The Homosexuality Issue

fat wee robin said:

Homosexual sex is worse than any other as it is physically as well a morally turning God's Creation on it's head .At the beginning there were always man and woman ,and there was no need for 'marriage' which is a formalised Relationship before God and community . There is never ,was never any such thing a homosexuality in God's creation .It is a creation of Satan to pervert God's plan for his
people .
So no, there is no other sin so serious ,when it is promoted widely everywhere now in all of the world to change basic creation.

Click to expand...

I agree. It ranks right up there with beastiology and pedophilia. It is even sick among the unsaved.

Spiritualized said:

It now says Christian! Yipee! I'm counted

Click to expand...

I have read your conversion story, that is great. However homosexuality is a grave sin to commit, without judging or anything, i don't think you can live the christian life and be gay, less to become a pastor...

HereIStand said:

That's been my experience. Maybe there has been a policy change.

Click to expand...

What is your personal beliefs? Is homosexuality a sin? I see you associate yourself as Presbyterian even in the light of this great change.

1stcenturylady said:

Wow, what has the church come to, when a man who stands up for the word of God should be unwelcome for doing so. Is that common practice in your church?

Click to expand...

No. The experience of being unwelcome that I referred to was dreadnought's, in his Methodist congregation. To my knowledge, intentionally making conservatives unwelcome isn't common in his church or mine. However some conservatives will feel uncomfortable because we don't accept their demands to stop accepting gays. It's hard to see how to prevent that kind of discomfort.

hedrick said:

Yes. Discussions of the ethics of homosexuality are only legal here, in the ELCA group, and in the Liberal group. People participating in the discussions are expected to abide by the rules of the group, which means that it isn't permitted to condemn the group for its acceptance of gays. Not that there's any hope of that happening.

Click to expand...

No, it says you can't promote homosexuality, not that we can't defend the word of God.

1stcenturylady said:

What is your personal beliefs? Is homosexuality a sin? I see you associate yourself as Presbyterian even in the light of this great change.

Click to expand...

No. Paul never spoke about homosexuality as we know it now, and the rules in Lev aren't generally considered binding on Christians. Requiring all homosexuals to be celibate creates dangers that I'd rather avoid. That's why Paul recommended that people not remain celibate unless they had a specific gift for it.

It seems some churches are accepting homosexuality because pressure of society, homosexuality 'came out of the closet' what 40 years ago? to rub in everyone faces that being gay is ok and normal. Before that in all history the church always said according to the bible and our conscience that it is wrong.
Modern society moral values does not equal to God values.

hedrick said:

No. Paul never spoke about homosexuality as we know it now, and the rules in Lev aren't generally considered binding on Christians. Requiring all homosexuals to be celibate creates dangers that I'd rather avoid. That's why Paul recommended that people not remain celibate unless they had a specific gift for it.

Click to expand...

Paul mentions homosexuality in Romans 1. He doesnt have nice things to say about it.

1stcenturylady said:

What is your personal beliefs? Is homosexuality a sin? I see you associate yourself as Presbyterian even in the light of this great change.

Click to expand...

Acting on it is sinful. The church that I attend is Evangelical Presbyterian not mainline. My church separated from the mainline church and at considerable cost. Presbyterian Robert Gagnon's book, The Bible and Homosexual Practice is an exhaustive defense of the Scriptural view. It takes a while to read, but it's well worth the effort.

NBB said:

It seems some churches are accepting homosexuality because pressure of society, homosexuality 'came out of the closet' what 40 years ago? to rub in everyone faces that being gay is ok and normal. Before that in all history the church always said according to the bible and our conscience that it is wrong.

Click to expand...

No. No one that I know is under the illusion that accepting homosexuality will somehow make us more attractive to society. Most churches that changed their position were well aware that there would be a price. We did it because it was right.

You're right that there was a change in society. There was a nearly universal irrational fear of homosexual relations. It's not until enough gays became visible, and people started getting to know them, that this fear subsided sufficiently to take a serious ethical and Biblical view of the subject.

HereIStand said:

Acting on it is sinful. The church that I attend is Evangelical Presbyterian not mainline. My church separated from the mainline church and at considerable cost. Presbyterian Robert Gagnon's book, The Bible and Homosexual Practice is an exhaustive defense of the Scriptural view. It takes a while to read, but it's well worth the effort.

Click to expand...

I agree. The book is extremely useful in documenting both Jewish and pagan attitudes towards homosexuality. I'm not aware of anything close to as useful. His exegesis, not so much.

W2L said:

Paul mentions homosexuality in Romans 1. He doesnt have nice things to say about it.

Click to expand...

He does not. Some referred to Gagnon. Please take a look at it. Paul was reflecting a view which Gagnon documents, that when pagans exhaust the possibilities with heterosexual relations, they go on to sex with the same gender. Rom 1 fits this description to a T. It's explicitly talking about pagans, and it's describing homosexuality as something that happens when people give us their natural sex.

This has nothing to do with Christians who are only attracted to those of the same gender, and who want to live according to Christian sexual ethics.

Furthermore, it's not so clear that Paul even agreed with what is in Rom 1. Remember that the argument in Romans was about the relationship between Jews and Gentiles. Rom 1 is the exact case that Paul's opponents made: that pagans are inherently immoral, and Jews are morally superior. Paul is *rejecting* this case, as he makes clear at the beginning of Rom 2. Indeed Rom 2:2-3 would appear to apply very explicitly to you.

hedrick said:

No. No one that I know is under the illusion that accepting homosexuality will somehow make us more attractive to society. Most churches that changed their position were well aware that there would be a price. We did it because it was right.

You're right that there was a change in society. There was a nearly universal irrational fear of homosexual relations. It's not until enough gays became visible, and people started getting to know them, that this fear subsided sufficiently to take a serious ethical and Biblical view of the subject.

Click to expand...

I don't want to discuss this much, but when someone says that the bible is ok with homosexuality, then they have done a lot of twisting to the scripture to accomodate their view.

hedrick said:

No. Paul never spoke about homosexuality as we know it now, and the rules in Lev aren't generally considered binding on Christians. Requiring all homosexuals to be celibate creates dangers that I'd rather avoid. That's why Paul recommended that people not remain celibate unless they had a specific gift for it.

Click to expand...

You've got to be kidding? Who was it that wrote Romans 1? You are believing that homosexuality is not a choice.

HereIStand said:

Acting on it is sinful. The church that I attend is Evangelical Presbyterian not mainline. My church separated from the mainline church and at considerable cost. Presbyterian Robert Gagnon's book, The Bible and Homosexual Practice is an exhaustive defense of the Scriptural view. It takes a while to read, but it's well worth the effort.

Click to expand...

Too bad you had to keep any part of the name.

1stcenturylady said:

You've got to be kidding? Who was it that wrote Romans 1? You are believing that homosexuality is not a choice.

Click to expand...

That's correct. Like most in the Methodist and Presbyterian churches, I normally accept the conclusions of medical and social science research. But even if I didn't, Christian gays are simply not in the situation described in Rom 1, nor does your view take account of the overall argument in Romans. You can't just take isolated sentences out of context and use them as weapons. That's not what the authority of Scripture means. It means taking seriously what the author was actually trying to say.

hedrick said:

He does not. Some referred to Gagnon. Please take a look at it. Paul was reflecting a view which Gagnon documents, that when pagans exhaust the possibilities with heterosexual relations, they go on to sex with the same gender. Rom 1 fits this description to a T. It's explicitly talking about pagans, and it's describing homosexuality as something that happens when people give us their natural sex.

This has nothing to do with Christians who are only attracted to those of the same gender, and who want to live according to Christian sexual ethics.

Furthermore, it's not so clear that Paul even agreed with what is in Rom 1. Remember that the argument in Romans was about the relationship between Jews and Gentiles. Rom 1 is the exact case that Paul's opponents made: that pagans are inherently immoral, and Jews are morally superior. Paul is *rejecting* this case, as he makes clear at the beginning of Rom 2. Indeed Rom 2:2-3 would appear to apply very explicitly to you.

Click to expand...

And i guess there is an excuse for this verses too, which?

1 Timothy 1:8-11 Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)
8 We know that the law is good if someone uses it right. 9 We also know that the law is not made for those who do what is right. It is made for those who are against the law and refuse to follow it. The law is for sinners who are against God and all that is pleasing to him. It is for those who have no interest in spiritual things and for those who kill their fathers or mothers or anyone else. 10 It is for those who commit sexual sins, homosexuals, those who sell slaves, those who tell lies, those who don’t tell the truth under oath, and those who are against the true teaching of God. 11 That teaching is part of the Good News that our blessed God gave me to tell. In it we see his glory.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)
9-10 Surely you know that people who do wrong will not get to enjoy God’s kingdom. Don’t be fooled. These are the people who will not get to enjoy his kingdom: those who sin sexually, those who worship idols, those who commit adultery, men who let other men use them for sex or who have sex with other men, those who steal, those who are greedy, those who drink too much, those who abuse others with insults, and those who cheat. 11 In the past some of you were like that. But you were washed clean, you were made holy, and you were made right with God in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

As you probably know, we don't really know what he word they translate as "homosexual" meant. The ESV translators have made a guess.

hedrick said:

That's correct. Like most in the Methodist and Presbyterian churches, I normally accept the conclusions of medical and social science research. But even if I didn't, Christian gays are simply not in the situation described in Rom 1, nor does your view take account of the overall argument in Romans. You can't just take isolated sentences out of context and use them as weapons. That's not what the authority of Scripture means. It means taking seriously what the author was actually trying to say.

Click to expand...

You speak a lot of sense, Hedrick. I would also say that I know a gay people (some male and a couple female) 2 of which are Christian. I too have seen the destruction caused by being rejected, or worse, trying to reject themselves. Certainly none of that "Good fruit" was evident as an outcome. Our church is a URC Church (United Reformed) and we have congregation fairly evenly split between many denominations, mostly (Baptist, Catholic, Methodist and Presbyterian). What I have witnessed is the good fruit overflows when these people were accepted as they are and loved. Their lives were transformed, their relationship with God became tenfold stronger and their general happiness has improved. They are both active members of our church and amongst the most humble, unjudgemental and loving people we have.

I will admit that our church does classify itself as open, affirming and inclusive. We have a a rainbow fish on our alter and church inner door before getting into the sanctuary and they also take part in outreach at Pride festivals alongside Muslim and Jewish leaders preaching a message of love and acceptance.

From what I understand from the Bible (I read it every day and have read it all), when its read through the context of time, culture and an understanding of the type of document you're reading as well as original transcripts and translations, I always come back to the point of Love being the answer. I invite anyone to listen to Bishop Michael Currie's sermon in the Royal Wedding this year. Summed up what Jesus came to preach to a T.