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?

[99percentatheism]

KCKID:

Here's a question I should have asked 12 months ago. 99percent ...is homosexuality a salvation issue?

Yes. Unrepentent sin is a salvation issue. promoting and encouraging sin, sinning and sinners is a salvation issue. Though in the unsaved and rejection of the Gospel category.

If it is, would you point me to the scripture that tells us this?

Romans 1

Romans 2

If it isn't, then what the heck is the point of this thread?

Denominations may be like tumors or they may be like healthy parts of the body. As you know, I use Jude frequently for this topic because it is dead-on accurate to todays world and worldview of liberalsim to do so. I visited a huge Church in a major city recently that was not a Catholic Church and the Jude pendants are completely sold out. I am not the only person seeing the signs of the times. One thing about the vitriolic nature of the Says versus Christians issues, it is finally driving people to Church, and, to see what is heading at the Church lke a freight train.

The OP is about the incompatibility of gay culture and Christian truth, but it is at least a civil approach to it. Like Mormo0ns and LDS theology, it is far better off being well defined in its own locations, rather than to mix with the faith delivered only once to the saints.

Now one thing that is utter fascinating about Jude's expose of the sexually immoral "in the Church," he doesn't seem to indicate to kick them out of it. Just to recognize them and their ways and to avoid them like the plague. Or rather, like an STD or other nasty communicable disease.

I was just introduced to a different version of the New Testament than I usually employ, by a guy at a Christian book store I visited recently. The following (from Jude of course) is a good take on the issue:

Show mercy toward those who have doubts; save others by snatching them out of the fire; and to others show mercy mixed with fear, but hate their very clothes, stained by their sinful lusts.

By the way, that appears to be directed at people that are already IN The Church.

Remember, the propaganda phrase and neologism "gay" is a very, very, very, recent invention of the licentious crowd.

KID, you seem the perfect person to start a gay denom, because you do sometimes offer up some scripture here and there. Go for it and see if your efforts are blessed.

[99percentatheism]

Allahakbar

[Replying to post 1831 by 99percentatheism]

It would have been simpler for you to just say you couldn't answer my questions, rather than trying to avoid them like you have.

Ahhhhh, the ol' liberal comeback: "Where's your proof?

It gets supplied.

Liberal comeback number 2: "Where's your evidence?"

It gets supplied.

"Where's your proof?"

The merry-go-round of propaganda ad infinitum . . .

Sir, dude, miss, madam, or whatever,

People that claim to be religious and that also claim to engage in or encourage homosexuality should invent their own dogma/religion, or attempt the denomination game to ply their belief system.

The OP is historically civil and sensible.

Your theological questions should dwell there.

I think that either your monitor is faulty or the computer supplying the information that appears on that monitor is faulty. Or perhaps you imagine things that do not appear on said monitor to be on that monitor?
Just to clarify for you, what?

Just agree with the OP and its sensible nature and direct your activism and encouraging of homosexuality there theologically.

The vitriol directed at Christians that keep to the orthodoxy towards the inappropriateness of homosexuality can simply be diffused in the religious setting by open and declared gay religions and gay religious places. Society can move on from there. Then the supposed connection between "gay Christians" and orthodox bible-believing Christians, can be entertained in simple theological differences of opinion. Just like the other denominations do now.

You just don't see Mormons suing Christians for hate crimes.

Thread back on track.

I have spent some considerable time and effort over these days attempting to enlighten you as to the teachings of the man you use in the name of the religion you claim to represent.

Are you trying to hurt me? My sides almost split open from laughter.

You call yourself a christian.

I call myself a Christian.

That name is derived from the character in a book commonly known as the New Testament.

You get a gold star.

That character is a man (or god) called jesus christ.

Quite the Character. allakbar

You claim that this man/god condemns behaviour such as love between same sex adults and yet as I have pointed out to you, this jesus has consistently taught.... LOVE EVERYONE, in the NT.

The rudeness by which you use the lower case is cliche pal.

In fact His parables and dealings with people are far more complicated than a stoned and lascivious hippy.

And I do love my enemies. This thread.

In fact I have shown you repeatedly that this jesus never ever mentions same sex relationships unless you count his imprecation for everybody to love everybody.

And I have shown that trying to find validation from silence is absurd.

Any honest reading of that command must mean that same sex love is CONDONED by jesus.

An orthodox Jew? A teacher that taught what a marriage is? Very detailed as well. And the silence on same gender "marriage is deafeing.

Absurdity bell tools. Guess for who?

I am honestly at a loss to understand why an alleged follower of this jesus would, not only, defy this command but in fact try to teach against it.

If you were trying to impart honesty, you would declare the inappropriateness of same sex marriage ever being attempted to be justified as a Christian concept. AND, you would capitalize Jesus et al.

It is obvious from your rejection of the teachings of Christ that you should no longer claim to be a follower of Christ and should therefore start a belief system created around your own teachings and give your religion a name that doesn't associate yourself or your beliefs with the teachings found in the NT.

You should look through this amazingly long thread. Your pitiful attempts insulting is way behind others. I had some guy in one post call out demons to harrass me. I did chip a fingernail on my keyborad while mocking the attempt on my life.

Now this is only my opinion and I mean no disrespect at all.

It is my opinion that you are not telling the truth about that.

Do you understand my POV?

Are you a Christian?

As you can see, I hope, I have attempted to return to the theme of the thread. I think as per your request, I hope.

You have not. You haven't tried even the slightest theological position to insert into The Church the justification to insert a very worldy behavior where it cannot fit.

Now, if you can produce just one piece of scripture that unambiguously declares the righteousness AND holiness of gay sexual behavior, than I will excuse your digs and insults above.

I'll give you a push: David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, the Roman Slave owner.

But please know that these gay theological positions are as easy to disprove as someone saying Jesus was an American.

But we'll have fun while it lasts, seeing your attempts at real answers.

And please, rise above the need to slight by using lower case.

[99percentatheism]

KCKID
99percent, I'm looking forward to your response regarding Allahakbar's nicely constructed post (above) and my previous question that asked: Is one's sexuality (i.e. homosexuality) a salvation issue?

KID, I'm glad you found another friend.

But his use of the lower case is a common and ubiquitous insult technique used by his kind.

Thanks.

You're welcome.

As always.

Now, in the Christian concept . . . when a person is unrepentant of their sexual sins and VERY, "Proud" about their licentiousness, and not only wants to be celebrated in these sins, but wants to demand to encourage other people's children to engage in those kinds of sins, where is your theological support for these kinds of people?

[McCulloch]

Now, in the Christian concept . . . when a person is unrepentant of their sexual sins and VERY, "Proud" about their licentiousness, and not only wants to be celebrated in these sins, but wants to demand to encourage other people's children to engage in those kinds of sins, where is your theological support for these kinds of people?

As I understand it, gay Christians still see licentiousness and promiscuity as sins. Where they differ from the more traditional Christians, is that they do not see same sex attraction and marriage as being sinful. They are not proud of their sinfulness, that would be contrary to the very core of Christianity. They just have a different list of behaviors which they see as being sinful, just as my Methodist grandmother had a different list of behaviors that she saw as being sinful: any alcoholic consumption, playing cards and dancing. To her, those alleged Christians who are proud of their licentious behavior where unmarried men and women touch each other in dance are all on the pathway to hell.

[Danmark]

Now, in the Christian concept . . . when a person is unrepentant of their sexual sins and VERY, "Proud" about their licentiousness, and not only wants to be celebrated in these sins, but wants to demand to encourage other people's children to engage in those kinds of sins, where is your theological support for these kinds of people?

As I understand it, gay Christians still see licentiousness and promiscuity as sins. Where they differ from the more traditional Christians, is that they do not see same sex attraction and marriage as being sinful. They are not proud of their sinfulness, that would be contrary to the very core of Christianity. They just have a different list of behaviors which they see as being sinful, just as my Methodist grandmother had a different list of behaviors that she saw as being sinful: any alcoholic consumption, playing cards and dancing. To her, those alleged Christians who are proud of their licentious behavior where unmarried men and women touch each other in dance are all on the pathway to hell.

There have always been those who sought to divide the word so carefully they missed the broader point, of loving and uplifting one another. They focus on blame and detail. Jesus spoke to this in Luke, Chapter 7:

30...but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.)

31“To what then shall I compare the people of this generation, and what are they like? 32They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling to one another,

“‘We played the flute for you, and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge, and you did not weep.’

33For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ 34The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ 35Yet wisdom is justified by all her children.�

Today's Pharisees are those, in the church and outside it, who focus on the details of some pet sin they despise instead of seeing the central message of love and hope; that wisdom has many expressions, that it is 'justified by all her children.'

[KCKID]

Here's a question I should have asked 12 months ago. 99percent ...is homosexuality a salvation issue?

Yes. Unrepentent sin is a salvation issue. promoting and encouraging sin, sinning and sinners is a salvation issue. Though in the unsaved and rejection of the Gospel category.

While heterosexual and homosexual humans sin on a daily basis I don't believe that homosexuality per se is a sin to be repented of. I just don't see how it can be ...no more that heterosexuality per se being a sin. One's sexual orientation being equated to 'a wrongdoing' just doesn't make a lick of sense.

If it does, would you point me to the scripture that tells us this?

Romans 1 Romans 2

While I've addressed and rebutted those particular scriptures a number of times I have to ask you ...is Paul the arbitrator of who is saved and who is not? Sounds a tad blaspemous to me.

Denominations may be like tumors or they may be like healthy parts of the body. As you know, I use Jude frequently for this topic because it is dead-on accurate to todays world and worldview of liberalsim to do so. I visited a huge Church in a major city recently that was not a Catholic Church and the Jude pendants are completely sold out. I am not the only person seeing the signs of the times. One thing about the vitriolic nature of the Says versus Christians issues, it is finally driving people to Church, and, to see what is heading at the Church lke a freight train.

I don't doubt that there are a whole slew of Judgmental Christians who find fault with everyone and everything except themselves and theirs. I persponally, however, have no desire to belong to a church (huge or small) that is bound together in homophobic unity.

The OP is about the incompatibility of gay culture and Christian truth,

Christian=Christ-follower. The only professed Christians I see that are not compatible to 'Christian truth' are the fundamentalists or the Pharisees. One more time, Jesus gave no comment about the homosexual but He sure said plenty about the self-righteous. We already know what Jesus would say to you and yours if you hauled a 'practicing' homosexual to Jesus for condemnation, don't we? And yet, you do this on an almost daily basis. Haven't you learned anything from that story yet?

but it is at least a civil approach to it.

Not hardly. You desire those that YOU don't like keep as far away as possible so that the 'pious ones' are not contaminated by those that are different in sexual orientation only. But, who knows your reasoning behind the OP title ...perhaps there might be some closet gays in your church that could be swayed to 'come out' if the gays are allowed to assimilate with them ...?

Like Mormons and LDS theology, it is far better off being well defined in its own locations, rather than to mix with the faith delivered only once to the saints.

Oh man ...there are only so many times I can respond to that one.

Now one thing that is utter fascinating about Jude's expose of the sexually immoral "in the Church," he doesn't seem to indicate to kick them out of it. Just to recognize them and their ways and to avoid them like the plague. Or rather, like an STD or other nasty communicable disease.

Isn't Jude long dead? You fawn all over him as though he's a current standing member of your local church.

I was just introduced to a different version of the New Testament than I usually employ, by a guy at a Christian book store I visited recently. The following (from Jude of course) is a good take on the issue:

Show mercy toward those who have doubts; save others by snatching them out of the fire; and to others show mercy mixed with fear, but hate their very clothes, stained by their sinful lusts.

By the way, that appears to be directed at people that are already IN The Church.

Would that not be more directed to those that are deluded into believing that they have reached the pinnacle of piety while, in reality, they are no different - perhaps worse - than those they condemn? I don't know, I really don't get too fanatical about the written words of long dead ancient men.

Remember, the propaganda phrase and neologism "gay" is a very, very, very, recent invention of the licentious crowd.

So is the term 'love child' as invented by licentious crowds of heterosexuals. And, while 'adulterer' has been around thousands of years, that word is never/hardly ever applied to the army of those within the church to whom it applies.

KID, you seem the perfect person to start a gay denom, because you do sometimes offer up some scripture here and there. Go for it and see if your efforts are blessed.

There is no need for a gay denomination. More and more mainstream Churches are accepting of gay people as it is. Stay tuned for a list of such Churches here in Australia.

[KCKID]

Why the need for a specifically 'Gay Church'? Below is a list of the most recently compiled "Gay Friendly" Churches in Australia.

WELCOMING GAY FRIENDLY CHURCHES IN AUSTRALIA

Integrity Adelaide. Adelaide. Anglican
Ashfield Parish Mission. Ashfield. Uniting Church
Burdekin Uniting Church. Ayr QLD. Uniting Church
Balmain Uniting Church. Balmain. Uniting Church
Blackwood Uniting Church. Blackwood, Adelaide. Uniting Church
Bondi Beach, Chapel By The Sea. Bondi Beach. Uniting Church
St. John’s Anglican Cathedral. Brisbane, QLD. Anglican
MCC Brisbane. Brisbane, QLD. MCC
New Way Community Chapel. Brisbane, QLD. Non-denominational
Brunswick Baptist Church. Brunswick. Baptist
Canberra Baptist Church. Canberra City. Baptist
Canberra City Uniting Church. Canberra City. Uniting Church
Church of the Trinity. Clarence Park. Uniting Church
Community Church of Saint Mark. Clifton Hill. Baptist
St. James’ Congregation. Curtin, Canberra. Uniting Church
Christ Church Anglican Cathedral. Darwin. Anglican
United Ecumenical Catholic Church. Dundas Valley. Ecumenical Catholic Church
Yilki Uniting Church. Encounter bay. Uniting Church
St. Chad’s Anglican Church. Fullarton. Anglican
Glebe Café Church. Glebe. Uniting Church
Gordon Uniting Church. Gordon. Uniting Church
MCC Good Shepherd. Granville. MCC
Homebush Uniting Church. Homebush. Uniting Church
Wayside Chapel Parish Mission. Kings Cross. Uniting Church
St. Ninian’s Congregation. Lyneham. Uniting Church
Integrity Melbourne. Melbourne. Anglican
Ashburton Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist
Box Hill Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist
Collins Street Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist
East Doncaster Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist
Footscray Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist
St. Kilda Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist
MCC Melbourne. Melbourne. MCC
Acts2Faith Fellowship. Melbourne. Non-denominational
Nambucca Heads Uniting Church. Nambucca Heads. Uniting Church
Hamilton Uniting Church. Newcastle. Uniting Church
North Adelaide Baptist Church. North Adelaide. Baptist
Paddington Uniting Church. Paddington. Uniting Church
The Open Door. Penrith. Community of Christ
Randwick Uniting Church. Randwick. Uniting Church
Strathfield Uniting Church. Strathfield. Uniting Church
St. Andrews Anglican Church. Subiaco. Anglican
St. James King Street. Sydney. Anglican
Community of Christ Our Hope. Sydney. Ecumenical Catholic Church of Australia
Crave MCC. Sydney, Paddington. MCC
MCC Sydney. Sydney. MCC
Pitt Street Congregation. Sydney. Uniting Church
South Sydney Uniting Church. Sydney. Uniting Church
Waverley Lugar Brae Uniting Church. Waverley. Uniting Church
Footscray Baptist Church. Victoria, Footscray. Baptist
South Yarra Community Baptist Church. Victoria. South Yarra. Baptist
St. Francis & St. Clare Liberal catholic Mission. Victoria. Liberal Catholic Church
Westgate Baptist Community. Yarraville. Baptist

[99percentatheism]

Now, in the Christian concept . . . when a person is unrepentant of their sexual sins and VERY, "Proud" about their licentiousness, and not only wants to be celebrated in these sins, but wants to demand to encourage other people's children to engage in those kinds of sins, where is your theological support for these kinds of people?

As I understand it, gay Christians still see licentiousness and promiscuity as sins.

Where? The Castro? Boystown in West Hollywood?

There's a difference in wanting to seem "judgmental" and having a debased population as part of your celebrated "community."

As I see it, the LGBT "Community" wants The Church to become part of the LGBT community and they have no desire to leave the world and its ways. They seem darwin-bent to be of the world and in it, yet ply their wares in The Church "too."

Where they differ from the more traditional Christians, is that they do not see same sex attraction and marriage as being sinful.

And that is where the world and its ways barges into The Chuch and threatens it with secular laws and morality to cave in or be caved in.

They are not proud of their sinfulness, that would be contrary to the very core of Christianity.

Redefining sin for a new pop culture and purely secular morality forcing its way into Christian truth is the very definition of heresy.

They just have a different list of behaviors which they see as being sinful,

And the OP shows where it should be plied.

. . . just as my Methodist grandmother had a different list of behaviors that she saw as being sinful: any alcoholic consumption, playing cards and dancing.

Now the cards thing, there may be scriptutre to back that up (but I doubt it), but the booze and the partying, your Grandma needs a bit of studying and less following along with the crowd.

To her, those alleged Christians who are proud of their licentious behavior where unmarried men and women touch each other in dance are all on the pathway to hell.

You mean the men and women that have spread STD's like a plague and have been the cause of the slaughter of tens of millions of unborn babies? Or those dancers that end up cruising and adulterous as a lifestyle choice? I would have to say that reality has them definately on the pathway to hell.

Now, do those lascivious dancehall adherants, do they demand to be protected by hate crimes laws to never be "insulted" by Christians that teach that their behaviors and antithetical to Christians life? Do they demand a congenital excuse for their licentiousness, debauchery and incompatible behaviors?

Here let me help you . . .

NO.

[99percentatheism]

Now, in the Christian concept . . . when a person is unrepentant of their sexual sins and VERY, "Proud" about their licentiousness, and not only wants to be celebrated in these sins, but wants to demand to encourage other people's children to engage in those kinds of sins, where is your theological support for these kinds of people?

As I understand it, gay Christians still see licentiousness and promiscuity as sins. Where they differ from the more traditional Christians, is that they do not see same sex attraction and marriage as being sinful. They are not proud of their sinfulness, that would be contrary to the very core of Christianity. They just have a different list of behaviors which they see as being sinful, just as my Methodist grandmother had a different list of behaviors that she saw as being sinful: any alcoholic consumption, playing cards and dancing. To her, those alleged Christians who are proud of their licentious behavior where unmarried men and women touch each other in dance are all on the pathway to hell.

There have always been those who sought to divide the word so carefully they missed the broader point, of loving and uplifting one another. They focus on blame and detail. Jesus spoke to this in Luke, Chapter 7:

30...but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.)

31“To what then shall I compare the people of this generation, and what are they like? 32They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling to one another,

“‘We played the flute for you, and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge, and you did not weep.’

33For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ 34The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ 35Yet wisdom is justified by all her children.�

Today's Pharisees are those, in the church and outside it, who focus on the details of some pet sin they despise instead of seeing the central message of love and hope; that wisdom has many expressions, that it is 'justified by all her children.'

It's always fascinating to see anti-Christians teaching Christians how to be Christians.

If you demand to enter that arena as judgmentally as you demand, then please continue in the word until you find that the LGBT demands come from a decidely secular power and have no roots, no foundation in sound doctrine. That is why it is effortless for you to demand to be their champion.

What's utterly fascinating, is that it is the atheist that immediately points out the "hypocrisy" of Christians preaching the Christian message and then doing the opposite. Nothing shines such a spotlight on that kind of hypocrisy than the crowd screaming for marriage and sexual morality to be reineveted by the secular world and then ramrodded down the throats of Christians as something that can be celebrated through scripture.

There is no such thing as same gender marriage anywhere supported, celebrated, encouraged or condoned in scripture.

We see just the opposite.

Now put on the judgment glasses. They fit better now that the log has been pulled from the eyes.

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 1845 by KCKID]

The time will come when people will not listen to sound doctrine, but will follow their own desires

and will collect for themselves more and more teachers who will tell them what they are itching to hear.

They will turn away from listening to the truth and give their attention to legends. But you must keep control of yourself in all circumstances; endure suffering, do the work of a preacher of the Good News, and perform your whole duty as a servant of God.

- Paul to a young Christian Pastor named Timothy