SHOULD CHRISTIANS SUPPORT HOMOSEXUALITY?

[Jos]

Trying to "save others" is a distraction from working on ourselves.

That's what the Bible teaches though. Didn't Jesus Himself say to go and preach to all nations?

 

[David T]

I don't know. Should Christians support gravity?

No its a sin... It only occured after eve ate the apple. Thats how they realized they were naked.

There that i think is a pretty nornal way of reading the text..

 

[PureX]

That's basically why Martin Luther nailed his 99 Thesis to the door of All Saints Church, and it has been the reason for every schism and the birth of every non-Catholic denomination
And what it means to you? What's the point if you decide it's all based on what you want it to be? And in many instances it will not be valid as it's very clear what the Bible means. "Sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor" is pretty clear. Some may adhere to the so-called "prosperity Gospel," but it's a fairly newer thing and contradicts Jesus' multiple statements that condemn wealth. Of course we all have our own thoughts that come to mind when we read something, but post-modernist literary critiques fail because there is no way way to separate the suicidal ideations and thoughts born of an existentialist crises that is the heart and soul of Hamlet's "to be, or not to be" soliloquy, no matter how uncomfortable the subjects are to some people. It's the same mentality that breeds apologists who claim the Quran makes no instruction to kill infidels and excuse the issue of slavery in the Bible as no big deal because they were, somehow according to them, treated well (it contradicts the Biblical permission to beat your slaves as severely as you want provided you don't kill them and they recover after a few days, and you can do it because they are your property), and everything was cool and good because they were "indentured servants." History revisionists also tend to live and thrive on this notion of promoting "what it means to me."

The presumption of religious Christianity is that Jesus was starting a religion. Of course! Because it created itself to be that religion.

But Jesus was a Jew. That was his religion. And he remained a Jew throughout his life. So I see no reason to presume that he was starting a new religion, regardless of whatever words were written into his mouth by those scribes who WERE starting a new religion, later on. And the Jews did not believe that anyone else needs to convert to Judaism, then, or ever. So IF Jesus ever said anything about being "fishers of men", he was probably not talking about proselytizing religion, or converting sinners. And given the general message and promise conveyed by the totality of his story, it would be far more likely to assume he was talking about spiritual healing, not religious conversion. That is the healing that comes from letting go of the self-centered fears and resentments that separate us from each other, and from God; and the healing that comes from forgiving ourselves and each other regardless of the trespasses we've committed against them, or they against us. These are spiritual precepts that show up in many of the world's religions. Which is why Jews, then and now, have never believed that conversion is a requirement to alignment with God.

 

[Jos]

The presumption of religious Christianity is that Jesus was starting a religion. Of course! Because it created itself to be that religion.

But Jesus was a Jew. That was his religion. And he remained a Jew, throughout his life. So I see no reason to presume that he was starting an new religion. Regardless of whatever words were written into his mouth by those scribes who WERE starting a new religion. And Jews have never believed that anyone else needs to convert to Judaism, then, or now. So IF Jesus ever said anything about being "fishers of men", he was probably not talking about religious evangelism. And given the general message and promise conveyed by the totality of his story, it would be far more likely to assume he was talking about spiritual healing, not religious conversion.

Aren't you interpreting the Bible the way you think is right just like Christians do? Also you're making a positive claim when claiming that Jesus didn't want to start a religion... where's the proof for this claim?

 

[Windwalker]

That's what the Bible teaches though. Didn't Jesus Himself say to go and preach to all nations?

To share the "good news" is not the same as trying to save someone, trying to fix them, making it your business to convince them to convert to your religion in order to find your truth that works for you. How I look at it is quite simple, "let your light shine so that they may see God". That's not the same as trying to "save them". They may actually help save you from such an egotistical project. Letting your light shine, is a gift, not a job for you to do. When you are authentic, people will be drawn to that to find that in themselves as well, and it has little to do with your words.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't see the connection between being "born this way" and "sin".

That's like saying that you chose to drink because you are born to drink. If you aren't born to drink, does that mean you can't drink? If you weren't born to drink, does that prevent you to drinking?

What's the connection between born/genes and action/choice? (According to scripture)

Edit. Does scripture mention that one's action is connected to one's genes?

Hm. Can a christian give me some insight on this according to scripture?

 

[David T]

I used to use the word, but it was more problematic than it's worth because suddenly atheists and theists alike want to ignore my points that separates me from them and hardcore latch onto a couple of minor points in order to claim me as one of their own. Anymore I tend to use "Sagian Agnostic" in reference to Carl Sagan in how gave it a whirl at trying to explain this to an audience who otherwise in my experience really doesn't want to care about what it is that makes your beliefs and instead start screaming "but you said this!" at something they liked hearing and then proceed to beat the point into an unrecognizable bloody pulp because they don't even try to understand how or why someone does not ascribe to a position of "either-or."
I also sometimes throw out "confused dumb ape like the rest of the confused dumb apes wondering the Earth stupefied and awe-stricken."

"I also sometimes throw out "confused dumb ape like the rest of the confused dumb apes wondering the Earth stupefied and awe-stricken"

I dont trust anyone who doesnt articulate that!!!! We get a little bit hung up on the sounds we make. We cinvince ourselves those sounds control the cosmos! Especially if they are written

 

[Subduction Zone]

No its a sin... It only occured after eve ate the apple. Thats how they realized they were naked.

There that i think is a pretty nornal way of reading the text..

You shoot yourself in the foot when you pretend that a myth was real.

 

[David T]

Is being a closeted homosexual pretending to be pure christian christian? . Only people with homosexual tendencies concern themselves with homosexuality. Paul barely wanted to even write about it. And only did since he was concerned the young budding church would get labeled homosexual. And that would be very very bad 2,000 years ago. Learn to read.

Personally i missed the pick your sexuality class. I am a cursed raging hetrosexual that finds a particular type attractive inspite of the fact i know they are nuts.... Women....

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is being a closeted homosexual pretending to be pure christian christian? . Only people with homosexual tendencies concern themselves with homosexuality. Paul barely wanted to even write about it. And only did since he was concerned the young budding church would get labeled homosexual. And that would be very very bad 2,000 years ago. Learn to read.

Personally i missed the pick your sexuality class. I am a cursed raging hetrosexual that finds a particular type attractive inspite of the fact i know they are nuts.... Women....

Paul was probably a closeted homosexual that due to his religious views hated himself.

 

[PureX]

Aren't you interpreting the Bible the way you think is right just like Christians do? Also you're making a positive claim when claiming that Jesus didn't want to start a religion... where's the proof for this claim?

There is no "proof" that Jesus even existed, and I already offered the reasoning for my understanding of his motives.

To read is to interpret. The act of reading words on a page is the act of interpreting symbols. Which is why making absolute idols of those words by pretending that God wrote/spoke them is both irrational, and dishonest. The words contain nothing 'sacred'. They are only ink marks on paper that WE put there, and that WE interpret the meaning of. And our interpretation is surely not to be held as 'sacred', as that pathway leads only to insanity and death.

 

[David T]

You shoot yourself in the foot when you pretend that a myth was real.

Oh it happens daily at work! Yesterdays facts are todays myths, tomorrows myths are todays facts. But the term myth has a thousand faces itself. So, if we say myth which face are we talking about?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh it happens daily at work! Yesterdays facts are todays myths, tomorrows myths are todays facts. But the term myth has a thousand faces itself. So, if we say myth which face are we talking about?

That is not the case. It is merely wishful thinking.

 

[David T]

Paul was probably a closeted homosexual that due to his religious views hated himself.

Thats if you read it as a single person paul. The reality its Paul(s).

Iits like we have a song and and we believe the song we have is original to that person singing. Yet we dont realize that its been transmitted through a variety of invisible individuals over time, not unlike a folk song.

Music may be the oldest form of art and the last form to be literally recorded and transmitted and replayed. In a sense its the last art form that loses its pre literate tendency in the early 20th century.
What we have in the text is an oral tradition restarted, jesus never wrote, that story passes around and eventually its written down. It loses its oral tradition as it settles into a literate tradition.

 

[David T]

That is not the case. It is merely wishful thinking.

What that myth doesnt happen daily at work? Ha. I would say buildings get built inspite of us not because of us!. Why its like having to remind everyone everyday god exists! Gravity in this case. A myth with a thousand faces. Or are you proposing we can defy gravity and do what we want? Why in the bible pretending is called sin! We can pretend we can defy gracity but what happens when we do? Death, the consequence of sin.

The bible is easy its all about nature! Only theists think its not.

 

[ChristineM]

And what are you when "without god" starts to bring up entirely the wrong idea? To me, it's similar to a spiritual experience. I've had those. But what was I feeling? I certainly felt something, something that felt very real, but was it spiritual or just some weird trick of the brain? I don't know what it was, I don't know what I felt other than something, and literally I am left not knowing if I had a spiritual experience or not and only use that term because it's how other people have used it to describe the experience. It certainly feels spiritual and real, but I don't know if it is or not. It is that uncertainty that separates it from a "yes i had a spiritual experience" and "no I lack that experience."
Except with god it's more a philosophical pondering that I am unable to support or deny.

I am without god and without a need for god or a need to believe in gods. No god is needed to tell me right from wrong, i need no god the threaten people who dont think like me. My life is complete without a bronze age mythology to hold it together. And of course i disbelieve in the existence of a god on several counts, but that is a subject for elsewhere?

If i had an "experience" spiritual would not come into it. I would consider it to be an action of my brain.

 

[Jos]

To share the "good news" is not the same as trying to save someone, trying to fix them, making it your business to convince them to convert to your religion in order to find your truth that works for you. How I look at it is quite simple, "let your light shine so that they may see God". That's not the same as trying to "save them". They may actually help save you from such an egotistical project. Letting your light shine, is a gift, not a job for you to do. When you are authentic, people will be drawn to that to find that in themselves as well, and it has little to do with your words.

Again that's your interpretation.

 

[Jos]

There is no "proof" that Jesus even existed, and I already offered the reasoning for my understanding of his motives.

How could they be His motives if you don't believe He existed?

To read is to interpret. The act of reading words on a page is the act of interpreting symbols. Which is why making absolute idols of those words by pretending that God wrote/spoke them is both irrational, and dishonest. The words contain nothing 'sacred'. They are only ink marks on paper that WE put there, and that WE interpret the meaning of. And our interpretation is surely not to be held as 'sacred', as that pathway leads only to insanity and death.

On this point I think I can agree.

 

[Etritonakin]

Hi guys, much as happened within our society over the past few years. Many have claimed one side or the other when it comes to homosexuality and the Bible. In this video, I give some statements about each side of the scope and discuss them a bit. I hope it help and maybe gives a new perspective.

Those who would obey the God of the bible should not consider same sex marriage or sex correct -but they are also not to judge others or stand in the path of sinners. Same sex marriage and sex is a transgression of the law -and so a sin -but that should not change how we treat anyone. For example... Making a cake is not a sin -regardless of its purpose. What about TVs, computers, cell phones -shoes, pants, shirts -all of which would almost certainly be involved in some sort of transgression of one commandment or the other -can they not sell those? Adding a little plastic same sex couple might be against the beliefs of a cake maker who would not want to support such -but they could politely explain that someone else would have to do that. We should certainly not hate them, wish them harm or do them harm.

HOWEVER.... The law is intended for distinct males and females -within a creation in which physiological gender differentiation has not been corrupted.
Where there is TRUE mixed gender, the one affected -who was of a mind to obey God -would need to understand their own situation as well as possible in order to apply the law accordingly.

 

[PureX]

How could they be His motives if you don't believe He existed?

I didn't say I didn't believe he existed. I simply said there is no proof. Reasoning tells me that someone probably did exist at the center of the story, even if the story has been embellished to make him sound implausible, or to promote some religious agenda.