Flawed Logic of Gay Christians

[Wiccan_Child]

Sorry but the 1 Samuel passage isnt about a man and a woman and the Genesis passage specifically is, your thinking is fundamentally flawed. Genesis 2 says God created woman for man to be united as man and wife, Jonathan was neither a woman nor a wife, so the passage doesn’t mirror Genesis 2. In fact David then married Michal so this is the bit that mirrors Genesis 2.

On the contrary, David left to live with Saul etc before being offered Mereb's and Michal's hands in marraige. Indeed, he only went to live there after his and Jonathan's souls were bound, which sounds an awfully lot like Biblical marriage.

But you are seeing sex and I am not, nor does it say David slept with Jonathan whereas we know when he sleeps with Bethsheba it says so. So I should think this is self-explanatory and not what you think..

I never said they had sex, nor that the Bible explicitly mentions them having sex. But given the nature of their relationship, it seem strange for a married couple to not have sex at some point. Moreover, we are told David slept with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11:4) because it is integral to the plot: she bears, among others, King Solomon. Since a gay couple cannot conceive, there is no need to mention sex.

But marriage was man and woman, as defined in Genesis 2 and as described in every Biblical instance. What you are doing is ignoring what the Bible says throughout to try and justify what you would like to see.

As I've said before, I do not believe the Bible to be true. If I believed the Bible depicts David and Jonathan to be heterosexual pals, I'd say that instead.

I think there are two reasons the Bible 'defines' marriage as between a man and a woman. First, it's the same reason incest is defined as a-okay in early Genesis chapters: there simply weren't enough humans to sustain a viable population if people were going to go off and not have kids. Second, heterosexuality is by far more common than homosexuality, so it makes sense to talk about marriage and so on from the perspective of the heterosexual. When a person makes the assumption that a man's spouse is female, that person is not automatically declaring homosexuality an abomination: it's just the logical assumption to make. Likewise, when Jesus spoke about adultery, he spoke of lusting after a woman. Does that mean he condones women (and, indeed, men) lusting after men?

So what, the disciples loved Jesus and Jesus loved the disciples. Love isn’t sex. When the writer of Samuel describes sex he writes that David found the body of a woman attractive and slept with her.

Which mirrors what Jesus taught , to love Him more than anyone.

But Jesus is typically seen as God made manifest; David was a mere mortal. Are you declaring David the messiah?

But infact I think suggesting they were gay lovers is a sign of massive disbelief and denial of the truth, and why the gay and lesbian thinking is such disbelief, because it makes assumptions on the back of ignoring what the Bible says marriage is, what love is, and the condemnations of same-sex unions.

It's not so much that pro-gay Christians ignore what the Bible says, but rather the disagree with the translations and interpretations used by their anti-gay counterparts. That is, whereas some Christians see Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1, etc, as condemnations of homosexuality, others see it as something else entirely.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Oh, I'll talk to you all day long. Just excuse me for not putting a whole lot of stock in your interpretation of the Bible when you dont believe in God or His Bible.

Which makes me wonder why I should bother talking to you at all, if you've already made up your mind to ignore anything I say. Exegetical analysis does not require one to believe the text is true: it doesn't magically change shape to believers, â la Stargate: SG1.

Next time I see a Buddhist, I'll say, "...Uh, excuse me sir, I think your Buddha beliefs are fairy tales and Buddha is a lie, but now let me tell you how Buddha wants you to live..." I bet he'll take my word for it and change his belief system based on my interpretation of his fake god.

If you can back up your claims with references to Buddhist literature and other evidences, then I don't see why he wouldn't. You don't need to be a Buddhist to understand Buddhist philosophy and teachings. Likewise, you don't need to be a Christian to read the Bible. The text is the same for everyone.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

This is nonsense. David and Jonathan were in no way gay lovers...they were very close friends. Here is an article that can explain this far better than I can, and explain it with alot less frustration. Read carefully...
http://www.tektonics.org/gk/gaydavid.html

See OllieFranz's post, which says everything I want to say about the article.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Wiccan_Child,

On the contrary, David left to live with Saul etc before being offered Mereb's and Michal's hands in marraige.

ok so he didn’t leave his father and mother for his wife, so the passage doesn’t mirror Genesis 2 as you incorrectly claimed.

Indeed, he only went to live there after his and Jonathan's souls were bound, which sounds an awfully lot like Biblical marriage.

No totally the opposite as marriage is defined in the Bible as man an woman, so David and Jonathan would be totally the opposite to marriage, no their relationship is very much like the disciples had with each and with Jesus and the women. Agape love is not sex, same-sex arguments are a perversion of love.

But given the nature of their relationship, it seem strange for a married couple to not have sex at some point.

But as we have seen their relationship is not marriage.

Moreover, we are told David slept with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11:4) because it is integral to the plot: she bears, among others, King Solomon.

Ok so that we know.

Since a gay couple cannot conceive, there is no need to mention sex.

a gay couple could conceive provided they are a gay man and a lesbian woman, if they want to use their sexual organs as God designed, or even nature intended, they could conceive. Gay mean having a same-sex attraction, so gay couple means two people having same-sex attraction, it makes no reference to the sex of the two people. Your thinking is gay, and not Bible based.

I do not believe the Bible to be true. If I believed the Bible depicts David and Jonathan to be heterosexual pals, I'd say that instead.

Again flawed logic, if you don’t believe the Bible to be true whatever you say the Bible says is therefore false.

I think there are two reasons the Bible 'defines' marriage as between a man and a woman.

So you do believe the Bible is true? Sorry Wiccan_Child but you have already said what the Bible says God created woman for man so you do not believe “there simply weren't enough humans” and nor do you believe “heterosexuality is by far more common than homosexuality,”

When a person makes the assumption that a man's spouse is female, that person is not automatically declaring homosexuality an abomination:

that’s gay thinking as a Bible believing Christian doesn make assumptions about it they can see that the sex of people to be in union is man and woman just as God’s purpose.

But Jesus is typically seen as God made manifest; David was a mere mortal. Are you declaring David the messiah?

Whats that got to do with the disciples loved Jesus and Jesus loved the disciples. Love isn’t sex. When the writer of Samuel describes sex he writes that David found the body of a woman attractive and slept with her. Which mirrors what Jesus taught , to love Him more than anyone.??

It's not so much that pro-gay Christians ignore what the Bible says, but rather the disagree with the translations and interpretations used by their anti-gay counterparts.

Yes but that’s what they think I and most Christians think that is satanic and not Christian as said by some of the Anglican leaders at GAFCON.

Sory but we hardly seem able to communicate with each other,

Which makes me wonder why I should bother talking to you at all, if

tell me what Wicans think of same-sex sex and we will tell you what Chistians think.

 

[kiwimac]

tell me what Wicans think of same-sex sex and we will tell you what Chistians think.

Sorry Phineas, the most you can do is to tell what some Christians think.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear kiwimac,
Granted, but maybe you can tell me why some Christians think like Wicans do on this topic and not like other Christians?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

ok so he didn’t leave his father and mother for his wife, so the passage doesn’t mirror Genesis 2 as you incorrectly claimed.

As I said, that Genesis 2 mentions men leaving for their wives doesn't exclude men leaving for their husbands.

No totally the opposite as marriage is defined in the Bible as man an woman, so David and Jonathan would be totally the opposite to marriage, no their relationship is very much like the disciples had with each and with Jesus and the women.

Can you justify this claim?

Agape love is not sex, same-sex arguments are a perversion of love.

The (God-inspired) Hebrew Bible begs to differ.

But as we have seen their relationship is not marriage.

On the contrary, I have given a number of Biblical verses that strongly allude to David and Jonathan's relationship being romantic in nature. You have done little more than say "Nuh-uh!"

a gay couple could conceive provided they are a gay man and a lesbian woman, if they want to use their sexual organs as God designed, or even nature intended, they could conceive. Gay mean having a same-sex attraction, so gay couple means two people having same-sex attraction, it makes no reference to the sex of the two people. Your thinking is gay, and not Bible based.

I think you knew what I meant by "gay couple". Two men cannot conceive a child, nor can two women. Humans are not natural transsexuals, nor can we reproduce by parthenogenesis: we require a male and a female to reproduce.

In any case, the Bible puts emphasis on sex being about breeding, so any sexual contact between Jonathan and David would go unnoticed.

Again flawed logic, if you don’t believe the Bible to be true whatever you say the Bible says is therefore false.

And you accuse me of flawed logic . I do not believe the Harry Potter books to be true, but I can still debate the Wizarding world's philosophies as depicted by the books. Similarly, I am undecided whether 1 and 2 Samuel depict actual events.

But so what? We are discussing the nature of the relationship between Jonathan and David. Does the historicity really matter to this discussion?

So you do believe the Bible is true?

No.

Sorry Wiccan_Child but you have already said what the Bible says God created woman for man so you do not believe “there simply weren't enough humans” and nor do you believe “heterosexuality is by far more common than homosexuality,”

Do not tell me what I do and do not believe. Heterosexuality is far more common than homosexuality: only 2-5% of people identify as homosexuality. There really weren't enough people to sustain a viable population without incest (as implied by the Bible, at least): two people as would have to resort to incest to populate the Earth. This is why incest was not forbidden till much later.

that’s gay thinking

"Gay thinking"? Is that the same kind as "Black thinking" as put forth by Martin Luther King, Jr.?

as a Bible believing Christian doesn make assumptions about it they can see that the sex of people to be in union is man and woman just as God’s purpose.

What a quintessential "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Yes but that’s what they think I and most Christians think that is satanic and not Christian as said by some of the Anglican leaders at GAFCON.

You're free to believe whatever you want. However, it is quite telling that the pro-gay side has the Hebrew and Koine Greek on their side, and all the anti-gay side has is ad hominems, emotional appeals, and slippery slope arguments (please, prove me wrong).

tell me what Wicans think of same-sex sex and we will tell you what Chistians think.

According to Wicca, sex is to be celebrated as praise to the Goddess: "Sing, feast, dance, make music and love, all in My Presence, for Mine is the ecstasy of the spirit and Mine also is joy on earth. For My law is love is unto all beings."

I am not aware of any Wiccan tradition that denounces homosexuality or homosexual sex.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Dear kiwimac,
Granted, but maybe you can tell me why some Christians think like Wicans do on this topic and not like other Christians?

Because a Christian can believe things wholly unrelated to Christianity, as can Wiccans. For example, I daresay there is at least one Christian out there who shares my belief that the LHC will not destroy the Earth this August .

 

[catlover]

Ollie-so Nakedness meant sex in The Bible? I thought it simply meant nudity...

 

[OllieFranz]

I'm sure that there are verses which speak of simple nudity*, but when someone speaks of the shame of uncovering a family member's nakedness they are usually referring to something sexual. I believe the idiom of the particular phrasing is similar to to our modern English phrase about airing the family's dirty linen in public.

* In fact, Genesis 2:25 comes immediately to mind. Note how the author makes it clear that he is not talking about the shameful type of "nakedness."

 

[MercyBurst]

Hello DMAGOH -- all good points no doubt -- but you are just wasting your time. Here is the whole gay debate in a nutshell:

The Bible tells us how to get to heaven, but it does not approve of gay sex. According to the gay affirmers here, the Bible has no authority because it was written by man. Even though it tells us how to get to heaven, it isn't reliable information for living our lives on the earth. There are some Old Testament verses that prohibit certain foods, and that renders all moral codes obsolete according to them.

Moses met God face-to-face and recorded what God said. There are people on this forum that never had this privilege, yet they can tell us what God really said. Supposedly God didn't bother proof-reading what Moses wrote, so the gay-affirmers are here to correct God's implied ineptness because he chose the wrong stenographer and didn't bother following through on His own dictation to Moses. Gay sex receives additional warnings in the New Testament from the apostle Paul and Jude, but that is rationalized away with gay-affirming footnotes.

ALL the translations got it right -- but never fear -- the gay pundits are here to tell you otherwise while discrediting YOUR faith that is founded in the authority of the Bible scriptures.

There it is in a nutshell. Your faith is built on the solid rock of scriptural authority, but their faith is built on the sinking sands of some gay pundit's excuses so they can ignore scriptural authority and serve their own sexual lusts.

I suppose they can justify just about ANY conduct the way it's rationalized on this forum. Once the Bible is placed in doubt there really is no bottom for human depravity.

Close the forum.

This thread concerns the flawed logic of persons justifying homosexual behavior. I have seen many reasons posted as to why people think homosexual behavior is okay. However, if these reasons are true, then the logic should follow through to all things. Here are some popular reasons I have seen posted, and why you cannot say homosexual behavior is okay based on these “logical” reasons.

• Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.

Flawed Logic: Jesus also never mentioned incest, polygamy, pedophilia, necrophilia.... are those okay too?

• Why would a loving God hate love?

Flawed Logic: If I love my sister and she turns me on sexually, is it okay to have sex with her?

• Animals do it.

Flawed Logic: Animals also eat their young and some female animals kill their male counterparts after mating. Should we do this too? My dog “positions himself” on my leg periodically… is he thinking sex with humans is okay, and if so, does that mean humans and animals can have sex since animals do it?

• It’s genetic; it would unnatural for me to be heterosexual.

Flawed Logic: Men turned on by animals and children feel the same way – it would be unnatural for them to have sex with humans or adults.

• You should not deny happiness to someone.

Flawed Logic: What if children and animals make me happy?

• Monogamous same-sex relationships are okay; it’s just being promiscuous that’s a sin.

Flawed Logic: So if I JUST have sex with my sister, and only my sister, is that okay?


In no way am I condoning any behaviors mentioned in this thread, just merely pointing out the flawed logic. If your reason for thinking homosexual behavior is okay does not follow through to all other activities, then it is flawed logic.

 

[brightmorningstar]

The Bible tells us how to get to heaven, But it does not approve of gay sex. According to the gay affirmers here, the Bible has no authority because it was written by man

Yes thats about it in a nutshell, thats why many debates come down to that very matter.
It also means there are two different worldviews being presented as Christian.

 

[CryoftheNation]

Yes thats about it in a nutshell, thats why many debates come down to that very matter.
It also means there are two different worldviews being presented as Christian.

Unfortunately the bible is the ONLY authority we have dealing with our salvation. Therefore only one of those world views can be Christian!

God bless

Simon

 

[MercyBurst]

Yes thats about it in a nutshell, thats why many debates come down to that very matter.
It also means there are two different worldviews being presented as Christian.

Two views indeed and it's always been that way: One view is the carnal view and the other is the spiritual view. One is wheat and the other is tares. By their fruit ye will know them.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Unfortunately the bible is the ONLY authority we have dealing with our salvation. Therefore only one of those world views can be Christian!

God bless

Simon

Unless they are both irrelevant to your salvation: whether or not Noah's Flood actually occurred is irrelevant to the fact that you are saved by the blood of Christ.

No?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Hello DMAGOH -- all good points no doubt -- but you are just wasting your time. Here is the whole gay debate in a nutshell:

The Bible tells us how to get to heaven, but it does not approve of gay sex.

According to you. Most other Christians would beg to differ.

According to the gay affirmers here, the Bible has no authority because it was written by man.

That's the non-Christian, not the pro-gay. The pro-gay Christian rejects the claim that the Bible is anti-gay, or that to be Christian requires one to reject homosexuality.

You really do like strawmen.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To MercyBurst and CryoftheNation.
True, the Bible is the ONLY authority.

So to Wican_Child

Unless they are both irrelevant to your salvation: whether or not Noah's Flood actually occurred is irrelevant to the fact that you are saved by the blood of Christ.

Both are from the Bible which is the authority of Christians.
Well scripture can be revelation and prophecy rather than actual history, but Jesus who said He shed His blood, talks about Noah and the flood, so why would you not believe one and believe the other?
May I add that Jesus Christ's teaching is for His followers to obey all His commands, not suggestions, commands. the suggestion that someone can pick exceptions of Jesus teaching they want to ingore is good reason to show they arent a Christian, as demonstrated by Jesus convesation with the rich young man who lacked one thing and tried ot justify himself. Followers may fall short but not for want of trying.

 

[KCKID]

Two views indeed and it's always been that way: One view is the carnal view and the other is the spiritual view. One is wheat and the other is tares. By their fruit ye will know them.

You and others on this forum might be in for a big shock on Judgment Day, MB. The shock for right now, however, is that many 'gays' are presently your absolute equal in God's eyes because of their heart condition ...NOT their sexuality. And there's not a thing you can do about it as much as you'd like to.

Have a good day.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To KCKID,

You and others on this forum might be in for a big shock on Judgment Day,

We expect to from what Jesus Christ teaches we fall badly short often enough, if you don’t good for you.
But we trust the blood of Jesus will avail for us and we will be told well done good and faithful servants for what we have done. I believe speaking up for the truth against homosexual practice might gain reward.

The shock for right now, however, is that many 'gays' are presently your absolute equal in God's eyes because of their heart condition ...NOT their sexuality. And there's not a thing you can do about it as much as you'd like to.

On the issue of homosexual practice, I think not based on the evidence given; based on what the Holy Bible says the wrong heart condition applies to those who push homosexual practice. How do you determine what God’s views on this are?

 

[MercyBurst]

You and others on this forum might be in for a big shock on Judgment Day, MB.

I don't think so, but if I'm wrong I get corrected, and God has a heck of a lot of explaining to do about stoning gay sex offenders to death. However, if you are wrong you lose everything.

The shock for right now, however, is that many 'gays' are presently your absolute equal in God's eyes because of their heart condition ...

You compare yourself to me, but I don't compare myself to you, and neither does God. God isn't in the business of making comparisons. He isn't a respecter of persons. So go ahead and justify your sins as rigtheous if that makes you feel better. You're the only one that cares to do so.

NOT their sexuality. And there's not a thing you can do about it as much as you'd like to.

God knows how to fashion one vessel unto righteousness and another unto destruction. There's nothing I really want to do about that, except take God's redeeming message elsewhere to someone who will listen instead of a forum that delights in justifying perverted sex.

You have all your excuses figured out and there is nothing I can do about that. THat is your issue to deal with, not mine.

Have a good day.

I'm doing quite well, trusting in the authority of the Bible as my promise for heaven. I don't know what your promise of heaven is and frankly I don't care what you think your authority is apart from the Holy Bible.