Then I respectfully submit to you that you do not understand what is bigotry and are ironically and hypocritically displaying an appalling practice of that which you report to disdain.Well, if I'm understanding some of the responses I've had then, yes.
If telling someone that their consenting, loving relationship is an abomination isn't bigotry then I don't know what is.
It appears you've based your position on a red herring: it is not love that the dissent considers the abomination; it is the homosexual sex. It is not the person; it is the behavior and I will add the enormous and unjust influence such a small percentage of the population has in political and social discourse in what is supposed to be a pluralistic democratic society.
I will concede some of the posts I read do reflect an inappropriate contempt for people, not sinful behavior, but I see that mainly as poor wording, not actual functions of God's moral code.
Immaterial.I know a gentleman that is Gay. He is...
Sound thought, discourse, politics, and social policy is not based on personal anecdotal experience. For every wonderful, beautiful, warm, fuzzy, and nice smelling homosexual you cite I can cite one that is ugly, cold, prickly, and smelly and we'll get nowhere. Can you reason through your own positon, forming a polite and respectful, reasonable and rational, cogent and coherent case for what you believe? If so then I'm all eyes but so far this looks like Christian-bashing and that makes you much like those you wish to judge. You've already asserted one red herring and one appeal to personal experience. Certainly you can see, now those erros have been noted, you've got to have a better argument than the one presented so far. Yes?
Sound morality, sound politics, nor sound social policy is based on your personal appeals to conscience or imagination. What you're implicitly arguing is everyone must have a conscience like yours, everyone must imagine like you do. The despotism, Brutus.I cannot in good conscience imagine...
Don't be yadda yaddaing people's beliefs, Brutus. That is rude and disrespectful bigotry and hatred.Yes, it is said in Leviticus and other places that man must not lay with man yadda yadda yadda...
Breath.
If you cannot contribute your half of this conversation without mockery then I suggest you don't. At least not until you can have the conversation without such fallacious arguments.
The fact of the matter is the OT code did prohibit same-sex sex but it also required all capital cases to be witnessed by two or more people. The necessary implication of these two laws is that 1) God knew homosexual sex existed, 2) He prohibited, and 3) restricted it to the privacy of the individuals and did not allow it in public where two or more would or could observe it.
But persecutorial, bigoted, and hateful people don't consider the whole of God's law; they selectively copy and paste the parts they like to use to justify their misbegotten views.
Well, you can but either you won't or you haven't been presented a case that would rationally persuade you to reconsider your position....I can't see a way around that not being hideously wrong.
You eternal disposition is not dependent upon politics or social policy. That's where you go with this. Here you've got a false cause fallacy going.So, if my spiritual journey brings me to Christ then, where do I go? What do I do? The thread was asking how others have grappled with this.
If you sincerely believe in God and His resurrected Son Jesus then that's where you start. Everyone who has ever become a Christian has had to deal with the fact their prior views and prior ways of living warranted change, sometimes severe change. Augustine wrote of this eloquently. Paul the apostle himself wrote of this experience and declared to all he'd struggled long and hard knowing that which he wanted to do he did not do and that which he did not want to do he did.
So....
1) Let's normalize this. Your question about change is valid. It is also not just common but probably inextricable with conversion to Christianity.
2) Fallacy should be avoided.
3) You have the wonderful opportunity to experience the very concern about which you are inquiring! You're going to have to change your thinking... whether you remain agnostic or not .
4) Figure out whether you actually truly sincerely want an answer to your inquiry. Is there any genuine desire to discuss the matter? Can you do so within the limits of a text-based internet because most here post small and that's probably not going to be very effective for this topic.
5) If you can in good conscience authentically do the above then I'll do what I can to provide a reasonable and rational basis for a Bible-based Christian position.
But if you're just angry, or you're just trolling, or you're not really interested in discussion then do please let me know now and I'll move on.
You already know something of what the Bible states. So let's start with the simple premise it is God, not Christians, Who considers same-sex sex sinful (unrighteous, lawless, disobedience, etc.). Since you're not sure God exists you're probably not going to take up the matter with Him so you've got the diversity of Christians with which to have this conversation. You're not going to get a monolithic response but all you need is one single reasonable and rational case. You up for that?
Upvote
0