Will gays EVER be accepted by mainstream Christianity?

[KCKID]

The Mainstream Christian Church (i.e. the 'Christian Church' in general) appears to have an unshakable belief that gay people cannot possibly be Christians. Therefore gay people will always be regarded as 'lepers' because the mainstream Church believes that homosexuality is against the will of God and the actual practicing of such is a 'grave sin'. This is in spite of the fact that nowhere in the Bible is homosexuality referred to as a grave sin. This more comes from the minds of people who have received a life time of brainwashing into believing this. Where homosexual activity IS mentioned in scripture it almost always - in fact, PROBABLY always - refers to the practice of idolatry and not as WE today refer to homosexuality. There are those Christians who are so appalled at the notion that gay people might desire to integrate with 'actual Christians' within their Church community that they suggest gays start their own denomination ...minus the 'Christian' prefix, of course, which would be sacrilege. Such folks want nothing to do with homosexual people and their minds appear to be set on this.

Below is a recent item from The Guardian that tells of the plight of gay Christians in Uganda. In our particular neck of the woods (probably the majority of those of us who participate on the forum) gays have no fear of state imposed death or life imprisonment as do those in places such as Uganda. Gays do, however, have a stigma placed on them by most Christians that results in rejection by the mainstream Church and, indeed, by God himself. And, of course, the rejection of God is tantamount to death or, worse still, eternal torment. The latter makes the penalty imposed on gays in Uganda pale by comparison.

Will mainstream Christianity ever be accepting of people whose only 'sin' is that they happen to be gay ...i.e. an involuntary sexual attraction between two people of the same gender? If not, why not? Please, give your HONEST reasons.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/f ... ry-kampala

Sunday is a special day in Uganda, the conservative east African country that is threatening to put gay people behind bars for life. On Sunday you can see families flocking to churches all over the country for prayer, wearing their best clothes.

The sermons are predictable. Church leaders will pray for divine intervention against the corrupt leaders, poverty and the potholed roads, and then finally call doom upon the country's homosexuals who are sinning against the Christian God and ruining African culture.

But not at a tiny church tucked away in one of Kampala's suburbs. Here, gay people meet in devoted challenge to mainstream denominations that have declared them outcasts. With dread-locked hair and in jeans and bathroom slippers, members of this congregation would stand out in the prim and proper evangelical church I sometimes go to. I feel overdressed in my white dress.

"Here we are all about freedom," Pepe Onziema, a gay rights activist tells me. "It is a universal church. We welcome people whether gay or straight."

The gates may be open but the road to the church that calls itself a friendship and reconciliation centre is not paved with sleek cars or thronged with believers. The worshippers trickle in. They take their seats, but not before surveying the crowd furtively, trying to identify everyone. Their life depends on this vigilance.

In Uganda, police raid homes and arrest those they suspect to be gay. Homosexuality is an offence under the penal code. The president, Yoweri Museveni, refuses to pass a bill that seeks to strengthen the punishments for homosexuality to include life imprisonment, but isn’t under pressure to do so. Conservative Christian churches, under the auspices of the Uganda Joint Christian Council, refuse to accept homosexuals in spite of more gay-friendly approaches from parent churches abroad. The anti-gay furnace is fanned by American evangelical churches that have made it their mission to free Africa of homosexuality, saying it is alien to African culture.

The gay Ugandan church seeks to spread an alternative gospel of love and acceptance for all. On this particular Sunday, it is the memorial of David Kato, a gay rights activist who was murdered in 2011. So the numbers are bigger than usual. When the church was started by Bishop Christopher Senyonjo (who has since been thrown out of the Anglican Church for ministering to gay people), the gay community in Uganda attended devotedly. But with arrests and growing anti-gay sentiments, threats to their lives and arrests, fewer and fewer people come to the church.

"Our numbers have reduced ever since we started in 2008," Denis, the chaplain and a primary school teacher, tells me. "It is worse now that the bill has been passed." If Denis's employees knew of his orientation or his calling, he would certainly lose his job. "This is the only place we can feel at home. Here we can worship God without feeling guilty or fearing persecution."

Joining a gay congregation in Uganda is risky but Onziema says it is necessary in a society that greatly values community. For on Sundays, when many Ugandans spend time with their families, most gay people have nowhere to go. "Coming here lets us know that we are not alone and gives us the strength to continue the struggle," Onziema says.

You can see both hope and fear in the eyes of the congregation as they read Bible verses proclaiming God's protection over them and sing "What a friend we have in Jesus".

Here, there are no thunderous shouts of praise, speaking in tongues or Bible-thumping that is characteristic of the evangelism that is so trendy in the country. In the quiet worship of Uganda's gay community, there is a still hope and the kind of courage you can only muster after you have seen it all and there is nothing left to fear. Sunday is also the day gay people in Uganda cast off their masks to chat about the latest fashion, cars and celebrities.

"You thought we were going to pray that God stops the anti-homosexuality bill," Mugisha, the head of Sexual Minorities Uganda, asks me with laughter and mischief in his voice. "It will not pass. We do not need to pray for that."

Mugisha is for a moment free from his job, his life, fighting for the basic human rights of gay people. "I come here for the community. It is better than staying home alone," he says. As the service ends, members of the congregation are asked to say something in memory of David Kato, whose spirit of resilience they will need as they walk out of the church into their daily routine.

"We know he did not die in vain," Mugisha says. "One day we shall be accepted."

[KCKID]

For those that might be interested in viewing a popular weekly Australian TV forum/discussion program, in this case pertaining to the topic at hand, the below link will take you there.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3755423.htm

Q&A featured this particular program on 27 May 2013. That week's topic was Religion, Marriage & Euthanasia. The host is Tony Jones and the panel guests are Lawrence Krauss, Amanda Vanstone, Gene Robinson, Fred Nile and Susan Ryan whose credentials are given when introduced at the start of the program. The first 25 minutes of the program discuss homosexuality, the Bible and gay marriage. However, the rest of the program might also be of interest to those who choose to click on to the link.

[connermt]

[Replying to post 361 by 99percentatheism]

Did the Vikings rape and pillage before or after they became Christians?

I wouldn't know as I wasn't there. Neither were you. But thanks for accepting and bolstering my point that there are extreists in all camps.

Yes it [knowing what kind of behavior defines who a Christian is?] is rather really simple. Really.

Again, it's good to see common ground between us!

Per Jesus it is.

Unsubstantiated claim. Being that jesus wrote nothing of his own stories, that's not exactly true. What you're attributing to jesus should be attributed to the specific author of the bnook you're referncing

Heresy and false teachings by false teachers is seen even in the first century Church.

OK...... I didn't see anyone saying otherwise.

What is amazingly good about Christianity and Christians is that it and they call for self examination first and foremost.

First and foremost is a stretch, even on a good day. Take out the 'self' part of your sentence and you'd be on the right track. In other words, christians tend to like to judge others before looking into their own lives.

Notice I don't preach or proselytize here?

Not really, no but continue

I am not really confused as in confused.

Your intent is readily apparent. I didn't see anyone claim otherwise, but, that doesn't mean you're not confusd. Which you appear to be if you believe 'hate' and 'fear' demand anything.

A free press and assemblies most definitely have to do with the business of society.

Free press has nothing to do with this discussion. Bringing it into it only solidifies your confusion. I'm sure you know that civil rights are a part of society, not society as a whole. So yes, religion does tend to be a part of society, but not civil rights. Hiding behind religion to spout hate and condemnation is wrong - and very telling of the individual(s) that do so

What I see as unstructured is secularism.

You see what you want to see

Just look around at the world today?

Is that a statement or question?

The New Testament on the other hand is quite well structured.

As should any writing that's had centuries to be edited, added to, detracted from, translated and edited - all by long dead people. Why wouldn't they have structured it well?

If I don't I could get sued or lose a government contract right? But I am preparing my life for that anyway. Lot's of off shore savings accounts.

Has nothing to do with it, but thanks...?

I am always curious as to why so many people that post here address me so personally and so directly instead of just debating issues.

Perhaps because your approach is often times hateful & deceitful.

It's none of my business what people that engage in same gender sexual behavior do with their Sunday's. Or any other day. Unless they demand that I celebrate their sexual inclinations and behaviors. Then of course THEY have made it my business haven't they?

No, most of them haven't. It seems YOU'VE made one's personal decisions YOUR business. You keep spouting about gay people 'forcing' you to accept this or that and you have shown nothing - nothing at all - to show that is true, yet you expect us to believe you? No one can force another to believe or accept ANYTHING. You own glorified god given free will tells you that. So if you accept anything, it's by your own doing. Therefore, all your hate that's spilling out towards others is your own.

"Gays" demand that they have a congenital excuse and pass for their sexual sins.

That appears rather paranoid and self elevating. I know some gay people and they have never, ever, demanded anything of you. Even if they would have, giving 'a pass for their sins' is nothing you can do. Again, you're elevating yourself to a 'lord-type' of position. Which is very unbcoming.

You are seeking much more than just clarification.

Of which neithr you've provided. Only shreakin' hate from behind the proteted of thr 'religion vwall'

Same gender sexual acts have no support from the New Testament.

Therefore, it's none of your business since you 'affirm' the new testament.
BTW, you are aware that all claims in the NT of jesus saying this or that or believing this or that aren't of jesus, but the ones who wrote the NT, yes?

[connermt]

[Replying to post 360 by 99percentatheism]

So what (that Paul picks and chooses which of the laws in Leviticus he chooses to waive away, and which he wants to reinforce.)?

So what indeed. For this reason, Paul's a good one to follow

I compare marriage to monogamy and marriage is man and woman/husband and wife. For Christians.

Then to those who aren't christians, you have nothing to say.... which means many if not most gay people?

I don't live in a world where homosexuality factors into ti at all.

Then you might want to join the rest of us

All I know is that I cannot justify or excuse my own sins by pop culture or by any congenital excuse other than original sin.

Who is asking you to do such a thing?!?

What I do consistently condemn is lying and pretending that a lie can be the truth.

I would submit christians do that everyday of their life. Hypocritical isn't it?

[99percentatheism]

And even better, go to Matthew Vines' website and invite him or his followers here to enter this debate?

I just now sent an email to the address on the Matthew Vines' website inviting him (or others if they care to) to participate in this thread. So, we'll wait and see what happens.

Awesome. I can't wait to see how many texts they produce that clearly declares gay sex acts as something for The Church to celebrate and "affirm." And of course along with all of that exegesis will come all of the same immutable gender marriage quotes as well.

Why not invite Spong here too?

Unless these guys have written their own versions of the New Testament, I don't think Christian truth is going to be altered at all.

[99percentatheism]

connermt
[Replying to post 360 by 99percentatheism]

So what (that Paul picks and chooses which of the laws in Leviticus he chooses to waive away, and which he wants to reinforce.)?

So what indeed. For this reason, Paul's a good one to follow

Jesus picked Him out for such a purpose. Obviously he's a good one to follow. But of course not for anyone that pushes the gay agenda.

I compare marriage to monogamy and marriage is man and woman/husband and wife. For Christians.

Then to those who aren't christians, you have nothing to say.... which means many if not most gay people?

I never speak TO non and anti Christians. I just contend for the faith the way it was delivered. To homosexuals, I only talk to them when they demand that it happen. As can be seen in my "Gay Denomination" thread, I'd rather we exist in completely different addresses and theological positions.

I don't live in a world where homosexuality factors into ti at all.

Then you might want to join the rest of us

Only in what is a secular occurrence. I have no desire to ignore people in the public or business settings no matter how they choose and/or desire their sex acts with whomever they choose to engage in sex with. That is behavior that will never involve me whether it is actual or supportive. It is other-worldly behavior scripture wise and chosen by individuals and that is where it stays. It is no concern of The Church what non and anti Christians do unless they want to claim Christian support for their behaviors. Then it has become a matter for The Church to deal with.

All I know is that I cannot justify or excuse my own sins by pop culture or by any congenital excuse other than original sin.

Who is asking you to do such a thing?!?

It very much sounds like the LGBT agenda and its legion of supporters. ENDA seems a direct threat to the freedom of Christians everywhere in the USA.

What I do consistently condemn is lying and pretending that a lie can be the truth.

I would submit Christians do that everyday of their life. Hypocritical isn't it?

Then submit something. Otherwise, Jesus already addressed that and preaching and engaging in REPENTANCE and FORGIVENESS is not seen as hate speech or a hate crime, or any kind of phobia by Jesus.

[99percentatheism]

connermt
[Replying to post 361 by 99percentatheism]

Did the Vikings rape and pillage before or after they became Christians?

I wouldn't know as I wasn't there. Neither were you.

But the history is there.

But thanks for accepting and bolstering my point that there are extremists in all camps.

Thanks for accepting what? I do battle here constantly with extremists. (BTW I cleaned up your typo on extremists.)

Yes it [knowing what kind of behavior defines who a Christian is?] is rather really simple. Really.

Again, it's good to see common ground between us!

So you are renouncing the world and its ways and accepting Christ as your personal Savior? It's fascinating that I just don't see a rush to alter calls by all of these gay Christian preachers. Do you? Lotta gay bars emptying out for a Billy Graham style crusade in the Castro, WH or Boston? Is gay Christianity sweeping up a new generation in a massive revival?

Per Jesus it is.

Unsubstantiated claim. Being that Jesus wrote nothing of his own stories, that's not exactly true. What you're attributing to Jesus should be attributed to the specific author of the book you're referncing

OK. Doesn't alter one bit of the theology that shows what is and what isn't Christian truth found in scripture. By the way, I find it offensive that you purposely do not capitalize Jesus.

Heresy and false teachings by false teachers is seen even in the first century Church.

OK...... : I didn't see anyone saying otherwise.

I am so right on so many things. Thanks. My confidence grows. Not hubris, nor haughtiness mind you. Confidence. I didn't write the Bible. I just agree with those that did. And why they did it.

What is amazingly good about Christianity and Christians is that it and they call for self examination first and foremost.

First and foremost is a stretch, even on a good day. Take out the 'self' part of your sentence and you'd be on the right track.

You need to get to know evangelical Christians. They got things in the right order and perspective.

In other words, Christians

Notice spell check says you are misspelling "Christian" with a small c? Hint? Hint?

. . . tend to like to judge others before looking into their own lives.

Reality says otherwise when "testing all things" is employed. Can you imagine how much money can be made from LGBT's flooding into "Mainstream Churches" if only? I guess poverty is better than complicity? Like I said, things in their proper order.

Notice I don't preach or proselytize here?

Not really, no but continue

Simply put, I know where I am treading and I see the proverbial dust on my shoes.

I am not really confused as in confused.

Your intent is readily apparent. I didn't see anyone claim otherwise, but, that doesn't mean you're not confusd. Which you appear to be if you believe 'hate' and 'fear' demand anything.

I am not confused about what is propaganda either.

A free press and assemblies most definitely have to do with the business of society.

Free press has nothing to do with this discussion. Bringing it into it only solidifies your confusion. I'm sure you know that civil rights are a part of society, not society as a whole. So yes, religion does tend to be a part of society, but not civil rights. Hiding behind religion to spout hate and condemnation is wrong - and very telling of the individual(s) that do so

Ah yes, the free press and propaganda used accordingly. No disappointment there.

What I see as unstructured is secularism.

You see what you want to see

Reality is impossible to ignore. It is why I became a Christian.

Just look around at the world today?

Is that a statement or question?

Unfortunately both.

The New Testament on the other hand is quite well structured.

As should any writing that's had centuries to be edited, added to, detracted from, translated and edited - all by long dead people. Why wouldn't they have structured it well?

The manuscripts pass the testing well. All of those "different" translations and yet the same message in each one. Except of course for those written by offshoot organizations to support a theology that cannot be supported unless a rewrite of the manuscripts are meted out. It will be fascinating to see what gay theologians come up with in terms of new translations. Especially when it comes to interpreting husband and wife. Unfortunately for gay theology, the Bible is "hetero-normative." (I hyphenated that word so spell check would relax.)

If I don't I could get sued or lose a government contract right? But I am preparing my life for that anyway. Lot's of off shore savings accounts.

Has nothing to do with it, but thanks...?

Actually I said a lot in that metaphor.

I am always curious as to why so many people that post here address me so personally and so directly instead of just debating issues.

Perhaps because your approach is often times hateful & deceitful.

Never. Not even once. I'll repeat that if you need.

It's none of my business what people that engage in same gender sexual behavior do with their Sunday's. Or any other day. Unless they demand that I celebrate their sexual inclinations and behaviors. Then of course THEY have made it my business haven't they?

No, most of them haven't. It seems YOU'VE made one's personal decisions YOUR business.

Oh really? A "Doctor" comes into my Church building and says "I'm gay, do you people affirm gay pride?" Now, he would not be talking about his tennis game.

Now, why do we need to know, let alone "affirm" how this guy desires his sexual encounters?

You keep spouting about gay people 'forcing' you to accept this or that and you have shown nothing - nothing at all - to show that is true, yet you expect us to believe you?

I believe the lawsuits against Christians and the Chick-fil-A "protests" by the LGBT community and their legion of supporters says otherwise. And that is just recent demands. And ENDA will force this as law.

No one can force another to believe or accept ANYTHING. You own glorified god given free will tells you that.

So if you accept anything, it's by your own doing. Therefore, all your hate that's spilling out towards others is your own.

Propaganda alert!!! Actually trying to force me to affirm and celebrate gay behavior and gay pride by scaring me into feeling I have "hated" anyone is proof of my assertion. Thanks. If holding to marriage as man and woman/husband and wife is "hate" then Jesus is the chief of haters. Or rather Chief of Haters.

"Gays" demand that they have a congenital excuse and pass for their sexual sins.

That appears rather paranoid and self elevating.

Really? It is just referencing "orientation" in its "born that way" usage. Reality is important to me. Like I said, it's why I became a Christian.

I know some gay people and they have never, ever, demanded anything of you.

I know some too. And yet they act differently when in a gay crowd. Then they demand that we Christians affirm their behaviors. That is my experience sir.

Even if they would have, giving 'a pass for their sins' is nothing you can do.

It is impossible and yet it is demanded that it is hate speech to hold to Christian truth on proper sexual behavior. Which does not include gay sex anywhere in the New Testament. And like I've already pointed out, your usage of labeling my positions as hate is proof as well.

Again, you're elevating yourself to a 'lord-type' of position. Which is very unbcoming.

Actually I am doing nothing of the sort. But I realize how modern conditioning of propaganda makes it seem so. I am just agreeing with the writers of the New Testament as to what are the guidelines and limits for Christian behavior to be appropriate.

You are seeking much more than just clarification.

Of which neithr you've provided. Only shreakin' hate from behind the proteted of thr 'religion vwall'

That propaganda is getting old fast. I can hardly wait for the newly minted neologism to come at us.

Same gender sexual acts have no support from the New Testament.

Therefore, it's none of your business since you 'affirm' the new testament.

Absolutely true. UNLESS someone makes it my business. Per the New Testament writers.

BTW, you are aware that all claims in the NT of Jesus saying this or that or believing this or that aren't of Jesus, but the ones who wrote the NT, yes?

OK. But still none of the words written by whomever disprove the reality of my positions here at this website in these threads. But the same writings do not support or affirm or condone homosexuality anywhere within them No matter who wrote them. Now sir, you are free to believe whatever you want to in whatever justification you so choose.

Two way street sir.

But Christians are to walk the narrow one going in the right direction.

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 364 by KCKID]



KCKID,

With all due respect (and you do deserve respect) . . .

Since you brought up the Holy Spirit so prominently in this post (364). I must decline to engage in debate of it (364). There are limits to what should be and shouldn't be argued and bantered about that I should observe. I'll go for the other post you entered.

[KCKID]

[Replying to post 364 by KCKID]



KCKID,

With all due respect (and you do deserve respect) . . .

Since you brought up the Holy Spirit so prominently in this post (364). I must decline to engage in debate of it (364). There are limits to what should be and shouldn't be argued and bantered about that I should observe. I'll go for the other post you entered.

That's okay ...it was rather a derail. I raised the topic of those huge Pentecostal mega-Churches and their, at times, 'circus-like antics' only to emphasize how 'off-track' Christianity has become ...nothing like the "Jesus message" of the Bible that you're trying to promote but would rather put the blame on gays for threatening 'Christendom'.

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 366 by KCKID]

KCKID

Cont’d response to 99percentatheism from post 364:

To continue. You refer to yourself as a Christian and yet you go out of your way - as do many Christians - to dig up texts from an ancient book for no other reason than to demean and to dehumanize the Matthew Vines of this world.

That is a misplaced charge and a false one as well. I couldn't care less about Matthew Vines until he enters my world and demands I celebrate, condone and affirm his sexual tastes.

I spoke of ‘the Matthew Vines of this world’ …not specifically Matthew Vines.

They are all the same.

He has made his choice and his fate is not up to me at all. I am just to stay clear of people like him that's all.

Spoken like a true representative of Jesus Christ. Not!

Excuse me? I am following the advice of Jesus accurately.

Gay people have NOT made any more choice regarding their sexuality. . .

There is no scientific proof of that assertion.

. . . than have you ...whatever your sexuality happens to be.

I have command over my choice behaviors. I am not an animal.

I personally don't care what it is. Flaunting your ignorance with regard to 'sexuality' won't bide too well with regard to convincing others to agree with your particular stance on this issue.

Choices are what differentiates humans from beasts of the field. The Christian life as it is portrayed in the New Testament and the dignity and ethics it delivers to choices made is impressive. Good choices of course and the choice to repent of the bad ones.

NOWHERE in the Bible are you are required to do this. Are you not bothered by at least a tinge of conscience that its such examples of fanaticism for a 'holy book' (coupled with personal reasons for gay disapproval) by alleged 'followers of Christ' that has led many a young gay person to suicide?

I don't buy that propaganda at all. It is more likley that people that engage in gay sex commit suicide while IN the LGBT community and culture. Don't lay their choices on me or any other Christian that chooses as best as it is possible to live life like a Christian should.

Yes, your previous response was indicative of someone striving to live the life of a Christian. Not!

How are you judging me of that? By which/what authority? If it is by gay pride, you are barking up the wrong tree.

If you can't admit, at least from a logical standpoint as well as from overwhelming scientific support , that people are 'hardwired' to be gay or straight ...or, if you're unable to think for yourself without requiring the words from an ancient book to do your thinking for you

So you are demanding that I scrap the Bible for the DSM V? Which of course is a book written by men. And men as fallible as any that have ever lived in any age.

Newsflash! Both the DSM V AND the Bible were written by ‘fallible’ men!

Oh my goodness. Here comes the APA as the ultimate authority of mankind?

By the way, gay behavior used to be a mental illness in psychology and there are still books around that say that that have not been burned or thrown away.

Funny you should bring up psychology, 99percent. Below are a few snippets from a couple of articles that deal with Fundamentalism as being a Psychological problem. Feel free to skip the parts in red unless the psychology of fundamentalism is your thing.

Once again, send me a PM and I will show you on what level I hold psychology.

What is a fundamentalist? A fundamentalist is usually considered to be a person who adheres strictly to a doctrine, viewpoint or set of principles that are considered original and 'pure'; this doctrine might be theological in nature. For the fundamentalist, many of their beliefs and the behaviors that arise from them will, at least in theory, be derivative of their fundamental doctrine. For the fundamentalist, there is no room to consider views that are at variance with their accepted doctrine and contrary views will usually either be dismissed out-of-hand or resisted with considerable vigor and, often, violence.

How did that not just describe a DSM V adhering psychologist?

In contrast to the fundamentalist, a person who is 'open-minded' may still hold strong views and perhaps even have a strong conscientious position on certain issues. They will usually behave in accordance with those views and their conscience. However, despite this, they will usually also demonstrate a willingness to seriously contemplate an alternative view or course of action before discarding it. Moreover, they are likely to accept suffering, in one form or another, as the outcome of their conscientious position; they are unlikely to use violence to 'defend' it.

"Test all things and hold fast to that which is truth."

A solid Christian reality. And why gay pride is rejected by "Mainstream Christianity."

Fundamentalism, in a religious guise, is both widespread and problematic. For example, Christian fundamentalism plays a crucial role in shaping US domestic policies in relation to abortion, gay marriage and theories of evolution . . .

THAT is political posturing "in the guise" of some kind of science.

Psychologically, a fundamentalist is a person with an intense fear of being 'wrong'; that is, an intense fear of being judged to hold the wrong' view or to engage in the 'wrong' behavior. This intense fear of being wrong develops during childhood when one or both parents, and probably teachers, dogmatically refuse to listen to the child, thus denying it the chance to develop its own views and moral code (based on its own experience), while also terrorizing (by threatening and using violence) the child into believing/adopting a particular set of values and beliefs, and behaving in a particular manner. It is the intensity of their fear of being judged 'wrong', and the violence they will suffer if they are so judged, that makes the child hold, with phenomenal tenacity, to the 'approved doctrine' with which they are presented. It is this intense fear of being wrong that marks out the fundamentalist from the person who is open-minded and/or conscientious.

This sayeth the lord god DSM V?

Gimme a break KCKID. Why not trot a Ouija Board too?

Fundamentalism is a significant social problem, particularly in some contexts. And to fix it, we need to recognize its psychological origin. Unfortunately, however, this is not easy to do because the terror that holds their value and belief system in place, and drives their behavior, is deeply hidden within the individual's psyche.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e37337.htm

Who gets checks and balances on the psychologists that wrote that er, um, uh, stuff.

Fundamentalist Christians often find themselves embroiled in controversial issues.

Like Jesus? Like the Apostles? Like the First Century "Christians?"

I'll endure more of this just because its you that posted it.

Recently, the battleground has turned to the arena of psychology as therapists study and isolate the effect of fundamentalism on believers and on ex-adherents.
Psychologists across the country are becoming increasingly concerned about the possible psychological dangers of fundamentalism, a type of Christianity usually characterized by a strict, literal interpretation of the Bible.

When do the "psychologists start taking control of Christian families en masse? paranoia or simply reading what is written above? Does every Church have to be approved by a DSM V wielding psychologist?

My how a new religion look to be springing forth with Prophets Priests and Kings (er and Queens) all in a row. My, my my. And anyone trying to refuse, of course, they are in denial. Sounds like a new inquisition is rising.

This criticism is coming from inside Christianity, and from outside its folds. Marlene Winell, PhD., is a licensed psychologist who has been practicing in Fort Collins for three years. Born in Hong Kong of Pentecostal missionaries, Winell now describes herself as an ex-fundamentalist.

Wwwellll there's an UNBIASED opinion huh? As you say: NOT!

In August, Winell will present a paper at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association in New York City. In this paper, Winell identifies certain symptoms she believes are common in people who have left the fundamentalist belief system. She quotes Bible verses that she believes leads people to develop certain tendencies that constitute a syndrome, very much like the syndrome experienced by adult children of alcoholics.

And this "psychologist feels she is un-opinionated I presume?

Unlike that syndrome, however. Winell acknowledges that many positive experiences often occur in a fundamentalist family.

Who cares what this person has to say about Christian life?

For the past year, Winell has been taking a critical look at tier ex-faith, and talking about her experiences with clients and other associates. She has identified 11 typical "features" of former fundamentalists. These features range from disregard of human emotions, to low self-esteem and the inability to find fulfillment from within.

Is there anything of worth in all of this KCKID?

"What people out of this background really struggle with is simply relaxing and being happy in the present, instead of how it's going to be someday in the future," explains Winell. "That strikes me as really very tragic.''
http://marlenewinell.net/page/psycholog ... estion-e-0

Another personal vendetta in the guise of science? Do we get to analyze Ms. Winell?

The entire page that deals with the topic of Fundamentalism: A Psychological Problem is:
https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourcei ... Psychology

Right next to the promotion of the Humanist Manifesto KCKID?

. . . AND possibly getting it wrong in the process, then you are in a sorry state indeed ...despite any theological know-how you may claim to possess!

Possibly getting it wrong? Not according to history. And the theology that is pro gay comes from as long ago as maybe the 1950's or 60's and out of the sexual revolution. Hardly a Church movement.

Where, in history, have the half-dozen ‘clobber texts’ of the Bible been used by the Church to condemn homosexuality? It’s only a recent phenomenon as far as I’m aware.

The usage of the label "clobber passages" is new as well and is more a strawman than anything else. As just I have proven, over and over again, there is no support for gay behavior anywhere in the entire Bible from genesis to Jude and beyond. That's like, more than six clobber passages when added up. Really, just one huge clobber passage KCKID.

I admire you somewhat, but you haven't shown, even slightly, any case for altering the Bible to celebrate gay pride. And i will be amused at Matthew Vines disciples to show anything, anywhere in the Bible that does. Like same gender marriage, it simply does not exist.

Because it’s a recent phenomenon the ‘pro-gay theology’ you speak of has been the result of serious Bible exegesis having been sought in order to counter the vicious attacks of homosexuals (both verbally and physically) by those that use certain scriptures with which to denigrate them!

If truth is considered a vicious attack that is simply weird. Gay thgeolgy is purely seen through a gay lens. Notice it followed a definite line of liberal theology and secular movements? Not a great yoked couple. From the word and its ways we see spring gay theology.

I also have a certain amount of theological credentials myself, even though I am basically an average Joe with absolutely no so-called 'gay movement' connections.

"By their fruit you will know them."

Are you’re saying that my admitting to being an average Joe with absolutely no affiliation with any so-called ‘gay movement’ is an indication of my ‘bad fruit’?

You sure know how to hurt a guy.

I am just testing all things and being honest with the outcome of said test.

Those half-dozen so-called 'anti-gay' scriptures that you use as a blanket condemnation of homosexuality are shrouded with ambiguity.

Half dozen or so? Where do you come up with that number?

Um, yes …there are a half dozen or so scriptures that Christians use to condemn homosexuality. There are two or three (if one references Sodom & Gomorrah) misinterpreted texts in the Old Testament and two or three misinterpreted texts in the New Testament. Total: about a half dozen. Is there something wrong with my math?

Absolutely wrong. Where is there even ONE pro gay statement in the entire Bible? For a behavior and a "condition" of man (persons for all of the LGBT audience) that is said to be so common, why not a definitive statement on all of the great and holy homosexuals among the people Israel and the The Church triumphant? But even though the Bible isn't silent on the inappropriateness of homosexuality, it is utterly and immutably silent on its support and celebration. If truth and reality is considered "hate" well, I'll take my chances with Christ on Judgment day and I'll juts have to "tolerate" the slurs and charges made against me by the legion of gay proponents in this world. If the First Century Church made it through Nero, I feel we will be just fine overall.

There is ZERO scriptures that support, affirm, condone, approve of or that celebrate homosexuality as we know it today. And as you know very well, I do not use the "clobber passages" alone and certainly nothing I have used is ambiguous at all.

As said previously, Why would I be debating the “ZERO� scriptures you speak of when they have nothing to do with the topic? I don’t care what the Bible DOES NOT say about homosexuality. Seems as if you’ve now warmed to the fact that the ‘clobber’ passages don’t mean and never have meant what you and yours want them to say and so you now rely on the Bible’s silence on the matter. A somewhat strange form of ‘Bible exegesis’, don’tcha think?

Au contraire mon ami. I take the clobber passages as they are. Clobber passages. And connected to all of the descriptins of appropriate sexuality and the incredible silence of support for homosexuality and there is only a verdict of not only innocent to be delivered to Christians that disapprove of the affirming of gay pride and homosexuality, but of a well done good and faithful servant as well.

And, since these scriptures are ambiguous, then why would you not err on the side of 'positive' toward your gay brothers and sisters rather than opting for the negative approach?

What? Why won't homosexuals side with us? WE are the ones with all of the support and supportive theology behind our positions.

“Why won’t homosexuals side with us …?� you ask. I’ll have to think about that for a while. I’m sure it wouldn’t be because you allude to them as ‘abominations’, or that God hates them and has given you the murky task of telling them they’re hell-bound until they repent of their homosexuality and convert to heterosexuality.

So you are saying that there is a congenital pass, a pre-birth conditional excuse for sins and sinning? Is that what you are positing? Because Psalm 51 is another clobber passage to use on the gay agenda as well. The numbers keep getting bigger there.

[/quote][color]Hmmm . . .other than that I really have no idea why gay people won’t side with you . . .[/color][/quote]

Truth should be respected. But then again, relativism has taken a firm foothold on modern secular society. And on its heels we see the gay pride movement become powerful. Very powerful.

Will "God" really condemn those to 'eternal torment' who, though they may have interpreted scripture incorrectly, approached the topic from a loving perspective rather than from a hateful one?

We keep going around the same circles. "I" do not judge people's souls or eternity. That is the sole power of Christ Jesus alone! I can only judge actions and statements.

And, 'Christ Jesus alone' is not recorded in scripture of either having judged the actions of homosexuals OR having made any statement AT ALL about homosexuality. I realize how frustrating it is that the icon of Christianity never even broached the subject. He did, however, have a bit to say about divorce and remarriage = adultery (that Christians ignore) and the news ain't good ...!

Jesus claimed to be the God of Abraham. And the Sanhedrin members that heard Him declare this were going to stone Him for saying it and more importantly, believing it.

And you can keep preaching the truth about divorce and remarriage for as long as it takes for you to realize that there is also no such thing as same gender marriage in the same context. Jesus in fact, never said a word about same gender marriage ever. because there is no such thing. And the reality of silence is never going to make your demands come true otherwise. You aren't just beating a dead horse, you are beating a horse that isn't there and never will be in the context of biblical truth.

And in that respect I can never "yoke" myself to gay activists anywhere.

]But you CAN 'yoke yourself' to scriptural adulterers ...?

That's an interesting accusation but one that will never stick. I yoke myself to repentance and forgiveness. Ala Jesus and His great, great, grand father King David.

[color][/quote]Does the topic of glaring hypocrisy ever come up when you're preaching your anti-gay message (as you've stated you do) to your Christian flock? Or, do they know so little about the Bible that they can't even recognize hypocrisy when they see/hear it?

That said, you’re using the entire Bible and its silence on the topic to make judgment on homosexuals so it’s not a stretch to assume that you’d be using Jesus’ silence on the topic of homosexuality as support for your anti-gay stance. Again, a strange form of Bible exegesis …moreover, a personal one.[/color][/quote]

My message is based on the one that John (the Baptist) Jesus, Peter, Paul and Jude taught. So is my pro repentance and forgiveness preaching. Same Bible, same context, same truth.

Do you really believe this? The only answer I can come up with, and I've stated this before, is that the Bible has nothing to do with your aversion to homosexuality. In fact. I would lay that charge against most anti-gay Christians!

Based on what right? What justification? Gay pride has only entered The Church in extremely recent years. And it is a secular movement is it not? Stonewall Inn is not a Christian Cathedral.

Perhaps you missed my point. I said that I believe that very few Christians care too much about what the Bible may or may not say about homosexuality …or anything else for that matter.

And Jesus taught that before you ever wrote about it. And you of all people know that I never miss your points.

One's aversion toward homosexuality (and other pet dislikes) is more a personal thing. As the old adage goes, "God hates the very same things that 'I' hate."

If that makes you sleep well at night, who am I to rain on your gay pride parade? I have absolutely nothing personal to do with gay pride at all. It exists in a place outside of The Church. It is a secular event. So why would I care to make this a personal involvement? I don't go to Mosques, Mormon Stakes, Voodoo celebrations, strip clubs or many other places that I shouldn't.

That said, if your 'holy book' affects you in such a way as to drive you toward hating those whose only 'sin' is that they are sexually hardwired differently to you then close up this evil book with a loud thump and toss it on to the highest shelf because that's where it belongs!

That is a very threatening and very insulting position to assert.

But making judgment on someone else and condemning them to an eternity of hell-fire because they’re different to you ISN’T a threatening and insulting position to assert?

Where have I done this? Where are my judgmental pronouncements on any personal "them?"

This comes through in just about every response you post, 99perent, and you’re using a book (coupled with your own personal dislike) with which to do this. "I" don’t necessarily believe that the Bible is an evil book (I’m not too sure what it is) but it sure does play havoc with the minds of some folks!

Ad hom attack. "I" just present scripture accurately. If someone takes that as a personal address, I am thinking that is something far greater than me speaking to their heart and mind.

You have no justification for saying something like that to a Christian.

Christians, by virtue of a self-applied label, are immune from any criticism?

Of course not. But you have to use the right judgmental tool. You can't judge "me" or any other Christian that will not celebrate gay pride by gay pride measures. That's inappropriate and impossible as well.

I would NOT say any such thing to a great many Christians who I have associated with and respected over many years. My comments are never intended as blanket statements for every Christian. But, as I’m sure you know …there are Christians and ‘Christians’. And, each of us determine which is which based on who we are and what our own personal feelings tell us, don't we, 99percent?

Couldn't disagree with you more. "Personal feelings" are as untrustworthy as being stoned and trying to teach an AA class. If I went by my "personal feelings" I would have a harem with no doubt about it. Etc., etc., etc..

Why not just encourage people that enjoy homosexuality to respect the Christians that do not affirm that behavior and have those so inclined to engaging in same sex sexual behavior to go to Churches and denominations that will celebrate gay sex all day long?

Yes, I guess the use of sarcasm in a demeaning manner is yet another example of your "Christian walk', 99percent. You do realize, do you not, that behind the label of 'gay' is an actual human being ...? It often doesn't sound like you do.

Not fair at all. It is I that have so many times taken that label away from the "person" of propaganda being used for the gay agenda and addressed them as "people" that do this or that. In fact, have I ever declared that a person that engages in homosexuality can not BE a Christian?

I invite the testing of any or all of my posts on that. But still, sins and sinning cannot be "affirmed" ever. Not even if holding that line is called all the bad labels laid on us by gay pride activists and advocates. Propaganda is never going to seriously hurt the faith delivered only once to the saints.

And even better, go to Matthew Vines' website and invite him or his followers here to enter this debate?

As said, I’ve already done this. We'll wait and see whether he or his staff respond.

Like catching fish in a barrel. Their Bibles and mine will not kowtow to the gay agenda. And after they have had their say:

“The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.�

- Proverbs 18:17

And of course if it was this bad in the same way at the beginning of The Church, why should we expect less?:

Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people. For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

- Jude

[Danmark]

Since you brought up the Holy Spirit so prominently in this post (364). I must decline to engage in debate of it (364). There are limits to what should be and shouldn't be argued and bantered about that I should observe. I'll go for the other post you entered.

So you're on a Christianity and Religion debating site, but your Christian principles forbid you to discuss the Holy Spirit? You refuse to debate the nature of God? Why are you here, besides to talk about homosexuality being a sin?

Are you claiming the Christians who discuss the "Holy Spirit" here are wrong to do so?