The Gay Denomination?

[99percentatheism]

The Gay Denomination.

For those people that desire same gender sexual behavior or thoughts, AND that claim to be a Christian and claim that their beliefs and theology can fit the New Testament witness, instead of waging an endless, fruitless and vicious war on other Christians - that will NEVER accept their gay doctrines and dogmas . . ., - why won't they just declare a new and alternative denomination, just like Watch Tower theological adherants and Mormons?

Why the need to join forces with anti-Christian and secularist movements to attack "Bible believing" Christians?

Afterall, in referencing the New Testament, there is no justifiable comparison of sex acts to being a slave (slavery), or the charge of bigotry and hatefulness in holding that marriage is a man and a woman.

Why not just start an "Out and Proud" Gay Denomination?

[Clownboat]

KCKID

[Replying to post 1793 by 99percentatheism]

My contention was and is that the NT says nothing about homosexual marriage, it neither supports nor opposes it. You on the other hand claim some fanciful opposition exists.

I don't think it's 'the marriage' part of a homosexual union that irks 99percent so much as his imaginings as to what the gay married couple do with each other when intimate.

While I simply marvel at the personal nature of your posts and your incessant desire to personally attack me over and over again . . . are you saying that the very nature of marriage ESPECIALLY IN THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY . . . is not about sexual behavior? I mean, that is purely the issue of the arangement in Christian theology. Otherwise, "civil unions" would suffice for the gay activists.

Do you need even more scriptures supporting that position?

I have no idea why any of us should be concerned about what two adults might be doing in private but it's THIS - I believe - that offends 99percent so.

False teachers and false teachings are the issue as well as, the equaling of homosexuality with appropriate sexual behavior. You can't possibly be unaware of this.

That said, why one should be excluded from a mainstream Christian Church because a member or two of that congregation choose to imagine the sex play going on between either a gay or straight couple is somewhat creepy.

Either way, it's no one elses business.

That is a theologically, historically and morally, a misguided position you offer up for consumption KID. But, as the OP describes, in your new religion you can define marriage as an impassionate business arrangement all you want to. But not even your gay pals would support you there. They want their "sexual orientation" and its resultuing behaviors affirmed, celebrated and solemnized.

And that can only be attained in an altogether different religion or religious expression from that of the one delivered only once to the saints.

Here ya go:

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.

- Paul to the Christians in Thessalonica 1 Thess 4

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? ...

- Paul to Timothy: 1 Tim 3

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: Eph 5

If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

- Paul to Titus: Titus 1

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her . . .

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: E 5

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons . . .

- Paul to Christians at Phillipi: 1 P 1

Etc', etc..

There is no such thing as same gender marriage in the New Testament. There isn't even a basis for the claim that there is silence on altering the definition of marriage in the New Testament.

It is amazing to me that you are willing to break one of the ten commandments just so you can use your idol to beat others over the head.
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images.

Seriously, you might as well be using the Lord of the Rings as your idol. It holds as much truth as the Bible does to those that you are trying to beat down.

Think about it this way. Would you give a crap if the Lord of the Rings books said not to go fishing on Saturdays?
Would it make any difference if I quoted from it continually to show how they don't say you can do it, so therefore you can't fish on Saturdays?

You wouldn't, just like we don't care about the fact that the Bible does not say that homosexuality is OK.

Gah! It's like you are beating people over the head with a story about Santa! Now, this will be well received when dealing with other believers in Santa, but consider how effective this would be when dealing with people that understand Santa to be a myth.

Carry on.

[KCKID]

KCKID

[Replying to post 1793 by 99percentatheism]

My contention was and is that the NT says nothing about homosexual marriage, it neither supports nor opposes it. You on the other hand claim some fanciful opposition exists.

I don't think it's 'the marriage' part of a homosexual union that irks 99percent so much as his imaginings as to what the gay married couple do with each other when intimate.

While I simply marvel at the personal nature of your posts and your incessant desire to personally attack me over and over again . . . are you saying that the very nature of marriage ESPECIALLY IN THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY . . . is not about sexual behavior? I mean, that is purely the issue of the arangement in Christian theology. Otherwise, "civil unions" would suffice for the gay activists.

Do you need even more scriptures supporting that position?

I have no idea why any of us should be concerned about what two adults might be doing in private but it's THIS - I believe - that offends 99percent so.

False teachers and false teachings are the issue as well as, the equaling of homosexuality with appropriate sexual behavior. You can't possibly be unaware of this.

That said, why one should be excluded from a mainstream Christian Church because a member or two of that congregation choose to imagine the sex play going on between either a gay or straight couple is somewhat creepy.

Either way, it's no one elses business.

That is a theologically, historically and morally, a misguided position you offer up for consumption KID. But, as the OP describes, in your new religion you can define marriage as an impassionate business arrangement all you want to. But not even your gay pals would support you there. They want their "sexual orientation" and its resultuing behaviors affirmed, celebrated and solemnized.

And that can only be attained in an altogether different religion or religious expression from that of the one delivered only once to the saints.

Here ya go:

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.

- Paul to the Christians in Thessalonica 1 Thess 4

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? ...

- Paul to Timothy: 1 Tim 3

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: Eph 5

If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

- Paul to Titus: Titus 1

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her . . .

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: E 5

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons . . .

- Paul to Christians at Phillipi: 1 P 1

Etc', etc..

There is no such thing as same gender marriage in the New Testament. There isn't even a basis for the claim that there is silence on altering the definition of marriage in the New Testament.

Hmmm . . .lots of stuff from Paul who by virtue of your quoting him are giving this mere mortal divine authority. Anything from Jesus on this topic . . .?

[Allahakbar]

KCKID

[Replying to post 1793 by 99percentatheism]

My contention was and is that the NT says nothing about homosexual marriage, it neither supports nor opposes it. You on the other hand claim some fanciful opposition exists.

I don't think it's 'the marriage' part of a homosexual union that irks 99percent so much as his imaginings as to what the gay married couple do with each other when intimate.

While I simply marvel at the personal nature of your posts and your incessant desire to personally attack me over and over again . . . are you saying that the very nature of marriage ESPECIALLY IN THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY . . . is not about sexual behavior? I mean, that is purely the issue of the arangement in Christian theology. Otherwise, "civil unions" would suffice for the gay activists.

Do you need even more scriptures supporting that position?

I have no idea why any of us should be concerned about what two adults might be doing in private but it's THIS - I believe - that offends 99percent so.

False teachers and false teachings are the issue as well as, the equaling of homosexuality with appropriate sexual behavior. You can't possibly be unaware of this.

That said, why one should be excluded from a mainstream Christian Church because a member or two of that congregation choose to imagine the sex play going on between either a gay or straight couple is somewhat creepy.

Either way, it's no one elses business.

That is a theologically, historically and morally, a misguided position you offer up for consumption KID. But, as the OP describes, in your new religion you can define marriage as an impassionate business arrangement all you want to. But not even your gay pals would support you there. They want their "sexual orientation" and its resultuing behaviors affirmed, celebrated and solemnized.

And that can only be attained in an altogether different religion or religious expression from that of the one delivered only once to the saints.

Here ya go:

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.

- Paul to the Christians in Thessalonica 1 Thess 4

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? ...

- Paul to Timothy: 1 Tim 3

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: Eph 5

If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

- Paul to Titus: Titus 1

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her . . .

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: E 5

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons . . .

- Paul to Christians at Phillipi: 1 P 1

Etc', etc..

There is no such thing as same gender marriage in the New Testament. There isn't even a basis for the claim that there is silence on altering the definition of marriage in the New Testament.

Is it just me or did others not see any mention of gay marriage in these passages?

[KCKID]

KCKID

[Replying to post 1793 by 99percentatheism]

My contention was and is that the NT says nothing about homosexual marriage, it neither supports nor opposes it. You on the other hand claim some fanciful opposition exists.

I don't think it's 'the marriage' part of a homosexual union that irks 99percent so much as his imaginings as to what the gay married couple do with each other when intimate.

While I simply marvel at the personal nature of your posts and your incessant desire to personally attack me over and over again . . . are you saying that the very nature of marriage ESPECIALLY IN THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY . . . is not about sexual behavior? I mean, that is purely the issue of the arangement in Christian theology. Otherwise, "civil unions" would suffice for the gay activists.

Do you need even more scriptures supporting that position?

I have no idea why any of us should be concerned about what two adults might be doing in private but it's THIS - I believe - that offends 99percent so.

False teachers and false teachings are the issue as well as, the equaling of homosexuality with appropriate sexual behavior. You can't possibly be unaware of this.

That said, why one should be excluded from a mainstream Christian Church because a member or two of that congregation choose to imagine the sex play going on between either a gay or straight couple is somewhat creepy.

Either way, it's no one elses business.

That is a theologically, historically and morally, a misguided position you offer up for consumption KID. But, as the OP describes, in your new religion you can define marriage as an impassionate business arrangement all you want to. But not even your gay pals would support you there. They want their "sexual orientation" and its resultuing behaviors affirmed, celebrated and solemnized.

And that can only be attained in an altogether different religion or religious expression from that of the one delivered only once to the saints.

Here ya go:

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.

- Paul to the Christians in Thessalonica 1 Thess 4

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? ...

- Paul to Timothy: 1 Tim 3

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: Eph 5

If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

- Paul to Titus: Titus 1

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her . . .

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: E 5

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons . . .

- Paul to Christians at Phillipi: 1 P 1

Etc', etc..

There is no such thing as same gender marriage in the New Testament. There isn't even a basis for the claim that there is silence on altering the definition of marriage in the New Testament.

Is it just me or did others not see any mention of gay marriage in these passages?

No, not just you. But 99percent is noted for presenting scriptures that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. I think that HE thinks that no one notices.

[99percentatheism]

KCKID

[Replying to post 1793 by 99percentatheism]

My contention was and is that the NT says nothing about homosexual marriage, it neither supports nor opposes it. You on the other hand claim some fanciful opposition exists.

I don't think it's 'the marriage' part of a homosexual union that irks 99percent so much as his imaginings as to what the gay married couple do with each other when intimate.

While I simply marvel at the personal nature of your posts and your incessant desire to personally attack me over and over again . . . are you saying that the very nature of marriage ESPECIALLY IN THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY . . . is not about sexual behavior? I mean, that is purely the issue of the arangement in Christian theology. Otherwise, "civil unions" would suffice for the gay activists.

Do you need even more scriptures supporting that position?

I have no idea why any of us should be concerned about what two adults might be doing in private but it's THIS - I believe - that offends 99percent so.

False teachers and false teachings are the issue as well as, the equaling of homosexuality with appropriate sexual behavior. You can't possibly be unaware of this.

That said, why one should be excluded from a mainstream Christian Church because a member or two of that congregation choose to imagine the sex play going on between either a gay or straight couple is somewhat creepy.

Either way, it's no one elses business.

That is a theologically, historically and morally, a misguided position you offer up for consumption KID. But, as the OP describes, in your new religion you can define marriage as an impassionate business arrangement all you want to. But not even your gay pals would support you there. They want their "sexual orientation" and its resultuing behaviors affirmed, celebrated and solemnized.

And that can only be attained in an altogether different religion or religious expression from that of the one delivered only once to the saints.

Here ya go:

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.

- Paul to the Christians in Thessalonica 1 Thess 4

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? ...

- Paul to Timothy: 1 Tim 3

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: Eph 5

If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

- Paul to Titus: Titus 1

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her . . .

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: E 5

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons . . .

- Paul to Christians at Phillipi: 1 P 1

Etc', etc..

There is no such thing as same gender marriage in the New Testament. There isn't even a basis for the claim that there is silence on altering the definition of marriage in the New Testament.

Is it just me or did others not see any mention of gay marriage in these passages?

There is no such thing as gay marriage in Christianity. Why would you think that there is celebration in silence, when it is clear that same gender sex acts is antithetical to the theology presented in the Bible? Gay marriage is connected to a society that is turning away from the Gospel and the Christian message and embracing the tents of humanism. Secular Humanism.

Now obviosuly this was predicted to happen to some even in the Church, but it is an odd form of morality that looks to silence to find its roots of moral positioning. Just leave the Church (too) and be done with it.

It's very intersting that the only attempts to "prove" homosexuality and same gender marriage could be had in a Christian life is from one-liner responses that are sarcastic and have no weight of a theological or honest stance. Just a "going along with" the mob of secular pop culture.

Of course.

[Clownboat]

KCKID

[Replying to post 1793 by 99percentatheism]

My contention was and is that the NT says nothing about homosexual marriage, it neither supports nor opposes it. You on the other hand claim some fanciful opposition exists.

I don't think it's 'the marriage' part of a homosexual union that irks 99percent so much as his imaginings as to what the gay married couple do with each other when intimate.

While I simply marvel at the personal nature of your posts and your incessant desire to personally attack me over and over again . . . are you saying that the very nature of marriage ESPECIALLY IN THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY . . . is not about sexual behavior? I mean, that is purely the issue of the arangement in Christian theology. Otherwise, "civil unions" would suffice for the gay activists.

Do you need even more scriptures supporting that position?

I have no idea why any of us should be concerned about what two adults might be doing in private but it's THIS - I believe - that offends 99percent so.

False teachers and false teachings are the issue as well as, the equaling of homosexuality with appropriate sexual behavior. You can't possibly be unaware of this.

That said, why one should be excluded from a mainstream Christian Church because a member or two of that congregation choose to imagine the sex play going on between either a gay or straight couple is somewhat creepy.

Either way, it's no one elses business.

That is a theologically, historically and morally, a misguided position you offer up for consumption KID. But, as the OP describes, in your new religion you can define marriage as an impassionate business arrangement all you want to. But not even your gay pals would support you there. They want their "sexual orientation" and its resultuing behaviors affirmed, celebrated and solemnized.

And that can only be attained in an altogether different religion or religious expression from that of the one delivered only once to the saints.

Here ya go:

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.

- Paul to the Christians in Thessalonica 1 Thess 4

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? ...

- Paul to Timothy: 1 Tim 3

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: Eph 5

If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

- Paul to Titus: Titus 1

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her . . .

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: E 5

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons . . .

- Paul to Christians at Phillipi: 1 P 1

Etc', etc..

There is no such thing as same gender marriage in the New Testament. There isn't even a basis for the claim that there is silence on altering the definition of marriage in the New Testament.

Is it just me or did others not see any mention of gay marriage in these passages?

There is no such thing as gay marriage in Christianity. Why would you think that there is celebration in silence, when it is clear that same gender sex acts is antithetical to the theology presented in the Bible? Gay marriage is connected to a society that is turning away from the Gospel and the Christian message and embracing the tents of humanism. Secular Humanism.

Now obviosuly this was predicted to happen to some even in the Church, but it is an odd form of morality that looks to silence to find its roots of moral positioning. Just leave the Church (too) and be done with it.

It's very intersting that the only attempts to "prove" homosexuality and same gender marriage could be had in a Christian life is from one-liner responses that are sarcastic and have no weight of a theological or honest stance. Just a "going along with" the mob of secular pop culture.

Of course.

You are not god's spokes person. You cannot speak for all of Christianity.

And just for fun:
Religious paranoia is a condition which has been compared to extremism and intolerance.[1] It has been cited as a possible contributor to political violence.[2][3] It is often related to splitting, psychological projection, a desire to maintain a sense of purity in situations of real or perceived persecution, and rigid and unchallengeable attitudes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_paranoia

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1797 by Allahakbar]


Moderator Warning


implying others are taking drugs is a personal insult.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[99percentatheism]

KCKID

[Replying to post 1793 by 99percentatheism]

My contention was and is that the NT says nothing about homosexual marriage, it neither supports nor opposes it. You on the other hand claim some fanciful opposition exists.

I don't think it's 'the marriage' part of a homosexual union that irks 99percent so much as his imaginings as to what the gay married couple do with each other when intimate.

While I simply marvel at the personal nature of your posts and your incessant desire to personally attack me over and over again . . . are you saying that the very nature of marriage ESPECIALLY IN THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY . . . is not about sexual behavior? I mean, that is purely the issue of the arangement in Christian theology. Otherwise, "civil unions" would suffice for the gay activists.

Do you need even more scriptures supporting that position?

I have no idea why any of us should be concerned about what two adults might be doing in private but it's THIS - I believe - that offends 99percent so.

False teachers and false teachings are the issue as well as, the equaling of homosexuality with appropriate sexual behavior. You can't possibly be unaware of this.

That said, why one should be excluded from a mainstream Christian Church because a member or two of that congregation choose to imagine the sex play going on between either a gay or straight couple is somewhat creepy.

Either way, it's no one elses business.

That is a theologically, historically and morally, a misguided position you offer up for consumption KID. But, as the OP describes, in your new religion you can define marriage as an impassionate business arrangement all you want to. But not even your gay pals would support you there. They want their "sexual orientation" and its resultuing behaviors affirmed, celebrated and solemnized.

And that can only be attained in an altogether different religion or religious expression from that of the one delivered only once to the saints.

Here ya go:

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.

- Paul to the Christians in Thessalonica 1 Thess 4

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? ...

- Paul to Timothy: 1 Tim 3

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: Eph 5

If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

- Paul to Titus: Titus 1

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her . . .

- Paul to Christians in Ephesus: E 5

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons . . .

- Paul to Christians at Phillipi: 1 P 1

Etc', etc..

There is no such thing as same gender marriage in the New Testament. There isn't even a basis for the claim that there is silence on altering the definition of marriage in the New Testament.

Is it just me or did others not see any mention of gay marriage in these passages?

There is no such thing as gay marriage in Christianity. Why would you think that there is celebration in silence, when it is clear that same gender sex acts is antithetical to the theology presented in the Bible? Gay marriage is connected to a society that is turning away from the Gospel and the Christian message and embracing the tents of humanism. Secular Humanism.

Now obviosuly this was predicted to happen to some even in the Church, but it is an odd form of morality that looks to silence to find its roots of moral positioning. Just leave the Church (too) and be done with it.

It's very intersting that the only attempts to "prove" homosexuality and same gender marriage could be had in a Christian life is from one-liner responses that are sarcastic and have no weight of a theological or honest stance. Just a "going along with" the mob of secular pop culture.

Of course.

You are not god's spokes person. You cannot speak for all of Christianity.

And just for fun:
Religious paranoia is a condition which has been compared to extremism and intolerance.[1] It has been cited as a possible contributor to political violence.[2][3] It is often related to splitting, psychological projection, a desire to maintain a sense of purity in situations of real or perceived persecution, and rigid and unchallengeable attitudes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_paranoia

So, you are claiming that as homosexuality was taken out of the DSM, now Christian beliefs are going to be inserted in its place?

Yes or no.

Please.

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 1804 by Clownboat]

And also, is this someone writing a wikipedia article claiming Jesus was insane or a bigot and homophobe?:

You are not god's spokes person. You cannot speak for all of Christianity.

And just for fun:
Religious paranoia is a condition which has been compared to extremism and intolerance.[1] It has been cited as a possible contributor to political violence.[2][3]

It is often related to splitting, psychological projection, a desire to maintain a sense of purity in situations of real or perceived persecution, and rigid and unchallengeable attitudes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_paranoia

"I am the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by Me."

- Jesus called Christ.

Paranoia or psychosis? Now obviously no man is sane that asserts that right?

Lord, lunatic or liar right?

Don't bother telling me which you pick. I know what the STOP sign defines. I've gotten a ticket for failure to follow the immutability of its message.

[99percentatheism]

The Gay Denomination.

For those people that desire same gender sexual behavior or thoughts, AND that claim to be a Christian and claim that their beliefs and theology can fit the New Testament witness, instead of waging an endless, fruitless and vicious war on other Christians - that will NEVER accept their gay doctrines and dogmas . . ., - why won't they just declare a new and alternative denomination, just like Watch Tower theological adherants and Mormons?

Why the need to join forces with anti-Christian and secularist movements to attack "Bible believing" Christians?

Afterall, in referencing the New Testament, there is no justifiable comparison of sex acts to being a slave (slavery), or the charge of bigotry and hatefulness in holding that marriage is a man and a woman.

Why not just start an "Out and Proud" Gay Denomination?

Why haven't all of the pro gay, anti and non-Christians, here just agreed with this OP?

It seems so simple and fair.