Creating an ideal world - homosexuality

[Norm d'Plume]

Hi. This is one in a group of questions I have related to a sci-fi book I'm writing that includes an ideal conservative Christian world called New Bethlehem. For more information about the book, please see my original thread here:http://www.christianforums.com/threads/creating-an-ideal-world-for-conservative-christians.7890296/

How should New Bethlehem deal with homosexuality? Should it be illegal?

Should the offender be put to death, as advocated in Leviticus 20:13 of the Bible: http://biblehub.com/kjv/leviticus/20-13.htm

What about those who claim to have been born gay? Should they be required to undergo reparative therapy? What if it doesn't work?

Since my main character will be a deeply-closeted self-loathing homosexual, is it a sin if he has homosexual thoughts even if he resists any temptation to act on them? What if he can't stop having such thoughts?

Thank you.
Norm

 

[Aldebaran]

Hi. This is one in a group of questions I have related to a sci-fi book I'm writing that includes an ideal conservative Christian world called New Bethlehem. For more information about the book, please see my original thread here:http://www.christianforums.com/threads/creating-an-ideal-world-for-conservative-christians.7890296/

How should New Bethlehem deal with homosexuality? Should it be illegal?

Should the offender be put to death, as advocated in Leviticus 20:13 of the Bible: http://biblehub.com/kjv/leviticus/20-13.htm

What about those who claim to have been born gay? Should they be required to undergo reparative therapy? What if it doesn't work?

Since my main character will be a deeply-closeted self-loathing homosexual, is it a sin if he has homosexual thoughts even if he resists any temptation to act on them? What if he can't stop having such thoughts?

Thank you.
Norm

Is this a story similar to "Brave New World", but with a twist in a different direction?

 

[Norm d'Plume]

No. Here's the premise:

Into the Mind of God is the story of Joseph and Apollo, teenagers who live worlds apart but share a common bond — both are visited by a being who calls himself God. God takes each of them on an incredible journey to fulfill their destinies. With God’s help, one leads a holy crusade to conquer a perilously divided galaxy, while the other founds a radical new religion to steer mankind away from the Apocalypse. Ultimately, their destinies will collide, something neither may survive. But is God a real deity, or the imagination of two mentally ill boys?

Norm

 

[Aldebaran]

No. Here's the premise:

Into the Mind of God is the story of Joseph and Apollo, teenagers who live worlds apart but share a common bond — both are visited by a being who calls himself God. God takes each of them on an incredible journey to fulfill their destinies. With God’s help, one leads a holy crusade to conquer a perilously divided galaxy, while the other founds a radical new religion to steer mankind away from the Apocalypse. Ultimately, their destinies will collide, something neither may survive. But is God a real deity, or the imagination of two mentally ill boys?

Norm

Sounds interesting! I wish you luck on writing this novel. I tried writing a book once and became overwhelmed, so I admire your dedication. Is this your first book, or have you done others?

 

[Norm d'Plume]

Thank you, Aldebaran.

This is my first book. It's supposed to be a trilogy, but I'm writing at a snail's pace, so I may be dead before I'm done.

Norm

 

[Resha Caner]

How should New Bethlehem deal with homosexuality? Should it be illegal?

Basically, yes. But your next question is more important.

Should the offender be put to death, as advocated in Leviticus 20:13 of the Bible: http://biblehub.com/kjv/leviticus/20-13.htm

If the Bible says that is the penalty, then that should be the penalty. But there is an element of "it depends". Does the Bible ever suggest mercy & forgiveness? And "illegal" means more than applying a penalty. Would their occupations be restricted, etc?

What about those who claim to have been born gay? Should they be required to undergo reparative therapy? What if it doesn't work?

I'm not sure exactly what "therapy" you're suggesting, but such things are usually a terrible idea. Is this going to be 1984 where you regulate people's thoughts, or is it going to be more pragmatic where you regulate their actions? Temptation is not a sin. Even Jesus was tempted. It's not a sin to have gay feelings/thoughts if you resist homosexual acts. The problem with being gay is not about who you are, but with what you do.

 

[Resha Caner]

But is God a real deity, or the imagination of two mentally ill boys?

That's a question many unbelievers ask, and one many believers wrestle with. It will be a challenge to answer it without being cliche'.

 

[Norm d'Plume]

Thank you for responding, Resha. I haven't figured out how to use quoting yet on this site, so please forgive me while I do it the old fashioned way.

I'm open to all possibilities as to how to deal with gays in this future conservative society. However, if I'm going to make homosexual sex a capital offense punishable by stoning, for example, then I should really be consistent with all other forms of capital offenses described in the Bible. There are many stoning offenses: http://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Stoning

Your first sentence states that the punishment should follow the Bible, which is pretty clear on the matter. But then you also say it depends, and I agree that the Bible is very much about mercy and forgiveness. Should we spare children/teens who were experimenting? Should we spare someone if it's their first offense? Should those who haven't been put to death be removed from society (e.g.., prison or a leper-like colony)?

I don't mean to pepper you with a million questions, but I'm trying to get a general sense of where the boundaries should be. In the book, I can't kill the gay teens in the story, since that would kill off several key characters. In their case, it's kissing, so that probably excludes them from capital punishment. What should their punishment be?

My question about therapy referred to gay-to-straight conversion therapy, which is still used in parts of the U.S., although it's increasingly illegal to force teens to undergo such treatments. At a minimum, though, I would think a conservative society would mandate religious counseling, since kissing could easily lead to banned sex.

I don't plan to regulate thought in this futuristic society. You stated that temptation is not a sin, which is fine for the purposes of the book. Being the crown prince in a conservative society that severely punishes gay sex is enough to make the character (Joseph) terrified of being found out. I want him to bear that burden and struggle to come to terms with it over the course of the story.

The last item, whether or not the teens are hearing God or are mentally ill, will be answered at the end of the story, but just for the two teens and for the reader. Society at large will be irreversibly changed by their actions (for better or worse), but it will be left to speculate forever as to what really happened.

Thanks.
Norm

 

[Resha Caner]

There are many stoning offenses

Indeed. Because no sin is greater than another (James 2:10). One of the keys to mercy is John 8:10-11.

What should their punishment be?

You're still focused on grading their sins. Of course it's your story, but that's not my point. To me it's irrelevant if the issue was kissing or sodomy. It's all the same. The difference is where it goes from there. Do they acknowledge their sin or do they defy the law and continue?

The last item, whether or not the teens are hearing God or are mentally ill, will be answered at the end of the story, but just for the two teens and for the reader. Society at large will be irreversibly changed by their actions (for better or worse), but it will be left to speculate forever as to what really happened.

I see. I like that you leave it a little open-ended. Things tend to go in cycles, and at the moment I'm tired of "save the world" stories. I prefer something more introspective ... but even my tastes change over time and I'm not a good barometer for what the rest of the book-buying public likes.

 

[Norm d'Plume]

Resha, thanks for your reply. The only reason I'm trying to grade the sin is because you said that mercy and forgiveness should be considered when implementing a clear rule from the Bible (put them to death). Does that mean the sinner will be completely forgiven? Would the sinner also be forgiven for murder as long as he/she acknowledges the sin and begs forgiveness? Of course not. So, if I'm going to show some form of mercy in this idealized society, it has to be based on other criteria.

Also, I'm not sure that kissing and having sexual relations with someone are one and the same. KJV says: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Who decides what "lie with mankind" means in modern English? The word lie is key. If they kiss while standing up, then they haven't violated the literal interpretation. If we're going to kill someone, I think God would want us to be very careful about our interpretation of scripture.

 

[Resha Caner]

The only reason I'm trying to grade the sin is because you said that mercy and forgiveness should be considered when implementing a clear rule from the Bible (put them to death). Does that mean the sinner will be completely forgiven? Would the sinner also be forgiven for murder as long as he/she acknowledges the sin and begs forgiveness? Of course not.

They absolutely would be forgiven. Where does the Bible say murder is an unforgiveable sin? You seem to be confusing forgiveness with removing consequences (punishment, etc.). And my point in quoting Deut 16:18 is that the law need not stipulate every iota. That is a Pharasaic approach. Rather, the judge decides the case based on what is before him.

So what would the purpose of the punishment be? That is the question you need to answer.

Also, I'm not sure that kissing and having sexual relations with someone are one and the same. KJV says: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Who decides what "lie with mankind" means in modern English? The word lie is key. If they kiss while standing up, then they haven't violated the literal interpretation. If we're going to kill someone, I think God would want us to be very careful about our interpretation of scripture.

Oy. You need to read Matt 5:27ff.

 

[Norm d'Plume]

We seem to be going in circles. You stated earlier that temptation is not a sin. Even Jesus was tempted.

Then you referred me to Matthew 5:27-28 - But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Then we have Leviticus 20:10 - And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

Then this: John 8:7 - He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

In Matthew 5:27-28, He says that looking at someone lustfully is adultery, which the Old Testament says is punishable by death. Jesus then saves the woman by telling the men that only someone without sin should cast the first stone. But in Matthew 5:18, He says "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

Thanks.
Norm

 

[grasping the after wind]

I think it is impossible to concieve of a utopian conservative Christian society . The two notions are contradictory. Conservatives do not believe in utopias. As for your notion that humans ought to be the agents of enforcement of the Law i.e. the biblical Law of God as opposed to civil laws established by governments, that is simply anti - Christian whether conservative, liberal or otherwise. The Adversary, Devil, Satan , whatever you choose to call that voice that accuses the saints, is the source of the idea that the Law needs humans to enforce the Law upon other humans. The Law is not there to accuse or punish, it is there to humble. As a huge number of all Christians, both liberal and conservative, are believers in salvation achieved by Grace rather than works the society you propose would hardly be considered ideal. It would more appropriately be considered some version of Hell.

 

[Resha Caner]

We seem to be going in circles. You stated earlier that temptation is not a sin. Even Jesus was tempted.

I did say that, but lust is not temptation. Lust is sin. Temptation comes from the object and sin from the subject. The presence of a woman may be tempting, but it is not a sin until you lust. You seem to be confusing all kinds of different things here.

I think all that has been quoted (Leviticus, Matthew, and John) fits together nicely. Are you saying you can't resolve those verses?

 

[Resha Caner]

I think it is impossible to concieve of a utopian conservative Christian society . The two notions are contradictory. Conservatives do not believe in utopias. As for your notion that humans ought to be the agents of enforcement of the Law i.e. the biblical Law of God as opposed to civil laws established by governments, that is simply anti - Christian whether conservative, liberal or otherwise. The Adversary, Devil, Satan , whatever you choose to call that voice that accuses the saints, is the source of the idea that the Law needs humans to enforce the Law upon other humans. The Law is not there to accuse or punish, it is there to humble. As a huge number of all Christians, both liberal and conservative, are believers in salvation achieved by Grace rather than works the society you propose would hardly be considered ideal. It would more appropriately be considered some version of Hell.

Agreed. Based on what Norm has said so far, his ideology probably fits better in the Fundamentalist forum than here.

 

[Norm d'Plume]

I must be missing something. Fundamentalists, Evangelicals, Catholics, etc. all consider themselves to be conservative Christians. Is this not a forum that spans that spectrum? What definition of conservative Christians are you using?

Also, I couldn't find the Evangelical forum you were referring to, but my understanding of Evengelicals does not include the other denominations. On this site, this forum is classified as a faith group, not a denomination. What am I missing?

As for the constant thrashing I'm getting for attempting to define a conservative society grounded in Christianity, I refer you once again to the Puritans. If they can come to America to attempt to create a more ideal life for themselves that revolved around their specific Christian beliefs, then it's a reasonable premise. The world I'm trying to define will be no more or less perfect than that of the Puritans.

I mention my desire to attempt to define a Christian-oriented government that blurs the lines between church and state, and I'm told I don't understand the Bible. Hard-right conservatives would like nothing more than to turn back the clock to a more Christian-friendly era. That's why they want prayer in public schools, the teaching of Christianity in school, the teaching of creationism, and the Ten Commandments posted on court buildings, among other goals.

When I was growing up, all stores were closed on Sundays to allow for the observance of the Sabbath. It was in the law that you couldn't be open for business, which was later repealed. That's a simple example of the bluring between church and state, based on Christian values.

If you want to keep telling me I'm wrong, go express your views in the Fundamentalism forum and see if they agree. Fundmentalists, who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, have no problem with the death penalty, regardless of how Jesus felt about it.

I have no problem with a spirited debate, but I do have a problem for being attacked because I'm trying to be inclusive of other conservative views on Christianity.

Thanks.
Norm

 

[football5680]

How should New Bethlehem deal with homosexuality? Should it be illegal?

Should the offender be put to death, as advocated in Leviticus 20:13 of the Bible: http://biblehub.com/kjv/leviticus/20-13.htm

It should be illegal and I would say the punishment for a first time offense should be some amount of prison time. If they commit the same crime again then the punishment should be exile or death. The goal would be to remove a negative influence who refuses to obey God from the society.

What about those who claim to have been born gay? Should they be required to undergo reparative therapy? What if it doesn't work?

Since my main character will be a deeply-closeted self-loathing homosexual, is it a sin if he has homosexual thoughts even if he resists any temptation to act on them? What if he can't stop having such thoughts?

I don't believe the "born this way" excuse and even if that individual believed it, they would still be expected to follow the law.

Therapy would be a waste of time so I wouldn't do that. If homosexuality is a choice then therapy would be useless because we cannot control free will. If they were somehow born that way, therapy would again be useless because the only way to change them would be to cause permanent brain damage.

We cannot really control what we think so simply thinking about it would not be sinful. We must put our temptations into effect for something to be sinful.

 

[Norm d'Plume]

Hi C.J. Sorry for the intervening post. That was directed at other members on the forum I'm debating with.

I freely accept your view that homosexuality should not be illegal.

Do you have an opinion as to whether homosexual "acts" should be illegal? Should homosexual acts be treated with capital punishment, as specified in the Bible? What about kids, who might be curious, kissing? Should their be an age limit below which kids would not be held accountable?

I'd be interested in your opinions on the matter.

Thanks.
Norm

 

[Norm d'Plume]

Thank you, football5680. I appreciate your detaild reply.

Norm

 

[Resha Caner]

I must be missing something. Fundamentalists, Evangelicals, Catholics, etc. all consider themselves to be conservative Christians. Is this not a forum that spans that spectrum? What definition of conservative Christians are you using?

I made a typo that I corrected. I meant the Fundamentalist forum.

As for the constant thrashing I'm getting for attempting to define a conservative society grounded in Christianity, I refer you once again to the Puritans. If they can come to America to attempt to create a more ideal life for themselves that revolved around their specific Christian beliefs, then it's a reasonable premise. The world I'm trying to define will be no more or less perfect than that of the Puritans.

I wasn't attacking you. I was challenging several premises of your story:
1) That what you were describing represents conservative Christianity. If nothing else, you should realize there is a great diversity of opinion among conservatives, so you'll probably not get a singular answer here. You'll just have to pick something.
2) I was trying to determine if you are presenting this society in a positive or negative way. It is a common trait of new writers to engage in information hiding. If you really want to discuss your story, you'll need to open up. I can understand you don't want to publish your plot arc on a public site. As such, you might be better off taking this to an actual Christian writer's group so you can maintain some confidentiality of the plot details.
3) I was trying to determine if this society represents your beliefs. If it doesn't, you must be very careful not to create a strawman. You must also be prepared for some negative responses from those who don't like how you're portraying conservative Christians. If it does represent your views, I'm not sure why you're asking others how to define it.