How do pro-gay Christians reconcile their views with anti-gay scripture?

NBB said:

You have to see their 'pride' parades, grown adults showing their parts to children in the street, and we need to reconcile any of this with the gospel? in what gospel we are believing... do me a favour.

Click to expand...

I've been to may and have never seen that. I did see it the time i went to Mardi Gras but i am sure it was heterosexuals exposing themselves there.

NBB said:

Of course not, but i don't see other movement trying to make sins to get acceptation from everyone, and calling them bigots because you disagree with what they do, i would be against that the same way as this, i don't hate gay people i would treat any gay person with respect, but i hate the whole promotion of what is not ok and actually dangerous in regard of what the bible says.

Click to expand...

you say you don't hate gays....but what you put into your posts sure isn't love.

SilverBear said:

you say you don't hate gays....but what you put into your posts sure isn't love.

Click to expand...

I definetely don't hate them, love is too telling the truth. Love for you is that i accept a sin as ok and approve? no i disapprove.

Gregorikos said:

If you held either viewpoint you would heed what it says.

They know God’s decree, that those who practice such things deserve to die—yet they not only do them but even applaud others who practice them. Romans 1:32 (NRSV)

Click to expand...

Cute, because that's essentially you advocating for authoritarianism, but knowing even consciously or subconsciously that putting forward such an idea anywhere in the world is generally frowned upon because it assumes religious laws should govern a civil society that is not composed of people that adhere to those views. Or would you prefer the world just bend over and submit to Christianity as you view it and things would be "better"?

Also, you didn't answer the question, which tells me you either don't know or don't care and just push this "obey or perish" narrative

We have gone WAY beyond "visibility".

And no, the spurious speculation of "threatened" is abjectly false. It's just more of the "Disagreement means hate" nonsense. Rejected on its face.

Click to expand...

As a straight person, you have the luxury and privilege of being represented constantly, don't act as if everyone else is being unfair to demand more visibility for people like them to not feel like they are a monster or other invectives people throw at them to silence them

Not all disagreement means hate, I never claimed anything like that, so you're thoroughly strawmanning based on your generalization of all people who would defend LGBTQ based on the behavior of some, not a rational response

You must not be paying attention to the news if you haven't seen sexual identity promoted frequently as an important credential, when it is not. People are going to do what they are going to do and no one is stopping them.

Click to expand...

It is an important aspect of people's identity and you are confusing sexual identity as regards biological sex and sexuality, which is sexuality orientation and behavior that results from that. Let's at least get the term straight, first off. And let's also establish that people are not claiming that their sexuality is a credential for jobs, that is patently false.

But this question was about the CHURCH. I am referring to the Church only. In the CHURCH, believers need to adhere to God's Word and not the world's standards and beliefs, which are directly contrary to Truth.

Click to expand...

What you don't appear to realize is that YOU don't get to determine what the Church is by your preferential standards or interpretation, because the only basis you have to demonstrate it is something that is not self evident in a singular interpretation and thus would be question begging on your part to suggest that you have the true interpretation, or True, to use your needless capitalization of a term that is essentially an impossibility to show to the absolute standards you require

You are conflating principles if you wrongly think that anyone is talking about hedonism. God has sexual standards for His people and He is pretty serious about it. People sin, and can repent. But unrepentant sin has consequences. In reference to sexual sins in particular - which are by no way an exhaustive list of sins one should know better than to commit if one has any biblical grounding whatsoever (like don't kill, don't steal, etc) - Adultery, fornication, and homosexual behavior are all forbidden. Not just the last one. All of them are not for God's people.

Click to expand...

You assume everyone takes your interpretation seriously when that's not how this works in a free market of ideas.

Hedonism is pertinent to this if the condemnation of sexual sin is based in part on a lack of self control and focus purely on pleasure. Or is that not what you're condemning at all and just focus on the acts themselves? In which case, can you really even involve the so called sin nature if we are just behaving based on what appears to be simple instincts and intent doesn't matter whatsoever?

And again, you assume mistakenly that the condemnation was homosexual behavior in itself when the concept did not remotely exist back then of distinguishing behavior relative to the idea of sexual orientation, but merely the partner in question. The notion that homosexuality was the target not only neglects that homosexuals can follow the standards about adultery and fornication in their romantic relationships, often monogamous in nature, the only difference is reductive idiocy that because they cannot procreate that their acts must be unnatural, or that somehow only male/female coitus can be natural, which then condemns anal and oral sex (though even that can be selective if the idea is that any act in the marital bed is no longer condemned, which would justify marital rape alongside anal and oral intercourse)

You keep assuming the truth of your claim instead of actually presenting even an iota of something resembling an argument for why one should take this to be the case, even within the bounds of "Christianity", which is a fragmented and messy religious perspective that can only be pinned down by simplistic appeals to orthodoxy and demands of obedience to a standard that is found authoritative per arguments from ignorance and incredulity[/QUOTE]

RestoreTheJoy said:

Well, if you believe erroneously that this passage condemns only rape - a revisionist theology that has become popular among some circles - then you are correct. Rape is already condemned and is already criminal.

But that isn't what this passage or the other relevant ones say, and it is not what the totality of scripture teaches. Ignore at your peril (if in the Church).

Click to expand...

Oh, but rape isn't universally condemned in the bible, especially not if you remotely would accept that some Mosaic law is still applicable (not the priestly stuff, none of that is really part of the passages in the Bible that say some rape is not criminal according to that law put in place and all of it done by men, conveniently, because women apparently couldn't rape according to ancient ISrael).

But if you want to selectively ignore the passages that permit rape under the auspices of a man taking care of his "wife" that he was essentially given by God and don't even punish rape equally based on the context of whether it took place in the countryside or in the city, then be my guest, but I never took your holy book seriously in the first place for anything resembling morality that isn't incidentally in agreement with rational evidence based standards rather than ethical subjectivism where God is the subject declaring and commanding things and they are good because of God being tautologically defined as perfect to begin with.

But the passage isn't talking about sexual orientation, it's talking about sexual behavior and homosexual rape is something I would condemn. To suggest that the violation was rooted in some human nature that requires people to be straight is insinuating your modern, yet still antiquated patriarchal ideas that someone is somehow wrong if they don't fit into your little box that everyone should be in to be "right"

And to act like Sodom was remotely having people in the kind of relationships we see gay people in today, which only differ superficially from straight relationships is again insinuating something that isn't evidenced in the verses as referring to generally bad behaviors, but not anything so broad as just being gay in a way that is indistinguishable from being straight, but outright violating people's dignity by rape, sexual harassment, etc.

NBB said:

You have to see their 'pride' parades, grown adults showing their parts to children in the street, and we need to reconcile any of this with the gospel? in what gospel we are believing... do me a favour.

Click to expand...

I've watched a pride parade. Pretty entertaining. Never saw any private parts though. A person can see way more with the Yearly Naked Bike Ride that draws thousands of riders. Unfortunately canceled this year. Both are a ton of fun.

NBB said:

You have to see their 'pride' parades, grown adults showing their parts to children in the street, and we need to reconcile any of this with the gospel? in what gospel we are believing... do me a favour.

Click to expand...

My sense is that you shouldn't go to one than. But also, what's a Christian to do with a changing society around them? Religions change over time.

NBB said:

I definetely don't hate them, love is too telling the truth. Love for you is that i accept a sin as ok and approve? no i disapprove.

Click to expand...

men who sexually assault children or who beat their wives claim that both are expressions of love as well.

dlamberth said:

I've watched a pride parade. Pretty entertaining. Never saw any private parts though. A person can see way more with the Yearly Naked Bike Ride that draws thousands of riders. Unfortunately canceled this year. Both are a ton of fun.

Click to expand...

I remember seeing bits of one when I was on a school trip that took us up to New York, and it was brief and I was a sheltered kid, so I just had a reaction of, "Haha, it sounds fun," or something that might've been insensitive, I don't remember (probably more open minded already at that age of 15 or so)

Not sure where anyone gets the idea that a pride parade can get away with violating public nudity laws, because I'm pretty sure they can't

SilverBear said:

men who sexually assault children or who beat their wives claim that both are expressions of love as well.

Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with what is being discussed here, i don't hate them, but calling what is good bad and bad good is dangerous spiritually and not only that if you say something you are hater and bigot, the only thing i have say is that God may have an issue with all this, and now i'm a hater... but someone that warns you of your bad path that can lead you to a bad result is actually your ally i would say.

NBB said:

This has nothing to do with what is being discussed here, i don't hate them, but calling what is good bad and bad good is dangerous spiritually and not only that if you say something you are hater and bigot, the only thing i have say is that God may have an issue with all this, and now i'm a hater... but someone that warns you of your bad path that can lead you to a bad result is actually your ally i would say.

Click to expand...

who has called you a hater?

SilverBear said:

I've been to may and have never seen that. I did see it the time i went to Mardi Gras but i am sure it was heterosexuals exposing themselves there.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that... but why they didn't stop them then, you see this kind of stuff at a 'family' parade?
I actually never went to one but i say videos myself about this, not funny at all.

SilverBear said:

who has called you a hater?

Click to expand...

"You compare me with people who beat their kids and wife to call that expressions of love"
This has nothing to do with disliking the whole ordeal and disapproving promotion of sin and calling what is good bad and bad good.

NBB said:

I don't know about that... but why they didn't stop them then, you see this kind of stuff at a 'family' parade?
I actually never went to one but i say videos myself about this, not funny at all.

Click to expand...

maybe you you should see for yourself. there are plenty of groups that edit in things to such videos to stir up anti-gay sentiment.

NBB said:

"You compare me with people who beat their kids and wife to call that expressions of love"
This has nothing to do with disliking the whole ordeal and disapproving promotion of sin and calling what is good bad and bad good.

Click to expand...

i made no such comparison nor did i ever suggest you enrage in violence against anyone

SilverBear said:

maybe you you should see for yourself. there are plenty of groups that edit in things to such videos to stir up anti-gay sentiment.

Click to expand...

I don't want to say you are a liar, but this videos had very convincing evidence, youtube probably removed them all though since that last scandal with kids abuse they just swiped the whole site of things like this.

dlamberth said:

My sense is that you shouldn't go to one than. But also, what's a Christian to do with a changing society around them? Religions change over time.

Click to expand...

There plenty of reasons, God morals don't change, after you meet Jesus you could start to think what the bible says is true about issues in the NT, the gospel is power of God to save and change lives, is not just a belief system, the bible also says this may seem crazy for the people who don't believe etc.

NBB said:

I don't know about that... but why they didn't stop them then, you see this kind of stuff at a 'family' parade?
I actually never went to one but i say videos myself about this, not funny at all.

Click to expand...

Just curious, if this actually happened, other than the sensitivities of some, did it really hurt anyone?

dlamberth said:

Just curious, if this actually happened, other than the sensitivities of some, did it really hurt anyone?

Click to expand...

This is not ok... a lot of parents if some stranger showed their things to their kids who have had very violent reactions, and with reasons... do me a favour...