3 "phobic" VALUES OF GOD

[Douglas Hendrickson]

In America we have freedom of religion as a fundamental right, and it has always been so.

"Hate the sin, love the sinner". You know, that doesn't even appear in the Bible. Augustine said it. And in my experience, it never works that well.

It doesn't work that well when the SINNER INSISTS IT IS HIS VERY NATURE TO DO THE SIN.
IF that is accepted as true, then since the sinner IS the sin, if it must be accepted it means the person stands in condemnation by God, and not merely his action is wrong, he is WRONG IN HIS VERY BEING.

 

[FireDragon76]

Do you agree with this article?

Arguing Against Homosexuality Based On Its "Yuck Factor" is Gross

From a purely pragmatic perspective, it is a dumb thing to argue in this day and age.

Conversely, in my experience, it works extremely well.

OK. My perspective is that people are what they do, at least that is our common sense understanding. So it's bound to introduce potential cognitive distortions, such as we see when people get so pathologically angry over a "gay agenda". We are very bad at appreciating the value of a person as a person.

 

[Sammy-San]

From a purely pragmatic perspective, it is a dumb thing to argue in this day and age. But some people just like reveling in the visceral feeling of righteousness, I guess, at condemning


OK. My perspective is that people are what they do, at least that is our common sense understanding. So it's bound to introduce potential cognitive distortions, such as we see when people get so pathologically angry over a "gay agenda". We are very bad at appreciating the value of a person as a person.

What is a dumb thing to argue?

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

From a purely pragmatic perspective, it is a dumb thing to argue in this day and age.

OK. My perspective is that people are what they do, at least that is our common sense understanding. So it's bound to introduce potential cognitive distortions, such as we see when people get so pathologically angry over a "gay agenda". We are very bad at appreciating the value of a person as a person.

When a person dis-values themselves so much they even insist they ARE SIN INCARNATE, then the reprobate mind has triumphed indeed.

 

[FireDragon76]

What is a dumb thing to argue?

The "yuck" factor. I think it assumes everyone has the same sense of visceral revulsion. In this day and age, they don't.

Plus, it could potentially open somebody up to just being seen as ignorant. It's based on stereotypes of gay sex that don't even apply to many gays or lesbians. It's far more intellectually honest just to argue on theological grounds.

 

[FireDragon76]

When a person dis-values themselves so much they even insist they ARE SIN INCARNATE, then the reprobate mind has triumphed indeed.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Who is insisting they are sin incarnate?

Is this another ignorant jab at my title, "sinning boldly"? Do you realize that is a statement of humility and trust in Christ alone?

 

[Sammy-San]

The "yuck" factor. I think it assumes everyone has the same sense of visceral revulsion. In this day and age, they don't.

Plus, it could potentially open somebody up to just being seen as ignorant. It's based on stereotypes of gay sex that don't even apply to many gays or lesbians. It's far more intellectually honest just to argue on theological grounds.

What is your flaw with it? That sexuality isn't gross? I don't know about that.

 

[FireDragon76]

What is your flaw with it? That sexuality isn't gross? I don't know about that.

Gross is subjective now days.

 

[Sammy-San]

The "yuck" factor. I think it assumes everyone has the same sense of visceral revulsion. In this day and age, they don't.

Plus, it could potentially open somebody up to just being seen as ignorant. It's based on stereotypes of gay sex that don't even apply to many gays or lesbians. It's far more intellectually honest just to argue on theological grounds.

What about homosexuality not being a hygenic practice?

 

[Sammy-San]

Gross is subjective now days.

I'm talking about bibically.

 

[FireDragon76]

I'm talking about bibically.

I don't want to go there. Esp. because statements of what my church actually believes easily takes us into controversial territory (we actually have no one specific authoritative statement on this topic that is binding).

 

[Sammy-San]

I don't want to go there. Esp. because statements of what my church actually believes are against the forum rules.

They believe it's okay?

You can word it in a way that doesn't promote it, i guess.

 

[FireDragon76]

What about homosexuality not being a hygenic practice?

Straight sex is not exactly a hygenic practice, either. And like I said, that's a stereotype of gay sex.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

I have no idea what you are talking about. Who is insisting they are sin incarnate?

Is this another ignorant jab at my title, "sinning boldly"? Do you realize that is a statement of humility and trust in Christ alone?

No it is not a jab at your "sinning boldly."

What I am referring to is SINNING without repentance, where the sin is said to be indistinguishable from the sinner, that it is his very nature, or incarnate in him.

 

[FireDragon76]

They believe it's okay?

You can word it in a way that doesn't promote it, i guess.

Officially, we in the ELCA do not have a binding statement on the ethics of homosexuality. Some consider it unethical and sinful, others do not. We agree to disagree.

We all in the ELCA agree that gays deserve respect, dignity, and the protection of the law. We just don't agree beyond that. We are having a conversation about it. I saw it in my own pastor after there was the mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub near our church. And truthfully, moralism has never been an emphasis in our church. Mostly it's considered a difficult conversation that would be reserved for situations where it is pastorally appropriate.

 

[FireDragon76]

No it is not a jab at your "sinning boldly."

What I am referring to is SINNING without repentance, where the sin is said to be indistinguishable from the sinner, that it is his very nature, or incarnate in him.

Like it or not, that is our common sense psychological approach to the world. That our habits make us who we are.

 

[Sammy-San]

Straight sex is not exactly a hygenic practice, either. And like I said, that's a stereotype of gay sex.

So sexuality itself isnt hygenic and that doesnt apply to homosexuality in a remarkable way?

 

[FireDragon76]

So sexuality itself isnt hygenic and that doesnt apply to homosexuality in a remarkable way?

At least, it's not something I find persuasive just based on the merits of hygene alone. Alot of other unhygenic things aren't sinful.

People end up in the emergency room from straight sex. Sometimes with serious injuries. You rarely hear about it though, perhaps for obvious reasons (we just don't talk alot about sex period). One reason I don't like the "yuck" and "hygene" arguments. The more you know about sex in general, the less appealing those arguments are.

 

[Sammy-San]

At least, it's not something I find persuasive just based on the merits of hygene alone. Alot of other unhygenic things aren't sinful.

People end up in the emergency room from straight sex. Sometimes with serious injuries. You rarely hear about it though, perhaps for obvious reasons (we just don't talk alot about sex period). One reason I don't like the "yuck" and "hygene" arguments. The more you know about sex in general, the less appealing those arguments are.

What's the main issue? That it isnt proper? To me that is the issue-what God says is proper or not.

But then again I've heard people say improperly before married implying sex between a husband and wife is not sinful but improper.

 

[FireDragon76]

BTW, I am pretty sure the biblical prohibitions on a lot of things as abomination, "to'evah", has to do with the confusion of categories, not hygene. Maimonedes was probably the first to try to argue hygene was the basis of alot of Torah, but he was a rationalist.