Homosexuality, Immorality and Christianity

T

truth

Registered Senior Member
I have often asked myself this question and with the issue of the gay Episcopalian Bishop election, how do those who follow Christ reconcile homosexuality and fornication practices when it so forcefully condemned in the Bible?

I ask this question in all seriousness because I have found it quite perplexing, and would like a serious answer. This thread is not a troll, I do not intend it to be so. I am not looking for an argument, bashing, or anything of the like. Please do not bash or ridicule, please post respectfully.

My own point of view is that homosexuality, fornication, adultery, etc. are all wrong and immoral. My view is love the sinner and hate the sin. I am not judging, not my place and heaven knows I better not be throwing stones. Christ loved all without regard, but condemned these things either by declaring it Himself or through His apostles. I am genuinely interested to know, again please be respectful, I am not judging, but asking to understand, I am not here to change anyone. Thank you.
 
I was surprised too at hearing a gay bishop being appointed.

" I have often asked myself this question and with the issue of the gay Episcopalian Bishop election, how do those who follow Christ reconcile homosexuality and fornication practices when it so forcefully condemned in the Bible?"

Well, to be a homosexual,and preform homosexual acts are 2 different things. It is immoral to be homosexual but thats the way life is. Its immoral to curse, steal etc, yet people do it and does that mean they are more excused then the bishop? That problem could very well be his "cross".
But the problem is what is he doing about it? Im not judging him or calling him evil, i just think that he kind of made a mitake of announcing it. Its kind of setting a bad example, in my opinion its even like a comerial. Its delivering the wrong message to people, its saying that homosexuality is okay.
These are my views, and as i said, im not judging him or calling him worse and more evil than others, since we ALL have our dark little problems.
 
You are right Smith, I probably should have clarified it more, though I kind of look at it with regards to "He that lusteth after a woman, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." There certainly is a difference between practicing and feeling that way, with any type. I am speaking of the sexual issues, I think most people will agree that stealing, murder, etc. are wrong. I am thinking more in terms of practicing homosexuality or fornication, etc. I am cetainly not judging, not my place, nor would I want that job, Christ commanded us to forgive and not judge the person, but stated what acts were wrong.
 
How can homosexuality be immoral?

Maybe I need someone to define the very meaning of the concept moral to me?

What more is immoral according to you?
 
In this case God, or God through his apostles, said don't do it. That's how I view it.
 
for your robban

Morality
mo·ral·i·ty (m-rl-t, mô-) n. pl. mo·ral·i·ties : An an entirly arbitrary system of values whereby actions are judged as right or wrong with no qualifying criteria to back up said values. ie "There is nothing inherently bad about homosexuals except that they are not moral."

does that clear things up?
 
Moral is a hard wired attribute to any human being. Each person moral differ from the other, while they all seem to share many common points. But for example, a retarded person have a different moral makeup than a sane. How do we know if this moral exist or not within us, we have to test it. For example, when I listen to my mother and that put a smile on her face, I feel right. My moral system is happy, I have agreed with it. When I yell at my mom, it feels awfull, my moral is not happy, I'm going againest my code. When my 2 year old goes to the toilet to drink from it, he think he's not doing anything wrong, only mommy says it's wrong, but his moral system doesn't oppose it. He is doing nothing immoral.

Same for gays, If a gay person can tell me that they have complete inner peace with themselves and feel that what they are doing is 100% right, then they are going with their moral and it's moral to be gay, but of course they could be lying to themselves, but I wouldn't know and it's none of my business, so is the reason for human judgement to see if humans acted right or wrong againest their own moral.
 
Flores:

Retarded and sane are not oppocites. Most retarted people are sane. Maybe you meant insane or demented or something rather than retarded
 
Spymoose,
It is really hard to tell what is retarded and what is sane and what is insane.....What I'm trying to get at is that people with disabeled functions have less moral responsbility than people with full able function. A retarded person might be optimizing his system and doing the best that he can, while a healthy peson can be an idiot who abuses all he got.
 
Flores: for once we agree :)

Conclution: blaming gay-people for being immoral IS by MY definition an immoral behaivor.

Saying that gay-people cant be x-ian is foolish. This is reverible: x-ian people can be gay.
 
Robban, that is my the point of my question. I am trying to understand how a homosexual, practising homosexual, fornication (pre-marital sex), etc. reconcile the acts, practices, whatever with what Christ said you should not do. You can certainly be Christian and be gay, what I am asking is effectively is what allows one to justify what they do, contrary to what they claim they follow, or more precisely what God commanded one not to do.

For example, if I stole money, I know it is wrong because God clearly said so. So if I engaged in fornication, adultery, homosexual acts, how do I in good conscience justify what I do with what I have been instructed by God not to do? I think everyone would clearly agree that if I stole, I am doing something wrong. What allows one to pick one part of God's commands to live, but disregard another. I picked gays and fornication, because I feel it is so prominent and so many feel it is okay and yet would not steal because that is wrong. Why the dichotomy?

This is what I am trying to get at. This is no judgment on anyone, or else I myself am a hypocrite and breaking a command not to judge or to forgive.
 
I think one reason that people will accept homosexual conduct as acceptable VS stealing is that in a theft there is a clear victem. You are depriving somone of something that is rightfuly thiers, and obtaining something that you did not have a right to.

With homosexuality it is difficult to find a victem (but there are several creative people who have tried) and some people are begining to get to the point where the search for a victem seems so hard that they cant even really beleive its wrong even if god says it.
 
I would guess that in the case of homosexuality, fornication, most likely the victim would be yourself, at the very least. I say that because you would be doing something you were told not to do.

This might be a very difficult question to answer. Please, do not take me as being rude or judgmental, it is just to me it all seems so hypocritical. A person says one thing and then does another. Or it seems like it is okay to pick one part of God's word to live, but this other thing does not apply to me. To me it is like saying, I will not steal, I don't think that is right, but hey, that guy deserves to have me quick his butt, so I beat him up. What's the difference?

I am being very sincere in my questioning, because I would truly like to at least know something about it.
 
I dont know Truthy boy, do you eat pork? Would you shun somone for shaving? Kill people who wear cloths woven of two types of cloth?

the bible is written so you have to live by some of "gods word" and not by others.
 
Originally posted by truth
Robban, that is my the point of my question. I am trying to understand how a homosexual, practising homosexual, fornication (pre-marital sex), etc. reconcile the acts, practices, whatever with what Christ said you should not do.
Click to expand...

I can't remember Christ having said anything about homosexuals. But if it's just the fornication aspect that you worry about, would it be moral for homosexuals to engage in homosexual behavior after having married one another? Or in other words would homosexuality be immoral if the church allowed homosexual marriages? It’s true that Leviticus condemns homosexual behavior, but it also names shaving and eating pork as equal sins, so are we to follow those too, or simply continue on paying the old testament very little attention (except perhaps when it serves our hateful agendas to pick and choose)? In this situation, would it not be the church, who denies homosexual unions, responsible for the immorality?


Originally posted by truth
You can certainly be Christian and be gay, what I am asking is effectively is what allows one to justify what they do, contrary to what they claim they follow, or more precisely what God commanded one not to do.
Click to expand...

Well God commanded man to do a lot of things, and I'm not saying any of this to be contrary, I'm genuinely trying to play the theology game on your own terms here, but a lot of what he said contradicts things he says later, and then things he says through Christ later still. If people tried to obey every word in the bible our own society would not look that different from fundamentalist Muslim nations. Women and children would be second class citizens, and subject to adult males whims, stonings would be common place, and our lives would be full of strange and seemingly meaningless regulations and divine dictums.

Originally posted by truth
For example, if I stole money, I know it is wrong because God clearly said so. So if I engaged in fornication, adultery, homosexual acts, how do I in good conscience justify what I do with what I have been instructed by God not to do?
Click to expand...

Well it could be done mostly through the reorganization that "sin" or disobedience of what God has told us to do through the bible, is an essential part of society. We've seen the world that such strict adherence brings, and chosen instead to act as though we are all good Christians and avoid sin and try hard to be righteous, but our very way of life is contrary to dozens of his teachings without a single tear shed, or thought given to the depth of our disobedience. The fact that we have created a secular government alone speaks volumes toward this end. We are a nation that has rejected God and theological morality as a valid source of authoritative power. We've recognized that building our society based more closely on laws and morals justifiable through secular or more logical means creates a better society for us than one based upon arbitrary, and often vague and even contradictory theological teachings.

Take a good look at the world man has built for himself, then compare it to the dark ages, or modern day Muslim fundamentalist nations, and ask yourself which you prefer. I’m not trying to make an argument for atheism with this (I know that’s very like me, but I’ve decided to play nice for this thread and won’t get into that) but just want to see if I can get you thinking about the nature of theological morality. If God is apparently a valid source of morality and authority, then you really must ask yourself if the bible is really his word.


Originally posted by truth
I think everyone would clearly agree that if I stole, I am doing something wrong. What allows one to pick one part of God's commands to live, but disregard another. I picked gays and fornication, because I feel it is so prominent and so many feel it is okay and yet would not steal because that is wrong. Why the dichotomy?
Click to expand...

Well, again it's just society's own way of tending back toward standards of morality which are justifiable through more secular, natural and justifiable (if not always completely logical or rational) means. Stealing and murder are external actions which harm your fellow man, homosexuality however harms no one, and unlike stealing or murder no one but those involved in the homosexual act have any stake at all in it. For those reasons murder and theft are obvious choices for labeling as immoral, and homosexuality is not, as it would take and extra intrusion into people's private lives in order to condemn it.
 
Are we absolutely positive that it is Gods words? That is it Gods intension to live by there rules?

Matter of faith, yes i know.

But you must never forget that these rules was written for another timeframe. It is not easy to apply 3000 years old rules of life into out modern society.

The rules say more things that is hard to translate into modern times, like:

- If you buy a a hebrew slave you must free him after sex years.

- The one who hits his father or mother shall be punished with death.

- The one who curses his father or mother shall also die.

- If a bull hurt a slave, the owner of the bull shall pay 30 siklar to the slaves owner.


When solving disagreal of financial agreement, the law-people always try to look for the intension of the agreement rather than split words.
 
[content deleted because spymoose is now somehow having his posts show up as mystech]
 
Truth,

Morality is concerned with the choice between what is right and what is wrong. Unfortunately mankind has yet to agree on what constitutes right and wrong.

There are two primary types of human morality, religious and rational.

Religious Morality.

Religious morality is a set of rules and guidelines defined and written by people who typically lived in a culture thousands of years before our own and where the dominant political control was authoritarian and usually barbaric compared to modern values. These were times where politics and religion were inter-dependent and political power was only considered viable if it had the support of the alleged gods or god concepts that were popular and/or fashionable at the time.

The rules were written as if they were inspired by supernatural forces to again add weight to their required authority, but ultimately the rules were designed to allow the ruling authorities (religious controlled) to control a largely ignorant populace by fear. A good example is the biblical ten commandments, which one should note are of the form ‘You shall’ or ‘You shall not’, as opposed to ‘this is good because…’, ‘this is bad because…’.

But what usually accompany such rules are the punishments for disobedience, and again the Ten Commandments are accompanied by suitable punishments which are often not highlighted by current Christianity because they are so obviously barbaric. Try this link and scroll down to the ten punishments. Eight out of ten demand death, but I do like number 10 –

10. Mal. 2:1-4: And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you. If you will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name,... behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces.

Hmm – looks like favoritism to the priests (the rulers).

http://www.positiveatheism.org/crt/whichcom.pdf

The punishment for homosexuality is of course death again – see punishment number 7 –

7. Lev. 20:13 :If a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.

Note that lesbianism seems fine, but then in past cultures women were not considered seriously and were commonly treated as lower class citizens or the property of men.

Rational Morality.

Rational morality is a code of values required by man for his survival, well-being and happiness. A rational moral code must be based on man’s need for objective values, and his needs to determine those goals that are conducive to his well-being. A simple example: Food is of value to man, he needs it for his survival, but poison is not. If man is to survive then he must value food and disvalue poison. Man’s evaluations of a moral code must be based on, and agree with those things that are actually of value to him.

Homosexuality.

Homosexuality and heterosexuality are lifestyles that provide mutual comfort and love to their respective adherents. Both have always been practiced and both are quite common in the animal kingdom, i.e. they are both natural.

But homosexuality appears to have been the subject of brutal discrimination because it is not the majority lifestyle and the heterosexual majority has simply bullied homosexuals into silence. But then minorities of all types have always been bullied throughout the history of mankind. This also seems to be a result of the natural evolutionary process of survival and where those that are considered ‘different’ represent an instinctive threat.

Fortunately those who have been able to rise above their basal primitive instincts welcome differences, variations, and newness as valid methods to increase knowledge and to increase civilized cooperation.

Unfortunately the primitive barbaric and intolerant nature of some religions especially Christianity and Islam reveal their ancient primitive roots and outdated thinking as they victimize and threaten others. As such they represent a direct threat to world stability and enlightenment.

The acceptance of a homosexual bishop shows some semblance of rationality within Christianity and recognition that common sense and modern tolerance can outweigh the primitive ideas of this redundant religion and its barbaric concepts of morality.
 
Well, my personal views on homosexuality are summed up rather well by a sticker I saw online once. "I'm straight, but not narrow." As to how a christian can be homosexual. How can christians go around with clean shaven faces eating bacon egg and cheese mcmuffins? Times change, morals are readjusted. Soon we'll have The New Testament. The third testament of the bible will reveal all the new laws we need for living in this digital age.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top