Is homosexuality worse than heterosexual infidelity?

[Moses Yoder]

I don't normally copy and paste an article but this is great stuff. At the end I have a question.

The morning after Chick-fil-A day
AUGUST 2, 2012 BY MIKE PATZ 1 COMMENT

Its the morning after the Chick-fil-A drama and Im still chewing.

I remember the day I was sitting next to an incredibly nice gay guy, enjoying a really good conversation when he dropped the ultimate conversation-killer.

What do you do for a living?

I hate that question. I hate that question because people cant help but size you up when they hear the answer. I hate that question because were already prone to think of ourselves as human doings instead of human beings. I hate that question because of what it does to people when they find out what I do.

Ive often tried to find ways around the question. Ive told people I work with non-profit organizations (this is true). Ive told people that I write (this is true). Ive even told people that I am a spiritual guru that assists people in opening their third eye (I really like this one). For whatever reason, on that day, I just cut to the chase. I work as a pastor of a church.

Everything changed. His next words went something like this:

Listen, Im gay and Im content with who I am. Im sure you are going to say that I was not born this way, and I wont argue the point. For a significant part of my childhood I was violated by a neighbor and then an uncle. Did that play a role in my sexual orientation? Possibly. I also know many people that had a trouble-free childhood and they turned out very happily gay. Regardless of how it occurred, this is who I am now and I make no apologies for the man I have become. If God has a problem with a man who tries to be true to himself, then I have a problem with a God that allows these kinds of things to happen to kids like me in the first place.

I kept thinking how much easier it would have been if I said I was a writer.


Fortunately, Jesus has a way of showing up in the middle of conversations just like these, and on that day He did not disappoint. My friend shared his heart, and I shared mine. Ive never seen people change via argument, which is why I prefer to help people taste and see that the Lord is good.

This is where Christians tend to blow it.

They taste really bad. They serve up some really Biblical truth in some really nauseating ways. They major on minors and minor on majors. They tend to be extremely unaware of their pride, and pride is like bad breath " everybody knows you have it, except for you. Its always easy to scream the loudest about sins you do not personally struggle with.

So why are we yelling?

Im still not sure why Christians are so militant in their opposition of homosexual immorality while they seem to go so mild with their opposition of heterosexual immorality. I hear the concern about homosexuality and the catch phrase is often family values: Imagine how much it will mess up a child who is being raised by two women, the reasoning goes. A kid needs both a father and a mother, we say. Yet the gays I speak with often wonder how the church can talk about family values when 50-60% of Christian couples divorce. Talk about family values. So a community of people that do not stay married is trying to talk to us about marital morality. How ironic.

In light of the fact that Christians have just as much pre-marital sex and watch just as much porn and divorce just as frequently why arent we more embarrassed to speak out on the issue of homosexual sin? Good question.

One guy said, Its funny how you can claim the grace of God to cover heterosexual sin while saying that homosexual sin is beyond the reach of Gods grace.

That brings me to all the Chick"fil-A drama.

I get why Chick-fil-A day looked so annoying to so many people yesterday. I understand why people have planned a kiss-in this Friday. And I can see why people shake their heads when they read yet another homophobic Facebook post.

Church people ask, why wont our culture repent? My answer: because repentance is a learned behavior. Someone has to model it. I tell parents that its silly to expect a child to repent when they have never seen a parent repent. And its futile to wait for a culture to repent when a culture has never seen the Church repent.

Is the real problem with our culture the unrepentant gay community? No. Its an unrepentant Church.

I am so sorry today for all the hatred that Christians have dished out toward gays. I am so sorry for all of the homophobic sarcasm that has come from the pulpits of Christian ministers. I am so sorry for the way we pick and choose which sins to condemn. I am so sorry that we have claimed to follow Jesus while we neglected widows and orphans, and then engaged in gossip and gluttony. I am so sorry that we have provided such a bad example for the rest of society to follow. Im embarrassed, Im ashamed, and I repent. Im serious. I repent.

Yet Im also concerned that when our culture most needs to hear truth, Christians dont know how to tell it.

Weve come to a dangerous moment in culture, and Christians are ill-equipped to handle it. We have reached the point where disagreement is now seen as hatred. I read an article today where a woman was appealing to Christians to recognize their hateful crimes against the homosexual community. I nodded in agreement, but decided to keep reading to see how she itemized these crimes. Paragraph after paragraph described the hurt and rejection resulting from these offenses, but it took a while to get to the actual crime: Christians claim that homosexuality is a sin. I was stunned. Disagreement was equated with hate.

Christians have a substantial challenge on their hands because every generation and every culture is going to disagree with Gods truth at some point. How interesting that our USAmerican culture considers Christianity to be closed-minded on the issue of sexual morality, while the majority of world religions are in agreement in opposition to the USA position on sexuality. Is USA culture not closed-minded for claiming that all these other religions are wrong? Is it not hypocrisy to say that we will be tolerant with everybody " except the people we consider intolerant. Closed-mindedness is not just a religious thing, its a human thing.

If ever Christians needed some good breath, it is now.

Because we have to kiss this world with the truth of God.

The problem is, no matter how good your kiss, your breath can ruin the whole experience. And no matter how much truth we bring, if it does not drip with grace and humility, it always falls flat.

Im not asking Christians to stop telling the truth, Im asking them to brush their teeth.

What does that look like? The apostle Paul said to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy towards all people. (Titus 3:2)

Can you imagine what would happen if an entire chunk of Christians decided to embrace the Titus 3:2 approach? Will people be staging protests and kiss-ins to protest Chick-fil-A? Maybe. But the way of Jesus is to speak evil of no one. Has Chick-fil-A been bullied? Yes. But the kingdom of Jesus response is to avoid quarreling. Is there more drama to come as our culture becomes increasingly polarized? Of course. But if God is our Father, then we have to start showing the family resemblance, being gentle and showing perfect courtesy. This should have an effect on the way we post our thoughts on Facebook. Or talk to angry people at work. Or wait in line at Chick-fil-A.

You see, we cant shrink back on truth-telling or we dishonor the very Gospel. But when we bring the truth of Jesus we have to do it in the Spirit of Jesus.

Or stop being surprised when our culture doesnt want a kiss.

Is homosexuality worse than heterosexual infidelity? If not, why do Christians hate gay people so much? If the two are equally bad, why do so many Christians who would never be gay cheat on their wife?

[KCKID]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

The problem that has occurred within mainstream Christianity is that 'the Bible' has actually become 'Jesus'. Christianity per se is so simple that anyone can follow the MAIN teaching of Jesus without all of the additional 'fluff'. The message of Jesus is LOVE and not CONDEMNATION. While we all know this it doesn't seem to sink in with many. It's not the focusing on the perceived sins of others but on walking a mile in the mocassins of others. People 'sin' for all kinds of reasons and it's oftentimes not simply because they are wicked. Few people are 'wicked' per se. Oftentimes, in fact, a 'sin' might only be so-called in the mind of the beholder. That said, I have seen no effort whatever by the anti-gay people on this forum to even CONSIDER why a gay person is a gay person to begin with. On the contrary, all I hear from these people is the continual parrotting of sin! sin! sin! SIN ...what an utterly STUPID word that is! Just think about it . . .

Jesus appears to have turned a blind eye to the 'common sinner' while He more set His sights upon those who consider themselves pious and zero in on the perceived sins or the more obvious sinful acts of others. Jesus clearly demonstrated this in the story of the adultrous woman. Whether that story actually happened is not nearly as important as the message it gives. It demonstrated that Jesus does not condemn but that he forgives. It also demonstrates His total disinterest in the Pharisaical ones among us. And this is why, I believe, that many tend to disregard the opinions/posts of people that smack of condemnation and show a total lack of any concern for those that they condemn. Such people as the former, though perhaps unwittingly, are actually demonstrating Jesus when they ignore the pious rants of the Pharisees.

[Allahakbar]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

[noshameinChrist]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

The problem that has occurred within mainstream Christianity is that 'the Bible' has actually become 'Jesus'. Christianity per se is so simple that anyone can follow the MAIN teaching of Jesus without all of the additional 'fluff'. The message of Jesus is LOVE and not CONDEMNATION. While we all know this it doesn't seem to sink in with many. It's not the focusing on the perceived sins of others but on walking a mile in the mocassins of others. People 'sin' for all kinds of reasons and it's oftentimes not simply because they are wicked. Few people are 'wicked' per se. Oftentimes, in fact, a 'sin' might only be so-called in the mind of the beholder. That said, I have seen no effort whatever by the anti-gay people on this forum to even CONSIDER why a gay person is a gay person to begin with. On the contrary, all I hear from these people is the continual parrotting of sin! sin! sin! SIN ...what an utterly STUPID word that is! Just think about it . . .

Jesus appears to have turned a blind eye to the 'common sinner' while He more set His sights upon those who consider themselves pious and zero in on the perceived sins or the more obvious sinful acts of others. Jesus clearly demonstrated this in the story of the adultrous woman. Whether that story actually happened is not nearly as important as the message it gives. It demonstrated that Jesus does not condemn but that he forgives. It also demonstrates His total disinterest in the Pharisaical ones among us. And this is why, I believe, that many tend to disregard the opinions/posts of people that smack of condemnation and show a total lack of any concern for those that they condemn. Such people as the former, though perhaps unwittingly, are actually demonstrating Jesus when they ignore the pious rants of the Pharisees.

Please note, the last words Jesus said to the woman caught in adultery was "GO AND SIN NO MORE" (John 8:11). You are right, Jesus did forgive and show mercy in that instance. But, he did not condone her reported sexual immorality. He showed her LOVE by both forgiving her, and by admonishing her about how to live. So often people embrace Jesus' love and forgiveness, but they want to do whatever they want to do. This was never the teaching of Christ. Hence, he said "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance" (Matthew 9:13). To "repent" means to change your life to conform to the ways of Christ.

[noshameinChrist]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

We've already gone over Romans 1:27. You say that has to do with "pagan" worship, and ignore the clear references to homosexual conduct as being unacceptable conduct for followers of Christ. Again, it is your choice whether or not to reject certain teachings. God is the judge, not me.

Paul was certainly fallible. He admitted such himself (Romans 7:14ff). The same applies to Peter, John, Matthew, and all the other apostles. Nevertheless, all these men were sent by Christ (at least this is what I believe).

[Allahakbar]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

We've already gone over Romans 1:27. You say that has to do with "pagan" worship, and ignore the clear references to homosexual conduct as being unacceptable conduct for followers of Christ. Again, it is your choice whether or not to reject certain teachings. God is the judge, not me.

Paul was certainly fallible. He admitted such himself (Romans 7:14ff). The same applies to Peter, John, Matthew, and all the other apostles. Nevertheless, all these men were sent by Christ (at least this is what I believe).

I never made mention of pagan or Jewish worship. I pointed out that the passage doesn't ever mention SIN. (That is one of the million or so comments you need to make in order that the bible says what you mean)

27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Now show me where it declares that behaviour to be SIN.
In fact Romans 1:26 tells us that god made them behave as they did. So is it god's sin?
In fact all of Romans-1 talks about the lusts that god made them partake of.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

[noshameinChrist]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

We've already gone over Romans 1:27. You say that has to do with "pagan" worship, and ignore the clear references to homosexual conduct as being unacceptable conduct for followers of Christ. Again, it is your choice whether or not to reject certain teachings. God is the judge, not me.

Paul was certainly fallible. He admitted such himself (Romans 7:14ff). The same applies to Peter, John, Matthew, and all the other apostles. Nevertheless, all these men were sent by Christ (at least this is what I believe).

I never made mention of pagan or Jewish worship. I pointed out that the passage doesn't ever mention SIN. (That is one of the million or so comments you need to make in order that the bible says what you mean)

27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Now show me where it declares that behaviour to be SIN.
In fact Romans 1:26 tells us that god made them behave as they did. So is it god's sin?
In fact all of Romans-1 talks about the lusts that god made them partake of.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

My friend, what do you think the word "shameful" connotes in those passages you've cited? Honestly.

[Allahakbar]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

We've already gone over Romans 1:27. You say that has to do with "pagan" worship, and ignore the clear references to homosexual conduct as being unacceptable conduct for followers of Christ. Again, it is your choice whether or not to reject certain teachings. God is the judge, not me.

Paul was certainly fallible. He admitted such himself (Romans 7:14ff). The same applies to Peter, John, Matthew, and all the other apostles. Nevertheless, all these men were sent by Christ (at least this is what I believe).

I never made mention of pagan or Jewish worship. I pointed out that the passage doesn't ever mention SIN. (That is one of the million or so comments you need to make in order that the bible says what you mean)

27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Now show me where it declares that behaviour to be SIN.
In fact Romans 1:26 tells us that god made them behave as they did. So is it god's sin?
In fact all of Romans-1 talks about the lusts that god made them partake of.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

My friend, what do you think the word "shameful" connotes in those passages you've cited? Honestly.

Does it mean that you get to declare it sin and claim that Jesus said it?
Or does it mean that you get to declare it sin and admit that god was the cause of it?
Or is it shameful?
You tell me.

[noshameinChrist]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

We've already gone over Romans 1:27. You say that has to do with "pagan" worship, and ignore the clear references to homosexual conduct as being unacceptable conduct for followers of Christ. Again, it is your choice whether or not to reject certain teachings. God is the judge, not me.

Paul was certainly fallible. He admitted such himself (Romans 7:14ff). The same applies to Peter, John, Matthew, and all the other apostles. Nevertheless, all these men were sent by Christ (at least this is what I believe).

I never made mention of pagan or Jewish worship. I pointed out that the passage doesn't ever mention SIN. (That is one of the million or so comments you need to make in order that the bible says what you mean)

27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Now show me where it declares that behaviour to be SIN.
In fact Romans 1:26 tells us that god made them behave as they did. So is it god's sin?
In fact all of Romans-1 talks about the lusts that god made them partake of.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

My friend, what do you think the word "shameful" connotes in those passages you've cited? Honestly.

Does it mean that you get to declare it sin and claim that Jesus said it?
Or does it mean that you get to declare it sin and admit that god was the cause of it?
Or is it shameful?
You tell me.

I've noticed that you like to answer questions with questions. I think you can reasonably surmise that in context "shameful" connotes sin in the passages. Of course you can argue otherwise (and you probably will), but honestly I think you know better.

[Allahakbar]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

We've already gone over Romans 1:27. You say that has to do with "pagan" worship, and ignore the clear references to homosexual conduct as being unacceptable conduct for followers of Christ. Again, it is your choice whether or not to reject certain teachings. God is the judge, not me.

Paul was certainly fallible. He admitted such himself (Romans 7:14ff). The same applies to Peter, John, Matthew, and all the other apostles. Nevertheless, all these men were sent by Christ (at least this is what I believe).

I never made mention of pagan or Jewish worship. I pointed out that the passage doesn't ever mention SIN. (That is one of the million or so comments you need to make in order that the bible says what you mean)

27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Now show me where it declares that behaviour to be SIN.
In fact Romans 1:26 tells us that god made them behave as they did. So is it god's sin?
In fact all of Romans-1 talks about the lusts that god made them partake of.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

My friend, what do you think the word "shameful" connotes in those passages you've cited? Honestly.

Does it mean that you get to declare it sin and claim that Jesus said it?
Or does it mean that you get to declare it sin and admit that god was the cause of it?
Or is it shameful?
You tell me.

I've noticed that you like to answer questions with questions. I think you can reasonably surmise that in context "shameful" connotes sin in the passages. Of course you can argue otherwise (and you probably will), but honestly I think you know better.

Why is the word shameful used if what was meant was SINFUL. There is ample opportunity to say what YOU mean and it never happens. The passage never says what YOU mean. Does that tell you anything?

[noshameinChrist]

[Replying to post 106 by KCKID]

Actually, your question is not frustrating at all (at least not for me - as a Christian). I do think however that it is steeped in absolute rejection of scripture. I think you know that scripture opposes homosexual relationships.

I think it is more courageous to simply say "I reject this" instead of bantering about with insincere questions about whether Jesus specifically and expressly condemns homosexual relationships.

Bottom line, it is your CHOICE whether or not to follow Christ. Nobody can take that right to choose away from you. I personally would encourage to follow Christ, but I realize I cannot make you do it.

The Bible teach that at one time period God overlooked ignorance, but now he commands all men to repent (Acts 17:30). Whether or not you understand or believe this will not make it any less true.

And if you wish to claim christianity and to follow the teachings of christ and christ makes absolutely no mention of homosexuality then you by rejecting homosexuality on the basis of christs teachings are committing HERESY.
Do you follow christ's teaching?

As I have said already, I believe Christ has spoken on the subject. This was done through at least of one of his apostles - Paul (Roman 1:27). In addition, when Christ spoke of the subject of sexual relationships it was always between a man and a woman (e.g. Matthew 5:31ff). You simply are wrong my friend.

OK then a passage where Paul calls it a sin? Not that it matters because you are a follower of christ and paul never met christ. Yes, yes I know he says he had a vision. I wasn't aware that anyone claims Paul's infallibility.
But a passage where this erstwhile apostle declares homosexuality a sin may help your cause.

Oh and since the only record we have of "Jesus speaking" is the NT and it does not appear there, your belief would appear heretical.

We've already gone over Romans 1:27. You say that has to do with "pagan" worship, and ignore the clear references to homosexual conduct as being unacceptable conduct for followers of Christ. Again, it is your choice whether or not to reject certain teachings. God is the judge, not me.

Paul was certainly fallible. He admitted such himself (Romans 7:14ff). The same applies to Peter, John, Matthew, and all the other apostles. Nevertheless, all these men were sent by Christ (at least this is what I believe).

I never made mention of pagan or Jewish worship. I pointed out that the passage doesn't ever mention SIN. (That is one of the million or so comments you need to make in order that the bible says what you mean)

27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Now show me where it declares that behaviour to be SIN.
In fact Romans 1:26 tells us that god made them behave as they did. So is it god's sin?
In fact all of Romans-1 talks about the lusts that god made them partake of.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

My friend, what do you think the word "shameful" connotes in those passages you've cited? Honestly.

Does it mean that you get to declare it sin and claim that Jesus said it?
Or does it mean that you get to declare it sin and admit that god was the cause of it?
Or is it shameful?
You tell me.

I've noticed that you like to answer questions with questions. I think you can reasonably surmise that in context "shameful" connotes sin in the passages. Of course you can argue otherwise (and you probably will), but honestly I think you know better.

Why is the word shameful used if what was meant was SINFUL. There is ample opportunity to say what YOU mean and it never happens. The passage never says what YOU mean. Does that tell you anything?

contextual clues my friend, contextual clues. Again, I think you know this already.