Gay and Christian

[IngliHaShem]

If anyone has actually read the BIble will know that you cannot be a practicing Gay and a practicing Chritsian. Sex is not bad and can be talked about but sex with anyone, anytime is not allowed. A Bible reading, God following Christian.

[Ravenvalles]

The Bible seems to regard women as categorically dirty and sinful, and female sexuality as inherently wicked, so I think lesbians are covered under the general rule that women shall be punished with Hellfire if they have sexual desire of any kind.

Are you freaking kidding me? You don't know what the crap you're talking about.

How was church?

The patriarchal nature of the old testament religion (father worship) was suplanting the matriarcal religion (nature worship). So of course the woman would be submissive to the man. That is a common theme across the middle east and europe. Odin, Zeus, and Jehovah rose to power, the mother/wife was dominated.

Romans 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

You notice it starts with women turning to women, that leads to men turning to men.

[Eskandapolis]

My mention of the pelican was a little WTF, but eating a bat?????
(anyway, I don't eat chicken, so for me it's pretty disgusting the image of eating a pelican )

[Ceannairceach]

If anyone has actually read the BIble will know that you cannot be a practicing Gay and a practicing Chritsian. Sex is not bad and can be talked about but sex with anyone, anytime is not allowed. A Bible reading, God following Christian.

Though I am not a religious person, I must agree even still; it is quite impossible to follow Christian tenants to the letter and be a homosexual.

[Eskandapolis]

Are you freaking kidding me? You don't know what the crap you're talking about.

How was church?

The patriarchal nature of the old testament religion (father worship) was suplanting the matriarcal religion (nature worship). So of course the woman would be submissive to the man. That is a common theme across the middle east and europe. Odin, Zeus, and Jehovah rose to power, the mother/wife was dominated.

Romans 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

You notice it starts with women turning to women, that leads to men turning to men.

And what about (the Virgin) Mary or Mary Magdalene (in old Christianism), both were giving a f high place in Christianity, with Magdalene being considered (in early gospels) the superior of the disciples, in a role equal or superior to the one of Peter

[Gagatron]

If anyone has actually read the BIble will know that you cannot be a practicing Gay and a practicing Chritsian. Sex is not bad and can be talked about but sex with anyone, anytime is not allowed. A Bible reading, God following Christian.

Though I am not a religious person, I must agree even still; it is quite impossible to follow Christian tenants to the letter and be a homosexual.

No it is NOT. Must I cite Jonathan and David again? Two men are allowed to love eachother.

[Eskandapolis]

If anyone has actually read the BIble will know that you cannot be a practicing Gay and a practicing Chritsian. Sex is not bad and can be talked about but sex with anyone, anytime is not allowed. A Bible reading, God following Christian.

Though I am not a religious person, I must agree even still; it is quite impossible to follow Christian tenants to the letter and be a homosexual.

Why????

[Eskandapolis]

I don't see any problem w/ being an LGB Christian

[Ceannairceach]

Though I am not a religious person, I must agree even still; it is quite impossible to follow Christian tenants to the letter and be a homosexual.

No it is NOT. Must I cite Jonathan and David again? Two men are allowed to love eachother.

Did they ever make love? Did they ever share passionate, intimate, loving moments as a man would with a woman? Did they ever once profess love as if it were something other than a deep friendship?

Though I am not a religious person, I must agree even still; it is quite impossible to follow Christian tenants to the letter and be a homosexual.

Why????

Because the Christian God declares them to be disgusting, and though I believe he is not real, I still have to point out that it goes against Christian ideology to be both homosexual and Christian.

[Gagatron]

Because the Christian God declares them to be disgusting, and though I believe he is not real, I still have to point out that it goes against Christian ideology to be both homosexual and Christian.

God will love me no matter who I sleep with.

Not that I intwend to sleep with a man anytime soon, it's a moot point anyway.

[Eskandapolis]

Because the Christian God declares them to be disgusting, and though I believe he is not real, I still have to point out that it goes against Christian ideology to be both homosexual and Christian.

God will love me no matter who I sleep with.

Not that I intwend to sleep with a man anytime soon, it's a moot point anyway.

Well said GaGatron

[IngliHaShem]

Leviticus doesn't really. It's just a bunch of rules which apparently became irrelevant.

It also includes such gems as

11:6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud , but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

and

11:13 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls ; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,
11:14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind;
11:15 Every raven after his kind;
11:16 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind,
11:17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl,
11:18 And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle,
11:19 And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.

Which are scientifically inaccurate (hares don't chew cud, bats aren't birds).

The Bible's not a science book anyway, and has probably been slightly mistranslated. It's already known that the word for bird really means "flying thing". So the bat thing doesn't surprise me.

"Which are scientifically inaccurate (hares don't chew cud, bats aren't birds)."
hars do not chew cud but this does not make the Bible inaccurate as you have to look at the hebrew meaning and it kind of chews cud.

Bats are categorised as fowl as they have the chartaristics of birds and are not fit for the altar, and therefore are unclean.

You should research your misunderstandings.

For any one who has read the Bible will also know that being a practicing homosexual and a practicing christian is incompatible. Also to say the old testament is superfluous is arrogance and shows you pick and choose what parts of the Bible you want.

[The Norwegian Blue]

No it is NOT. Must I cite Jonathan and David again? Two men are allowed to love eachother.

Did they ever make love? Did they ever share passionate, intimate, loving moments as a man would with a woman? Did they ever once profess love as if it were something other than a deep friendship?

Respectively, the Bible doesn't say, yes, and yes.

I have no idea if David and Jonathan were gay, or if they ever had sex. But it's not at all an unreasonable reading of the Bible to conclude that they might have been gay.

Why????

Because the Christian God declares them to be disgusting, and though I believe he is not real, I still have to point out that it goes against Christian ideology to be both homosexual and Christian.

That is untrue. There is not a single passage in the Bible that declares homosexuality to be disgusting. There are a couple of disputed passages that can be read as declaring homosexual SEX to be disgusting, but that's not actually the same thing. (It's still stupid and I disagree with it, to be clear.)

I'm not a Christian, either, but I see no reason to support the worst elements of Christianity in hijacking a religion that is quite explicit about minding your own damn business and not being a dick to other people because you perceive them as being sexually immoral, and making it all about hating on gay people instead, and I find it stupid to suggest that "true Christians" should ignore things that Christ actually says in the Bible in favor of a couple of passages in Leviticus and the writings of Paul.

[IngliHaShem]

Did they ever make love? Did they ever share passionate, intimate, loving moments as a man would with a woman? Did they ever once profess love as if it were something other than a deep friendship?

Respectively, the Bible doesn't say, yes, and yes.

I have no idea if David and Jonathan were gay, or if they ever had sex. But it's not at all an unreasonable reading of the Bible to conclude that they might have been gay.

Because the Christian God declares them to be disgusting, and though I believe he is not real, I still have to point out that it goes against Christian ideology to be both homosexual and Christian.

That is untrue. There is not a single passage in the Bible that declares homosexuality to be disgusting. There are a couple of disputed passages that can be read as declaring homosexual SEX to be disgusting, but that's not actually the same thing. (It's still stupid and I disagree with it, to be clear.)

I'm not a Christian, either, but I see no reason to support the worst elements of Christianity in hijacking a religion that is quite explicit about minding your own damn business and not being a dick to other people because you perceive them as being sexually immoral, and making it all about hating on gay people instead, and I find it stupid to suggest that "true Christians" should ignore things that Christ actually says in the Bible in favor of a couple of passages in Leviticus and the writings of Paul.

"I'm not a Christian, either, but I see no reason to support the worst elements of Christianity in hijacking a religion that is quite explicit about minding your own damn business and not being a dick to other people because you perceive them as being sexually immoral, and making it all about hating on gay people instead, and I find it stupid to suggest that "true Christians" should ignore things that Christ actually says in the Bible in favor of a couple of passages in Leviticus and the writings of Paul"

Clearly you dont understand teh Bible. He tells all his followers to follow Leviticus' teaching as it is the law. So your in favour of ignoring some of Christs actual teachings beacuse you dont like what they say. You pick and choose again.

[Ravenvalles]

Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3 seem reasonably sexist to me, all that submission that I believe you now denounce.

First, there has to be one person who is responsible for making the final decision in any household. Second, it is tempered by the statement to love your wife as Christ loved the church. That is love unconditionally, and if need be give your life for her. Love is when another's pleasure,security, and desires are very important to the individual. That is not being the boss, a man is expected to lead. no man worth having would want to boss his wife around. To me it is a very wise recommendation. The needs of men and women are different. A man craves respect, a woman craves love. If done right this satisfies both.

Anything written by Paul concerning the relationships of men and women has to be taken with a grain of salt. Many scolars believe that he was probably latent homosexual (non-practicing), and a bit of a misogynist.

[IngliHaShem]

Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3 seem reasonably sexist to me, all that submission that I believe you now denounce.

First, there has to be one person who is responsible for making the final decision in any household. Second, it is tempered by the statement to love your wife as Christ loved the church. That is love unconditionally, and if need be give your life for her. Love is when another's pleasure,security, and desires are very important to the individual. That is not being the boss, a man is expected to lead. no man worth having would want to boss his wife around. To me it is a very wise recommendation. The needs of men and women are different. A man craves respect, a woman craves love. If done right this satisfies both.

Anything written by Paul concerning the relationships of men and women has to be taken with a grain of salt. Many scolars believe that he was probably latent homosexual (non-practicing), and a bit of a misogynist.

I think you should re-read those passages.

[Ceannairceach]

I would like to point out this bible passage:

"⁹Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor the homosexual ¹⁰ nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Given, some translations say "men who have sex with men" and others "those men who fornicate with men", I am fairly certain any way it is said, it implies that anyone who is a homosexual does not 'belong' in with the Christian God.

[Eskandapolis]

Respectively, the Bible doesn't say, yes, and yes.

I have no idea if David and Jonathan were gay, or if they ever had sex. But it's not at all an unreasonable reading of the Bible to conclude that they might have been gay.



That is untrue. There is not a single passage in the Bible that declares homosexuality to be disgusting. There are a couple of disputed passages that can be read as declaring homosexual SEX to be disgusting, but that's not actually the same thing. (It's still stupid and I disagree with it, to be clear.)

I'm not a Christian, either, but I see no reason to support the worst elements of Christianity in hijacking a religion that is quite explicit about minding your own damn business and not being a dick to other people because you perceive them as being sexually immoral, and making it all about hating on gay people instead, and I find it stupid to suggest that "true Christians" should ignore things that Christ actually says in the Bible in favor of a couple of passages in Leviticus and the writings of Paul.

"I'm not a Christian, either, but I see no reason to support the worst elements of Christianity in hijacking a religion that is quite explicit about minding your own damn business and not being a dick to other people because you perceive them as being sexually immoral, and making it all about hating on gay people instead, and I find it stupid to suggest that "true Christians" should ignore things that Christ actually says in the Bible in favor of a couple of passages in Leviticus and the writings of Paul"

Clearly you dont understand teh Bible. He tells all his followers to follow Leviticus' teaching as it is the law. So your in favour of ignoring some of Christs actual teachings beacuse you dont like what they say. You pick and choose again.

Did you read my post about supersession, or whatever that was called?
here it is the Wiki article about that, it has a lot of quotations of the fathers of the church and a lot of famous and recognized theologists suporting my "theory"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism

[Holy Paradise]

Christ never said, "Follow Me, unless you're gay or bisexual." He said, "Follow Me." Your sexual orientation does not mean you can't be Christian. Nothing much more to say here.

[Ravenvalles]

Oh, there's a lot more sexism, Gagatron won't acknowledge it though.

The SAB notes over 300 separate sexist verses.

They noticed some in Genesis, but their attempts on Exodus were pathetic. I think it's common sense that when a woman bleeds out of her vagina, the things she bleeds on are unclean.

The is not supported by medical science, there is nothing intrinsically dangerous about menstrual fluid. This is the prejudice of men.

[Eskandapolis]

I would like to point out this bible passage:

"⁹Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor the homosexual ¹⁰ nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Given, some translations say "men who have sex with men" and others "those men who fornicate with men", I am fairly certain any way it is said, it implies that anyone who is a homosexual does not 'belong' in with the Christian God.

actually it says "nor arsenokoítai nor the malakói", those 2 words translations is an issue of debate

[Lancaster of Wessex]

All right, let's just explain how you can be gay, bi, whatever, and still be a happy, loved, Christian.

It's really quite simple.

Does the Bible as a whole not smile on homosexuality? Yes.

Does the Bible consider homosexuality a sin? Yes.

Does the Bible also consider adultery, lust, theft, prostitution, swearing, lying, etc. sins? Yes.

Did Christ die for ALL sinners so that ALL may be forgiven and saved of ALL sins? YES.

So if an adulterer, a criminal, a liar can all be forgiven and loved - and Christ dined with prostitutes and tax collectors - He would this day dine with the same sorts of people, those who are persecuted and spat upon by society - including gays, and they too can be forgiven and loved.

End of story, and praise God for His love of ALL people.

[Eskandapolis]

Those who want to know how you can actually be a gay christian, google John Shore and you'll find a blog by some guy, go to where it says Gays and Lesbians/LGB or something like that, read it for some minutes, meditate and reflex, it may open your mind a little

[Ceannairceach]

Those who want to know how you can actually be a gay christian, google John Shore and you'll find a blog by some guy, go to where it says Gays and Lesbians/LGB or something like that, read it for some minutes, meditate and reflex, it may open your mind a little

Why does it always say "LGB" and not "LGBT"?

[IngliHaShem]

All right, let's just explain how you can be gay, bi, whatever, and still be a happy, loved, Christian.

It's really quite simple.

Does the Bible as a whole not smile on homosexuality? Yes.

Does the Bible consider homosexuality a sin? Yes.

Does the Bible also consider adultery, lust, theft, prostitution, swearing, lying, etc. sins? Yes.

Did Christ die for ALL sinners so that ALL may be forgiven and saved of ALL sins? YES.

So if an adulterer, a criminal, a liar can all be forgiven and loved - and Christ dined with prostitutes and tax collectors - He would this day dine with the same sorts of people, those who are persecuted and spat upon by society - including gays, and they too can be forgiven and loved.

End of story, and praise God for His love of ALL people.

It also basically says that when you turn to Christ you do not break the law.