What would a moderate christian standpoint on homosexuality look like?

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Ok, sorry if I misunderstood. But there are restraints in law and deterents. They may not deter everyone, but they do deter some.

Yes, I agree Yahuweh has orchestrated and put in place the powers that be, along with all the limits there-of,

so we might have some peace and some order instead of sheer chaos ....

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

... shalom....

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Churches that don't follow the Golden Rule should be denied land to build on.
- President Theodore Woodstock

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

If my church condemned my relationship with my wife, I would leave that church and find one that was more aligned with what I beleive. I think you are acrediting churches with too much power here - they cannot "outlaw" your behaviour. They can only express their oposition and at worst expel you from their church.

If you feel a church is wrong in its teaching and you feel that people in your church are being oppressed by false teaching, why do you stay a member of that church?

I don't think there is a single church that believes what Skywriting has concluded through his "self research". So where would he go?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Compassion for other people?
The possibility you are wrong?
Because they are family?
To help change the world?
Becasue they need your help?
Becasue you enjoy challenges?
Becasue you can learn from others?
Becasue diversity is healthy?

Because there isn't a church that agrees with your beliefs?

 

[Jon Osterman]

I don't think there is a single church that believes what Skywriting has concluded through his "self research". So where would he go?

There are plenty of churches that have no issue with homosexuality. He could join one of those.

 

[J03y]

My stance is that it's in no way their fault, if anything, it's a sign of the times

" God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for even their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature, and likewise also the males, having left the natural use of the female, were inflamed by their lust for one another, males with males, committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was fitting for their error."
Romans 1:26–27

As for their culpability, I'm happy that they, just as I, am not held to the same standard as Levitican law.

 

[Starnchrist]

I'm bisexual. Reading this was hard, but I understand it since I grew up in church and was in full ministry. Sadly I fell from grace, but seeing the other side of it has been hard. I want to leave my partner and try again, but I can't. It's very complex. I already spend 3 years with this person and to just up and leave would be heart breaking. I ask God to help me. I've been considering leaving for the past few months and all I can do is ask God for help. It's true it's a sin and it's hard to deal with. We all have that one sin we tend to stumble on. sadly mine was this one and it's one of the worstl condemned sins, yet all sins are the same in God's eyes, but it's a very hard subject. But As one who is bisexual and who is trying to go back to church... I can only say that Love is what starts the process of healing. Let me sit on you bench and listen to a message of hope and inspiration. Let me visit and take part of activities open to all even sinners. I know I cannot take part in ministry or anything like that, but let me at least be welcome to your church and pray and seek God. In the midst of it he can free me.

 

[Albion]

Most congregations of most denominations are in accord with what you are asking. It kinda sounds as if you are afraid to try finding out if it's so.

Of course you could have a bad experience if you go ahead, but I'd say to try while also being mindful that not every last congregation would be so welcoming. All you need on that score is to find the right one for you.

 

[Hazelelponi]

I'm bisexual. Reading this was hard, but I understand it since I grew up in church and was in full ministry. Sadly I fell from grace, but seeing the other side of it has been hard. I want to leave my partner and try again, but I can't. It's very complex. I already spend 3 years with this person and to just up and leave would be heart breaking. I ask God to help me. I've been considering leaving for the past few months and all I can do is ask God for help. It's true it's a sin and it's hard to deal with. We all have that one sin we tend to stumble on. sadly mine was this one and it's one of the worstl condemned sins, yet all sins are the same in God's eyes, but it's a very hard subject. But As one who is bisexual and who is trying to go back to church... I can only say that Love is what starts the process of healing. Let me sit on you bench and listen to a message of hope and inspiration. Let me visit and take part of activities open to all even sinners. I know I cannot take part in ministry or anything like that, but let me at least be welcome to your church and pray and seek God. In the midst of it he can free me.

Most churches are more in accord with you... try a PCUSA or a Lutheran or an Episcopalian type of church.

You can work through all this with a welcoming body.

 

[JackRT]

What would a moderate Christian standpoint on homosexuality look like? I think that such a Christian would understand that homosexuality lies within the range of normal human sexuality and would suggest that all people, be they heterosexual or homosexual, be held to exactly the same standards of morality. Marriage would be a covenant between two loving people, regardless of gender, who wish to live together exclusively for life.

 

[Albion]

The forum does not exist to find compromises, "split the difference" on thorny issues, etc. or denigrate traditional Christian beliefs, however.

It refers to the participants behaving in a temperate, understanding fashion absent rancor--much as our inquirer here has done.

 

[hedrick]

The forum does not exist to find compromises, "split the difference" on thorny issues, etc. or denigrate traditional Christian beliefs, however.

It refers to the participants behaving in a temperate, understanding fashion absent rancor--much as our inquirer here has done.

There's always been an ambiguity as to whether we're looking at moderate positions or using moderate attitudes to discuss them. The OP seemed to be looking for a moderate position.

I think that's hard to find. Either you allow gay marriage and ordination of gay pastors or you don't. Many denominations tried for a moderate position by leaving it up to congregations, but the fact that they allow it at all causes many people to classify them as liberal.

The OP proposes a moderate position. But because it rejects gay leaders or gay marriage, I consider it a conservative position. It's great that the OP doesn't want to force people into conversion therapy, and forgives those who sin, but the basic position is still conservative. The OP is, however, moderate in how it's expressed.

 

[Albion]

There's always been an ambiguity as to whether we're looking at moderate positions or using moderate attitudes to discuss them. The OP seemed to be looking for a moderate position.

I disagree on the first part, although it may be a moot point after all this time. When this forum was created, the idea that was agreed upon was that the members would not be flamethrowers or severe partisans. Of necessity, that required some degree of tolerance or at least understanding of some nouveau religious ideas.

Just the same, the thinking was that this forum would not promote a halfway (i.e. "moderate") position on every theological POV.

It is also worth noting that at the time this was happening, all sorts of people were demanding forums for their own religious and political camps...something like safe houses. So 'bridge-builders' was created for those who wanted to discuss controversial issues in a way that was different from those camps on either side.

As for the OP, he did not ask us to take sides. He has his own mind and he knows where he stands. His inquiry concerned about what to do in furtherance of the goal he was seeking, so IMHO that should be right 'up our alley' here.

 

[rturner76]

Answering the OP directly,

IMO a moderate opinion may be that it is surely a sin to act on it but it may not be a sin to admit to yourself that you have this attraction and it's forgiven and you can live like make companions share a bed and whatnot if you can handle that without engaging in the act and still be without sin.

I think the bigger sin is hating yourself for having feelings that you are not acting on or feeling like it's too late to repent.

I maybe didn't answer that very clearly but I can't say it's right. Even just from the laws of nature it's counterproductive. Still I must admit that since I am not afflicted with same sex attraction, I can't know their struggle. That's probably the moderate view "not my issue."

 

[dms1972]

I only seen this thread had resurfaced after about a year over the last week as have had limited resources for using the internet at the moment. I have done my own research since it started. I find that there are different views out there and to try and form a median, half way view may not be particularly helpful.

I have found helpful William Barclay's: Plain Man's Guide to Ethics. It looks at the issues in historical context, as well as a theological one and is pretty good in the historical overview which includes the Roman and Greek cultures. Amongst the other studies that I looked at included Psychiatrist Ruth Tiffany Barnhouse's book Homosexuality : A Symbolic Confusion, and also Lionel Ovesey's book: Homosexuality and Pseudohomosexuality. The latter was one of the first studies to look at male homosexuality from an adaptional frame of reference, and at its components.

I think claims of psychotherapy in itself to be able to cure homosexuality are questionable. I think some responses in relationships which stem from insecurity may be misinterpreted these days as homosexuality.

From a Biblical and pastoral point of view however homosexuality, or any overt sin is not the chief issue, its a whole life orientation in independence from God that is the issue regardless of whether that is overtly expressed in sinful homosexual acts or in other sinful acts. For the christian I believe homosexuality is a remnant of the old life, that the scriptures tell us to cast off, no longer being conformed to the pattern of this world, submitting our bodies as living sacrifices, which is our reasonable service and to be renewed in our minds. Romans 12:1-2

 

[hopeforhappiness]

I know that most of us don't believe in mortal sins as opposed to venal ones.
But accepting that committing or thinking even one sin that is not covered by the atoning work of Christ will damn us, where in the hierarchy of sin, its social effects or the offence to God, does homosexuality lie?
I just don't know. Maybe sex between a man and a man really, really really is bad, offending against the way God made our bodies.(yes, I know its a secular blasphemy to even point this difference between men and women's bodies). An offence against a creation statute, the original idea that was in God's mind for mankind? Loving friendship between two men or two women is obviously potentially wholesome.
I just don't know and prefer not really to think about it. (which is what the secular authorities want)

 

[9Rock9]

The only thing I'd change about the marriage laws in the United States would be getting the government out of the marriage business completely, but allow civil unions for both same sex and opposite sex couples.

That way, people can define marriage however they want, but no one is forced to accept another person's definition of it if they think it goes against their religion.

 

[Albion]

The only thing I'd change about the marriage laws in the United States would be getting the government out of the marriage business completely, but allow civil unions for both same sex and opposite sex couples.

That way, people can define marriage however they want, but no one is forced to accept another person's definition of it if they think it goes against their religion.

That's a commonly-held view among Libertarians, and it's worth thinking about.

Keep in mind, though, that if that the government really got out of the marriage business, all government policies that acknowledge a marriage, such as the burial of spouses in a military cemetery or widow's benefits under Social Security, would probably be ended.

But you also said that civil unions would be recognized. If that were done, everyone would consider these 'civil unions' (especially if there were some sort of spousal benefits coming from the government) to be the government accepting them as marriages but with new terminology.

 

[hedrick]

The only thing I'd change about the marriage laws in the United States would be getting the government out of the marriage business completely, but allow civil unions for both same sex and opposite sex couples.

That way, people can define marriage however they want, but no one is forced to accept another person's definition of it if they think it goes against their religion.

That's the way it is now. There's nothing in the legal system about a religious significance to marriage. It's really a civil status, with lots of effects on tax, inheritance, medical responsibility. Most marriages happen in churches, but it's the church that adds the religious significance. But you can also have non-religious marriage. The idea of separate but equal civil unions for gays was solely intended as an insult to gay unions. Assuming they were really equal, there was no legal difference.