

 

[4] And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

[5] And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

[6] Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

 

He confirmed God's establishment of marriage between one man and one woman through covenant and through sexual union as the definition of marriage.

[Heather in Neverland]

Tolerance, acceptance, and equality is absolutely necessary.

 

 

Do my "extreme" Christian beliefs also deserve that same tolerance, acceptance and equality? Being tolerant of everyone and their beliefs requires being tolerant of the "intolerant" as well.

 

That's why I sometimes have a hard time with that word- tolerance. My dictionary states its definition as: a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own.

 

Because beliefs are based on faith, I do not think we can say we are "objective" about the topic and my faith definitely precludes "permissiveness" in regards to homosexual behavior. So how can we be "tolerant"? Can a homosexual who feels maligned by Christian principles on this topic truly be "objective" about it and be "tolerant" of those Christian beliefs?

 

So I guess that word just bugs me a little because it has all those undertones of condoning behaviors. I just strive to LOVE my neighbors as much as possible (and love is not "objective" either).

[Foofy Coffee Lover]

Sin, of course, starts as a thought Admittedly, we can greatly influence what those thoughts will be by what we let into our "gates" (see, hear, touch, etc. and ), but we cannot completely control the thoughts that come to our mind -- at least I can't! 2 Corinthians 10:5 admonishes us to bring our thoughts into obedience. Thus, I believe the indication is that what we choose to do with a thought determines whether it becomes sin or not. I think that if we have tendencies to believe or feel certain ways that do not line up with truth, the process of taking those thoughts "captive" as the verse says, and replacing those thoughts with truth, will eventually overrule those tendencies. God has an abundance of grace and mercy. One thing I have learned first-hand is that where sin abounded, grace did much more abound (Romans 5:20). We all have our "tendencies" to sin in certain areas, whether they be the "big" things people most often point out or the "little" things that may in reality be more harmful than the former. God's grace to apply God's truth covers it all. The bottom line is, all of life is a choice, is it not? All of life is choosing what we do with truth which often may oppose feeling.

[Colleen]

I'm so sorry! I was shoveling poo all day with a totally wicked headache and nasty nausea from the meds I took for the headache and then completely misread your post, and felt attacked and a bit betrayed (I thought we were friends!) and just lashed out. I'm super sorry.

 

It's all good. Here, have some rep points. (Tosses some green squares to Nicole.) I was confuzzled by your reply, but I totally know how it is to pop in, read something on the fly and reply, and pop out. No worries.

 

I don't think it was a dumb question, but since I've started hanging out on this board I've learned that I'm just a bear of very little brain.

 

Oh, I didn't mean to imply it was a dumb question! I thought rather that you were encouraging people to take ownership of their opinions ~ and that's not necessarily a bad thing. It just so happens that with this one Really Significant Topic, it's hard to answer the question without further exposing oneself to analysis. If that makes sense? Perhaps not. I'm posting on the fly myself.;)

[CAMom]

Thanks for the clarification. What is taught here in our schools is that no one is allowed to discriminate against anyone on the basis of sexual orientation, and that being gay does not make one a bad person. Kids can seek help if they are confused and feel they can't go to their parents, but there is no indoctrination going on- only the teaching of tolerance and acceptance of others. I would hate for any child to grow up without learning those important lessons.

 

 

 

But according to the infallible Bible, we are all sinners. So that means you would have to limit your children's time with everyone, including yourself, their siblings- all these people sin. Lol- just kidding, but what you are saying here sounds a bit like you think some sins are worse than others.

 

Some of the others have already spoken to this but I'll clarify anyway.;)

 

I would never say that being gay makes one a "bad person" and no one I know would say it either. I would say that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23) but I wouldn't call a gay person "bad" any more than any other person committing any sort of other sin. I also don't teach my kids to "descriminate" against anyone. What does that mean anyway?

 

I would also say that I would limit my kids' exposure to people who are in sin and show no intention whatsoever of repenting. (I wanted to be specific in mentioning repentence in my first post but didn't think it would go ever very well.;))

 

So, yes! I do sin. Everyone in my house sins. Everyone in our church sins. Everyone in our homeschool group sins. But the difference is is that these people show remorse for sin. Their hearts are contrite. They repent and move on. If they commit the sin again, they repent again.

[PameliaSue]

Do my "extreme" Christian beliefs also deserve that same tolerance, acceptance and equality? Being tolerant of everyone and their beliefs requires being tolerant of the "intolerant" as well.

 

That's why I sometimes have a hard time with that word- tolerance. My dictionary states its definition as: a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own.

 

Because beliefs are based on faith, I do not think we can say we are "objective" about the topic and my faith definitely precludes "permissiveness" in regards to homosexual behavior. So how can we be "tolerant"? Can a homosexual who feels maligned by Christian principles on this topic truly be "objective" about it and be "tolerant" of those Christian beliefs?

 

So I guess that word just bugs me a little because it has all those undertones of condoning behaviors. I just strive to LOVE my neighbors as much as possible (and love is not "objective" either).

:iagree: Its kind of like saying, "There are no absolutes."

[PameliaSue]

I am obligated to yank my kids from school to keep them from deviant sexual indoctrination.

 

This is where merely having personal religious beliefs that dictate personal behaviors (which I totally respect, no matter what the religion) crosses over into discrimination.

 

So are you saying you would not "allow" your child to be friends with someone who is gay? Would you also not allow your child to be friends with someone who commits some of the other sins mentioned, such as lying and gossiping?

 

When an institution decides that it knows better than I do what is morally acceptable and by it's very structure undermines my parental authority I, without a doubt have NO tolerance. Call it discrimination if you like. But really I think you misunderstand me. That was a one liner sentence but the last word says it all. Indoctrination.

 

As for allowing my child to have a gay friend, I don't know. My oldest is only 8. I don't think they even know what a homosexual is. And that is how I want it. What 8 year old needs to be grappling with the complexities of sexuality and what my religion deems a deviation of sexuality to boot? We will cross that road as prayerfully and humbly as possible when we come to it.

 

As for other sins, it depends. How much sway does that friend have over my child? Who is the leader and who is the follower in their friendship? The Bible does call all sin equal in God's eyes. What hasn't been mentioned yet is that different sins have different consequences in the physical and sometimes in the spiritual realm. Just like if I were to plant corn, corn would grow and if I were to plant peas, peas would grow. Different sins have different consequences. Would I allow my daughter to hang out with a friend who is very seductive in her dress and actions toward boys? No. The fruit from that sin can be very dear indeed. The physical fruit from lying or gossiping isn't as tangible though it can be just as destructive. And again we'll tackle the specifics when we get to them. She's only 4 right now. It's all hypothetical at this age. I can tell you that I will endeavor to honor God. I also realize that it is unhealthy and "inbred" (and by inbred I mean a faith that can not reproduce it's self... a me and mine on our way to heaven attitude) to totally shelter a child from the world around us. They have friends that come from homes that aren't Christian but at this age it is all monitored.

[AmyB]

First of all, Islam can be very tolerant of homosexuality. Several small cultures within Islam practice homosexuality. The Pashtuns of Afghanistan even take young boys as lovers (which most people DO consider to be a heinous sin), yet it was only when the Taliban entered their area that they started punishing the warlords who took boys. Homosexuality is much more tolerated in Islam than you are led to believe.

 

Second, the punishment is not necessarily death. One of the punishments is to have a mud brick wall falling on you. If you survive, you go free. As anyone knows who has made a brick path or wall, you can get much worse from very hard baked bricks, and get away with a bad bruising.

 

The third point is that Greek probably didn't have a word for homosexuality. I am supposing this only from a linguistic point of view. Cultures tend not to have words for things that are common. The French don't have a clear word for food, for example. 'Nourriture' and 'cuisine' are not as clear cut as 'food'. One talks around these words. So if Christians are making certain words to mean other words, it is a misinterpretation.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

You've just pulled out parts without looking at the whole bible in context. Read it first please before attacking. Everyone here has stayed respectful...it would be nice if you could do the same.

 

But that's exactly what's been going on in this entire thread. I have read the entire Bible. I don't see how I am being disrespectful by simply pointing out that the Bible says all kinds of things. I respect the views of others on this thread, let me make that perfectly clear right now.

 

so you tolerate, accept, and consider equal those actions that you consider criminal, immoral or wrong? or are you willing to qualify your definition of tolerance, acceptance, and equality?

 

As a Christian, I'm supposed to treat everyone as equals. That's my personal belief.

 

The Bible says that we are ALL "unclean" --there is none righteous, no not one. We are to discriminate against -distinguish-call to repentance- ALL who openly sin --even if they are Christians. That's part of Christian accountability. You have things you choose to discriminate against, we have things we are told to discriminate -distinguish- recognize.

 

So you do believe that disabilities come from sin like the Bible says?

 

What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

 

Yes, and there are plenty of Gay couples who are joined in holy union in the church. But I guess since it's not the right church, it's okay to put them asunder?

 

Do my "extreme" Christian beliefs also deserve that same tolerance, acceptance and equality? Being tolerant of everyone and their beliefs requires being tolerant of the "intolerant" as well.

 

Yes, of course. I also respect the Muslim faith very very much. However, when a small minority of Muslims go extremist, and use their religion in a way that hurts others, it is no longer about religion. That's a social problem. How do we stop this? Certainly not be being intolerant. Look where that strategy has gotten us.

 

I would never say that being gay makes one a "bad person" and no one I know would say it either. I would say that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23) but I wouldn't call a gay person "bad" any more than any other person committing any sort of other sin. I also don't teach my kids to "descriminate" against anyone. What does that mean anyway?

 

Discrimination would be holding up a sign at a gay parade that says 'Homosexuality is a Sin". It would be not hiring someone to work for you based on their sexual orientation. It would be lobbying against the civil rights of gays and lesbians. It would mean generally treating gay people like they are not equal.

 

My oldest is only 8. I don't think they even know what a homosexual is.

 

My dd7 has friends with two moms or two dads. As she put it as a 4 year old, "God makes all kinds of families." She knows we would not think she was bad or wrong if she found Hannah Montana attractive in the same way she finds Zac Efron attractive.

---------------

 

Here's the thing- I respect fundamentalist Christians. We used to have a family living across the street who didn't even allow their girls to wear pants. That was a wonderful thing for my daughter, because she got to see firsthand that way of life. Instead of just looking out the window and saying, "Man, those girls are weirdos," my daughter crossed the street and got to know those girls. And I think that's what it's all about- crossing the street- getting to know people before making blanket judgments.

 

That's what I am trying to do here- cross the street and try to understand exactly how someone could logically justify treating gay individuals and couples as immoral.

[Melinda in VT]

I wasn’t going to get back into this, but I see a serious misunderstanding of the nature of Christianity here and I think that it is important to try to explain, to the best of my ability, what Christianity is.

 

Specifically, I want to address is this business of “loving one’s neighbor†and how that is not as simple as it sounds. Yes, it would be very nice if I could just say, “You do whatever you want and I’ll do whatever I want and we’ll all just be happy.†But what if what I want interferes with what you want? What if what I want causes others to be hurt? What if what I want is self-destructive? Is it really loving to let someone destroy their life?

 

The thing is, if I am a Christian and I believe the Bible says that some behavior (it doesn’t matter which one for the sake of explaining what Christianity is - there are lots to pick from) is sinful and by doing that behavior you are bringing eternal condemnation upon yourself then I will try to avoid it personally and I will tell all those I love and care about it to avoid it as well. Love is not just accepting people for what they are. It is also telling people they are in trouble and need help.

 

 

I've been thinking about this post a lot. (The entire post, not just the part I quoted.)

 

The thing is, when I read the gospels, I don't come away with the impression that Jesus was encouraging us to go around calling people to repentance. I come away with the impression that he wants us to be *less* concerned than we naturally tend to be about the sins of others. Rather, he wants us to show love to others, not by calling them to repentance, but by eating with them (i.e., socializing with them, being friends with them) and seeing that their needs are met.

[PariSarah]

The thing is, when I read the gospels, I don't come away with the impression that Jesus was encouraging us to go around calling people to repentance. I come away with the impression that he wants us to be *less* concerned than we naturally tend to be about the sins of others. Rather, he wants us to show love to others, not by calling them to repentance, but by eating with them (i.e., socializing with them, being friends with them) and seeing that their needs are met.

 

Matthew, Mark, and John have other emphases, but you've captured Luke's message in a nutshell here. Jesus is almost exclusively concerned with "social holiness" in Luke--caring for the poor, healing communal relationships, rectifying injustice.

 

Jesus tends to be concerned with personal holiness more in Matthew and John than in Luke. (The Sermon on the Mount, e.g.) But even there, the emphasis is more on one's own holiness. Calling one's brothers and sisters to holiness is encouraged, but cautiously.

 

I've always been fascinated by the history of the theology of evangelism. John Wesley said that when you go to a new place, you have to preach sin, so that people know what they are being saved from. Then you preach gospel, so that they know they can be saved. In all four gospels, Jesus often does it in reverse: he preaches forgiveness, the forgiveness prompts repentance, and then he has to let the "righteous" know that they, too, need forgiveness. John 8 is the paradigmatic example of this. He chastises the crowd for not realizing that they, too, need forgiveness; he forgives the woman, and then tells her not to sin any more. It's very interesting.

 

I don't think you're going to be able to remove sin and repentance from the gospels entirely, Melinda. Jesus preached wrath as well as grace. You just can't get around it.

 

But I definitely think you've hit on a blind spot in evangelical theology.

[Melinda in VT]

Matthew, Mark, and John have other emphases, but you've captured Luke's message in a nutshell here. Jesus is almost exclusively concerned with "social holiness" in Luke--caring for the poor, healing communal relationships, rectifying injustice.

 

Jesus tends to be concerned with personal holiness more in Matthew and John than in Luke. (The Sermon on the Mount, e.g.) But even there, the emphasis is more on one's own holiness. Calling one's brothers and sisters to holiness is encouraged, but cautiously.

 

I've always been fascinated by the history of the theology of evangelism. John Wesley said that when you go to a new place, you have to preach sin, so that people know what they are being saved from. Then you preach gospel, so that they know they can be saved. In all four gospels, Jesus often does it in reverse: he preaches forgiveness, the forgiveness prompts repentance, and then he has to let the "righteous" know that they, too, need forgiveness. John 8 is the paradigmatic example of this. He chastises the crowd for not realizing that they, too, need forgiveness; he forgives the woman, and then tells her not to sin any more. It's very interesting.

 

I don't think you're going to be able to remove sin and repentance from the gospels entirely, Melinda. Jesus preached wrath as well as grace. You just can't get around it.

 

But I definitely think you've hit on a blind spot in evangelical theology.

 

Sarah, I'm glad you posted. I always enjoy hearing your comments on religious issues.

 

I wasn't trying to imply in my earlier post that Jesus didn't speak about sin and repentance, rather that, as you said, when he does "the emphasis is more on one's own holiness."

 

But you are right in sensing that I have issues with the wrath parts. ;)

[summer]

I understand that if someone is more along the lines of bisexual, they may pick to go one way or the other because they still want to have a committment and love and family life, etc. Think Anne Heche.

[summer]

I've been thinking about this post a lot. (The entire post, not just the part I quoted.)

 

The thing is, when I read the gospels, I don't come away with the impression that Jesus was encouraging us to go around calling people to repentance. I come away with the impression that he wants us to be *less* concerned than we naturally tend to be about the sins of others. Rather, he wants us to show love to others, not by calling them to repentance, but by eating with them (i.e., socializing with them, being friends with them) and seeing that their needs are met.

 

I agree with this. This is one the huge issues my dh has with Christians is that he says they always try to judge others and treat each other poorly rather than love one another. I think DH's experiences have just been very limited and we live in the bible belt now and he has never really been involved in a church. (other than as a child, he went to a Catholic one)

[Peek a Boo]

Quote:

The Bible says that we are ALL "unclean" --there is none righteous, no not one. We are to discriminate against -distinguish-call to repentance- ALL who openly sin --even if they are Christians. That's part of Christian accountability. You have things you choose to discriminate against, we have things we are told to discriminate -distinguish- recognize.

So you do believe that disabilities come from sin like the Bible says?

 

I see that the Bible says EVERYTHING comes from sin: including our diseased bodies, depraved minds, our sinful hearts, and our vicious tongues that kill w/ words. We are told scripturally to handle involuntary physical issues [the result of living in a fallen world w/ sinful nature] differently from conscious sinful choices [Gal 4:14] You need to specify exactly what verse you refer to where you think disabilities are somehow any worse than our general fallen nature, because you are losing the context of scripture by focussing on one thing. Or maybe you want to focus on what is said as a curse under the Law [Deut 28] vs what Christ clarifies under the New Covenant. Context, context, context. i haven't seen any Christians here elevate homosexuality to something worse than any other sin, only point out that in every Biblical context sex w/another of the same sex is still wrong. You might also want to look at what Christ said about people who are born w/ disabilities and why they were born that way --so that the glory of God may be revealed.

 

your turn:

Do you believe that Romans chapter 1 says that it is sinful and unnatural for people to exchange natural relations w/ the opposite sex and burn w/ lust for the same sex?

=

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

 

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

 

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

 

28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

=

 

so is all that just dismissed for you? i am sincerely interested in hearing how different Christians interpret scripture. i might not agree w/ you, but I think it adds a lot to the discussion to see how people are considering that which is written.

 

Yes, and there are plenty of Gay couples who are joined in holy union in the church. But I guess since it's not the right church, it's okay to put them asunder?

 

It's not that it's the 'right church', it's that they joining in holy union that which is spelled out as unnatural and unGodly. People want to marry animals too. That someone out there is willing to perform the ceremony doesn't make it scriptural or holy.

 

 

Yes, of course. I also respect the Muslim faith very very much. However, when a small minority of Muslims go extremist, and use their religion in a way that hurts others, it is no longer about religion. That's a social problem. How do we stop this? Certainly not be being intolerant. Look where that strategy has gotten us.

 

The Jews were very tolerant of the Nazis too. Look where that got them.

 

Discrimination would be holding up a sign at a gay parade that says 'Homosexuality is a Sin".

 

Quote:

so you tolerate, accept, and consider equal those actions that you consider criminal, immoral or wrong? or are you willing to qualify your definition of tolerance, acceptance, and equality?

As a Christian, I'm supposed to treat everyone as equals. That's my personal belief.

 

 

Holding up a sign that states what Romans chapter 1 says is simply pointing out what God says. Are you saying you wouldn't be tolerant of my right to hold up a sign about what the Bible says? That would be discriminatory of you. Would you really respect my right to do so? Or just put up with it? Would you treat me as an equal and help me pick up my sign if i dropped it??

 

It would be not hiring someone to work for you based on their sexual orientation. It would be lobbying against the civil rights of gays and lesbians. It would mean generally treating gay people like they are not equal.

 

 

Hiring employees: back to open, unrepentant sin. I would have no problem hiring someone who is a sinner as long as they are not being an immediate danger to the other employees. I won't lobby for women to have the 'right' to kill their unborn children, and i won't lobby for people to have a legal 'right' to do other destructive behaviors that God speaks against. Are you saying that you disagree w/ Paul when he says we are to confront those who are sinning? Do you disagree w/ Christ when He took a whip to the moneychangers in the temple? Was HE being discriminatory and treating those people as equals? I'll bet He got a lot of tongue clucking over that one. How intolerant of Him.

 

 

My dd7 has friends with two moms or two dads. As she put it as a 4 year old, "God makes all kinds of families."

...

Here's the thing- I respect fundamentalist Christians. .... And I think that's what it's all about- crossing the street- getting to know people before making blanket judgments.

 

That's what I am trying to do here- cross the street and try to understand exactly how someone could logically justify treating gay individuals and couples as immoral.

 

My best friend is an atheist and lives next door to a lesbian couple w/ children. I don't mind my kids playing over there [either place] or spending the night --they are not promiscuous or child molestors. They are not going to proselytize to my kids. You seem to assume that just because we disagree w/ one's choices we are condemning them to hell or something and refuse to treat them as friends. That would be incorrect and unGodly. I deserve just as many reminders that I do immoral things as a gay person does.

 

that one can call a lie a lie doesn't make it a blanket judgment. It looks a lot like people here are making blanket judgments about how Christians treat gays instead of acknowledging that Christians are people too: there are stupid Christians, inconsiderate Christians, misled Christians, and wonderful Christians. And I'm sure I've been all of them at times. How one chooses to TREAT another person isn't based just on religion.

 

God makes all kinds of people that are born into a sinful world and experience depraved bodies and minds [including self], but He recognizes only one ideal. Christians are not perfect. You want to use man's logic of civil rights instead of what Scripture says. We're warned about that too. We are called to flee immorality, not justify it. Whether that be cohabitating, a 'good Christian' hetero couple that uses drugs, a normal gay couple or a couple that is swinging --shoot, even w/ permission adultery is still adultery. Even when a sin is supported and justified by other Christians and the church it is still sin.

 

As has already been pointed out, loving everyone does not mean we support them in destructive behaviors. It means we help them turn from those destructive behaviors and be there for them.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Are you saying you wouldn't be tolerant of my right to hold up a sign about what the Bible says?

 

Would you be okay with me coming to one of your kids' recitals and holding up a sign that says "These children need to be in school to learn social skills"? Would you be okay with me standing on the sidewalk and shouting anti-homeschool sentiments at your children?

 

so is all that just dismissed for you?

 

Yeah, pretty much- just like not wearing cotton/wool blends, not feeling like my husband needs to be "served", and all the other archaic things in the Bible.

 

It's not that it's the 'right church', it's that they joining in holy union that which is spelled out as unnatural and unGodly. People want to marry animals too. That someone out there is willing to perform the ceremony doesn't make it scriptural or holy.

 

 

These are CHRISTIAN churches. Please tell me you are not comparing loving another human being with all your heart and soul- loving them so much that you want to spend a lifetime commited to that person-loving them enough to stand before God and declare this---- to wanting to marry an animal?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

 

i won't lobby for people to have a legal 'right' to do other destructive behaviors that God speaks against.

 

There is a big difference in choosing not to lobby for and choosing to lobby against someone's rights. There are a lot of people actively trying to take away the rights of gay and lesbian couples right now.

 

Here is the scripture from our church sermon this morning:

 

"The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.

 

The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'"

 

"'An enemy did this,' he replied."

 

 

"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'"

 

 

"'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.'"

 

 

 

So we can go round and round about how your version of Christianity takes every word in the Bible as scientific fact, and how my version focuses more on love and bettering oneself and the world, but in the end we *should* be able to agree that what Jesus wanted was for each of us to worry about our own lives, not about whatever "weeds" we feel are growing. We do not have the ability to tell the weeds from the good crop- only God does. Or, at least that's what Jesus taught. I fully respect if you choose to follow the teachings of Paul or someone else- Biblical or not.

 

 

Have you ever been attracted to another woman? Probably not, and neither have I. I would not presume to try to sit here and explain what it feels like to be gay- because I'm not. However, I do know what it's like to be in the minority, to have insults hurled at you for something you don't have a choice about. I know what it's like to be treated as a second class citizen. I know what it's like to have a friend cry on your shoulder because his parents will not accept their only grandchild just because he has two dads.

 

 

So I guess my next question would be- It seems as though some people are saying that they feel the Bible says being gay is a sin, but that we are all sinners and some people believe that it is their job to call out sin, whatever it is. So- do you approach the people who are denegrating gays and/or trying to take away their rights under the gusie of religion and point out to them that they are sinning as well?

[nakitty]

Did it occur to you that perhaps those people in the group were there BECAUSE they had suffered abuse...and that, perhaps, they were not a good representation of the majority of homosexuals? Not to mention...that it is fairly well known that such groups are a total sham....

 

for we all have tendencies and inclinations that are unique to who we are, but we don't all respond the same way to the temptations that we face.

 

What is so often left out is the high level of woundedness in the gay community. When I was in my early 20s I was part of a support group for homosexuals who were wanting to live as heterosexuals. A dear member of my family had determined that she was gay and left her family to follow her heart. I was wounded by this decision and wanted to understand her. The group was led by two former homosexuals who were now married to each other. They were so open about their struggles and the temptations that they felt, but that their love of God and their family kept them diligent in their commitments.

 

Do you know that EVERY one of the members of this support group had suffered some form of sexual abuse?? I am a firm believer that the vast majority of "gay" individuals have been wounded in the area of their sexuality at some point in their life. There are, of course, exceptions who may not be able to "explain" why they are attracted to members of their own sex, but that doesn't mean that they are powerless to do anything about it. I had so much admiration for the folks in this group and for how hard they were working to live their convictions. God did a great deal of healing in my own life through that group.

 

Anyhow, the Christian believes that we are made in His Image, and therefore we are so very much more than our feelings and emotions. There are many testimonies of those that have been healed. And there are many others who struggle with their "cross" for a lifetime, but persevere out of their love for their Lord. And others who have been convinced that they have been born this way, and therefore are powerless to do anything about it.

 

I think that is unfortunate. And that it is not a loving response to tell a homosexual that they can never change. Many would testify that is false.

 

So, I know that this is also a very unpopular opinion. But I believe so completely in God's love and incredible mercy (which I am grateful for every day as I need it desperately!!), and His love for every sinner. Certainly not picking out the homosexual as some worse sinner above others. Hardly.

 

When I receive the Eucharist each week, I pray for God's forgiveness for sinners, OF WHOM I AM CHIEF. I have much compassion for those who struggle with sexual temptation. I have plenty of my own temptations to grapple with as well.

 

Kim

[PariSarah]

Not to mention...that it is fairly well known that such groups are a total sham....

 

That is to say, most people who believe that homosexual acts are not inherently wrong do so because they believe that the individual's desires and feelings should be respected.

 

Whether you like it or not, there are people out there whose sexual desires do not match their moral desires--people who want to be faithful to their marriages and families, say, or people who believe in monogamy or celibacy. Why should their desires--conflicting and difficult and inconvenient to both pro-gay and anti-gay groups though they may be--not be respected?

 

I repent of the snarkitude with which this sentiment was earlier expressed, and can only plead my emotional distress at having it once more confirmed that a dear, struggling friend can find few allies, esp. among those who call themselves allies or friends of gay people.

[bkpan]

Did it occur to you that perhaps those people in the group were there BECAUSE they had suffered abuse...and that, perhaps, they were not a good representation of the majority of homosexuals? Not to mention...that it is fairly well known that such groups are a total sham....

 

All I can tell you is my experience.

 

I found an abundance of love in this group. Hurting individuals, and two former gay leaders struggling and growing WITH these members. There was no coercion, no attempts in instilling guilt or shame, just acceptance and love. And, the reminder that their strength in Christ is stronger than the message of the world. I will admit, that I wish we could see more and more outward Christian response that resembles what I witnessed in this group.

 

Could it be that some of the more militant homosexual rights groups WANT people to think that these groups are a sham? They don't want society to really get the message that change is possible, that there ARE choices involved. It might weaken the response they want to see and the goals that they want to see progress. They might not be able to convince every homosexual that they were "born that way" and that there is no hope for change. Talk about indifference to suffering??

 

I, probably like you, have known quite a few gay individuals, and my experience is that they really are suffering with a lot inside. We will disagree as to what is causing that suffering.

 

Kim

[Peek a Boo]

Would you be okay with me coming to one of your kids' recitals and holding up a sign that says "These children need to be in school to learn social skills"? Would you be okay with me standing on the sidewalk and shouting anti-homeschool sentiments at your children?

 

actually, yeah, I WOULD be fine w/ that. As long as you were outside off private property :) It would be a wonderful discussion opportunity for my children.

 

 

Yeah, pretty much- just like not wearing cotton/wool blends, not feeling like my husband needs to be "served", and all the other archaic things in the Bible.

 

and here's where we differ: you dismiss it as "archaic", and I embrace it as "covered by Christ" -- we are told to submit to each OTHER, not just wives to their husbands. An archaic manuscript that exhorts men to serve, husbands to submit to and love their wives and to be gentle w/ them, and to not exasperate their children. So i guess my next question --sincere, no sarcasm-- would be: just what parts of the Bible do you NOT dismiss as "archaic"? Do you only follow the parts that Jesus Himself spoke? What do you say about Christ affirming "one man/ one woman?" Do you dismiss Paul's letters? i ask so we can have a better understanding of where we are each coming from.

 

These are CHRISTIAN churches. Please tell me you are not comparing loving another human being with all your heart and soul- loving them so much that you want to spend a lifetime commited to that person-loving them enough to stand before God and declare this---- to wanting to marry an animal?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

 

Are you saying that just because a church is CHRISTIAN that it is exempt from doing something WRONG?

yes, i am comparing a human being that is wanting to intentionally commit an unGodly act TO another human being wanting to intentionally commit an unGodly act. There's a difference between loving a person in Christ and using the legal system and a church to justify a blatantly sinful ACT. i can commit to love my best girlfriend in Christ w/o resorting to committing an unGodly act sanctioned by a Christian church under the guise of Love.

 

 

There is a big difference in choosing not to lobby for and choosing to lobby against someone's rights. There are a lot of people actively trying to take away the rights of gay and lesbian couples right now.

 

 

no, i don't really see a difference. not only will i not support the right of someone to do something that God considers destructive, I will absolutely do what i can to encourage other Christians to NOT support this as legislation. However, the fact that I lobby against gays having the legal right to marry does in no way affect my charge to love and support them in LIFE. There are a lot of things that are legal but not scriptural. Some of us feel led to get the law changed, others feel led to just not avail ourselves of that legal option. FTR, I do recognize that there is a HUGE difference between civil rights and what God considers ideal. When it comes time to choose, i must side w/ God's ideal.

 

Here is the scripture from our church sermon this morning:

 

"The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.

 

 

and that's agreat parable, but even Jesus EXPLAINED that it was NOT talking about how to treat each other NOW, but what the division will be like at the end of the world: the Divine Judgment. that's kinda why He started the parable w/ "The Kingdom of HEAVEN is like...." i hope the sermon didn't end w/o the explanation in Matthew 13:36–43. Revelation describes a time where prophets will speak and people will die. We aren't there yet. We are in a time where we are to be accountable to each other in Christ, to God, and study the Word.

 

 

So we can go round and round about how your version of Christianity takes every word in the Bible as scientific fact, and how my version focuses more on love and bettering oneself and the world, but in the end we *should* be able to agree that what Jesus wanted was for each of us to worry about our own lives, not about whatever "weeds" we feel are growing. We do not have the ability to tell the weeds from the good crop- only God does. Or, at least that's what Jesus taught. I fully respect if you choose to follow the teachings of Paul or someone else- Biblical or not.

 

Actually, Jesus WANTED us to pay a little more attention to others and less to our own legalistic view of some works-righteousness view of salvation. He was very clear that we should love each other, and He was very clear on calling a spade a spade: He refused to stone the adulteress, but he sure told her to repent and Do No More. Since i take into account Paul's testimony in the rest of the New Testament, I see plenty of times that we are to assist each other in our walk w/ Christ --like 2 Tim 3:16 --

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.

 

 

So I guess my next question would be- It seems as though some people are saying that they feel the Bible says being gay is a sin, but that we are all sinners and some people believe that it is their job to call out sin, whatever it is. So- do you approach the people who are denegrating gays and/or trying to take away their rights under the gusie of religion and point out to them that they are sinning as well?

 

 

There is nothing sinful in promoting God's Word. i do have a problem w/ people who commit unGodly acts in the name of religion, whether they be marrying a person of the same sex, bombing abortion clinics, or abusing their spouses and children. It's not whether I believe it is "my job" to call out sin --there are times when i consider whether my actions would do more harm than good for the situation in question. We are in a specific discussion about this issue, so i am simply putting forth what scripture says. But yes, there are times when i need to remind a sister or brother in Christ [or be reminded myself] that a course of action is not scriptural and that we should seek a scriptural solution.

[Scarlett]

 

Have you ever been attracted to another woman? Probably not, and neither have I. I would not presume to try to sit here and explain what it feels like to be gay- because I'm not. However, I do know what it's like to be in the minority, to have insults hurled at you for something you don't have a choice about. I know what it's like to be treated as a second class citizen.

 

As for me....I'm not hurling insults. Not in this thread and not IRL. And I won't protest against homosexuals. However, I think all that most people have been saying in this thread is that they feel the Bible, therefore God, condemns homosexual acts. An act requires action--and that IS a choice.

 

How it feels to be gay? No, I don't know that. I bet it is difficult to have one's family turn on them and/or not support something they want to do. I am sure you can agree it would be difficult for that family too....trying to find some way to deal with someone they love choicing to practice sin. I think there are extreme responses...beating up one's son is extreme IMO. However, one desiring to please God would not want to condone a life of sin.

 

And although I don't know how it feels to be attracted to other women, I have my own weaknesses just like we all do. For instance, I have a horrible, hot temper that I have to work on constantly. I've done things in anger that make my face burn with shame to this day. I can't just shrug and say, 'oh well, that's just the way I am.' I have to control myself.

 

I think that is just the bottom line. Some of us see it (homosexual tendencies) as something to be resisted....and others want to see it as something to be embraced.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Your views of Christianity and mine are very very different. I think that's great and I respect your right to your own beliefs. However, not all Christians believe the same things you do. Since it is okay with you to compare a human being with an animal, I'm afraid this discussion can go no further. I'm so far left of where you are that I'm afraid middle ground can not be attained, not even through the words of Christ, someone I thought we both respected and whose words I hoped would give us something to agree on. Peace to you and yours. I look forward to talking about another topic we may very well agree on in the future. :)

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I've done things in anger that make my face burn with shame to this day. I can't just shrug and say, 'oh well, that's just the way I am.' I have to control myself.

 

See, I do think that for a very very few people, being gay is a choice. I have known one such person. He is now happily married to a woman, and if asked, he will tell you that he never was gay- bi maybe- but not gay.

 

But one of my oldest, dearest friends was born gay. I have known him practically my whole life. It's not like your anger that you can control- or not. He can't turn it on and off. He couldn't do it as a child, either. At first, his parents (when he was a toddler) thought he'd grow out of it. Then, when he hit Kindergarten age, his parents (who are Christians themselves, though not fundamentalist) thought they had to do something about it. So they hired a psychologist, forbid him from playing "his way," and filled his world with typical boy activities and such. When my friend hit his teen years, and the "training" still wasn't working to his parents expectations, his father started to become cruel. Luckily, my friend was able to go away to college early to escape that environment and now is doing very, very well these days. It makes me sad, though, to think of all those years my friend spent trying to be something he couldn't be- no matter how hard he tried- and he did try- with all his mind and all his heart.

 

Just as there are support groups for gay people who want to not be gay anymore, there are support groups for people who were forced to deny who they were their whole lives and are now struggling with being who they are. IMO, both groups serve a purpose for those who want to be there.

 

But I do understand how some think all gay people choose to be gay, and now I have a deeper understanding of how and why thanks to this discussion. Had I not had the life experiences I've had, I might have different beliefs too. I'm glad the whole world isn't alike.

[PariSarah]

So they hired a psychologist, forbid him from playing "his way," and filled his world with typical boy activities and such. . . . . It makes me sad, though, to think of all those years my friend spent trying to be something he couldn't be- no matter how hard he tried- and he did try- with all his mind and all his heart.

 

. . . your description here mentions what I would call the social markers of homosexuality rather than the essential core of it--that is, homoerotic acts.

 

I don't remember being a sexual being at all in Kindergarten. A gendered one, sure. Boyness and girlness gets thrust on us early, doesn't it? I can imagine how a proclivity for effeminacy could manifest itself in Kindergarten and before. And I can imagine even more how a proclivity for social behavior of the "wrong" gender could disturb parents and cause them to react to their children with intolerance or cruelty.

 

But how a sexual preference could manifest itself in Kindergarten, I'm having trouble imagining.

 

I often find it hard to enter into discussions of homosexuality because these two things are so often conflated--effeminate behavior in men is equated with homosexuality. (True story--a colleague of mine had to step down from a leadership position in my denomination because his effeminate behavior gave rise to the mistaken notion that he was gay. The anti-gay crowd sent him hate mail, and the militantly pro-gay crowd kept excoriating him for not being more supportive of "his own kind." The pressure eventually led him to step down, which was a shame, because he was a gentle and collaborative leader--a rarity.)

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

I don't remember being a sexual being at all in Kindergarten.

-----------

But how a sexual preference could manifest itself in Kindergarten, I'm having trouble imagining.

 

 

 

Hoo boy, I hate to even post this, but I can say in all honesty that I was very definitely a sexual being very early, even in kindergarten. It was pretty nebulous and non-specific, but it was very definite.

 

And I was never abused, to my knowledge. Just always very -- aware, I guess is the best way to put it. Hyperaware.

 

Not everyone has that experience, though, and those who didn't often look at those of us who did with a bit of suspicion. :001_smile: So we don't talk about (read: admit) it much IRL.

[SusanG]

Hoo boy, I hate to even post this, but I can say in all honesty that I was very definitely a sexual being very early, even in kindergarten. It was pretty nebulous and non-specific, but it was very definite.

 

And I was never abused, to my knowledge. Just always very -- aware, I guess is the best way to put it. Hyperaware.

 

Not everyone has that experience, though, and those who didn't often look at those of us who did with a bit of suspicion. :001_smile: So we don't talk about (read: admit) it much IRL.

 

I remember kindergarten, and I was the exact same way. My 7 year old daughter has also been the same way since she was 5 or so. Since that age, she has also had no trouble pointing out who on tv and in movies she finds attractive. My son just shrugs. She's a trip, and my parents always roll their eyes and tell me we're in big trouble when she hits 13, lol.

 

By the way, in first grade I had two crushes - Wonder Woman and Darth Vader. That's just one of those things you NEVER forget :D

[Laura Corin]

 

He confirmed God's establishment of marriage between one man and one woman through covenant and through sexual union as the definition of marriage.

 

The original point was about how selective some Christians are about which parts of the bible must be followed and which can be ignored, whilst they all-the-while claim to be following it to the letter.

 

Jesus stated that marriage was a good; this can be interpreted as a condemnation of homosexuality, although he never touched on the issue. On the other hand, the bible does specifically condemn groups and practices which are not now disapproved of by most Christians, whilst allowing others that modern Christians do not espouse.

 

Laura

[Laura Corin]

Laura

[genie]

Hoo boy, I hate to even post this, but I can say in all honesty that I was very definitely a sexual being very early, even in kindergarten.

 

You weren't the only one! ;)

[Rosie_0801]

To be honest, I personally do not understand homosexuality to be a lifestyle choice, nor do I have a sense of heterosexuality being a lifestyle choice. I indicated something to this effect in my original question. However, that term is used frequently when certain folks discuss homosexuality, and I wondered what they meant by it. My main objective here is to understand the pov of persons who understand homosexuality to be a lifestyle choice. I have read and re-read the comments from several posters and am still wrapping my head around what they mean.

 

We're building a garage (!) so I haven't had time to give a thoughtful response to everyone who has posted here, but I have been thinking about it all day, and will respond when I have the time and energy to do it right.

 

Ah, well in that case I'm honoured you chose to respond to my post!

Ok, now I'm getting closer to what you're looking for. I'm beginning to think "lifestyle" can mean two different things. One, which is what I would mean if I was to use the term, is 'participating in the gay or lesbian community in a cultural way.' Just like deaf people can identify as deaf, but not necessarily participate in the deaf community; be Christian without being part of a church etc. The other way it could be used, which I think is what our Christian buddies here are doing, is using it as a polite shorthand for "people sleeping with people of the same gender."

:)

Rosie

[Jenny in Atl]

Hoo boy, I hate to even post this, but I can say in all honesty that I was very definitely a sexual being very early, even in kindergarten. It was pretty nebulous and non-specific, but it was very definite.

 

And I was never abused, to my knowledge. Just always very -- aware, I guess is the best way to put it. Hyperaware.

 

Not everyone has that experience, though, and those who didn't often look at those of us who did with a bit of suspicion. :001_smile: So we don't talk about (read: admit) it much IRL.

 

My oldest had a crush on a boy in PreK so bad, she said it made her tummy hurt. She was going to marry him, she told me. Well her and about three of her girl friends. He was very cute, so this was not hard to see. Now none of them were interested in doing anything physical, but they were very aware of each other. Kids are all pretty cognizant of what feels good from a very young age. Hopefully most of us are educated enough to know this is normal, and just needs guidance as to privacy, etc.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

By the way, in first grade I had two crushes - Wonder Woman and Darth Vader.

:smilielol5::smilielol5::smilielol5: I wanted to be a Superfriend SO BAD!

 

My dd7 likes boys. All very nice boys, she has good taste. Of course nothing physical- although they do walk holding hands and hug- which she also does with her female friends. A boy from her dance class carried her bag and offered her a piggy back ride to class once- I had to really control the laughter.

 

I was a tomboy as a little kid, but also very aware.

[Peek a Boo]

Your views of Christianity and mine are very very different. I think that's great and I respect your right to your own beliefs. However, not all Christians believe the same things you do. Since it is okay with you to compare a human being with an animal, I'm afraid this discussion can go no further. I'm so far left of where you are that I'm afraid middle ground can not be attained, not even through the words of Christ, someone I thought we both respected and whose words I hoped would give us something to agree on. Peace to you and yours. I look forward to talking about another topic we may very well agree on in the future. :)

 

I think you are pretty much right on this, lol. i do appreciate you sharing your thoughts, and I do expect to vehemently disagree w/ one person in one thread, and agree whole-heartedly w/ the same person in another thread. that's the beauty of the internet :D.

 

i didn't expect us to agree here, but i do like to make sure that when one group is being presented, their views are presented correctly and accurately.

 

i don't mind presenting the view that "some Christians interpet portions of the Bible to be no longer culturally relevant" and I don't mind presenting that "some Christians believe in a literal 24 hour/ 7 day creation and others accept an Old earth/ evolutionary interpretation" [just a couple examples] but i do want to be sure of what those sides DO believe before I present their position inaccurately. This goes for other religions/ viewpoints too. like when I present Phred's view of "person" and "life" I want to completely understand it, even if I don't agree w/ it ;) Thus the many questions that feel like an interrogation......in that context:

 

 

The only thing I would clarify is that i am NOT comparing a human w/ an animal-- I'm comparing how in God's eyes one act is no more wrong than the other. It's akin to comparing a basic white lie to a terrible, horrible slaughter of innocent people. We obviously see a "sliding scale" in how bad each offense is. God doesn't. Scripturally speaking ;)

 

in keeping up w/ the current posts, I'm more of a Zorro kinda gal myself.....:)