Just wondering how so many followers of Jesus could support the war, but be heavily against homosexuality. As far as I know Jesus taught to forgive, and also not to kill anyone. I am hoping someone can explain this to me, because it doesnt seem to add up in my view. I am not saying that I think homosexuality is a good thing, but I don't consider someone a bad person if they are homosexual.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christian-War/Homosexuality
- Thread starter sdotbrown
- Start date
If you look at the war having been sarted in order to free a country of a dreadfully cruel dictator (if that was the intent), I can see the 'sin' of killing as the lesser of two evils, which makes it, I suppose an 'excusable sin'.sdotbrown said:
What is more, from what I understand, it is not Homosexuality which is considered a sin, it is the act of sex between homosexuals. Not that I see that as a sin...........
Fluffy
A fool
This is just a guess but sdotbrown might be trying to highlight the different form that these two "immoralities" appear to take. Morals can be mostly split into two categories, those that try and reduce suffering and those which must merely be accepted. Homosexuality falls into the latter whilst war would be dealth with in the first.
SoyLeche said:
I made an error writing homosexuality there when I should have written homosexuals. But I ask the question in the context that Jesus' clearly states that killing someone is wrong. I do not know of a place in the bible where he says it is ok to kill someone. Jesus also clearly says that you should forgive people time and time again. If you are a christian how can you accept killing as justified, but also say that homosexuals dont deserve equal rights.
Fluffy
A fool
It depends how parsimonious your ethical structure is. For some people, like myself, morality is based on a very small group of beliefs that are then applied to every situation. In this case it would depend on your reason for supporting the war. If you supported a war in order to liberate a people from oppression but, in turn, a oppressed a minority in your own country (ie homosexuals) then you are not applying your morals evenly and so must either change your belief in one of the instances or give up the master moral.
The only verse I remember is "those who live by the sword, must also die by the sword." If you are the one fighting in the war then yes it is permissable because you are serving the law of the land, to serve in the army.sdotbrown said:
Yes homosexuals are human beings too. But being christians how can you accept equal rights for homosexuals if that will keep said persons in sin thinking that it is justified when they obtain equal rights. We condemn the homosexual act not the person. This sin is no worse than commiting a sexual act with a woman to God, although by most societal standards is not valued as equal. It is the same essence of sin of lusting of the flesh. But the sense of complacency while in this sin is not and will never be accepted. This sense of complacency only deceives them and is used just to relieve themselves of the guilt of sin.
Many people use the example of this behavior being natural and found in the animal kingdom. What is not accounted for in this depiction is that individuals in that popluation are naturally selected against and weeded out of populations because their fitness, ability to reproduce, is zero. This behavior is destructive to a population of individuals, and can lead to the population being wiped out. This type of selfish behavior of the few hurts the majority. (Sounds alot like muslim extremist activities, but I dont see the media or anyone ever defending them.) Also another problem with this depiction is why would we compare ourselves to animals, we are obviously more advanced than animals. We as humans have the ability to control our desires in order to fulfill what is more beneficial, unlike animals.
This sin should not be placed higher than any other sin, for to God the punishment for sin is death.
muichimotsu
Holding All and None
You do realize that in the historical context of the Christian bible, they had no concept of gayness? They merely thought that the sexual practices were strange. At least back then they probably would have just stayed away from the person. Now, Christians dehumanize and put these people in a different area of acceptance (human not sin) merely because they don't put a penis in a vagina. Like that's even the way some married male/female couples even always do it. There's a reason why God gave you a mouth and a rectum. And there are other ways of using them besides eating and defecating. And to add lastly...you realize that makes the Christian god not only a homophobe, but a xenophobe?
I thank you alot for stating this because this is the point that should be emphasized.
Yes, definitely there are Chirstians whom go about it in that way. But this type of behavior, putting them in a different area of acceptance, is not how a true christian should act.
Sorry for the fire and brimstone bit. Yes, God is justice and mercy. Of course no one is perfect and without sin, so that would mean we all go to hell. But if someone striving in the life of repentance, constant trying to improve their life, then mercy is what is given. If no effort is given and the person become complacent with where they are in life justice will be given.
muichimotsu
Holding All and None
So you are suggesting that the gays repent to gain the mercy of God? Who are Christians to decide what is considered "sinful" in the eyes of every religious person, myself included? "Sinful" could mean any number of things in reference to homosexuality, the first being that gays are only considered sinful by certain people because they seem to view anything that is strange to them as sinful in the first place. It could be other things, but this seems to be the principal case. If Christians tried to look at gays more objectively, perhaps they could understand that this is still love based with God in its own way. And isn't that more important than how they have sex anyway?
pdoel
Active Member
Maybe a better question would be, "How can someone support divorce, yet be against homosexuality?"
Even many of the most devout Christians are not only for divorce, but have even been divorced themselves. Something the Bible is strongly against. Yet, these same people are completely against homosexuality, consider it a Sin, and are against gay marriage.
Another example would be how can be have participated in pre-marital sex, yet be against homosexuality?
There's a simple answer to all of this. While all of us who are Christians have a basic understanding of God and his word, we've all decided for ourselves what to believe, and what not to believe. We've picked and chosen what parts of the Bible we wish to follow, and which ones we will not. Divorce is acceptable to many, because it's something they desire. It's easy for them to justify it when they are in need.
But it's also to point at others and tell them they are sinners, and tell them how to live their life. I think it also makes many people feel better about their sins, by judging others. "Sure, I was divorced, but it's not like I have gay sex!" Their sins seems less harsh when there are other people out there sinning even worse.
The way I see it is that sin is sin. God doesn't rate sin. Homosexuality is not a bigger sin than divorce. However, there is one major thing that I think many of the "judgers" have forgotten.
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son. That who shallever believith in Him, shall not perish, but have everlasting life."
That changed much of what occurred in the old testament. Believe, and you shall be saved. I wish more people would remember that.
:162:
Even many of the most devout Christians are not only for divorce, but have even been divorced themselves. Something the Bible is strongly against. Yet, these same people are completely against homosexuality, consider it a Sin, and are against gay marriage.
Another example would be how can be have participated in pre-marital sex, yet be against homosexuality?
There's a simple answer to all of this. While all of us who are Christians have a basic understanding of God and his word, we've all decided for ourselves what to believe, and what not to believe. We've picked and chosen what parts of the Bible we wish to follow, and which ones we will not. Divorce is acceptable to many, because it's something they desire. It's easy for them to justify it when they are in need.
But it's also to point at others and tell them they are sinners, and tell them how to live their life. I think it also makes many people feel better about their sins, by judging others. "Sure, I was divorced, but it's not like I have gay sex!" Their sins seems less harsh when there are other people out there sinning even worse.
The way I see it is that sin is sin. God doesn't rate sin. Homosexuality is not a bigger sin than divorce. However, there is one major thing that I think many of the "judgers" have forgotten.
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son. That who shallever believith in Him, shall not perish, but have everlasting life."
That changed much of what occurred in the old testament. Believe, and you shall be saved. I wish more people would remember that.
:162:
muichimotsu
Holding All and None
Again, I have to point out that some Christians don't believe Jesus to be God incarnate, merely a teacher of the essence of what God stands for. And following back to the sin of homosexuality, it was only considered an abomination in the bible and the interpretation when you think about it historically was merely that it was thought strange, not sinful. Back then it was, "You put your penis in her vagina and make babies that way. None of this sticking the penis in the anus or the mouth and none of this women pleasuring women." It's all a matter of context and that back then, they were afraid of talking about sex in public at all, let alone something as foreign to them as anal or oral sex, which are perfectly natural according to the Christian teaching of normal sexual activity being fine as long as it is forged in God's name, which can apply to Christian preachers that think the concept of homosexuality as sinful is being misinterpreted.
muichimotsu
Holding All and None
Isn't the idea of a Christian to follow Christ's teachings? Did Jesus ever say that you had to worship him in order to follow the way, the truth and the light? Wasn't the teaching of Jesus that he was teaching what God wanted people to do? And yet again, I must say that that is YOUR understanding of what it is to be a Christian. It doesn't mean it is complete truth.