- Apr 25, 2016
- 34,234
- 19,070
- 44
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
If you're celibate, then I don't see why your sexuality should be incompatible with Christian life. There are many faithful celibate gay people.
Upvote
0
"My own methodology" directly from Romans 10? I guess you know better than scripture.
Paul IS an apostle, by the way.
And that assertion about Jesus is false also.
The Sermon on the Mount. Jesus tells them what not to do as well as what to do. Both.
Woman at the well. He tells her what she is doing is wrong FIRST.
16 Jesus said to her, “Go, call your husband, and come here.” 17 The woman answered him, “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “You are right in saying, ‘I have no husband’; 18 for you have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband. What you have said is true.” 19 The woman said to him, “Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship.” 21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” 25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things.” 26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am he.”
Woman caught in adultery.
Jesus tells her that He doesn't condemn her either and to "Go, and sin no more." He does not give her - or the ones who wanted to stone her - a feel good message first before delivering the command.
What you are saying is just not true. The Holy Spirit has to pave the way, or the person cannot even understand it, but if he has a heart to believe, the truth will take root.
If you're celibate, then I don't see why your sexuality should be incompatible with Christian life. There are many faithful celibate gay people.
I didn't say anything about celibacy.
I do not believe homosexuality is compatible with a Christian life.
You said:
My point is that promiscuous homosexuality might not be compatible with a Christian life, but not everyone - straight or not - is promiscuous. A celibate homosexual person is still homosexual, but might also be a faithful Christian.
I don't want to interrupt but I'm getting a bit confused.I don't understand. Are you arguing that a person who experiences attraction to people of the same sex, but does not act on it, can't be Christian?
Really?
On what basis?
and if I were to ask you about what might be acceptable to … ummm…. a theoretical Anglican church in Melbourne - what might your answer be?By my understanding, a celibate state is the only one considered acceptable on CF.
Just without any real evidence that the thing you're hoping to change has any actual negative consequences. Attempts like that aren't going to have the intended outcome. Instead of forcing the change you want to see, it just makes the religion backing up that intent look disconnected from reality.We've got a lot of people who still drink themselves to death too. One of my siblings, for example.
This doesn't mean God created some of us to drink and we just can't help it. The Church would do a great disservice to others if it told them that, that God created them to be alcoholics. And that's exactly what we are doing in this other context.
Most people know they have problems but how many of them will acknowledge that their own sinfulness has contributed to these problems?
True, but how are they to hear if not for someone preaching the truth?
Nobody is suggesting that we pat people with same-sex attraction on the head, tell them they can't change, and bless a promiscuous lifestyle for them.
I do not believe homosexuality is compatible with a Christian life
But I know that heterosexual promiscuity is also incompatible with a Christian life
The only states acceptable to God are celibacy and marriage to a person of the opposite sex.Like a heterosexual, a homosexual can be in any one of three sexual 'states';
In which state is he or she acceptable to your version of Christianity?
- Celibate - no sex
- Married - sex within marriage
- Promiscuous - sex outside of marriage
Sex is not evil; it is holy. It was created as a way a man and woman who are married can express their love for each other. This holy union that God created is defiled when people use in other ways than God intended. Christians must speak out against this defilement.I have to ask why there is such an obsession about sex within Abrahamic religions. Sex is viewed as one of the most evil things you can do. It's such a weirdly unhealthy view.
I respect your view as I am fully aware that sex outside of marriage, is regarded as a 'defilement' within Islam, Judaism, Christianity and Hinduism.Sex is not evil; it is holy. It was created as a way a man and woman who are married can express their love for each other. This holy union that God created is defiled when people use in other ways than God intended. Christians must speak out against this defilement.
I don't understand. Are you arguing that a person who experiences attraction to people of the same sex, but does not act on it, can't be Christian?
Really?
On what basis?
I'm not talking about celibate people in either case.
I'm talking about sexually promiscuous people in both cases. Nobody's sexual promiscuity is compatible with a Christian lifestyle.
Sixty-five years ago, if an employee appeared in a public Communist Party rally, almost any employer in America would have fired him. That's what the "Hollywood Blacklist" was all about. Employers today might still do so, depending on who their intended customers are.
It's nothing new.
Injustice is nothing new. I agree. And yet many old things have been abandoned in recent years because they have been considered to be injustices that need to be stopped. Why keep this kind of injustice going then ? Telling me it is not new is not a reasonable rationale for allowing a company to do something to a free citizen that the government is forbidden from doing based upon the inherent rights individual's possess. Let me be absolutely clear that I am speaking of the individual's right to engage freely in political speech and not defamation of the employer so that strawman that has appeared elsewhere( not by you ) is not totted out again. A private company has no more business infringing on those rights than the government does. We still retain our inherent right to free speech and in the case you cited freedom of association when we sell our labor. We are selling our labor not our soul. Would anyone contend that an employer was within its right to tell its employees that they may not worship with a particular denomination? or that they must not travel on vacation but remain local? Yet there are people telling me that the employer has the right to insist that an employee not engage in political speech that the employer disagrees with in their own time. How does the employer acquire such control over a free citizen's ability to speak? By the lame excuse that political speech that the employer disagrees with will hurt business. Somehow, political speech that the employer approves of is immune form hurting business and somehow, people that have no idea that there has been political speech by an employee of a company that they n most likely do not recognize as a part of that company will stop patronizing that company because that employee said something political (while not being engaged in the work he/she is being paid for) that the upper management of the company did not agree with.
In regards to the OP - Overwhelmingly in Australia,
a) Same Sex attraction is not regarded adversely
b) Those who choose to imbibe alcohol, with the exception of being drunk and disorderly, as being adverse
c) Living in an unmarried relationship is not regarded adversely
d) those having sex outside of marriage is not seen adversely - indeed the focus is on safe sex and safe relationships.
Given the above, Christianity is not in keeping with most of the Australian public and CERTAINLY NOT in keeping with the ethos of Rugby Australia's whos ambition is inclusiveness not ridicule, divisiveness, or finger-pointing that they are in some way bad. And that goes double when its the children of those who Christians are pointing at.