Gay theology (i.e. Mel White, Soulforce) why even try?

[TheManeki]

Yes, it is called honesty and contending for the faith with the proper tools.

I see you wasted yet another opportunity to present evidence supporting your claims. Is it because there is none?

And how many names are on the AIDS quilt? I knew some of those people personally.

I see you're switching from the slippery slope fallacy to the AIDS-is-punishment-for-homosexuality fallacy. What makes it a fallacy? The fact that, globally, HIV/AIDS primarily affects heterosexuals. Even when you factor in the fact that homosexuals comprise about 5% of the world's total population, HIV/AIDS is still predominantly a heterosexual disease, with Africa hit the hardest. (source)

Thank God for Christians fighting injustice and for loving their neighbors (even slaves) as themselves.

And thank God that many Christians -- such as the Southern Baptists -- eventually repented of promoting slavery and segregation, and opposing emancipation and civil rights. I wonder if history will repeat itself again once fundamentalists realize that civil rights for homosexuals will no more cause the world to end than civil rights for non-whites did.

 

[selfinflikted]

No. Just responding to what is dealt to me and how and by whom.

You are just too much, even for me. You have the audacity to get up in the air about an alleged ad hominem when you have, in multiple posts, used every pejorative and every derogatory term in the book to describe gays? You sir, are full of baloney.

 

[BigBadWlf]

"People?" How about person? This is where the hate accusations get trashed and the reality of promiscuous gay life gets proven as a defining factor.

The “promiscuous gay lifestyle” has been shown to be just another lie of the religious right

There is no need to assume anything when a person proclaims that they are Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual. Their sex life defines them.

Just like how your mother’s heterosexuality defines her and shows her to be promiscuous

In Christian cultute we don't celebrate people's choice to sin. We try to help them out of it.

The only “choice” gays and lesbians make is the choice to live honestly and to reject the lies and hatred of the religious right

You GLBT's have used neologism and self-applied labels to categorize yourselves. We Christians do not see anyone as anything but a person.

So long as they pretend to be heterosexual. Yeah that isn’t a lable

But only GLBT's accuse and charge Christians with hate crime and bigotry and phobia labels. I see no adulterers screaming out against the Church. Adultery is one of the sins that ALSO must be repented of. I have never seen an adultery pride parade.

If you were to take what you say about gays and lesbians and post the exact same thing about blacks it would be called bigotry

If you were to take what you say about gays and lesbians and post the exact same thing about Jews it would be called bigotry

If you were to take what you say about gays and lesbians and post the exact same thing about Muslims it would be called bigotry

If you were to take what you say about gays and lesbians and post the exact same thing about Hispanics it would be called bigotry

If you were to take what you say about gays and lesbians and post the exact same thing about the handicapped it would be called bigotry

Just because you spew hatred against an unpopular minority does not change bigotry into something good or moral or just. It is still evil and sickening

I just read the New Testament without the need to alter it or ignore it because the writers of it show me how I am a sinner. GLBT's do. That is the point of this thread.

In your desperate attempt to glorify your own bigotry you ignore Jesus


"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." John 13:34-35

I am never allowed to not remember. The gay issues will not go away.

Just like civil rights.

Ever heard of the word "denomination?" It is a place where "toleraance and diversity" are shown to really exist. GLBT issues are like bobblehead dolls. I know the Gay commuity well.

So long as you lie about our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters no one will believe this

Then why the need to have Gay Clubs in public schools? Why the need to have pink rainbows in the human resources offices in businesses? Why the need for anyone to have to hear about "gay" goals and aspirations. Repeat, I know the gay community well.

For the same reason as they have any number of other clubs.

clubs like the black student caucus or student bible study groups

Tell that to your gay community activists. The ones supported by the vast majority of GLBT's. Hence the organizational use of GLBT.

Such groups are well away of the hatred and lies you and people like you preach, no real need to tell them

I think this thread proves that there is definately a Gays versus the straights and Christians. Basically the Christians. That is why I posted what gays teach about the scriptures I listed. They are an afront to decency and truth.

Yes the false witness you present and the hatred you preach is an affront to not just decency and truth but offensive to Christians as well.

But, that doesn't seem to ever stop the gay agenda from forcing its way into the Chruch and public life.

You mean like how a group of radicals is working to have equal rights removed form a minority and force the public to accept bigotry as normal ….oh wait. Its right wing Christians doing that.

Soulfoece for example, literally intimidates Christians and charges them with a sickening accusation of "spiritual violence," (another neologism) and goes from Christian Churches, Colleges and Organizations demanding to show how Christians are in error about gay sex and gay life being incompatible with Christian truth.

I would ask you for a reference for this. But I am sure you would never be honest enough to actually back up your claims

I wish they would "dialog" with my Church. I wouldn't hold the meeting in my office. It would be a debate in front of the whole congregation. Seriously, these Soulforce people in typical gay theological fashion, are truly intolerant and fanatical.

they aren't the ones attacking a minority

They present more like the men of sodom to Lot. They could just start their own religion or denomination, but they "choose" to force gay sex and gay lifestyle into and onto decent and peaceful Churches, Christain Universities and Christain Organizations. It is truly reprehensible. But that always seems to be OK behavior in the GLBT worldview.

I think its amusing that while you preach hatred you still try to pretend you are a decent person

There is cause and effect to immorality taking hold of a nation.

And that is why good Christians stand up to people like you and confront your hate and false witness

Our youth are NOT get a moral message from gay "rights." They are becoming more and more debauched by this "anything goes" proclamation being forced on them by Humanists and Gay rights activists.

How can you teach children that it is ok to hate people whoa re differ if they actually get to meet the people you have chosen to hate and see that what you told them are lies

Gay tactics just are not going to shake me up. I'm not a closeted self-loathing gay guy, I'm not trolling, and I'm not seking membership in PFLAG or GLSEN. I just want to show that the Bible no where supports and condones and/or promotes gay sex to be engaged in by Christians and that it is NOT hate to reject same-gender sexuality in all of its cleverly devised propaganda and ad campaigns.

Why not try to debate the gay side of the theology they take? I have provided the scripture references.

Why? You have already demonstrated you have no interest in truth

 

[BigBadWlf]

Two-thousand years of Christian theology and only now when Humanism has become the dominant influence in society is homosexuality being considered as acceptable.

Just like racial equality

I have shown ample evidence that Christians should reject GLBT culture because I have offered the New Testament unaltered. NO where in the New Testament is there a position to accept homosexuality and there are solid reasons for avoiding the behavior. That shouldn't be seen as anything mean.

No you cherry picked verses and ignored any interpretation that doesn’t support your own bigotry in attempt to justify hatred

The cartoons of the Christian hitting the pink triangle T-Shirt guy is a hateful and insulting thing to do. You can show why violence and homosexuality are wrong from an unaltered view of New Testament morality.

It was hilarious and struck close to home

So far he has failed to provide any evidence whatsoever, which leads me to think he has no such evidence.

your talking about yourself

Sex offenders talk of what they do as not really hurting anyone. This is NAMBLA's position. They believe that sex with children doesn't hurt them at all, because they too were once introduced to this behavior and they are still alive and kicking.

The old ‘if you can’t come up with plausible lies drop in a refernce to NAMBLA’ tactic.

Many sex offenders are working members of society. If sex offenders gain more supporters in politics what do you think the future holds. We already see what the age of consent laws do.

You do realize that sex offenders are pretty much exclusively heterosexual and Christian right?

That is an opinion of a liberal or gay mindset. Humanism through and through. And humanism opposes Christianity.

Its also the truth. Which is probably why you dismiss it

So many people, even in pederasty tolerating Greece and Rome, have oppsed homosexuality since the dawn of mankind, there has to be a solid reason why and not just an "irrational" fear of it and those that engage in it.

just like all those people who oppose racial eqaulity

And of course the biblical record completely rejects it. It seems history shows there are good reasons to do so. Watching our youth culture of 2008 and I see why. The unraveling of society and civilization seems a common occurance throught history and cell phones and computers make us no different than anyone else in history except for speeding up the process of debauchery. As GLBT's rise to political power and social prominence, and their "anything goes" ad campaigns influence young minds and young voters, we will see our society go the way of many, many others that have embraced moral chaos as a civil right. And now we see why, from evolution to atheism to gay marriage is a natural corruption process even in such an age as this. The Bible does indeed tell us so (as well).

this is why I would never allow you anywhere near my children. Your perversion of morals is something I would never want them exposed to until they are older and could defend themselves verbally and physically from you

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan

Two-thousand years of Christian theology and only now when Humanism has become the dominant influence in society is homosexuality being considered as acceptable.​

Um... well ACTUALLY there is a long history of homosexuality within Christianity... its not a new idea at all... if you'd care to do some research, rather than just making assumptions. Want links?
​

 

[CCGirl]

Um... well ACTUALLY there is a long history of homosexuality within Christianity... its not a new idea at all... if you'd care to do some research, rather than just making assumptions. Want links?
[/indent]

Yes!

 

[Aeris]

Not to mention the gay pride parade debauchery festivals held (it seems) every other day.

Lol if you think once a year is every other day then I can see why your religion would believe the earth is so young! (It would take 182.5 real years just to get to your one year)

 

[Aeris]

Seemed like an innocent question to me.

Hey you've been hear long enough, dont you know by now that nothing typed by those who support "the gay agenda" actually means what it says, its all tricksey with hidden meanings and of course its all meant to attack christians cause thats the point of this whole "gay agenda" the only purpose is to upset "True Christians", getting equal rights is just the excuse used to cover up the real purpose

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Yes!

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/index.html

Same-sex scholarly 'empires of the mind' were common in medieval Arabic and Hebrew cultures, as seen in their poetry on same-sex love.
According to John Boswell, author of Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980), there were same-sex Christian monastic communities and other religious orders in which homosexuality thrived. According to Chauncey et al (1989), the book "offered a revolutionary interpretation of the Western tradition, arguing that the Roman Catholic Church had not condemned gay people throughout its history, but rather, at least until the twelfth century, had alternately envinced no special concern about homosexuality or actually celebrated love between men."
Boswell was also the author of Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe (New York: Villard, 1994) in which he argues that the adelphopoiia liturgy was evidence that attitude of the Christian church towards homosexuality has changed over time, and that early Christians did on occasion accept same-sex relationships. [2] Unnamed critics dispute Boswell's findings and scholarly rigor.[citation needed]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history#The_Middle_Ages

 

[EnemyPartyII]

3rd century AD

• 218 - The emperor Elagabalus begins his reign. He married a man named Zoticus, an athlete from Smyrna, in a lavish public ceremony at Rome amid the rejoicings of the public.[9]

5th century AD

• 498 — In spite of the laws against gay sex, the Christian emperors continued to collect taxes on male prostitutes until the reign of Anastasius I, who finally abolishes the tax.[12]

9th century AD

• 800–900 — During the Carolingian Renaissance, Alcuin of York, an abbot, wrote love poems to other monks in spite of numerous Church laws condemning homosexuality.

11th century AD

• 1000–1100 — An eleventh century Byzantine legal treatise makes it clear that gay unions are well-known and legal in early medieval Byzantine society.
• 1051 — St. Peter Damian composed the Book of Gomorrah, in which he luridly described several varieties of gay sex, and said that they were quite common, especially among priests. He was unable to convince his contemporaries that homosexuality was a grave problem that had to be stopped. While Pope Leo IX saw homosexuality as a "grave sin", he was nevertheless reluctant to come down as harshly as Peter Damian wanted him to.
• 1100 — Ivo of Chartres attempts to convince Pope Urban II of the dangers of homosexuality. Ivo charged that Raoul/Ralph, Archbishop of Tours, had the king of France install John as bishop of Orleans. John was well-known as Ralph’s lover, and had even had relations with the king himself, which the king openly bragged about. Urban, however, did not see this as a major problem. John ruled effectively as bishop for almost forty years and Ralph was well-known and well-respected, and continued to be so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT_history
So, appoarently, seeking acceptance in Christianity for homosexcuals is NOT, in fact, a new phenomenon

 

[CCGirl]

[/list]
[/list]
[/list]
[/list]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT_history
So, appoarently, seeking acceptance in Christianity for homosexuals is NOT, in fact, a new phenomenon

Fascinating.....thank you!

 

[EnemyPartyII]

no worries. Anytime.

 

[wanderingone]

Perhaps some people still cling to the notion that the Bible... in whatever version is being read is the literal word of God.

I certainly don't need to argue endlessly over the bible affirming or not affirming homosexuality. The Bible may be written by people who believed they were writing the words that they were inspired by God to write... but they were still PEOPLE, humans who put their own understanding into what they wrote,... and then more humans translated and retranslated and retranslated....

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Perhaps some people still cling to the notion that the Bible... in whatever version is being read is the literal word of God.

I certainly don't need to argue endlessly over the bible affirming or not affirming homosexuality. The Bible may be written by people who believed they were writing the words that they were inspired by God to write... but they were still PEOPLE, humans who put their own understanding into what they wrote,... and then more humans translated and retranslated and retranslated....

Show where any of those versions/translations promote same-gender sex acts are OK for the followers of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. That is to say, the God, that Jesus claimed to be.

I certainly don't need to argue endlessly over the bible affirming or not affirming homosexuality.

There is no need to argue what doesn't exist and "affirming" homosexuality (EVEN as it is defined today) is not in the writings compiled (66 seperate books/letters) as The Bible. Christians rejecting the support of homosexuality and those that promote engaging in the behavior, is their correct decision to follow the guidelines "of the faith delivered only once to the Saints," the way it is written in every version or translation "to date.".

 

[EnemyPartyII]

except for the bits that, you know, DO seem to promote, or at least accept, homosexuality. (David+Jonathon, the centurian's "Servant")

 

[Polycarp_fan]

You are just too much, even for me. You have the audacity to get up in the air about an alleged ad hominem when you have, in multiple posts, used every pejorative and every derogatory term in the book to describe gays? You sir, are full of baloney.

Let's see, if I "dare" to stand against the gay train plowing through society, I am either a closeted gay gay, or a troll, or someone wanting to hurt gays physically. Man, it seems more and more as you deal with GLBT's that obviously Sodom and Gomorrah was no myth or metaphor. The inhospitality of gay sex adherants is haughtiness defined perfectly. There are more gay, lesbian, pagans and atheists here than there are Christians.

Parasatical plain and simple and for a different purpose than hearing the Gospel preached in truth.

There is no support for pushing the gay agenda on Christians but that is what is done incessanty by the GLBT culture and its proponents. This thread and all the others pushing the gay life proves this. People in your camp are demanding that Christians shutup or stay in their Churches . . . but, shutup too, about gay sex. When Christians stand against sexual behaviors being some kind of new minority classifications, we are labeled as bad people. Why can't same-gender sex be opposed? The very anatomy of the human body opposes the gay agenda. Paul's assertion and a modern MD.

Care to actually debate the premise of this thread? Baggering me as Lot was isn't debate.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

The very anatomy of the human body opposes the gay agenda.

Apparently not or we wouldn't see all these structures that are appropriate for same sex sex... including the neurological structures that determine it.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

There are more gay, lesbian, pagans and atheists here than there are Christians.

Christianity and homosexuality are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

except for the bits that, you know, DO seem to promote, or at least accept, homosexuality. (David+Jonathon, the centurian's "Servant")

FINALLY.

David and Jonathan show the love that two men can have for each other. It shows Jonathan realizing that God had annointed David as the "next" King of Israel and acting accordingly. A man loving another man is quite common in the history of men. Many men will abandon a wife a children, and literally, will die for their male friends.

Gay theology on David and Jonathan is easily countered when sound reasoning is presented against it.

Presenting that the Roman commander was a pedophile or pederast (at best) as a slave owner, asserts and inserts that the rape of another as a beautiful thing to be engaged in is the gay theological position. The entire New Testament rejects that inappropriate position.

What we have "in context" is a Roman (and NOT a Jew/Israelite) that cares deeply for a young person under his authority, that is suffering to the point of death. He should be seen as a Christian before the word Christian was used to describe the followers of Christ Jesus. (They were called Christians first in Antioch.)

Asserting that the Roman in the passage is a man who has sex with boy slaves and that "his faith" is great indeed, is a stretch of the imagination, not to mention that this position supports pederasty/pedophilia and man-boy sex. That position, opposes the reality of the entire New Testament witness on what is proper sexuality "for a Christian."

///

What about a mother in law and her daughter in law being lesbian lovers (Ruth and Naomi)?

Care to examine the scriptures on them? Or, how about just the modern moral statement in presenting the two ladies as homosexual partners? Naomi went to great depths to get Ruth to marry this sweet guy named Boaz. As can be seen on these very boards, lesbians do not go to any lengths to get their young lovers to marry any man. In fact they claim that that is hate crime to teach that.

I wonder how many people in the Christian world know how GLBT's teach and preach the Bible?

The whole idea of "loving" each other takes on a whole new meaning in Gay theology. Gay theology is close to blasphemy seeing that all of the people concerned in their theology (except the Roman and his sex slave) are in the family tree of Christ Jesus.

If nothing else gay theology certainly crosses the lines of decency and resembles the words spoken to Eve by the Serpent:

"Did God really say?"

 

[EnemyPartyII]

What about a mother in law and her daughter in law being lesbian lovers (Ruth and Naomi)?

If you want to make the case they were homosexual lovers, I'll listen, but thats a new one on me.

However, the homoeroticism of Jonathon/David's relationship is clear, and demonstrably so through this simple thought experiment...

Imagine two young men described in the exact same terms as Jonathon and david, only with the names changed. Exactly the same way, right up to the disaproving, homicidally enraged parents, the sneaking around to be with each other, the kissing, the nakedness, the having greater love for each other than for any woman... In all honestly, if this story came from anywhere but the Bible, about any other pair of young men, would you at any point consider the possibility they were homosexual lovers?

As for the Centurian and his servant, not nearly so cut and dried, but a great deal of thought has gone into it, and there is certainly a case to be made that the centurian and his servant were homosexual lovers. Its not definate nor obvious, but its certainly a possibility. Also noteable that Jesus certainly didn't say anything to clarify the matter, for example"I'll help him if you stop being homosexual" or "I'll help him because I know you aren't homosexual, despite appearances to the contrary." Such a caveat would clear up the whole matter.

But Jesus remains remarkably silent on the subject, so I'm forced to refer back to his two great commandments, which I believe endorse, rather than condemn, loving committed homosexual relationships, and their general acceptance by the wider community.