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]

And sins UNREPENTED of are worse than sins repented of. Sins repented of no longer exist.

Homosexuality is a worse sin than infidelity because adultery is a sin repented of.

Do the math.

Tell me something, 99percent. The above is something that you've mentioned a number of times ...that scriptural adulterers, i.e. divorced/remarrieds, can continue to 'live in scriptural sin' as long as they repent. In other words, once they repent it's not necessary for them to have their marriage annulled and forever on live a celibate life. They can continue with their adultrous relationship because they've repented. Do I have that right? If so, then would it not be just as simple - and as fair - for a homosexual to repent of their 'homosexuality' but still live their life as a practicing homosexual? If not, what, precisely, is the difference?

If you don't understand what I just wrote I'll rephrase the question and present it again. I await your response.

[Ooberman]

Here's another change from your early fellow Superstitionists:

Cynocephaly
In the very early days of Christianity, there were a few carry-overs from older mythology. One was the belief in cynocephaly (see item 5), or people with the heads of dogs. It was thought that many of the more distant peoples, like central Africans or Indians, had the heads of dogs, many believing that these people would go back to normal once baptized. Different saints who are said to be from distant lands, like St Christopher were depicted with a dogs head (see above). There was even myths about descendants of Cain, who inhabited Canaan before the Israelis, that barked and ate human flesh. Marco Polo was said to be surprised he didnt see any dog-headed people in China, though he claims many people he talked to had encountered dog headed barbarians in Asia.

http://listverse.com/2011/01/20/top-10- ... n-beliefs/

I notice no Christian wants to touch this with a ten foot pole..



"That's obviously wrong and crazy!" (I bet they say.)


Whereas a man rising from the dead to somehow atone for sins isn't?

[99percentatheism]

Here's another change from your early fellow Superstitionists:

Cynocephaly
In the very early days of Christianity, there were a few carry-overs from older mythology. One was the belief in cynocephaly (see item 5), or people with the heads of dogs. It was thought that many of the more distant peoples, like central Africans or Indians, had the heads of dogs, many believing that these people would go back to normal once baptized. Different saints who are said to be from distant lands, like St Christopher were depicted with a dogs head (see above). There was even myths about descendants of Cain, who inhabited Canaan before the Israelis, that barked and ate human flesh. Marco Polo was said to be surprised he didnt see any dog-headed people in China, though he claims many people he talked to had encountered dog headed barbarians in Asia.

http://listverse.com/2011/01/20/top-10- ... n-beliefs/

I notice no Christian wants to touch this with a ten foot pole..



"That's obviously wrong and crazy!" (I bet they say.)


Whereas a man rising from the dead to somehow atone for sins isn't?

"Test all things, and hold firmly onto the truth."

People don't have dog heads.

You actually were expecting someone to respond to that desperation?

Now you "serioulsy" believe that a triilion times a trillion set of accidents created a mud puddle became the human race. That is the bottom line of evolution no matter the spin and no matter how many PhD's the spinmasters posses.

[Ooberman]

People don't have dog heads.

People don't rise from the dead, either.

[99percentatheism]

People don't have dog heads.

People don't rise from the dead, either.

Jesus did. As did others. I believe the reports in the New Testament.

You are free to disapprove of them all you want to.

Now how about addressing the OP and leaving the Christian bash-fest for another thread?

[Allahakbar]

People don't have dog heads.

People don't rise from the dead, either.

Jesus did. As did others. I believe the reports in the New Testament.

You are free to disapprove of them all you want to.

Now how about addressing the OP and leaving the Christian bash-fest for another thread?

99 did you read the article in the OP? What was your personal take on that article?

[99percentatheism]

People don't have dog heads.

People don't rise from the dead, either.

Jesus did. As did others. I believe the reports in the New Testament.

You are free to disapprove of them all you want to.

Now how about addressing the OP and leaving the Christian bash-fest for another thread?

99 did you read the article in the OP? What was your personal take on that article?

In my opinion it sounded like the standard theological rubbish that is printed on many a pop culture lib website.

Like this:

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.

The Gospels show that even when you ARE kind to people that you still, must disapprove of, they will not allow you to live in peace. That "truth-telling" in the Gospels, shows that non and anti-Christians should be left to their own perversions and debauchery. I have been teaching on this for a long time now. Christians should have NEVER said a word about gay marriage. It has nothing what so ever to do with Christian life. In some regards, we get what we deserve for involving ourselves in the world and its ways.

Truth-telling demands an honesty that people like you label as bigotry (and hate and phobia etc., etc., etc.. You have accusaed me of this on at least two occasions and your vitriol is standard for your kind. Yet, I have never once demanded that you or any other gay activist live as a Christian should.

Go do as thou wilteth.

How many people did Jesus mean when he told His disciples to shake the dust off towards? It looks as if He was describing a fairly common occurence.

Have you ever seperated the wheat from the chaff? A lot of chaff and a small amount of wheat.

We just watched "the majority" of a country just celebrate the death of the defense of marriage.

Man that is an ominous and prophetic occurence.

[KCKID]

How about responding to my Post 200, 99percent? Once again ...how come scriptural adulterers, i.e. divorcees/remarrieds, can continue to 'live in sin' once they repent but repentent (?) homosexuals have to, from then on, live a life of celibacy? How come no lifetime of celibacy for the adulterers? If this question is too hard then just tell me so.

You keep on and on about the NT disapproval of across the board homosexuality even though I've shown a number of times that the (very few) texts relating to homosexuality are open to interpretation. Indeed, they ALL appear to be related to public idolatry or/and temple prostitution and nothing to do with what one might do in private. In fact, private intimacy between people would have nothing to do with Paul, Jude, etc. They would therefore have no cause to write about it. Now, would they? Anyway. how come your interpretation is the correct one and other interpretations are the wrong ones? How can you actually prove that you are correct and the others are not? In fact, can you do so?

By the way, that's a challenge if you're interested in taking it up . . .

[KCKID]

Double Post. Forum's fault . . .

[99percentatheism]

Ooberman

Ooberman

Quite the huge Red Herring you've tossed into this thread. But I'll answer your posints with pleasuer. Although you seemed to have given my answers for me. I'm used to people like you.

The Church isn't going to die because of gay activism and the secular authorities legislating same sex marriage. It will be persecuted, but nothing more than that.

The Church will change, as it has always done.

Places called Churches and denominations maybe.

Not maybe. They have and will.

The Churches are the manifestation of Christianity.

You may want to look up the developement of the Jewish Synagouge. I've been told by Rabbi's that it was the model for "Churches." I've been to Synagouge on many an occasion and without doubt they look like Churches in many respects.

They are the brick and mortar shops in which theologians sell their product.

That's a perfect description of the places that I designed this thread about.

I'm glad to see you recognize the changes in the Church and in Christianity.

And I'm glad you affirm my wit and knowledge so honestly.

I rather like the decdent interaction with you rather than the bash-fest events.