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

[selfinflikted]

A Christian's job is not to convince anyone.

Well, if you can't do it, god sure has done a lousy job of it.

 

[LittleNipper]

Paul would disagree. Perhaps you need to reread his preaching to the Athenians, where he adapted his words to suit his audience by using the words and logic of Greek philosophers to bolster his case. And he certainly got better results than you're getting.

Nip, real life ain't anything like how it's depicted in Chick tracts. If you feel burdened to evangelize, you need to follow in Paul's footsteps, not make some half-heated attempt and then pretend you've done your duty.

Paul did adapt his words but never his witness (behavior). My attempts are not half-hearted. They are very poignant or you would not be trying so hard to made me give up.

 

[LittleNipper]

Well, if you can't do it, god sure has done a lousy job of it.

Maybe GOD is not through with you as of yet.

 

[selfinflikted]

Maybe GOD is not through with you as of yet.

In all seriousness, is that some kind of threat?

 

[TheManeki]

Paul did adapt his words but never his witness (behavior). My attempts are not half-hearted. They are very poignant or you would not be trying so hard to made me give up.

If your behavior is correct, then you should have real-world evidence that your actions are based on a correct interpretation of the Bible. So far you have provided none.

I think you have no proof and that you are just making poor attempts to find religious justification for your bigotry, much like the segregationists did.

 

[LittleNipper]

Irreducible complexity is debunked by biology. Precursors to the human body can be found in other species. If anything, vestigal structures like the coccyx and appendix underscore our links to other species. If you would like to be educated about this topic further, however, let's head over to the CREVO forum on CF, instead of derailing things here.

Other than man, I have heard of no species that has any concept of GOD, nor runs around trying to kill other species because it finds them inferior to itself. ONE CREATOR, designer tradmark. Being an artist I can recognise such. This is true of painters, sculptors, writers, carpenters, builders, designers, architects, movie directors, thumbprints, etc... Since man was CREATED in the image of GOD, it would seem that GOD has such a trait also.

 

[David Brider]

16 for I am not ashamed of the good news of the Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation to every one who is believing, both to Jew first, and to Greek. 17 For the righteousness of God in it is revealed from faith to faith, according as it hath been written, 'And the righteous one by faith shall live,'
18 for revealed is the wrath of God from heaven upon all impiety and unrighteousness of men, holding down the truth in unrighteousness. 19 Because that which is known of God is manifest among them, for God did manifest it to them, 20 for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world, by the things made being understood, are plainly seen, both His eternal power and Godhead -- to their being inexcusable; 21 because, having known God they did not glorify Him as God, nor gave thanks, but were made vain in their reasonings, and their unintelligent heart was darkened, 22 professing to be wise, they were made fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of fowls, and of quadrupeds, and of reptiles.
24 Wherefore also God did give them up, in the desires of their hearts, to uncleanness, to dishonour their bodies among themselves; 25 who did change the truth of God into a falsehood, and did honour and serve the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed to the ages. Amen.
26 Because of this did God give them up to dishonourable affections, for even their females did change the natural use into that against nature; 27 and in like manner also the males having left the natural use of the female, did burn in their longing toward one another; males with males working shame, and the recompense of their error that was fit, in themselves receiving.
28 And, according as they did not approve of having God in knowledge, God gave them up to a disapproved mind, to do the things not seemly; 29 having been filled with all unrighteousness, whoredom, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil dispositions; whisperers, 30 evil-speakers, God-haters, insulting, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 unintelligent, faithless, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful; 32 who the righteous judgment of God having known -- that those practising such things are worthy of death -- not only do them, but also have delight with those practising them.

<< Romans 1 >>​

None of that is actually proof of God's existence, though.

In fact, I'd venture so far as to suggest that if you read the Bible cover to cover, you won't find anything that constitutes proof of God's existence. You'll find a lot of people for whom the existence of God was just a given, people for whom God's presence was a daily factor of their lives. But nothing in the way of proof.

David.

 

[David Brider]

A Christian's job is not to convince anyone.

Actually, we're meant to always have a ready defence for the faith that is in us.

 

[Corey]

What created "time?"

0 x 0 = the seen and unseen universe may make sense to an athiest, but this kind of logic is queer to those of us that reason things out.

Even better (and more appropriate) question: does time exist?

Oh...and taking things on faith (i.e., religious belief) is the opposite of reason.

 

[BigBadWlf]

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]

Shame on you for using facts. How do you expect anyone to bigotry when you keep bringing up the truth?

 

[BigBadWlf]

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

I have found that those who demand a literal reading of the bible are the first to reject such a literal reading when it comes to gays and lesbains

 

[BigBadWlf]

The perfect place to oppose the ethics and morality of supporting and promoting homosexuality as something a Christian should do. I have the entire New Testament as backup for that.

Except for all the verses you ignore

And we Christians are not going away in our opposition to gay sex being promoted.

And we Christians are not going to stop confronting the lies the religious tells about our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.

we Christians are not going to stop defending justice and equality

we Christians are not going to stop protecting children from people like you

That flies in the face of the reality of the founding of the United States. The founders used religion very well in many places in founding this nation.

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law."
-- Thomas Jefferson


"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."-- Thomas Jefferson

"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson

"I think vital religion has always suffered when orthodoxy is more regarded than virtue.” Benjamin Franklin

"The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly." --Thomas Jefferson

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." --- James Madison,

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."
-- James Madison

 

[Beanieboy]

One thing that strikes me so interesting about the OP is that it is written by a self-proclaimed Christian, but the OP boils down to: I believe that homosexuality is wrong, so why should they even try to justify it with the bible?

In other words, if you are gay, why come to Christ? It implies that you can't be gay and Christian (although such exist), and basically ask why you should even try. It suggests that one needs to be either homosexual or Christian (does that mean being heterosexual makes you Christian?), and therefore, makes gays, in frustration, finally say, "Fine. You win. I'm not a Christian, nor do I want anything to do with your religion."

It pushes people away.

If one considers that homosexuality is a sin for a moment, it still doesn't solve anything. Do they say that you can no be single and sexually activce and heterosexual AND a Christian? That you cannot be a Christian and get drunk? That you cannot be Christian and get divorced and remarried?

Does Christ even ask that one first change, and then become Christian? Or is Christ and the HS supposed to change you, and help you to sin no more?

But for gays, there is a call to change themselves first, in which case, they don't need Jesus at all.

Either way, it makes no sense.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Except for all the verses you ignore




And we Christians are not going to stop confronting the lies the religious tells about our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.

we Christians are not going to stop defending justice and equality

we Christians are not going to stop protecting children from people like you

Teaching liitle children to engage in gay sex is not protecting them. It is recruitment. No matter the frosting on the GLBT agenda, it boils down to encouraging children to accept gay life. Christians have opposed this kind of teaching. Jesus preached about leading children into sin is a greater sin.

You do the math.

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law."

-- Thomas Jefferson

Spoken like a slave owning slave-rapist. Jefferson did what all anti-Christians do, he altered the Bible. This guy literally altered the Bible. And we won't even get into his being a murderous traitor to England. Jefferson is no hero of mine.

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."-- Thomas Jefferson

"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson

"The purest religion ever preached?" I don't have to wonder which one he referenced. It was the one he altered for his own personal reasons.

"I think vital religion has always suffered when orthodoxy is more regarded than virtue.&#8221; Benjamin Franklin

For an alledged mass adulterer this isn't a bad opinion. I'm no fan of European influence on Christian truth.

[quote"The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly." --Thomas Jefferson[/quote]

Hitler and Stalin had the same mindset. Tens of millions of dead people can attest to the morality of atheism. How many slaves did Jefferson own?

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." --- James Madison,

A "just government?" I wonder what the native Americans and African slaves think of the legacy of Madison and Jefferson's little experiment?

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson

Of course the abolitionists made this kiind of opinion stupid. But, then again, Jefferson owned slaves for a very long time. Read Abraham Lincoln's idea of "what" freed the slaves in his Second Inaugural Address.

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."

-- James Madison

Not a bad position Mr Madison. Look at what the GLBT community is doing with government and religion. There should be a seperation of sexuality and state "interpretation" of the constitution as well.

I wonder how many British people were killed by the founders of the US? Why is it that a new country usually rises on the corpses of the slain? So much for the Enlightenment enlightening the founders. Base and typical most actions and behaviors for the most part.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law."
-- Thomas Jefferson


"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."-- Thomas Jefferson

"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson

"I think vital religion has always suffered when orthodoxy is more regarded than virtue.” Benjamin Franklin

"The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly." --Thomas Jefferson

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." --- James Madison,

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."
-- James Madison

Congressional Thanksgiving Day Proclamation
Congress set December 18, 1777, as a day of thanksgiving on which the American people "may express the grateful feelings of their hearts and consecrate themselves to the service of their divine benefactor" and on which they might "join the penitent confession of their manifold sins . . . that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance." Congress also recommends that Americans petition God "to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consisteth in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.'"


Congressional Thanksgiving Day Proclamation, November 1, 1777 Proposed Seal for the United States
On July 4, 1776, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams "to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America." Franklin's proposal adapted the biblical story of the parting of the Red Sea (left). Jefferson first recommended the "Children of Israel in the Wilderness, led by a Cloud by Day, and a Pillar of Fire by night. . . ." He then embraced Franklin's proposal and rewrote it (right). Jefferson's revision of Franklin's proposal was presented by the committee to Congress on August 20. Although not accepted these drafts reveal the religious temper of the Revolutionary period. Franklin and Jefferson were among the most theologically liberal of the Founders, yet they used biblical imagery for this important task.

Manuscript Division, Library of Congress (104-105)


Congressional Fast Day Proclamation
Congress proclaimed days of fasting and of thanksgiving annually throughout the Revolutionary War. This proclamation by Congress set May 17, 1776, as a "day of Humiliation, Fasting and Prayer" throughout the colonies. Congress urges its fellow citizens to "confess and bewail our manifold sins and transgressions, and by a sincere repentance and amendment of life, appease his [God's] righteous displeasure, and through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, obtain his pardon and forgiveness." Massachusetts ordered a "suitable Number" of these proclamations be printed so "that each of the religious Assemblies in this Colony, may be furnished with a Copy of the same" and added the motto "God Save This People" as a substitute for "God Save the King."


Congressional Fast Day Proclamation, March 16, 1776 Morality in the Army
Congress was apprehensive about the moral condition of the American army and navy and took steps to see that Christian morality prevailed in both organizations. In the Articles of War, seen below, governing the conduct of the Continental Army (seen above) (adopted, June 30, 1775; revised, September 20, 1776), Congress devoted three of the four articles in the first section to the religious nurture of the troops. Article 2 "earnestly recommended to all officers and soldiers to attend divine services." Punishment was prescribed for those who behaved "indecently or irreverently" in churches, including courts-martial, fines and imprisonments. Chaplains who deserted their troops were to be court-martialed. [SIZE=-1]Rules and Articles, for the better Government of the Troops . . . of the Twelve united English Colonies of North America [page 4] - [page 5]
Philadelphia: William and Thomas Bradford, 1775
Rare Book and Special Collections Division,
Library of Congress (111)[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]To all brave, healthy, able bodied
well disposed young men. . . .
Recruiting poster for the Continental Army.
Historical Society of Pennsylvania (112)[/SIZE]

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel04.html

 

[Polycarp_fan]

One thing that strikes me so interesting about the OP is that it is written by a self-proclaimed Christian, but the OP boils down to: I believe that homosexuality is wrong, so why should they even try to justify it with the bible?

Doesn't "OP" stand for opinion? Care to present even ONE gay promoting piece of scripture?

[quoteIn other words, if you are gay, why come to Christ?[/quote]

That is your OP. This thread is just about people warping and twisting scripture to promote a gay theology that isn't warranted.

It implies that you can't be gay and Christian (although such exist), and basically ask why you should even try.

Gay tactics 101 technique "7" is it? I should report your incredibly rude accusation. The "OP" is about the attempts to homosexualize the passages that gay theologians posit are gay affirming. Why try that? There must be a reason other than trying to unite the Church. I am judging no one. I am just presenting a postion that (gay theology) cannot be supported. The opinion to this OP.

It suggests that one needs to be either homosexual or Christian (does that mean being heterosexual makes you Christian?), and therefore, makes gays, in frustration, finally say, "Fine. You win. I'm not a Christian, nor do I want anything to do with your religion."

Sins do not seperate you from Christ unless you refuse to repent of them. Is that not sound theology? And, it covers everyone.

It pushes people away.

John says we shouldn't even let false teachers into our homes. So why should we allow false theologians to teach what cannot be supported as truth? I mention nothing about people and their sexual proclivities being unforgiveable.

If one considers that homosexuality is a sin for a moment, it still doesn't solve anything.

Your right. Only repentance solves sinning. The GLBT culture sees the preaching of repentance as a hate crime. Preaching that sinners should repent CAN BE proven from scriptures.

Do they say that you can no be single and sexually activce and heterosexual AND a Christian? That you cannot be a Christian and get drunk? That you cannot be Christian and get divorced and remarried?

Read Psalm 51. Read the Gospels. Engaging in homosexuality doesn't disqualify anyone from being saved. Let's go to scripture:

"All that call on the Name of the Lord will be saved."

Does Christ even ask that one first change, and then become Christian?

Not that I can see "in" the Gospels. It is after you become a Christians that change is observed. We Christians do not consider that hate speech. Seeing the way gay theologians appraoch Paul in Romans one, you would think that Romans 2 didn't exist. And Romans 10:

That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.

As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile&#8212;the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!"

///

Altering scripture is not good news, and inappropriate interpretation is also not good news to say the least.

Or is Christ and the HS supposed to change you, and help you to sin no more?

Read the New Testament. Test all things in it. On this point, it is all yours.

[quoteBut for gays, there is a call to change themselves first, in which case, they don't need Jesus at all.[/quote]

This is a worldly perspective. In Christ there are just people. No labels.

Either way, it makes no sense.

That is too bad for those that will not search for the sense in the Gospel.

 

[cantata]

OP stands for "original post".

 

[Polycarp_fan]

OP stands for "original post".

Thanks. I was going with opinion. As in op/ed.

I would have liked to see some theologian of GLBT culture post their biblical support for it and reply to the "OP." The scriptute I used is common in gay circles. What seems to have happened is the typical crowd of angry people not wanting anyone to question their ways, started in with the rabble rousing. A view of the Sodom story that looks to be played out in 2008 for quite a long time.

You're an atheist, do you have any thoughts on why the texts selected by gay theologians are offered as support for promoting a gay life?

Every thread that stands against promoting homosexuality becomes a mess of taunts, accusations and anger. Cyberspece looks just like Boston and San Francisco in a short amount of time. (Talk about spin, we went from the writers of the Bible, to Jefferson, Madison and Franklin.)

Why does the "OP" get ignored?

 

[TheManeki]

Why does the "OP" get ignored?

Probably because the OP either has no real life evidence that the claims of the OP are correct, or just chooses not to show said evidence. Speechifying ain't debate.

 

[uberd00b]

Teaching liitle children to engage in gay sex is not protecting them.

WHAT?!? How about some honesty? Who wants to teach kids to engage in gay sex?

It is recruitment. No matter the frosting on the GLBT agenda, it boils down to encouraging children to accept gay life.

It boils down to you guys attempting to teach something to children that appears to be untrue. Something you cannot demonstrate. Something that will lead kids to discriminate for no good reason.
In short it leads you to teach kids a lie. Why should anyone allow you to teach their kids something so obviously morally and intellectually flawed?

Christians have opposed this kind of teaching. Jesus preached about leading children into sin is a greater sin.

I disagree, there's a strong anti-lying ethic in Christianity (at least the Christianity I was raised with) and it's impossible to support the anti-gay agenda and remain honest. It's simply not a Christian endeavour, in my opinion.

You do the math.

The anti-gay agenda is harmful to our children and to society and is characterised by dishonesty and base prejudice wherever it raises it's primitive ugly head. It appears to be neither Christian nor good, moral or proper.

Carry on this nonsense and Christianity will be relegated to an embarrassing footnote in history. People simply know better in this day and age.