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

[Flibbertigibbet]

I myself have been guilty of posting off-topic from the OP, so don't think I'm chastising anyone - but there has been precious little response to the OP and I myself am really interested in knowing your answers.

For those who keep demanding proof of God's existence, I don't think the question really applies to you since you're not likely to be going around teaching from a book you think is complete bunk.

I am really curious about how gay Christians, or those Christians who don't believe the Bible speaks against homosexuality, have reached that position from the text. I know that in all the times that I have read (a) about the Roman soldier with the sick slave and (b) about Ruth and Naomi, it has never once occurred to me that a sexual relationship was implied. If that is the conclusion you have arrived at, how did you do so?

And for those Christians who believe that the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuality (in the same manner that it condemns other sins), how do you address Romans 1:21-32 and other verses which seem to explicitly speak against it?

I've asked before for someone to provide me with the name of a translation of the Bible that doesn't interpret these passages in like manner, but haven't gotten a referral yet. If there is such a translation, would someone please tell me what it is?

I hope you all have gathered by now that I'm not bashing anyone for their sexual orientation. I disagree with the methods used by some, and feel that it is not my place to attack and degrade other people for their choices. I believe that the way to support your position is to vote in support of said position, and champion your cause within your community - not to attack people. IMO that has little effect other than to tick people off and create dissension.

 

[HaloHope]

I am really curious about how gay Christians, or those Christians who don't believe the Bible speaks against homosexuality, have reached that position from the text. I know that in all the times that I have read (a) about the Roman soldier with the sick slave and (b) about Ruth and Naomi, it has never once occurred to me that a sexual relationship was implied. If that is the conclusion you have arrived at, how did you do so?

First off, thank you for such a respectful post and I thought I'd attempt to address these points. I consider myself a Christian who is gay, I go to church regularly, take part in church activities, tell non-Christians about God (is as unpreachy way as possible) and I am about to go on my yearly pilgrimage.

The whole "implications" of homosexuality in the Bible is interesting and its something I dont have a definitive answer on. I think relationships such as Ruth and Naomi and David and Johnathan may well be homosexual in nature but seeing as I wasnt actually there at the time I of course dont know for sure. I think their is a distinct lack of mention of homosexuality in the Bible because as a rule the authors were hetrosexual males and it probably wouldn't have crossed their minds to cater to smaller sections of their society.

And for those Christians who believe that the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuality (in the same manner that it condemns other sins), how do you address Romans 1:21-32 and other verses which seem to explicitly speak against it?

This I can answer you as I, reading the Bible originally without knowing that a basic tenant of a fairly sizeable chunk of Christianity was against homosexuality I never saw condemnation of it whatsoever.

Ezikiel clearly states Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for inhospitality for example (you cant really get much more inhospitable than attempting gang rape regardless of the sexuality of those involved).

Levitical laws are also up for much debate as to whether they cover homosexuality, and even if they did... their levitical laws, laws for the israelites of the time in a nomadic desert tribe. How is this remotely applicable to western society in 2008?

Corinthians and Romans are imho incredibly vague and Ill attempt to address why.

" 26For this reason(I) God gave them up to(J) dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another,(K) men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."

"To see this verse in context lets skip back a little too.. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they(A) became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22(B) Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and(C) exchanged the glory of(D) the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things."

Here we can see that Paul is talking about Pagan idol worship which at the time frequently involved all manner of sex acts. People who were married would doubtlessly have sex with other partners, some of the same-sex etc.. Paul is talking about this whole thing in the context of Pagan rituals as means to worship God. NOT (as in ALL possibly condeming homosexuality Bible verses) commited monogamous same-sex relationships.

I can go through the other verses like the second Romans passage that people claim has the word "homosexuality" in it when the word didnt even exsist in Biblical times. Oddly enough Ive never had Bible that said homosexual before.. just sodomite.. and as we know from Ezkiel the sin of Sodom was inhospitality NOT homosexuality.

If you really want to know my take on Corinthains ill post it later as Im about to head out, but this will hopefully help you understand where I am coming from.

 

[levi501]

Well, if so much is inconsistent, contradictory, and false in the Bible ---- you should be able to name one.

name one what?

 

[aeroz22]

Only to those who enjoy living with cruelity and are seeking simplicity but perhaps not the truth.

The irony is astounding...

 

[aeroz22]

Arrogance? Have you taken the time to SEE how GLBT's talk about their positions? It is the height of superiority 100% of the time. They have an elitist answer for everything (it's the guidebook and playbook style). Reminds me of Satan with Jesus in the Gospel.

Why does anyone need to identify as "gay" or "lesbian" or the king of them all "bi-sexual?"

If people that enjoy homosexuality were to go away when they achieve every one of their agenda's goals, I would march in a pride parade. But, history has taught us that this kind of sin (sexual perversion or porneia as the writers penned it) never just sits idle. And we are seeing that proven by the immorality of our youth "culture." Never, do we hear of a decent morality message from the GLBT community. It's always the protection of promiscuity and licentiousness. And let's not go to the marriage issue. Marriage is a man and a womannnnnnn BUUUUUUUUTTTTTTTTTT nnnnnnnot to a perverse and rebellious generation. Anything truly goes "now." Is that GLBT's fault exclusively? Almost. Except of course the message of the Gospel, that doesn't go many places anymore outside of the Church. That is now hate speech outside of it. Or, at least that is what I'm seeing and hearing FROM the GLBT community.


Here we go again. All we need is a new Nero at the helm.

Is it fun living in a black and white world, with unbending rules? Just curious. Or do you feel a lot of anger while talking about these things?

 

[LittleNipper]

So you are an expert about gay sex?

No, however, after reading through the Internet and some of the jokes, I've become an expert on human nature.

 

[LittleNipper]

name one what?

Biblical contradiction or fallibility.

 

[LittleNipper]

The irony is astounding...

There is more than enough irony to go around...

 

[LittleNipper]

Is it fun living in a black and white world, with unbending rules? Just curious. Or do you feel a lot of anger while talking about these things?

The Black & White TV shows of the 1950's were the best.

 

[aeroz22]

The Apostles taught marriage was a man and a woman too. They also taught that Christians should not engage in sexually inappropriate behavior like worldy people do. They wrote about this several times.

The Bible says different things depending on which book or passage you are reading and who wrote it. What makes you think you have the correct view on the Bible's message on homosexuality? If you think that only your view can possibly be correct, and you cannot consider other people's opinions and interpretations as equal to yours, then there's no point in talking to you--your mind is made up; your heart is hard and you will not listen.

...and while you've made your mind up for good, you could be dead wrong and missing out on a much bigger, exciting and happy world out there

 

[LittleNipper]

??

What does sexual role-playing have to do with anything? Are you going to suggest that only gay people - and not all of them do - role-play in the bedroom? You're rediculous.

How do you know what all of "them" do?

 

[aeroz22]

"
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.

You are assuming that a gay pride parade exists to celebrate promiscuity. Gay pride parades exist to celebrate the right of one person to love someone of the same gender.

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.

Why do you think you are not altering it. What if you're altering things without even realizing it? Who says that your interpretation is correct and that you are not altering anything?

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.

Just because you see these symbols doesn't mean you know them at all. You see a symbol, you get angry, and hopefully just keep moving. If you can have your Bible club then they can have their gay club. Whatever you get, they can get. Why are you so angry?

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.

Who says you get to decide what is decent and truth? You could be dead wrong about what is decent or truthful. Why do you assume you know for sure what is decent or the truth?

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 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.

If displaying symbols and forming clubs is forceful, then what is knocking on my door with a Bible in hand trying to convert me?

 

[aeroz22]

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

He thinks that presenting his own opinions and interpretations of scripture counts as solid, indisputable evidence. And he thinks that his interpretations are as plain as day, and anyone who doesn't interpret it the same way he is is, well, just plain stupid or too agenda-driven to see the "truth."

 

[selfinflikted]

The Black & White TV shows of the 1950's were the best.

They were also completely fictional, and not representative of reality.

 

[aeroz22]

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.

Woah, woah, wooooooaaahhhhh....where did he say that about you?

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

If displaying symbols and forming clubs is forceful, then what is knocking on my door with a Bible in hand trying to convert me?

While I disagree with PolyCarp's tactics and much of what has been said, I have to respond to this statement.

The difference is that should I come to your door with my Bible in hand, you are free to tell me to leave your home and close your door. I can't sit in your house and require you to either listen to me or leave your own home while I stay ensconced on your couch.

And, btw, I don't know about any other Christians out there, but if I show up at your house with my Bible in hand I'm not trying to convert you. I'm there #1 because I care about you and whatever your problems may be, regardless of what your lifestyle or living arrangements are. I'm also there to share that I have come to believe Jesus Christ died for my sins and those of everyone else, and to share the changes that have occurred in my life since I believed. That's all that I can do. The rest is God's work.

 

[aeroz22]

If you plan on staying around here, however, I suggest you provide some evidence corroborating that your Biblical interpretation is the sole correct one.

I agree.

 

[selfinflikted]

While I disagree with PolyCarp's tactics and much of what has been said, I have to respond to this statement.

The difference is that should I come to your door with my Bible in hand, you are free to tell me to leave your home and close your door. I can't sit in your house and claim squatter's rights and force you to listen to me or leave your own home while I stay ensconced on your couch running my mouth.

And, btw, I don't know about any other Christians out there, but if I show up at your house with my Bible in hand I'm not trying to convert you. I'm there #1 because I care about you and whatever your problems may be, regardless of what your lifestyle or living arrangements are. I'm also there to share that I have come to believe Jesus Christ died for my sins and those of everyone else, and to share the changes that have occurred in my life since I believed. That's all that I can do. The rest is God's work.

You seem civil and nice enough, but honestly, I'd prefer you didn't show up and knock of my door at all, period.

 

[aeroz22]

LittelNipper,

Do I sense a brother (or sister) in here? If you are, you're brave. Very brave.

Immature. Very, very, very immature.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

You seem civil and nice enough, but honestly, I'd prefer you didn't show up and knock of my door at all, period.

And I wouldn't if I didn't know you or know that you had some problem or need that I could offer assistance with. I'm a Baptist, not a Jehovah's Witness (no offense to JW's, but I've had many a knock at my door over the years).

On second thought, I did have Baptists knock at my own door a couple of years ago (not from church however). I live in a small town and they noticed that I had just moved in. At the time (prior to conversion) I said nice to meet you and went in the house and left my husband to it.

Anyway, SI, it won't be me knocking at your door. But if you ever have a problem I'm available.