My point of putting that up is just a simple reminder of the Bible declaring something on the basis of discovery of the earth’s shape and rotation. 500 years ago, there was an equality debatable cause in terms of what the Bible says as the ‘truth’, and what the Christian fundamentalists think at that time of Galileo’s version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair.
As the Wikipedia link you provided itself says:
“None of these findings proved that the Earth moved, or directly contradicted Christian doctrine; all were difficult at first for other astronomers to verify. But they caused difficulties for theologians and for natural philosophers (the name given to scientists at the time), as they contradicted the scientific and philosophical ideas of the time, which were based on those of Aristotle, whose teachings were and are closely associated with the Catholic Church.”
The idea of geocentrism was never a Christian invention, but a very old belief that can be traced at least as far back as the ancient Greeks. And when enough scientists had confirmed the theory, it came to be accepted. To put the accusation of bias solely on the shoulders of the Church is unfair and inaccurate, when the majority of scientists did not accept heliocentrism yet.
And non-religious scientists are equally prone to bias and prejudice. For a great long time after spontaneous generation was finally disproved by Louis Pasteur, there were nonChristian scientists continuing to vouch for it. When did it finally die off? When evolution came along as an alternative theory which needs no Creator. So not all worldview bias belongs to Christians.
Besides, it depends on one’s own interpretation to decide that the Bible verses quoted in the Wikipedia link mean that the Earth does not orbit the Sun or rotate on its axis. What earth do the passages mean? The whole planet, or the soil and rock that remain firmly attached to the planet by gravity?
I’d rather we didn’t get into science and the Bible, as the issue is whether or not God’s laws permit homosexuality (theology). Even if science is brought in to say that homosexuality is inborn, that influences not whether is is right by God. Sin and geentic defects are inborn too.
Whatever excuse we try to make, the Bible’s credibility was already shattered back in the 300ADs at Nicea. No one dares to deny this, especially how the politics and the split of religion between the Roman Catholics and Protest-ants eventually influenced the landscape of Bible History.
I dare deny this. By raising the issue of Nicea, I hope you are not invoking the Da Vinci Code arguments! That would be a total noob move.
One very important reason that the Protestant movement got under way was the straying of the Roman Catholic Church from the Biblical teachings. Purgatory? Apocrypha? Praying to Mary? None of these practices are in the Bible. Thus it is very much a spiritual and doctrinal issue rather than a political one (as the Anglican split was).
Good anti-disclaimer. The mirror has two faces. Surprisingly, John 3:16 is overlooked again; better yet, I will quote to verse 21.16″For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.
20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.”
Homosexuals, CAN be Christians. If homosexuality is soooooo evil, then surely homosexuals would hate the light of Christianity? And we are sinning everyday, straight or not. Can we deny this? Small issues like being angry is enough. That is why God already said, we are saved by GRACE.)
I will quote verse back at you, Matthew 7:15-23.
15″Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21″Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
If God’s revealed will in the Bible is for sexual relations to happen ONLY in marriage, ONLY between husband (man) and wife (woman), and marriage is ONLY between man and woman… Ergo, homosexual relations are out of the picture. There’s my main point of personal conviction.
Grace is free, yes. But we must have a heart that is receptive to it in order to accept it. If our hands are held tightyly shut, how can we accept the present? Similarly, if we disregard the freedom from sin that is grace by continuing to sin, we are rejecting grace.
God sent His son to die for our sins. He was crucified for our wrongdoings. Every time we sin, we hammer those nails into His body. Having heard and believed the Good News of Jesus, how can we continue to sin and hammer in those nails?
Are homosexuals sinning every day? Straight out, I would have to say yes.
Even in the most SIMPLEST commentary on homosexuality in the New Testament, it is all about pagan temple worships. And that is only giving the SIMPLEST tip of the commentary. People would deny this for their own lust to cling on to prejudice. Even if Scott wants to perform some Bible bashing, I am almost sure, that his resources would come from extremist Christians. Extremist, because only people that has nothing better to do than to bash homosexuals would bother to bash it up. Neutrals theologians would agree too. Because when neutrals publish their research, they get bashed up by them too!
I could use that same kind of argument, that every interpretation of the Bible that supports homosexuality is written up by liberals, antinomianists and Christian-value-destroying-conspirators.
You say my research is bad, I offendedly retort that yours is bad. Where does it get us? Nowhere.
Read the Bible like a child, seeing the words plainly and simply. The passages saying that homsexuality is bad seem to say that, well, homosexuality is bad!
There is nothing wrong with loving those of the same sex. Jesus loved His disciples dearly. John calls himself ‘the disciple that Jesus loved.’ It is the inappropriateness of sexual feelings between the same gender that is wrong.
I will half agree. We already know that homosexuality are sometimes inborn and sometimes socially constructed. I will not deny this. But there needs to be a separation between homosexuality that is socially constructed, and homosexuality that is not. There are grown straight men who like experimenting, surely everyone know of this. Be logical.
And here it is that the truth is revealed.
No man, straight or gay or adult or young, should be ‘experimenting’ with anyone – male or female. The Biblical command is to reserve all type of sexual behaviour (and according to Jesus, even sexual thoughts) to one’s marriage partner.
Homosexual experimentation is tempting, in large part because of its forbidden nature. Just as underaged girls, threesomes, sleeping with the neighbour’s wife and voyeurism are all similarly tempting.
Even Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, the largest ex-gay ministry in the world, finally admitted he had not seen even one ex-gay in his life, and that they only choose to be celibate.
Separate what is external, and what is internal; being drunken and smashing furniture harms others. What great harm would be done when two men are together in a room watching a movie? (The examples given here thus far is still personified by dogmas.)
Yes! That is what I was talking about when I said that even being easily angered and drunken, I kept my fists down and my pants up.
We can have every desire, every temptation to sin. But if we resist it, rebuke it every time in the name of Jesus, then we will have overcome!
Let’s forgo the anger and drunkenness, and use the example of liking very young girls. Say I am born that way, that is my excuse. Now I write love letters to a pre-teen who is 20 years younger than myself.
Was a sexual crime actually committed? No. Will the parents get a court restraining order against me? Probably! The intention was definitely there.
Whether or not sexual acts were carried out is not the point of a spiritual discussion. Your use of ‘gay men watching a movie’ or ‘gay men going to the mall’ dresses up the heart of the matter in innocent and prettified coverings.
The heart is what counts – because in the end, the only thing separating two straight guy buddies going bowling from two gay partners is that the two gay partners have sexual acts together, or are thinking of it, or have the intention.
The question sadly remains unanswered. What is so sinful about one that has sexual and romantic thoughts about the same gender? The mind and the heart? Good. God judges us on that. So what is so wrong about homosexuals’ mind and heart? Sinful. If it is SOOOOO sinful, then show me words, printed in red, that CHRIST condemns homosexuals. Surely Our Saviour would mention it, since it is such a big deal!
Christ also does not mention aborting fetuses, taking drugs, smoking, drinking till drunk, racist behaviour, gender bias. So are these things also permissible?
What can be learnt is what Christ inferred by His example. In particular, what He DOESN’T mention bears note. Homosexuality was a major, death-punishment sin in Jewish culture. If Jesus condoned it, wouldn’t He have said something about it? Or Paul after that, when Paul spoke against other laws like circumcism?
What Jesus DID say is this:
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”
4″Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,'[a] 5and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'[b]? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”
7″Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
8Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
10The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”
- Matthew 19:3-10
Would this not be a perfect chance for Jesus to bring up the (purported) fact that He considers it okay for men to marry men? Husbands having husbands? Or at least an example of what He might say to permit it?
And look at what the disciples said in verse 10. If you can’t stick to the rules God laid down, don’t let yourself get into a situation where you’ll easily break the rules (e.g. giving in to homosexual tendencies)!
And besides, one can argue that homosexuality was SO TABOO in Jewish culture, it wasn’t even a question that Jesus had to address – everyone knew it was bad, just like murder and prostitution. Jesus focused on the more gray areas, like whether non-Jews can be saved.
Good, agreed. Now someone go and start a ministry on that. Billions are exposed to these stuff everyday! Heterosexual behaviour, as admitted here, is sinful too!
All sexual behaviour outside marriage is sinful. There’s a major war going on, between the liberal humanism values and Christian Biblical values. Nowhere is this clearer than in America and its media, as the country is split into Red (who voted Bush for his values) and Blue (who support gay rights and abortion).
This is impossibly shallow. The word ‘homosexual’ is only invented in 1869! What is read here is just another updated translation from an old source.
Then use the word ‘catamites’, which refer to the Graceo-Roman tradition of older men taking in younger males as proteges, and often, lovers.
why not reconcile the Fundie Christianity of today with the vastly different reality of the world? After all, we do not want to tell women to shut up because God says so in the New Testament, rite?
You’d be surprised… Brethren churches do not permit their women to lead worship, and they must wear coverings on the head (in practise, are encouraged to wear and the coverings are really small).
So should women be allowed to speak in church or not? Doesn’t that go against our modern understanding of equality and fairness? Just like how the church’s views about homosexuality are out of date compared to the reality of the world?
(But honestly, homosexuality was around at the time of the early church – it is by no means a new conflict.)
The bottom line is this: If God says it, I will obey it. So my personal feelings are that women who are shown to be good leaders should be allowed to be pastors. Why not, I say? Especially when the men are lacking in churches.
But if God made His will known, I would submit to Him. Who am I to question God’s wisdom and decision-making ability? I sacrifice my own stubborn, self-assured rightness on the altar.
Boy, this is really getting stale. Okay, I get it. I hear ya. The stories are stories of harm done to others. Vividly. Period. So tell me how two men in love harms others? Tell me! Pertinent questions remain unanswered. And dogmatic beliefs are used to be imposed again.
How did any of my examples ‘harm’ others? To recap, I said:
Next, we can attend services focusing on holiness in thought led by a pornographic website host. And then, learn about how to be chaste from 17-year old Ms. Shelley, who is pregnant with her fifth child of unknown parentage. Finally, let’s learn how to read God’s word as fable from an atheist professor of Higher Criticism and Biblical Deconstructivism.
In my discussion, the point is not whether homosexuality harms people. It is whether it is Biblically correct. It is whether it hurts God. If I blaspheme God’s name in a soundproof room, it doesn’t hurt anyone… Except God.
Simple because LGTs know God would not judge LGTs for being who we are. Just imagine, putting up a mask everyday, lying to everyone that you are straight when you are not, getting a girlfriend for the sake of getting a girlfriend just to prove you are straight, then breaking the girl’s heart when she knows you are gay. Denial, will hurt not only the self, but even others.
Who asked anyone to go pretend to be straight? The above actions are merely to fit in with the world, to gain man’s acceptance, not God’s.
Denial of self is my answer again. If I have a super high sexual drive, but am so ugly no one would marry me, am I going to visit a protitute? God gave me these hormones, surely He’d understand! I KNOW He won’t judge me!
That is what I mean a lot of times I said, DO NOT DEFINE GOD FOR OTHERS. This is our personal relationship with Him. Come to think of it, we are both guilty of this.
Agreed. I shall leave it at that. Your view of God is not the same as mine, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
The good thing (but also a bad thing with cults and all) about our way of faith is that we can question the status quo and judge for ourselves. That’s how the Protestant movement cast off the manmade traditions of Roman Catholicism, after all.
It is amazing. You have not even BEGIN to describe to me how homosexuals would KILL others. Molestation? Heterosexuals do it too! Influencing others? Would you be influenced to be a homosexual? Ouch and Ouch again. Name me one thing that is so bloody different about heterosexuality and homosexuality. Even heterosexuals have anal! This I believe is getting to be a pretty annoying presentation, still equating crime with love. It is not the orientation. It is the person! The mind and the heart!
Given that heterosexuals commit most of the crimes in the world. But as I mentioned, the focus I choose is on whether God accepts it or not. All my examples are meant to point out that what goes down right with God.
As I said earlier, as a worldly man I would see NOTHING WRONG with homosexual love.
Only as a Christian, judging by the Bible, must I speak out when people assume/preach that Christianity condones homosexuality.
Please forgive me if I’ve given the impression that I think homosexuals are evil. It was not my intention.
And the only ‘agenda’ homosexuals have is to be equal with heterosexuality. What is bloody wrong with that? And sorry, I do not argue with ‘God condemns homosexuality’ dogma. You got yours. People got theirs. Belief is hard to argue with.
The two can never be equal, simply because of genetics and physical aspects. My friend brought this up:
“So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.” - Genesis 1:27-28
And therefore, said my friend: “I fail to see if gay is natural, God will enable them to be able to reproduce, if not what for ask them to go multiply?”
Meaning, if God meant homosexuality to be the way of things from the start, then men and men or women and women should be able to have children.
At the very least, referring back to Matthew 19 above, God did not intend to have homosexuality from the beginning. Therefore, it is the result of sin and stubborn hearts, just as divorce is.
I think we are all guilty of that. Are you not doing the same thing? The truth is we still seek to use the Bible to validate our sense of selves. But the difference is, one is to AFFIRM. One is to CONDEMN. I wonder what God will say about this.
I could say I’m AFFIRMingthe church’s view that homosexuality is nonChristian, no?
Put it plain and simple. If God says it, I will follow it. Honestly. If the Bible says homosexuality is okay, I’ll accept it. That will gel well with my humanist view of homosexuality.
And on a side note, but based on the same principle, if global warming and evolution are proven, I’ll accept. And even if God, Jesus and the Bible are disproven… I’ll sadly accept it and move on with my life.
On a closing note, debating with you has been an intellectual challenge.
Not to equate you with a cult or anything, but there was this Ahnsahnghong member who could quote Scripture and debate and attack mainstream church practices amazingly well. He too told me that my thinking was tainted by prejudice and church brainwashing, and that I interpreted Scripture wrongly.
You are at least on par with that level of learning and conviction. And just like that guy, I have to say that your arguments are well thought out.
I recognize your conviction that homosexuality is not condemned by the New Testament. However, I do not hold that opinion, for various reasons that seem convincing to me.
I do not believe that I am influenced or brainwashed by any church or teaching… Honestly, I am a very free mind and wild card. No belief gets into my skull without debating the guards and winning first.
It was surprising to know that you have had experience with Edmund Smith. It would explain a lot of the remarks you have made about him.
In the end, remember that Christ gives us forgiveness. His blood covers all our sins, both the knowing (and repented of) and unknowing. It is clear that you do not feel that homosexuality is a sin in God’s eyes, and so I will leave it at that: It’s between you and God.
But still, I sincerely believe that we should strive for a righteous lifestyle, erring on the side of caution.
And in conclusion, let me restate why this series of posts even exists: I firmly believe that Christians who follow God’s word cannot commend homosexuality, although homsexuals themselves must be accepted with love. The setting up of a church that says homosexual behaviour is right by God is unBiblical and untrue to God’s Word. This is my personal belief, and I think it is soundly grounded.
SCOTT’S NOTE: While I maintain my personal convictions – based on Scripture – regarding this issue, I apologize for any hurt or offense I may have caused with my remarks.