Will gays EVER be accepted by mainstream Christianity?

[KCKID]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[99percentatheism]

Joab
[Replying to post 97 by 99percentatheism]

You do notice that it says nothing about angels becoming men. You might imply that but it is not what the bible actually says.

It absolutely says that they are men. I offered the text. In the Jewish Bible used by Jewish people and the New Testament.

What is the type of angel/human intercourse that results in offspring?

It's not gay sex according to the Bible and nature. Other than that, I wasn't there to watch.

The angels were still a completely different species.

That became men. According to the Bible.

Remember that's why god created humanity according to the story.

What story? Where?

Besides if angels can create humans what makes god's efforts so wonderful?

God did it out of nothing. The angels needed to, you know, "do it" with a woman to get kids. I mean, you don't think that a man and a woman "create" people do you?

Um, I don't know if the rules here allow me to teach you how reproductivity works. In any case, if you need advice, I can send you a few URL's to some good websites I guess. But I'd rather not.

And here is what your subterfuge missed when you dodged my post:

99percentatheism wrote:

Joab wrote:

[Replying to post 93 by 99percentatheism]


THE ANGELS WERE NOT HUMAN


The non-humans, ie non-man, married women. Marriage in the bible is not immutably man and woman


You can huff and puff but you can't blow down the house of the angels that became men to marry women. It is clear from the context of the Biblical record, that those angels became men. Otherwise " different species" have a very difficult time making offspring. A cat and a dog don't make catdog babies.

Thus, in a thread about forcing The Church (mainstream Christianity) to celebrate homosexuals and homosexuality (gays) your theology is powerless to force that issue.

Although it does align well with entities leaving the place where they belong and forcing their ways on others. Once again, there is no support for homosexuality anywhere in the entire Bible. Even in the supernatural realm.


Quote:
Angels became men? Then why did they produce giants? Men and women very rarely produce large offspring, so are you sure they became men?


How did they impregnate women?

Ever see an NBA player's wife that is tiny compared to "him?" Yet their offspring can many times grow up to be a tall basketball player. I personally know some NFL players that are huge offensive linemen that married tiny women. Their offspring are big kids.

Quote:
How did they do that? Did they change back to angels at anytime?


They are supernatural beings. How did "God" change from a man to the Lord before and after wrestling with Jacob?

Quote:
Where do you get this story of angels becoming men? Certainly not from the bible.


Very certainly from the Bible:

From the Tanakh, Bereshit (Genesis) 18:

Quote:
1 And HaShem appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;

2 and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed down to the earth,

3 and said: 'My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant.

4 Let now a little water be fetched, and wash your feet, and recline yourselves under the tree.

5 And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and stay ye your heart; after that ye shall pass on; forasmuch as ye are come to your servant.' And they said: 'So do, as thou hast said.'

6 And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said: 'Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes.'

7 And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto the servant; and he hastened to dress it.

8 And he took curd, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.

- https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/js ... sis18.html


They became men to eat the food prepared for them by another man. Do Angels need to eat veal, breads and cottage cheese?

And of course from the New Testament:

Quote:
And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

- Jude


Now, in all honesty, I don't know how Angels "do it" but sexual intercourse with humans follows a natural path.

Oh and by the way, there is no marriage in heaven at all. Per the Son of God, Jesus.

Now follow the logic of why angels had to become men to "marry" women.

I must say, this is the most impressive discussion I have had with someone on these threads in a very, very long time.

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 98 by KCKID]

KID, if you want to join in on the Nephilim discussion, feel free, but please stay on track. Joab's on fire. Though we should be doing this in a new thread.

99percentatheism wrote:
Oh, I think my theology is just about as sound as the kind of sexual behaior it takes to make a child. Hint: It isn't gay sex.

Well, yet again the notion that God made sex specifically for procreation has been raised.

We're talking about angels and women KID. And what we are talking about is most definately procreation style.

If God DID intend sex for reproduction only then gay sex is definitely out.

Um, it's definately "out" according to the OT and the NT. For Israelites and Christians that is.

However, if the purpose of sex was and is intended predominantly for the bonding and the physical and psychological needs of a man and a woman, then sex can be whatever one decides it to be as long as it isn't used in ways that harm others or infringes on their equal right of self-determination.

Um, OK. But you kinda left out the "they should be married" part. And, can you produce the scriptures, or Christian historical writings outside of the Biblical wirtness where sex acts are for "the bonding and the physical and psychological needs of a man and a woman."

[Joab]

Joab
[Replying to post 97 by 99percentatheism]

You do notice that it says nothing about angels becoming men. You might imply that but it is not what the bible actually says.

It absolutely says that they are men. I offered the text. In the Jewish Bible used by Jewish people and the New Testament.

Yes you provided some passages talking about men, there was no mention of angels.

What is the type of angel/human intercourse that results in offspring?

It's not gay sex according to the Bible and nature. Other than that, I wasn't there to watch.

It would have absolutely nothing to do with nature, producing an angel/human hybrid cannot be called natural.

The angels were still a completely different species.

That became men. According to the Bible.

You haven't provided any evidence for this, just saying.

Remember that's why god created humanity according to the story.

What story? Where?

Besides if angels can create humans what makes god's efforts so wonderful?

God did it out of nothing. The angels needed to, you know, "do it" with a woman to get kids. I mean, you don't think that a man and a woman "create" people do you?

No. According to you they just created human males to copulate with human females. Or did they need to be born from their copulations in order that they could copulate.

Um, I don't know if the rules here allow me to teach you how reproductivity works. In any case, if you need advice, I can send you a few URL's to some good websites I guess. But I'd rather not.

And here is what your subterfuge missed when you dodged my post:

99percentatheism wrote:


From the Tanakh, Bereshit (Genesis) 18:

Quote:
1 And HaShem appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;

2 and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed down to the earth,

3 and said: 'My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant.

4 Let now a little water be fetched, and wash your feet, and recline yourselves under the tree.

5 And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and stay ye your heart; after that ye shall pass on; forasmuch as ye are come to your servant.' And they said: 'So do, as thou hast said.'

6 And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said: 'Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes.'

7 And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto the servant; and he hastened to dress it.

8 And he took curd, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.

Where are angels mentioned in these passages?

[99percentatheism]

Joab
[Replying to post 97 by 99percentatheism]

You do notice that it says nothing about angels becoming men. You might imply that but it is not what the bible actually says.

It absolutely says that they are men. I offered the text. In the Jewish Bible used by Jewish people and the New Testament.

Yes you provided some passages talking about men, there was no mention of angels.

What is the type of angel/human intercourse that results in offspring?

It's not gay sex according to the Bible and nature. Other than that, I wasn't there to watch.

It would have absolutely nothing to do with nature, producing an angel/human hybrid cannot be called natural.

The angels were still a completely different species.

That became men. According to the Bible.

You haven't provided any evidence for this, just saying.

Remember that's why god created humanity according to the story.

What story? Where?

Besides if angels can create humans what makes god's efforts so wonderful?

God did it out of nothing. The angels needed to, you know, "do it" with a woman to get kids. I mean, you don't think that a man and a woman "create" people do you?

No. According to you they just created human males to copulate with human females. Or did they need to be born from their copulations in order that they could copulate.

Um, I don't know if the rules here allow me to teach you how reproductivity works. In any case, if you need advice, I can send you a few URL's to some good websites I guess. But I'd rather not.

And here is what your subterfuge missed when you dodged my post:

99percentatheism wrote:


From the Tanakh, Bereshit (Genesis) 18:

Quote:
1 And HaShem appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;

2 and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed down to the earth,

3 and said: 'My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant.

4 Let now a little water be fetched, and wash your feet, and recline yourselves under the tree.

5 And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and stay ye your heart; after that ye shall pass on; forasmuch as ye are come to your servant.' And they said: 'So do, as thou hast said.'

6 And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said: 'Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes.'

7 And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto the servant; and he hastened to dress it.

8 And he took curd, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.

Where are angels mentioned in these passages?

Let's see what the Rabbi says?

The Torah recounts that three angels appeared to Abraham (Genesis 18:2). Later, only two angels go down to Sodom. What happened to the third angel? And what is the significance of three versus two?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:
Although the Torah does not mention the names of the angels that went to visit Abraham, the Talmud tells us they were Raphael, Michael and Gabriel. (Bava Metzia 86b)

Throughout most of their interaction, the Torah does not refer to them on an individual basis, but rather as a group, as it is written, "[Abraham] stood over THEM beneath the tree and THEY ate. [Afterwards,] THEY said to him..." (Genesis 18:8-9)

There are, however, instances in which the angels act as individuals. For example, only the angel Michael told Sarah that she was going to have a baby (Genesis 18:10). In Sodom, only the angel Raphael told Lot to flee from the city (Genesis 19:17). Similarly, it was only the angel Gabriel that informed Lot that the city was going to be destroyed.

- http://www.aish.com/atr/Three_Angels.html

You should give up Joab. Now, like I said, you have given an impressive effort, but it isn't going to do anything to support LGBT "pride" and certainly nothing to affirm homosexuality.

[Joab]

Joab
[Replying to post 97 by 99percentatheism]

You do notice that it says nothing about angels becoming men. You might imply that but it is not what the bible actually says.

It absolutely says that they are men. I offered the text. In the Jewish Bible used by Jewish people and the New Testament.

Yes you provided some passages talking about men, there was no mention of angels.

What is the type of angel/human intercourse that results in offspring?

It's not gay sex according to the Bible and nature. Other than that, I wasn't there to watch.

It would have absolutely nothing to do with nature, producing an angel/human hybrid cannot be called natural.

The angels were still a completely different species.

That became men. According to the Bible.

You haven't provided any evidence for this, just saying.

Remember that's why god created humanity according to the story.

What story? Where?

Besides if angels can create humans what makes god's efforts so wonderful?

God did it out of nothing. The angels needed to, you know, "do it" with a woman to get kids. I mean, you don't think that a man and a woman "create" people do you?

No. According to you they just created human males to copulate with human females. Or did they need to be born from their copulations in order that they could copulate.

Um, I don't know if the rules here allow me to teach you how reproductivity works. In any case, if you need advice, I can send you a few URL's to some good websites I guess. But I'd rather not.

And here is what your subterfuge missed when you dodged my post:

99percentatheism wrote:


From the Tanakh, Bereshit (Genesis) 18:

Quote:
1 And HaShem appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;

2 and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed down to the earth,

3 and said: 'My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant.

4 Let now a little water be fetched, and wash your feet, and recline yourselves under the tree.

5 And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and stay ye your heart; after that ye shall pass on; forasmuch as ye are come to your servant.' And they said: 'So do, as thou hast said.'

6 And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said: 'Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes.'

7 And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto the servant; and he hastened to dress it.

8 And he took curd, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.

Where are angels mentioned in these passages?

Let's see what the Rabbi says?

The Torah recounts that three angels appeared to Abraham (Genesis 18:2). Later, only two angels go down to Sodom. What happened to the third angel? And what is the significance of three versus two?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:
Although the Torah does not mention the names of the angels that went to visit Abraham, the Talmud tells us they were Raphael, Michael and Gabriel. (Bava Metzia 86b)

Throughout most of their interaction, the Torah does not refer to them on an individual basis, but rather as a group, as it is written, "[Abraham] stood over THEM beneath the tree and THEY ate. [Afterwards,] THEY said to him..." (Genesis 18:8-9)

There are, however, instances in which the angels act as individuals. For example, only the angel Michael told Sarah that she was going to have a baby (Genesis 18:10). In Sodom, only the angel Raphael told Lot to flee from the city (Genesis 19:17). Similarly, it was only the angel Gabriel that informed Lot that the city was going to be destroyed.

- http://www.aish.com/atr/Three_Angels.html

You should give up Joab. Now, like I said, you have given an impressive effort, but it isn't going to do anything to support LGBT "pride" and certainly nothing to affirm homosexuality.

Just bolden the mentions of angels in those passages and you will have proved your point.

[KCKID]

[Replying to post 98 by KCKID]

KID, if you want to join in on the Nephilim discussion, feel free, but please stay on track. Joab's on fire. Though we should be doing this in a new thread.

No, you and Joab seem to be doing alright without any help from me. Besides, I don't know what either of you are talking about . . .

99percentatheism wrote:
Oh, I think my theology is just about as sound as the kind of sexual behaior it takes to make a child. Hint: It isn't gay sex.

Well, yet again the notion that God made sex specifically for procreation has been raised.

We're talking about angels and women KID. And what we are talking about is most definately procreation style.

Well, not just angels and women. It's commonly stated - and, I'm sure, often hinted at by you - that gay people cannot procreate, meaning that procreation is the sole purpose for sex between a male and a female. Otherwise, why bring it up? If you DON'T believe that and believe that sex is also for recreation, then it matters not whether it be heterosexual sex or homosexual sex ...correct?

If God DID intend sex for reproduction only then gay sex is definitely out.

Um, it's definately "out" according to the OT and the NT. For Israelites and Christians that is.

But, the only logical reason for it being "out" would be that those OT and NT authors believed that non-procreation sex was 'a sin' ...right? So, where does that leave us? Is non-reproductive sex 'a sin' (whereby just about every person on this planet is damned) or is non-reproductive sex A-Okay (which means that it can be performed by gay or straight)? See the dilemma here?

However, if the purpose of sex was and is intended predominantly for the bonding and the physical and psychological needs of a man and a woman, then sex can be whatever one decides it to be as long as it isn't used in ways that harm others or infringes on their equal right of self-determination.

Um, OK. But you kinda left out the "they should be married" part. And, can you produce the scriptures, or Christian historical writings outside of the Biblical wirtness where sex acts are for "the bonding and the physical and psychological needs of a man and a woman."

Well, I don't know whether you're aware but MANY gay people DO want to marry, i.e. they desire to commit themselves to a monogamous relationship with a life-long partner.

As for the rest of the paragraph, why is it that you find it difficult to accept (even without scripture or Christian historical writings outside the Biblical witness) that sex acts are very much about bonding and the fulfilling of the physical and psychological needs of a man and woman?

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 104 by Joab]

Just bolden the mentions of angels in those passages and you will have proved your point.

I have presented the scriptures that proved my point.

It needs noting that you have not been able to offer even one word celebrating, affirming or supporting homosexuality anywhere in the Bible.

Of course.

Now let's get back to the OP please, where it is incredibly inapprpriate to force "Mainstream Christianity" to accept homosexuality. Since we have someone on your side that has presented many, many kinds of religious organizations that do celebrate homosexuality, there is no reason or need to force gay culture on The Church. Actually, it seems rather odd that "bullying" is such an important topic to the gay agenda and yet totally ignored when it comes to using it to force Christians to accept a behavior that is sinful and repugnant to them. Ever notice you never hear about gay activists acting out in a Mosque or Hindu Temple or Ashram?

[Joab]

[Replying to post 104 by Joab]

Just bolden the mentions of angels in those passages and you will have proved your point.

I have presented the scriptures that proved my point.

It needs noting that you have not been able to offer even one word celebrating, affirming or supporting homosexuality anywhere in the Bible.

Of course.

Now let's get back to the OP please, where it is incredibly inapprpriate to force "Mainstream Christianity" to accept homosexuality. Since we have someone on your side that has presented many, many kinds of religious organizations that do celebrate homosexuality, there is no reason or need to force gay culture on The Church. Actually, it seems rather odd that "bullying" is such an important topic to the gay agenda and yet totally ignored when it comes to using it to force Christians to accept a behavior that is sinful and repugnant to them. Ever notice you never hear about gay activists acting out in a Mosque or Hindu Temple or Ashram?

Now lets see how honest you are being here.

You have not provided any scripture prove that angels became men.

You are not a member of mainstream christianity, unless you are Catholic, so are in no position to ascertain whether or not they are being forced to CELEBRATE homosexuality.
From your posts it is patently obvious that you don't even understand what homosexuality is.
You claim that your holy book declares the immutability of marriage being between Man and Woman, even though your holy book states emphatically that Angels married Women.
You seem to think that an acceptance of homosexuality (something you don't understand) will force you to become homosexual. A ridiculous notion if there ever was one.
You have fabricated some bogeyman gay agenda that apparently scares the pants off you from a movement attempting to achieve equality.
If you believe equality is anti christian then perhaps christianity (or your flavour of it) is WRONG.

[dianaiad]

[Replying to post 91 by 99percentatheism]

The angels were not HUMAN, so no homosexuality but maybe bestiality or xenosexuality is approved by your god.

Still it proves beyond any doubt that marriage in the bible is not immutably man and woman.

That's is your whole argument shot down in flames.

Well, there are those of us who believe that angels were (and are) very much human. Just sayin'.

[Joab]

[Replying to post 91 by 99percentatheism]

The angels were not HUMAN, so no homosexuality but maybe bestiality or xenosexuality is approved by your god.

Still it proves beyond any doubt that marriage in the bible is not immutably man and woman.

That's is your whole argument shot down in flames.

Well, there are those of us who believe that angels were (and are) very much human. Just sayin'.

So why did god make humans if he'd already made humans?