Sir Elton John claims Jesus was gay

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

ParanoidAndroid

Guest
No, even an evil thought is a sin, like lust, your not harming anyone but your thought is still a sin.

It is impossible for Jesus to be a homosexual (even without carrying out any sexual acts). Homosexuality comes from the sinful desires of our hearts. Jesus had no sinful desire what so ever. He is the spotless lamb of God.
Curious that you bring up lust as a sin. Is a heterosexual male who lusts after a woman any more or less sinful than a homosexual male lusts after another male?

This is where I see a problem. We (that is, Christians) generally agree that all sins are equal in God's eyes - that is, all sins are equally repugnant. Then in discussions of heterosexuality and homosexuality they say that homosexuality is no worse than any other sin. Yet SOME (and I stress "some" because not all Christians hold this view) then go on to say that a heterosexual can have heterosexual thoughts as long as they don't act on them (or entertain those desires in a lustful fashion). But then those same people turn around and say that it's sinful for a homosexual to even have attractions towards the opposite sex, whether they dwell on their lust or not.

This does not make sense, and clearly shows a contradiction - whatever the person may be saying, they are clearly designating homosexuality as different to other sins.

* Heterosexual has feelings towards opposite sex, does not act on them, does not dwell on them or lust after them
~ Correct behaviour

*Homosexual has feelings towards same sex, does not act on them, does not dwell on them or lust after them
~ SINNER

Am I the only one who sees that the logic does not add up? If the homosexual is dealing with the same sins as a heterosexual, then why are different standards applied?

~ PA
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
P

ParanoidAndroid

Guest
You really should crack open your Bible.
And I think you should crack open a commentary from Greek and Hebrew scholars (don't get me wrong, I agree with you that homosexuality is a sin, but you can't just use all these passages to justify that belief):

1 Corinthians 6:9
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders

Genesis 2:24
For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh

Leviticus 18:22
" 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
1 Corinthians 6:9 - I agree on this one, though some have argued that the Greek does not refer to a "homosexual" (the word did not exist in ancient times) but rather to a male prostitute. I tend to agree that it refers to men lying with men regardless, but I'm just bringing it up

Genesis 2:24 - I agree on this one totally!

Leviticus 18:22 - Context, my friend, context. Leviticus 18 is describing what is detestable in terms of idol worship. The passage is not a coverall condemnation of homosexuality, but rather a very specific type of homosexual activity - homosexual relations in the context of idol worship.

~ Regards, PA
 
Upvote 0

fm107

Psalm 19:1-4 and Romans 1:20
May 12, 2009
1,133
139
London, UK
✟60,700.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Curious that you bring up lust as a sin. Is a heterosexual male who lusts after a woman any more or less sinful than a homosexual male lusts after another male?

This is where I see a problem. We (that is, Christians) generally agree that all sins are equal in God's eyes - that is, all sins are equally repugnant. Then in discussions of heterosexuality and homosexuality they say that homosexuality is no worse than any other sin. Yet SOME (and I stress "some" because not all Christians hold this view) then go on to say that a heterosexual can have heterosexual thoughts as long as they don't act on them (or entertain those desires in a lustful fashion). But then those same people turn around and say that it's sinful for a homosexual to even have attractions towards the opposite sex, whether they dwell on their lust or not.

This does not make sense, and clearly shows a contradiction - whatever the person may be saying, they are clearly designating homosexuality as different to other sins.

* Heterosexual has feelings towards opposite sex, does not act on them, does not dwell on them or lust after them
~ Correct behaviour

*Homosexual has feelings towards same sex, does not act on them, does not dwell on them or lust after them
~ SINNER

Am I the only one who sees that the logic does not add up? If the homosexual is dealing with the same sins as a heterosexual, then why are different standards applied?

~ PA

Listen, I'm not going to start posting massive posts as doing that really uses up a lot of my time and I don't enjoy posting massive posts.

So straight to the point.

Sins are not all equal.
 
Upvote 0

fm107

Psalm 19:1-4 and Romans 1:20
May 12, 2009
1,133
139
London, UK
✟60,700.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
All sins are equal in that any sin is enough to send you to Hell.

Not all sins are equal in the sense that some sins are more detestable and/or more evil than others. E.g. if someone only committed one sin - rape and another person only committed one sin - a lie. The person who raped another person will obviously be punished more severely in Hell than a person who told a lie. It is common sense.
 
Upvote 0

Texas Lynn

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2002
10,352
665
47
Brooklyn, NY
✟14,982.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Do they recognize same-sex unions in the Methodist church?

Officially, no. But Methodist churches are by and large extremely welcoming to LGBTs.

I realize that some denominations do this and others don't.

True. But eventually all will.
 
Upvote 0

Texas Lynn

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2002
10,352
665
47
Brooklyn, NY
✟14,982.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I can't say what Elton John's reasons were, but this is possible. If he was simply saying that Jesus identified with the oppressed, then this is a plausible analogy. However, when anyone refers to Jesus as gay, I'm pretty sure that they are referring to him being actively involved with a gay lover.

I don't think so. John is British but he's ironic. A lot of gays are not involved with a gay lover, but they're still gay. If gays aren't meeting that litmus test, why should anybody else.

Gay is a culture of which sex is but a small part.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Texas Lynn

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2002
10,352
665
47
Brooklyn, NY
✟14,982.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
All sins are equal in that any sin is enough to send you to Hell.

Not all sins are equal in the sense that some sins are more detestable and/or more evil than others. E.g. if someone only committed one sin - rape and another person only committed one sin - a lie. The person who raped another person will obviously be punished more severely in Hell than a person who told a lie. It is common sense.

I don't think so. I don't think it's common sense that hell exists at all, but mere fealty to superstition.
 
Upvote 0
P

ParanoidAndroid

Guest
I don't know what this means. What is it supposed to mean?
It means that Leviticus 18 is not a total blanket statement against homosexuality, but simply referring to homosexual practices made in worship to false idols (not uncommon in some of the beliefs of those who lived in close proximity to the Israelites).

Does that clarify my meaning?

~ PA
 
Upvote 0
P

ParanoidAndroid

Guest
All sins are equal in that any sin is enough to send you to Hell.

Not all sins are equal in the sense that some sins are more detestable and/or more evil than others. E.g. if someone only committed one sin - rape and another person only committed one sin - a lie. The person who raped another person will obviously be punished more severely in Hell than a person who told a lie. It is common sense.
I beg to differ. In a physical sense, I agree that some sins are graded as worse than others. A murderer or rapist is going to receive harsher penalties in the courts than others who commit lesser crimes or sins.

However, according to Jesus, being angry with your brother is the same as committing murder! But the courts aren't going to put you away for being angry. Looking lustfully after another person is the same as adultery. I'm not married and I have never had sex, and intend to remain a virgin until I am married (if I ever marry). But I have looked at inappropriate contentography, and that makes me an adulterer in my heart.

Thus in a spiritual sense, I must say that all sins are equal. If God sees me being angry with another person, then I have committed murder in my heart. I am a murderer!

Though it would be interesting to see evidence from the Bible that some people will be punished worse than others (the rapist and the one who tells a lie, using your examples). Off the top of my head I can't think of anywhere that says people will be punished worse than others (Revelation does say that each person will be judged according to their deeds, but no mention of grading their penalties and punishments).

~ Regards, PA
 
Upvote 0

fm107

Psalm 19:1-4 and Romans 1:20
May 12, 2009
1,133
139
London, UK
✟60,700.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
A person who is married but lusts after another woman is not as bad as an adulterer who commits the act.

Matthew 5:28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Adultery is a valid reason for divorce HOWEVER you cannot divorce your husband because he looked at a woman lustfully can you?

Matthew 19:19
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Therefore they cannot be equal sins in that sense.

……………………………………………………………………

Here is some biblical evidence you asked for which shows people will be punished more severely than others.

Luke 20:47
They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely."

Mark 14:21
The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."

Jesus never said this to any other unbeliever.

Matthew 10:15
I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.


What do you think the purpose is of the day of Judgement? It cannot be simply to say a person is going to Hell. As they know that because they would have been in Hades like in Luke 15.

It is to determine the severity of their punishment, those who sinned greater/more will reap a worse punishment, We reap what we sow.

Psalm 28:4
Repay them for their deeds and for their evil work; repay them for what their hands have done and bring back upon them what they deserve.

Ezekiel 36:19
I judged them according to their conduct and their actions.

Matthew 12:36
But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken.

Revelation 20:13
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done.

You might say 1 or 2 are out of context however the principle of judging according to their works remains the same. Don’t get me wrong, the bulk of the scriptures are within context and all of the above can be applied to what I have said.


P.S. According to what your saying, Hitler who is responsible for having millions of people slaughtered is just as bad as a 15 year old kid who rejected Christ? Scriptures are not required to prove my point, it is common sense that we are not all punished the same in Hell.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Kristin E

Follower Of Christ
Feb 28, 2010
1,498
127
33
VA/NC
✟2,278.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A person who is married but lusts after another woman is not as bad as an adulterer who commits the act.

Matthew 5:28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Adultery is a valid reason for divorce HOWEVER you cannot divorce your husband because he looked at a woman lustfully can you?

Matthew 19:19
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Therefore they cannot be equal sins in that sense.

……………………………………………………………………

Here is some biblical evidence you asked for which shows people will be punished more severely than others.

Luke 20:47
They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely."

Mark 14:21
The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."

Jesus never said this to any other unbeliever.

Matthew 10:15
I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.


What do you think the purpose is of the day of Judgement? It cannot be simply to say a person is going to Hell. As they know that because they would have been in Hades like in Luke 15.

It is to determine the severity of their punishment, those who sinned greater/more will reap a worse punishment, We reap what we sow.

Psalm 28:4
Repay them for their deeds and for their evil work; repay them for what their hands have done and bring back upon them what they deserve.

Ezekiel 36:19
I judged them according to their conduct and their actions.

Matthew 12:36
But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken.

Revelation 20:13
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done.

You might say 1 or 2 are out of context however the principle of judging according to their works remains the same. Don’t get me wrong, the bulk of the scriptures are within context and all of the above can be applied to what I have said.


P.S. According to what your saying, Hitler who is responsible for having millions of people slaughtered is just as bad as a 15 year old kid who rejected Christ? Scriptures are not required to prove my point, it is common sense that we are not all punished the same in Hell.

I agree with your last part, different sins have different forms of punishment in hell... But yup here is my but! All Sins are equal in the fact that a lie is just as bad as murder! May sound crazy but a Sin is a Sin there is no way you can turn your sin and make it a small sin.... When you sin you know you are doing something wrong but you continue to do it... The only sin that is not equal to all is to blaspheme the lord, and that sin is VERY bad. So yes murdering may get you a deeper spot in hell, but it's still a sin, just as lying or being an adulterer is a sin.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fm107

Psalm 19:1-4 and Romans 1:20
May 12, 2009
1,133
139
London, UK
✟60,700.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
In that case your stating the obvious. Of course a sin is a sin, what else can it be?

And no, murder is not as bad as telling a lie. Yes both are sins and yes doing either is enough to send you to Hell. But these two sins are not the same otherwise why would one person be punished more severely for it?
 
Upvote 0
P

ParanoidAndroid

Guest
A person who is married but lusts after another woman is not as bad as an adulterer who commits the act.

Matthew 5:28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Adultery is a valid reason for divorce HOWEVER you cannot divorce your husband because he looked at a woman lustfully can you?

Matthew 19:19
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Therefore they cannot be equal sins in that sense.
As I pointed out in my earlier post, in a physical sense, some sins carry greater consequences than others. A murderer will get sent to jail while someone who is simply angry with his brother (generic "brother", not necessarily blood relatives) will not be jailed. But by God's standards they are the same, both are murderers in their hearts.

Thus someone who commits adultery may have physical consequences (divorce) while someone who is married and lusts after another, let's say inappropriate contentography, may not have the physical consequence of divorce - but they are still the same sin in God's eyes.

With that said, I don't think Matthew 5 provides an "exception" to the divorce rule. But it would take far too long to discuss alternatives when the point is rather moot.


Here is some biblical evidence you asked for which shows people will be punished more severely than others.

Luke 20:47
They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely."

Mark 14:21
The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."

Jesus never said this to any other unbeliever.

Matthew 10:15
I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
Thanks for that, if you don't mind, here are my conclusion/s on those verses:

Luke 20:47 - Such men as described here will be up judged by harsher standards, and thus are doubly condemned since they are using their religious standing to take advantage of the widows in their grief. This is not a greater punishment, but a harsher standard of judgement (because those in authority to teach are also capable of leading people astray with false teachings)

Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.
~ James 3:1


Mark 14:21 - True, Jesus does say this specifically about Judas, but it does not logically follow then that Judas will be punished worse.

Matthew 10:15 - Speaking of sins being treated differently, are you suggesting here that Jesus is saying the town of Sodom, who's inhabitants attempted to engage in homosexual-gang-rape will be punished less severely than the house that simply does not listen to Jesus' disciples? Is it not more appropriate to simply consider that Jesus was comparing a horrific town known in the Old Testament and suggesting that the same wickedness (though not the same sin, of course) exists wherever the word of God is rejected?


What do you think the purpose is of the day of Judgement? It cannot be simply to say a person is going to Hell. As they know that because they would have been in Hades like in Luke 15.

It is to determine the severity of their punishment, those who sinned greater/more will reap a worse punishment, We reap what we sow.
Hades is not Hell, so how can they already know they would be going to hell? At Judgement, Hades will be thrown into the lake of fire -

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.
~ Revelation 20:14

The purpose of the Day of Judgement is to destroy all that is of the old creation, save for those whose names are found in the Book of Life. Notice that the lake of fire is described as "the second death", not "the place of eternal suffering and torture". Then God will usher in the New Creation - the new heavens and the new earth. Those who were not saved will perish with the old heavens and old earth.


Psalm 28:4
Repay them for their deeds and for their evil work; repay them for what their hands have done and bring back upon them what they deserve.

Ezekiel 36:19
I judged them according to their conduct and their actions.

Matthew 12:36
But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken.

Revelation 20:13
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done.

You might say 1 or 2 are out of context however the principle of judging according to their works remains the same. Don’t get me wrong, the bulk of the scriptures are within context and all of the above can be applied to what I have said.
Again allow me to quickly discuss each verse:

Psalm 28:4 - It seems that David is simply asking that God deal with them according to their deeds in a physical sense. Jews don't believe in Hell, nor is it taught in the Hebrew scriptures. The Hebrew Sheol
is a place where all people went, including David (Christians understand heaven and hell differently because of what we call "progressive revelation"). Thus David, in Psalm 28, could not have been referring to eternal punishment, but rather immediate physical retribution.

Ezekiel 36:19 - This is past-tense, discussing the physical judgement of their actions. And I have already agreed that on a physical level, some sins carry greater consequences than others. This says nothing of the Judgement at the end of time.

Matthew 12:36 - I don't disagree with this passage. But then, I don't see how this passage suggests greater punishment. It just says they will have to give an account of what they have said/done.

Revelation 20:13 - Again, I have no disagreements with this - everyone will be judged on their deeds. But this still says nothing of degrees of punishment. It's also interesting to note that the very next verse (20:14) discusses what the end result is for those not found in the Book of Life - I discussed this earlier in this response.



P.S. According to what your saying, Hitler who is responsible for having millions of people slaughtered is just as bad as a 15 year old kid who rejected Christ? Scriptures are not required to prove my point, it is common sense that we are not all punished the same in Hell.
P.S. Don't forget,you also made similar claims in quoting Matthew10:15 to support your position! The house (of which a fifteen year old boy may be included) who rejects Jesus will be dealt with more harshly than Sodom and Gomorrah (the inhabitants of Sodom, as noted earlier, attempted to engage in homosexual-gang-rape, this being just one of their many likely other evils). Of course, I don't think Matthew 19:15 is saying that, but you are suggesting it does.

As I said, in the physical world, some sins carry a greater punishment than others. This is common sense. Thus Hitler is deemed a monster for his actions by our physical world. But for God, he is just another sinner.

I think the biggest difference in our views here is that you believe there is torture of some kind involved with God's Judgement, and thus consider different "degrees" of punishment depending on how awful someone was (very Dante-esque actually, with different levels of Hell). I don't see the Bible supporting torture at all, though there is certainly a punishment for disobedience. However, this punishment is not unequal to the crime - no matter how evil a person is, even someone like Hitler, offering infinite torture for finite sins is not the work of a Just God.

~ Regards, PA
 
Upvote 0
P

ParanoidAndroid

Guest
I agree with your last part, different sins have different forms of punishment in hell... But yup here is my but! All Sins are equal in the fact that a lie is just as bad as murder! May sound crazy but a Sin is a Sin there is no way you can turn your sin and make it a small sin.... When you sin you know you are doing something wrong but you continue to do it... The only sin that is not equal to all is to blaspheme the lord, and that sin is VERY bad. So yes murdering may get you a deeper spot in hell, but it's still a sin, just as lying or being an adulterer is a sin.
This becomes even shadier when the context may require a lie. In Nazi-Germany, for example, many people, Christians included, helped hide Jews from the Nazis. When the Nazis would go searching for Jews they would go to a person's house, and obviously ask if they were hiding any Jews in their house.

Is it a sin to lie and tell them that they are not hiding anything? Of course, the soldiers are going to look anyway, and hopefully the person hid the secret trapdoor well enough that the Nazis wouldn't find it.

Perhaps this lie was a sin, though perhaps a necessary sin. I would fall back on what Jesus' two greatest commandments were - Love God, and Love your neighbour - because the Law and the prophets hang entirely on these two commands. I would submit that it is more loving to lie and save the hidden Jews than to tell the truth and condemn them to torture and/or death.

But this is moving into ethical controversies now, which is not really the point of the thread, and many people will have many answers to this type of question.

~ Regards, PA
 
Upvote 0

lucaspa

Legend
Oct 22, 2002
14,569
416
New York
✟32,309.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Elton, 62, declares as he pours out his heart to a magazine: "I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems."
who would have thunk it ?

Well ... If you consider the situation as depicted in the gospels, there is reason for Elton John to make that conclusion. In Jewish society, particularly at the time, young men married. Period. Yet here you have a single Jewish male at 30? Why?

You have some possibilities:
1. Like Paul, he hated women.
2. He was gay.
3. For some reason, he needed to be single to do his ministry.
4. He was married but the gospel authors didn't think it important enough to mention.

This is why I remained calm when it was suggested that Jesus was married. So what? I thought it would be kinda cool. That let God as human experience that aspect of humanity. Jesus being gay is also OK. A common theme in the Bible is that God does not use the type of people that other people expect. For instance, the person chosen to speak for the Hebrews -- Moses -- has a speech impediment. The person picked to lead Israel to victory over the Phillistines is not a great general, but a shepherd. Perhaps God wanted the person to speak to a patriarchal society with sexual hangups to be gay.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Texas Lynn

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2002
10,352
665
47
Brooklyn, NY
✟14,982.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It means that Leviticus 18 is not a total blanket statement against homosexuality, but simply referring to homosexual practices made in worship to false idols (not uncommon in some of the beliefs of those who lived in close proximity to the Israelites).

Does that clarify my meaning?

~ PA

Absolutely and I certainly agree. Any assertion that today, to be LGBT and in a physical relationship is not proper for LGBT Christians is certainly unsupported by logic, reason, or history. All such things are supported by is prejudice, purely and simply.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.