Christian Reasons to Support Gay Rights

[micatala]

I offer this thread as a Christian who supports gay rights as an admittedly forward challenge to my brothers and sisters in Christ.

In Acts Ch. 14 and 15, Luke describes James and the other Apostles discussions which led them to exempt Gentiles from well over 99% of the Law of Moses. The main reason they did so was to avoid putting an excessive burden on Gentiles. Implicit in their decision was the issue that expecting everyone to follow these traditional rules, rules that many saw as outdated, would be a drag on the new movement.

Today, we see polls like this one that indicate many young people leaving the church or the faith because of the negative attitude displayed by many religious people towards gays and lesbians.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/2 ... ign=buffer


1) Would it not make sense for Christians to lay aside anti-gay rhetoric, including quoting of Biblical verses that are claimed to condemn homosexuality, if for no other reason than it is counter-productive to evangelism?

2) Does not Jesus' own ministry, and the actions of the Apostles as described in Acts 15 give ample precedent for laying aside Biblical verses that seem to allude to homosexuality?


I will note that Christianity has by and large already set aside many precepts now seen to be archaic, including the idea that women should never speak in church, and that we should simply accept any and all governments as instituted by God and worthy of our obedience. The Declaration of Independence, in particular, repudiates this notion, outlined by Paul in his letters.

I will note that Jesus is quoted in the gospels as explicitly laying aside aspects of the law, and that he was criticized by many of his fellow believers, especially those who were arguably most religious, for doing so.

I will point out that the faith of those conservative believers rather quickly became a small minority as compared to Christianity.


It really comes down to this:

3) Is non-acceptance of homosexuality so central to Christianity that Christians should cling to traditional notions against homosexuality, or can we lay those aside as tangential to the central message of the gospel?

[99percentatheism]

micatala

I offer this thread as a Christian who supports gay rights as an admittedly forward challenge to my brothers and sisters in Christ.

In Acts Ch. 14 and 15, Luke describes James and the other Apostles discussions which led them to exempt Gentiles from well over 99% of the Law of Moses. The main reason they did so was to avoid putting an excessive burden on Gentiles. Implicit in their decision was the issue that expecting everyone to follow these traditional rules, rules that many saw as outdated, would be a drag on the new movement.

It should have been a thread supporting the rejection of gay pride and gay activism and the encouragement of engaging in homosexuality. Christians that reject the gay agenda are solidly supported by the New Testament. That non-Judaic Gentiles shouldn't have to learn the entire life of a Jewish person is no reason to celebrate gay behavior and the entire gay community. The premise of your OP could be the same with anything or anybody that claims Christian identity. I know several Wiccans that believe Jesus was a Shaman. Should they and that be brought into orthodoxy?

Today, we see polls like this one that indicate many young people leaving the church or the faith because of the negative attitude displayed by many religious people towards gays and lesbians.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/2 ... ign=buffer

The Huffington Post? Why not use a poll from the HRC? Same thing really. And why would mature leaders in any Denomination take the opinion of young people and "Polls" used by liberal-progressive websites? Why not just stay to the truth of the Gospel and Christian reality and allow the youth of today to compare secularized religious worldviews to what Jesus and His Apostles delivered to mankind?

1) Would it not make sense for Christians to lay aside anti-gay rhetoric, including quoting of Biblical verses that are claimed to condemn homosexuality, if for no other reason than it is counter-productive to evangelism?

First, it is not ANTI GAY RHETORIC. That is gay propaganda. What it is is preaching the Gospel truthfully as it is delivered by Jesus and His Apostles and Disciples. By what right does pop culture get to rewrite Christian reality just because a new fad comes along and chalenges feelings of people?

Why not let MTV write a new New Testament??? Wouldn't that fill the pews of ever-shrinking denominations?

2) Does not Jesus' own ministry, and the actions of the Apostles as described in Acts 15 give ample precedent for laying aside Biblical verses that seem to allude to homosexuality?

No. The absurdity of such a editing of Christian truth is the height of intolerance. Why not reject "Christian truth" and choose a secular morality? Why demand to secularize the Christian Church for gay pride?

I will note that Christianity has by and large already set aside many precepts now seen to be archaic, including the idea that women should never speak in church, and that we should simply accept any and all governments as instituted by God and worthy of our obedience. The Declaration of Independence, in particular, repudiates this notion, outlined by Paul in his letters.

Appealing to the Declaration of Independence proves the secularization demanded to replace Christian truth. That is not only intolerance but could be defined as persecuting The Church. It is ALWAYS maintained by secularists that the Constitution is hostile to religion and the state being joined. ALWAYS.

I will note that Jesus is quoted in the gospels as explicitly laying aside aspects of the law, and that he was criticized by many of his fellow believers, especially those who were arguably most religious, for doing so.

Jesus RE-asserted that marriage IS man and woman/husband and wife. And as it is famously used in gay propaganda . . . Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. And when read in an impassionate, non-agenda and straightforward manner, there is no support, celebration or condoning of homosexuals OR homosexuality anywhere in the entire New Testament. The date on a calendar has no effect on Christian truth.

I will point out that the faith of those conservative believers rather quickly became a small minority as compared to Christianity.

That is not provable at all. "Marriage" is exactly as "the conservatives" agree to the preaching of Jesus to be.

It really comes down to this:

3) Is non-acceptance of homosexuality so central to Christianity that Christians should cling to traditional notions against homosexuality, or can we lay those aside as tangential to the central message of the gospel?

Where is there ANY justification for a Christian bride to be marrying a Christian bride? A Christian husband to be marrying a Christian husband?

"Queer theory" Lesbian, Gay, and Bi-Sexual and their gender neutral worldviews (desired to be set into laws), behaviors and beliefs and the gay community as a committed organization of identity and activism . . . where is the compatibility with "The faith delivered only once to the saints?" The faith that was urged "Contend for the faith . . ." against attacks from being altered into something utterly foreign to truth.

And specifically outlined were people that would enter the Church for lascivious and licentious reasons and try to *change it.

Obviously, The Church has been through this right from the start of it:

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,

To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ:

Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance.

Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.

*For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

- Jude 1

Why not write an OP about a Gay Denomination and how so many people are flooding to salvation in Christ through it? How many advocates, supporters and proponents for LGBT's (and letters et al) here at this website will become Christians if only old fashioned Christians reject their old fashioned and "homophobic" ways and celebrate and encourage homosexuality and homosexuals?

Let's take a poll in that thread OK?

[Clownboat]

micatala

I offer this thread as a Christian who supports gay rights as an admittedly forward challenge to my brothers and sisters in Christ.

In Acts Ch. 14 and 15, Luke describes James and the other Apostles discussions which led them to exempt Gentiles from well over 99% of the Law of Moses. The main reason they did so was to avoid putting an excessive burden on Gentiles. Implicit in their decision was the issue that expecting everyone to follow these traditional rules, rules that many saw as outdated, would be a drag on the new movement.

It should have been a thread supporting the rejection of gay pride and gay activism and the encouragement of engaging in homosexuality. Christians that reject the gay agenda are solidly supported by the New Testament. That non-Judaic Gentiles shouldn't have to learn the entire life of a Jewish person is no reason to celebrate gay behavior and the entire gay community. The premise of your OP could be the same with anything or anybody that claims Christian identity. I know several Wiccans that believe Jesus was a Shaman. Should they and that be brought into orthodoxy?

Today, we see polls like this one that indicate many young people leaving the church or the faith because of the negative attitude displayed by many religious people towards gays and lesbians.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/2 ... ign=buffer

The Huffington Post? Why not use a poll from the HRC? Same thing really. And why would mature leaders in any Denomination take the opinion of young people and "Polls" used by liberal-progressive websites? Why not just stay to the truth of the Gospel and Christian reality and allow the youth of today to compare secularized religious worldviews to what Jesus and His Apostles delivered to mankind?

1) Would it not make sense for Christians to lay aside anti-gay rhetoric, including quoting of Biblical verses that are claimed to condemn homosexuality, if for no other reason than it is counter-productive to evangelism?

First, it is not ANTI GAY RHETORIC. That is gay propaganda. What it is is preaching the Gospel truthfully as it is delivered by Jesus and His Apostles and Disciples. By what right does pop culture get to rewrite Christian reality just because a new fad comes along and chalenges feelings of people?

Why not let MTV write a new New Testament??? Wouldn't that fill the pews of ever-shrinking denominations?

2) Does not Jesus' own ministry, and the actions of the Apostles as described in Acts 15 give ample precedent for laying aside Biblical verses that seem to allude to homosexuality?

No. The absurdity of such a editing of Christian truth is the height of intolerance. Why not reject "Christian truth" and choose a secular morality? Why demand to secularize the Christian Church for gay pride?

I will note that Christianity has by and large already set aside many precepts now seen to be archaic, including the idea that women should never speak in church, and that we should simply accept any and all governments as instituted by God and worthy of our obedience. The Declaration of Independence, in particular, repudiates this notion, outlined by Paul in his letters.

Appealing to the Declaration of Independence proves the secularization demanded to replace Christian truth. That is not only intolerance but could be defined as persecuting The Church. It is ALWAYS maintained by secularists that the Constitution is hostile to religion and the state being joined. ALWAYS.

I will note that Jesus is quoted in the gospels as explicitly laying aside aspects of the law, and that he was criticized by many of his fellow believers, especially those who were arguably most religious, for doing so.

Jesus RE-asserted that marriage IS man and woman/husband and wife. And as it is famously used in gay propaganda . . . Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. And when read in an impassionate, non-agenda and straightforward manner, there is no support, celebration or condoning of homosexuals OR homosexuality anywhere in the entire New Testament. The date on a calendar has no effect on Christian truth.

I will point out that the faith of those conservative believers rather quickly became a small minority as compared to Christianity.

That is not provable at all. "Marriage" is exactly as "the conservatives" agree to the preaching of Jesus to be.

It really comes down to this:

3) Is non-acceptance of homosexuality so central to Christianity that Christians should cling to traditional notions against homosexuality, or can we lay those aside as tangential to the central message of the gospel?

Where is there ANY justification for a Christian bride to be marrying a Christian bride? A Christian husband to be marrying a Christian husband?

"Queer theory" Lesbian, Gay, and Bi-Sexual and their gender neutral worldviews (desired to be set into laws), behaviors and beliefs and the gay community as a committed organization of identity and activism . . . where is the compatibility with "The faith delivered only once to the saints?" The faith that was urged "Contend for the faith . . ." against attacks from being altered into something utterly foreign to truth.

And specifically outlined were people that would enter the Church for lascivious and licentious reasons and try to *change it.

Obviously, The Church has been through this right from the start of it:

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,

To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ:

Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance.

Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.

*For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

- Jude 1

Why not write an OP about a Gay Denomination and how so many people are flooding to salvation in Christ through it? How many advocates, supporters and proponents for LGBT's (and letters et al) here at this website will become Christians if only old fashioned Christians reject their old fashioned and "homophobic" ways and celebrate and encourage homosexuality and homosexuals?

Let's take a poll in that thread OK?

How does your world view include those people that are born looking/feeling like a women (with a vagina and all), but then later in life find out that they have hidden testicles and that they are actually male?

Should they divorce their husbands which is a no no, or stay in a gay marriage which you claim is a no no, or just pretend that they are not biological creatures that reproduce via sex and stop having sex with their husband (and again, divorce or stay married to them?).

Your stance does not account for these people. Why not? How can you stand by your words when it disregards living breathing humans on this earth?

Finally, are you motivated either financially or by appearance to appose homosexuality? If so, that might shed light on my questions above and possibly on personal motivations.

[99percentatheism]

micatala

I offer this thread as a Christian who supports gay rights as an admittedly forward challenge to my brothers and sisters in Christ.

In Acts Ch. 14 and 15, Luke describes James and the other Apostles discussions which led them to exempt Gentiles from well over 99% of the Law of Moses. The main reason they did so was to avoid putting an excessive burden on Gentiles. Implicit in their decision was the issue that expecting everyone to follow these traditional rules, rules that many saw as outdated, would be a drag on the new movement.

It should have been a thread supporting the rejection of gay pride and gay activism and the encouragement of engaging in homosexuality. Christians that reject the gay agenda are solidly supported by the New Testament. That non-Judaic Gentiles shouldn't have to learn the entire life of a Jewish person is no reason to celebrate gay behavior and the entire gay community. The premise of your OP could be the same with anything or anybody that claims Christian identity. I know several Wiccans that believe Jesus was a Shaman. Should they and that be brought into orthodoxy?

Today, we see polls like this one that indicate many young people leaving the church or the faith because of the negative attitude displayed by many religious people towards gays and lesbians.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/2 ... ign=buffer

The Huffington Post? Why not use a poll from the HRC? Same thing really. And why would mature leaders in any Denomination take the opinion of young people and "Polls" used by liberal-progressive websites? Why not just stay to the truth of the Gospel and Christian reality and allow the youth of today to compare secularized religious worldviews to what Jesus and His Apostles delivered to mankind?

1) Would it not make sense for Christians to lay aside anti-gay rhetoric, including quoting of Biblical verses that are claimed to condemn homosexuality, if for no other reason than it is counter-productive to evangelism?

First, it is not ANTI GAY RHETORIC. That is gay propaganda. What it is is preaching the Gospel truthfully as it is delivered by Jesus and His Apostles and Disciples. By what right does pop culture get to rewrite Christian reality just because a new fad comes along and chalenges feelings of people?

Why not let MTV write a new New Testament??? Wouldn't that fill the pews of ever-shrinking denominations?

2) Does not Jesus' own ministry, and the actions of the Apostles as described in Acts 15 give ample precedent for laying aside Biblical verses that seem to allude to homosexuality?

No. The absurdity of such a editing of Christian truth is the height of intolerance. Why not reject "Christian truth" and choose a secular morality? Why demand to secularize the Christian Church for gay pride?

I will note that Christianity has by and large already set aside many precepts now seen to be archaic, including the idea that women should never speak in church, and that we should simply accept any and all governments as instituted by God and worthy of our obedience. The Declaration of Independence, in particular, repudiates this notion, outlined by Paul in his letters.

Appealing to the Declaration of Independence proves the secularization demanded to replace Christian truth. That is not only intolerance but could be defined as persecuting The Church. It is ALWAYS maintained by secularists that the Constitution is hostile to religion and the state being joined. ALWAYS.

I will note that Jesus is quoted in the gospels as explicitly laying aside aspects of the law, and that he was criticized by many of his fellow believers, especially those who were arguably most religious, for doing so.

Jesus RE-asserted that marriage IS man and woman/husband and wife. And as it is famously used in gay propaganda . . . Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. And when read in an impassionate, non-agenda and straightforward manner, there is no support, celebration or condoning of homosexuals OR homosexuality anywhere in the entire New Testament. The date on a calendar has no effect on Christian truth.

I will point out that the faith of those conservative believers rather quickly became a small minority as compared to Christianity.

That is not provable at all. "Marriage" is exactly as "the conservatives" agree to the preaching of Jesus to be.

It really comes down to this:

3) Is non-acceptance of homosexuality so central to Christianity that Christians should cling to traditional notions against homosexuality, or can we lay those aside as tangential to the central message of the gospel?

Where is there ANY justification for a Christian bride to be marrying a Christian bride? A Christian husband to be marrying a Christian husband?

"Queer theory" Lesbian, Gay, and Bi-Sexual and their gender neutral worldviews (desired to be set into laws), behaviors and beliefs and the gay community as a committed organization of identity and activism . . . where is the compatibility with "The faith delivered only once to the saints?" The faith that was urged "Contend for the faith . . ." against attacks from being altered into something utterly foreign to truth.

And specifically outlined were people that would enter the Church for lascivious and licentious reasons and try to *change it.

Obviously, The Church has been through this right from the start of it:

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,

To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ:

Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance.

Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.

*For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

- Jude 1

Why not write an OP about a Gay Denomination and how so many people are flooding to salvation in Christ through it? How many advocates, supporters and proponents for LGBT's (and letters et al) here at this website will become Christians if only old fashioned Christians reject their old fashioned and "homophobic" ways and celebrate and encourage homosexuality and homosexuals?

Let's take a poll in that thread OK?

How does your world view include those people that are born looking/feeling like a women (with a vagina and all), but then later in life find out that they have hidden testicles and that they are actually male?

Should they divorce their husbands which is a no no, or stay in a gay marriage which you claim is a no no, or just pretend that they are not biological creatures that reproduce via sex and stop having sex with their husband (and again, divorce or stay married to them?).

Your stance does not account for these people. Why not? How can you stand by your words when it disregards living breathing humans on this earth?

Finally, are you motivated either financially or by appearance to appose homosexuality? If so, that might shed light on my questions above and possibly on personal motivations.

How about answer this first?:

"Why not write an OP about a Gay Denomination and how so many people are flooding to salvation in Christ through it? How many advocates, supporters and proponents for LGBT's (and letters et al) here at this website will become Christians if only old fashioned Christians reject their old fashioned and "homophobic" ways and celebrate and encourage homosexuality and homosexuals?

Let's take a poll in that thread OK?"

Your example can find all solace there.

My "worldview" is to not alter truth for pop culture, fads and threats and to hold to the faith delivered only once to the saints. If you can show where that faith can be altered and literally changed into something entirely different every time some pop fad comes along in history, then ply that in your new denomination and see how many people flock to it.

You know, it is charged that Hitler was a Christian. Why not hold to the same logic and say he and the National Socialist Workers Party had the right to invent a Christianity that justified what they did?

National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany, which in 1933, under Adolf Hitler, seized political control of the country, suppressing all opposition and establishing a dictatorship over all cultural, economic, and political activities of the people, and promulgated belief in the supremacy of Hitler as Führer, aggressive anti-Semitism, the natural supremacy of the German people, and the establishment of Germany by superior force as a dominant world power. The party was officially abolished in 1945 at the conclusion of World War II.

- http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nazi

Or should we define all socialists by what German National Socialists did?

Clownboat,

Do you think the Gospels and the teachings in the New Testament (that appear to firmly set limits and guidelines for what a Christian is and does . . .) can be or should be completely reinvented by whoever holds the most political power in any given nation at any certain time period?

If you want to do that, then a man can be another man's husband in "Christian truth" right? A woman another woman's "wife?" Forget about what Jesus said because it doesn't fit pop culture right now.

Adolf Hitler, because HE and his powerful political pop culture activism invented a new Christianity right???

It all just depends on who holds the most power political influence right?

Right now, in western society, it is the Gay Pride Movement wielding great political power and social influence right? And it is gaining even more strength still isn't it? Those that do not salute its influence (with flag and all) are quite ridiculed and labeled as haters and mentally ill (phobic) and other negative labels for opposing any authority "it" and its followers now wield right?

How about a thread entitled: Christian Reasons to Support German National Socialist Workers Party of the mid-20th century?

Let's start with books on Dietrich Bonhoefer and how he dealt with it shall we?

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

Am I comparing the LGBT pride movement with Nazism? ALL I am doing is comparing pop cultural movements and the guidelines and the behaviors they promote, to what is and what isn't written in the New Testament. THAT IS ALL.

There is a very oft-used saying now: "Jesus never said a word about homosexuality and homosexuals."

That is a fact.

And not a word about reinventing His Church to include the support for reinventing and redefining marriage either. No, not one word. What facts we have that are settled, is that Jesus REAFFIRMED that marriage is man and woman/husband and wife.

Not one word about changing that for pop culture reasons.

The answer to the OP in any honest way is that there are none. "Gay rights" a VERY POWERFUL political propaganda terminology exists purely in the category of giving to Caesar what is Caesar's (almost totally literally) and to give to God what is God's. And since "God in the beginning" is referenced by Jesus as to what a marriage IS, there is even more foundation (truth) to the answer to the OP

Christian Reasons to Support Gay Rights

as being: "There are none."

[Clownboat]

micatala

I offer this thread as a Christian who supports gay rights as an admittedly forward challenge to my brothers and sisters in Christ.

In Acts Ch. 14 and 15, Luke describes James and the other Apostles discussions which led them to exempt Gentiles from well over 99% of the Law of Moses. The main reason they did so was to avoid putting an excessive burden on Gentiles. Implicit in their decision was the issue that expecting everyone to follow these traditional rules, rules that many saw as outdated, would be a drag on the new movement.

It should have been a thread supporting the rejection of gay pride and gay activism and the encouragement of engaging in homosexuality. Christians that reject the gay agenda are solidly supported by the New Testament. That non-Judaic Gentiles shouldn't have to learn the entire life of a Jewish person is no reason to celebrate gay behavior and the entire gay community. The premise of your OP could be the same with anything or anybody that claims Christian identity. I know several Wiccans that believe Jesus was a Shaman. Should they and that be brought into orthodoxy?

Today, we see polls like this one that indicate many young people leaving the church or the faith because of the negative attitude displayed by many religious people towards gays and lesbians.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/2 ... ign=buffer

The Huffington Post? Why not use a poll from the HRC? Same thing really. And why would mature leaders in any Denomination take the opinion of young people and "Polls" used by liberal-progressive websites? Why not just stay to the truth of the Gospel and Christian reality and allow the youth of today to compare secularized religious worldviews to what Jesus and His Apostles delivered to mankind?

1) Would it not make sense for Christians to lay aside anti-gay rhetoric, including quoting of Biblical verses that are claimed to condemn homosexuality, if for no other reason than it is counter-productive to evangelism?

First, it is not ANTI GAY RHETORIC. That is gay propaganda. What it is is preaching the Gospel truthfully as it is delivered by Jesus and His Apostles and Disciples. By what right does pop culture get to rewrite Christian reality just because a new fad comes along and chalenges feelings of people?

Why not let MTV write a new New Testament??? Wouldn't that fill the pews of ever-shrinking denominations?

2) Does not Jesus' own ministry, and the actions of the Apostles as described in Acts 15 give ample precedent for laying aside Biblical verses that seem to allude to homosexuality?

No. The absurdity of such a editing of Christian truth is the height of intolerance. Why not reject "Christian truth" and choose a secular morality? Why demand to secularize the Christian Church for gay pride?

I will note that Christianity has by and large already set aside many precepts now seen to be archaic, including the idea that women should never speak in church, and that we should simply accept any and all governments as instituted by God and worthy of our obedience. The Declaration of Independence, in particular, repudiates this notion, outlined by Paul in his letters.

Appealing to the Declaration of Independence proves the secularization demanded to replace Christian truth. That is not only intolerance but could be defined as persecuting The Church. It is ALWAYS maintained by secularists that the Constitution is hostile to religion and the state being joined. ALWAYS.

I will note that Jesus is quoted in the gospels as explicitly laying aside aspects of the law, and that he was criticized by many of his fellow believers, especially those who were arguably most religious, for doing so.

Jesus RE-asserted that marriage IS man and woman/husband and wife. And as it is famously used in gay propaganda . . . Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. And when read in an impassionate, non-agenda and straightforward manner, there is no support, celebration or condoning of homosexuals OR homosexuality anywhere in the entire New Testament. The date on a calendar has no effect on Christian truth.

I will point out that the faith of those conservative believers rather quickly became a small minority as compared to Christianity.

That is not provable at all. "Marriage" is exactly as "the conservatives" agree to the preaching of Jesus to be.

It really comes down to this:

3) Is non-acceptance of homosexuality so central to Christianity that Christians should cling to traditional notions against homosexuality, or can we lay those aside as tangential to the central message of the gospel?

Where is there ANY justification for a Christian bride to be marrying a Christian bride? A Christian husband to be marrying a Christian husband?

"Queer theory" Lesbian, Gay, and Bi-Sexual and their gender neutral worldviews (desired to be set into laws), behaviors and beliefs and the gay community as a committed organization of identity and activism . . . where is the compatibility with "The faith delivered only once to the saints?" The faith that was urged "Contend for the faith . . ." against attacks from being altered into something utterly foreign to truth.

And specifically outlined were people that would enter the Church for lascivious and licentious reasons and try to *change it.

Obviously, The Church has been through this right from the start of it:

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,

To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ:

Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance.

Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.

*For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

- Jude 1

Why not write an OP about a Gay Denomination and how so many people are flooding to salvation in Christ through it? How many advocates, supporters and proponents for LGBT's (and letters et al) here at this website will become Christians if only old fashioned Christians reject their old fashioned and "homophobic" ways and celebrate and encourage homosexuality and homosexuals?

Let's take a poll in that thread OK?

How does your world view include those people that are born looking/feeling like a women (with a vagina and all), but then later in life find out that they have hidden testicles and that they are actually male?

Should they divorce their husbands which is a no no, or stay in a gay marriage which you claim is a no no, or just pretend that they are not biological creatures that reproduce via sex and stop having sex with their husband (and again, divorce or stay married to them?).

Your stance does not account for these people. Why not? How can you stand by your words when it disregards living breathing humans on this earth?

Finally, are you motivated either financially or by appearance to appose homosexuality? If so, that might shed light on my questions above and possibly on personal motivations.

How about answer this first?:

"Why not write an OP about a Gay Denomination and how so many people are flooding to salvation in Christ through it? How many advocates, supporters and proponents for LGBT's (and letters et al) here at this website will become Christians if only old fashioned Christians reject their old fashioned and "homophobic" ways and celebrate and encourage homosexuality and homosexuals?

Let's take a poll in that thread OK?"

Your example can find all solace there.

My "worldview" is to not alter truth for pop culture, fads and threats and to hold to the faith delivered only once to the saints. If you can show where that faith can be altered and literally changed into something entirely different every time some pop fad comes along in history, then ply that in your new denomination and see how many people flock to it.

You know, it is charged that Hitler was a Christian. Why not hold to the same logic and say he and the National Socialist Workers Party had the right to invent a Christianity that justified what they did?

National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany, which in 1933, under Adolf Hitler, seized political control of the country, suppressing all opposition and establishing a dictatorship over all cultural, economic, and political activities of the people, and promulgated belief in the supremacy of Hitler as Führer, aggressive anti-Semitism, the natural supremacy of the German people, and the establishment of Germany by superior force as a dominant world power. The party was officially abolished in 1945 at the conclusion of World War II.

- http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nazi

Or should we define all socialists by what German National Socialists did?

Clownboat,

Do you think the Gospels and the teachings in the New Testament (that appear to firmly set limits and guidelines for what a Christian is and does . . .) can be or should be completely reinvented by whoever holds the most political power in any given nation at any certain time period?

If you want to do that, then a man can be another man's husband in "Christian truth" right? A woman another woman's "wife?" Forget about what Jesus said because it doesn't fit pop culture right now.

Adolf Hitler, because HE and his powerful political pop culture activism invented a new Christianity right???

It all just depends on who holds the most power political influence right?

Right now, in western society, it is the Gay Pride Movement wielding great political power and social influence right? And it is gaining even more strength still isn't it? Those that do not salute its influence (with flag and all) are quite ridiculed and labeled as haters and mentally ill (phobic) and other negative labels for opposing any authority "it" and its followers now wield right?

How about a thread entitled: Christian Reasons to Support German National Socialist Workers Party of the mid-20th century?

Let's start with books on Dietrich Bonhoefer and how he dealt with it shall we?

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

Am I comparing the LGBT pride movement with Nazism? ALL I am doing is comparing pop cultural movements and the guidelines and the behaviors they promote, to what is and what isn't written in the New Testament. THAT IS ALL.

There is a very oft-used saying now: "Jesus never said a word about homosexuality and homosexuals."

That is a fact.

And not a word about reinventing His Church to include the support for reinventing and redefining marriage either. No, not one word. What facts we have that are settled, is that Jesus REAFFIRMED that marriage is man and woman/husband and wife.

Not one word about changing that for pop culture reasons.

The answer to the OP in any honest way is that there are none. "Gay rights" a VERY POWERFUL political propaganda terminology exists purely in the category of giving to Caesar what is Caesar's (almost totally literally) and to give to God what is God's. And since "God in the beginning" is referenced by Jesus as to what a marriage IS, there is even more foundation (truth) to the answer to the OP

Christian Reasons to Support Gay Rights

as being: "There are none."

99%, why did it take you so many words when you could have just admitted that your stance does not encompass all people living on this planet like I pointed out?

Did you think we would not notice your dodge and lack of having an answer if you disguised it like you did?

I think you don't give us enough credit and will take your lack of a response as an acknowledgement of my point. Feel free to address it if you will and then maybe I will need to alter my thoughts on the matter, but until you do, your stance does not work for all of mankind. Some humans are clearly being left out. I notice it and acknowledge it, you cannot which is what led me to ask about your motivation. (are you motivated either financially or by appearance to appose homosexuality?)

I have no "dog in this fight". I'm not religious nor attracted to members of the same sex. I see your biblical side (and in fact shared it for 2 decades) and I see reality. I notice that they both cannot be true and am forced to side with reality over poorly written scripture on the topic. Again... easy for me due to not having a dog in the fight. You cannot say the same though. Consider the source as they say.

Sources:
- A motivated 99%'s personal interpretation of scripture.
- Reality. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/do ... 497556.htm

How long will you deny reality in order to hold your position?

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 173 by Clownboat]

99%, why did it take you so many words when you could have just admitted that your stance does not encompass all people living on this planet like I pointed out?

It's called logic. Takes a bit of thinking and much writing to answer your attempts at traps I know. This is what Christian debates are all about. Dodging the pitfalls your adversary lays out for you while staying on the narrow path.

I like that your premise is that homosexuality is a birth defect (like being born with both sets of genitals: (your comparison) and that genitalia points (orients) us all to the right sexual behavior for them to engage in.

Did you think we would not notice your dodge and lack of having an answer if you disguised it like you did?

You are comparing homosexuals and their condition to a person born deformed. You literally did that.

Did you think I would miss that?

I think you don't give us enough credit and will take your lack of a response as an acknowledgement of my point.

Your point is that homosexual orientation is a deformity. You literally made that comparison.

Feel free to address it if you will and then maybe I will need to alter my thoughts on the matter, but until you do, your stance does not work for all of mankind.

Genitalia denotes sexual orientation is your point right?

I can go with that. Your gay contingency cannot though. Who is denying reality? Me or you?

Some humans are clearly being left out. I notice it and acknowledge it, you cannot which is what led me to ask about your motivation. (are you motivated either financially or by appearance to appose homosexuality?)

Just truth. Honesty and reality are important to me when "contending for the faith." Your deformed Chinese citizen speaks volumes about many things, but homosexuality isn't one of them. The Chinese person honestly has the genitals of a woman right?

I have no "dog in this fight".

I notice that they both cannot be true and am forced to side with reality over poorly written scripture on the topic. Again... easy for me due to not having a dog in the fight. You cannot say the same though. Consider the source as they say.

Sources:
- A motivated 99%'s personal interpretation of scripture.
- Reality. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/do ... 497556.htm

Neither do I until the Dog comes into my Church and demands to be called a Cat.

I'm not religious nor attracted to members of the same sex. I see your biblical side (and in fact shared it for 2 decades) and I see reality.

Apostates are a common occurrence in Christian reality And one of the reasons why I, as an atheist, left that, IMO . . . all-too-rigid mindset and worldview, and chose the freedom in Christian reality.

How long will you deny reality in order to hold your position?

So YOU ARE ASSERTING that homosexuals are deformed people that deserve our pity?

That is a brave statement sir.

Does the malformed Chinese person take "pride" in his/her deformity? Or does he/she want to live as nature dictates for what genitalia is for?

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 173 by Clownboat]

99%, why did it take you so many words when you could have just admitted that your stance does not encompass all people living on this planet like I pointed out?

It's called logic. Takes a bit of thinking and much writing to answer your attempts at traps I know. This is what Christian debates are all about. Dodging the pitfalls your adversary lays out for you while staying on the narrow path.

I like that your premise is that homosexuality is a birth defect (like being born with both sets of genitals: (your comparison) and that genitalia points (orients) us all to the right sexual behavior for them to engage in.

Did you think we would not notice your dodge and lack of having an answer if you disguised it like you did?

You are comparing homosexuals and their condition to a person born deformed. You literally did that.

Did you think I would miss that?

I think you don't give us enough credit and will take your lack of a response as an acknowledgement of my point.

Your point is that homosexual orientation is a deformity. You literally made that comparison.

Feel free to address it if you will and then maybe I will need to alter my thoughts on the matter, but until you do, your stance does not work for all of mankind.

Genitalia denotes sexual orientation is your point right?

I can go with that. Your gay contingency cannot though. Who is denying reality? Me or you?

Some humans are clearly being left out. I notice it and acknowledge it, you cannot which is what led me to ask about your motivation. (are you motivated either financially or by appearance to appose homosexuality?)

Just truth. Honesty and reality are important to me when "contending for the faith." Your deformed Chinese citizen speaks volumes about many things, but homosexuality isn't one of them. The Chinese person honestly has the genitals of a woman right?

I have no "dog in this fight".

I notice that they both cannot be true and am forced to side with reality over poorly written scripture on the topic. Again... easy for me due to not having a dog in the fight. You cannot say the same though. Consider the source as they say.

Sources:
- A motivated 99%'s personal interpretation of scripture.
- Reality. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/do ... 497556.htm

Neither do I until the Dog comes into my Church and demands to be called a Cat.

I'm not religious nor attracted to members of the same sex. I see your biblical side (and in fact shared it for 2 decades) and I see reality.

Apostates are a common occurrence in Christian reality And one of the reasons why I, as an atheist, left that, IMO . . . all-too-rigid mindset and worldview, and chose the freedom in Christian reality.

How long will you deny reality in order to hold your position?

So YOU ARE ASSERTING that homosexuals are deformed people that deserve our pity?

That is a brave statement sir.

Does the malformed Chinese person take "pride" in his/her deformity? Or does he/she want to live as nature dictates for what genitalia is for?

Your foolish attempts to tell me what my point is can clearly be shown to be incorrect in the post above where you quote mined my point right out of it.

My point (Cut and pasted): Feel free to address it if you will and then maybe I will need to alter my thoughts on the matter, but until you do, your stance does not work for all of mankind. Some humans are clearly being left out.

In this case, which is one out of 10,000:
Her congenital anomaly (which you take liberties with) was surgically removed, but she cannot bear children and a chromosome examination confirmed that "she" is actually a "he."

Since Zhang has a vagina, it was not until the ultrasound exam that the couple learned "she" was a "he."

I am pointing out that these things happen. You in fact are the one claiming deformities, but regardless if it's a deformity, anomaly or whatever you want to call it does not change my point, that you stance does not include these people.

So I'm left to wonder, are these people not known by your god, or do you have ulterior motives? It seems clear to me that you cannot explain your stance while acknowledging that these humans exist, otherwise I assume you would have done so by now.

[Wordleymaster1]

Why would Christians need any different reasons than anyone else? Shouldn't a gay person be able to get a job without being discriminated against because they're gay? Shouldn't a gay couple be able to get the same legal rights as a straight couple? Shouldn't a gay person be able to do, say or live basically the same way as a straight person?
And how does any of this effect Christianity? I mean gay people aren't trying to make Christianity illegal (though that would be awesome to me at least), they aren't trying to invalidate current marriages, they aren't trying to bring down society...they're just trying to live their own lives as they see fit. That has nothing to do with Christianity.
So why the need for "special Christian reasons" at all? Shouldn't being a human being be enough?
Are Christians really that much more advanced than the rest of us that they need special consideration?

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 175 by Clownboat]

Your foolish attempts to tell me what my point is can clearly be shown to be incorrect in the post above where you quote mined my point right out of it.

It is quite easy to tell you your points since we both know what you are promoting and why. I used to be a non and/or anti Christian and now I am a Christian. You claim the opposite history. OK whatever. We all have choices to make.

There are no reasons at all for Christians to support homosexuals or homosexuality. It seems to be purposely ignored that Paul - and I assert other writers of NT testimony - spoke to the inappropriateness of Christians to engage in homosexuality. There is no reference to shrine prostitution in arsenokoitai and pederasty cannot be supported in any way at all. So, even for non-Jewish believers, homosexuality is to be avoided.

Now, on to your physically congenitally deformed Chinese person? How are they to be blamed for their behavior since they had proof of what gender they were and acted on that accordingly? LGBT's have no excuse like your deformed-from-the-womb Chinese citizen. So we can put aside that tactic.

My point (Cut and pasted): Feel free to address it if you will and then maybe I will need to alter my thoughts on the matter, but until you do, your stance does not work for all of mankind. Some humans are clearly being left out.

I am not here to attempt to change minds that are clearly bent to the position they display here. And for the exact reason that Jesus says: Some people are left out. That is not my doing, it is God's. I am just to contend for the faith, delivered only once to the saints, and not lie about it.

In this case, which is one out of 10,000:
Her congenital anomaly (which you take liberties with) was surgically removed, but she cannot bear children and a chromosome examination confirmed that "she" is actually a "he."

But innocently was told that she was a she. There was no culpability in "her" actions. If I was born with a prehensile tail and hung from trees since I was a baby, it wouldn't be my fault for thinking I should hang on trees. LGBT's do not have the same excuse. They are all anatomically accurate.

Since Zhang has a vagina, it was not until the ultrasound exam that the couple learned "she" was a "he."

And? How many homosexuals with "normal" genitalia are violating that "normality?"

C'mon now.

I am pointing out that these things happen.

So do a lot of birth defects.

You in fact are the one claiming deformities, but regardless if it's a deformity, anomaly or whatever you want to call it does not change my point, that you stance does not include these people.

I do not believe that your position is valid. ALL of Christian truth still does not bend to the will of a birth defect.

So I'm left to wonder, are these people not known by your god, or do you have ulterior motives?

What does a marriage consist of TO JESUS? And, to God, in the beginning? "I" nor any other Christian has to submit to secularism to tell us how we should live as Christians. You are free to invent new ideas about marriage all you want to, non and anti Christians are free to live their lives separated from faith delivered only once to the saints. Why should I care what decisions you and they make?

It seems clear to me that you cannot explain your stance while acknowledging that these humans exist, otherwise I assume you would have done so by now.

Are you kidding? The hermaphrodite tactic is a worn out cognitive dissonance ploy to attempt to homosexualize The Church. It is such a weak attempt that I really don't have to waste too much time responding to it. You and I can agree that physically deformed hermaphrodites get to choose what gender they can pursue BECAUSE THEY HAVE BOTH GENDERS TO CHOOSE FROM.

LGBT's do not. That puts this whole gay pride thing to rest now doesn't it?

Thank you for the opportunity to play along.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 175 by Clownboat]

Your foolish attempts to tell me what my point is can clearly be shown to be incorrect in the post above where you quote mined my point right out of it.

It is quite easy to tell you your points since we both know what you are promoting and why. I used to be a non and/or anti Christian and now I am a Christian. You claim the opposite history. OK whatever. We all have choices to make.

There are no reasons at all for Christians to support homosexuals or homosexuality. It seems to be purposely ignored that Paul - and I assert other writers of NT testimony - spoke to the inappropriateness of Christians to engage in homosexuality. There is no reference to shrine prostitution in arsenokoitai and pederasty cannot be supported in any way at all. So, even for non-Jewish believers, homosexuality is to be avoided.

Now, on to your physically congenitally deformed Chinese person? How are they to be blamed for their behavior since they had proof of what gender they were and acted on that accordingly? LGBT's have no excuse like your deformed-from-the-womb Chinese citizen. So we can put aside that tactic.

My point (Cut and pasted): Feel free to address it if you will and then maybe I will need to alter my thoughts on the matter, but until you do, your stance does not work for all of mankind. Some humans are clearly being left out.

I am not here to attempt to change minds that are clearly bent to the position they display here. And for the exact reason that Jesus says: Some people are left out. That is not my doing, it is God's. I am just to contend for the faith, delivered only once to the saints, and not lie about it.

In this case, which is one out of 10,000:
Her congenital anomaly (which you take liberties with) was surgically removed, but she cannot bear children and a chromosome examination confirmed that "she" is actually a "he."

But innocently was told that she was a she. There was no culpability in "her" actions. If I was born with a prehensile tail and hung from trees since I was a baby, it wouldn't be my fault for thinking I should hang on trees. LGBT's do not have the same excuse. They are all anatomically accurate.

Since Zhang has a vagina, it was not until the ultrasound exam that the couple learned "she" was a "he."

And? How many homosexuals with "normal" genitalia are violating that "normality?"

C'mon now.

I am pointing out that these things happen.

So do a lot of birth defects.

You in fact are the one claiming deformities, but regardless if it's a deformity, anomaly or whatever you want to call it does not change my point, that you stance does not include these people.

I do not believe that your position is valid. ALL of Christian truth still does not bend to the will of a birth defect.

So I'm left to wonder, are these people not known by your god, or do you have ulterior motives?

What does a marriage consist of TO JESUS? And, to God, in the beginning? "I" nor any other Christian has to submit to secularism to tell us how we should live as Christians. You are free to invent new ideas about marriage all you want to, non and anti Christians are free to live their lives separated from faith delivered only once to the saints. Why should I care what decisions you and they make?

It seems clear to me that you cannot explain your stance while acknowledging that these humans exist, otherwise I assume you would have done so by now.

Are you kidding? The hermaphrodite tactic is a worn out cognitive dissonance ploy to attempt to homosexualize The Church. It is such a weak attempt that I really don't have to waste too much time responding to it. You and I can agree that physically deformed hermaphrodites get to choose what gender they can pursue BECAUSE THEY HAVE BOTH GENDERS TO CHOOSE FROM.

LGBT's do not. That puts this whole gay pride thing to rest now doesn't it?

Thank you for the opportunity to play along.

My example is not one of someone being a hermaphrodite. You have argued a straw man of your own creation and have once again failed to answer what this person should do according to the judgments you claim.

Should he stay married to his husband, or should he divorce his husband and find a wife to be with even though he has a vagina?

Did your chosen god place a soul in this body or not?

It is ridiculous IMO to believe that a god would place a soul in a body that has a vagina, while in fact the body is male, and then allow said male to marry a man without knowledge that he was doing something that your god does not approve of, only to be faced with the decision to stay in a marriage you claim your god does not approve of or to divorce which your god also does not approve of.

Talk about a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't. How can you condemn gay people when what you use to condemn does not account for many?

If you were born with a vagina, thought you were female, were attracted to men, got married to a man only to find out years later that you have hidden testicles and are actually a man (like what happens to human beings on this planet), what would you do in order to stay in your chosen gods good graces?

No matter what you would choose, there are other people just like you are now that would be waiting to call you an abomination.
That is not fair and is the only reason needed to reject your claims. They cannot be truthful. No amount of twisting the Bible justifies what you do IMO. You might as well be using the book to justify slavery.

Perhaps if you have a good answer for the question in bold above, I will need to rethink my opinion, but as of now, you cannot claim to have the answers to marriage or being gay when you clearly don't have the answers like you continue to demonstrate.

[Yahu]

The "central message of the Gospel" is repentance and a life consecrated to God. All issues regarding God's moral expectations are cental to salvation and peace with God.

While I agree with most of what you presented, I have to STRONGLY disagree with this ridiculous statement.

Salvation is a gift and NOTHING we do to earn that salvation even moral behavior. Yes there are both physical and spiritual consequences to living in the flesh but it WILL NOT prevent salvation. It will hinder spiritual growth and position/rewards within the eternal kingdom.

Failures in moral areas will effect our Sanctification and Glorification but NOT our Justification! Even moral sins are covered by the blood of Yeshua.