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in their decision was the issue that expecting everyone to follow these traditional rules, rules that many saw as outdated, would be a drag on the new movement.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?

[PeteZa]

So do you believe it's Ok to cherry pick the Bible and just use the verses Christians think are relevant and throw away the rest?

I'll tell you what I believe; I believe all Christians cherry-pick, no matter how much they claim to hold the entire Bible as sovereign. Of course, I can't exactly prove this, because I can't test every single Christian in the world, but I believe I can show you how even those Christians who eschew the idea of "shelf verses" still do ignore the verses that don't fit with their own morals, beliefs, or conception of God.

I can't make any reasonably unflawed argument to say emphatically that Christians cherry pick the Bible or not. I think it goes without saying that interpretations are cherry picked. Maybe not random, maybe after considerable forethought, or maybe even a lack of, but since same verses often lead to different ends...the interpretation of meaning is picked.

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to rookiebatman]

Hello Rookiebatman,

I'm glad to meet you! Here are answers to your several posts.

Post #233:
You ask,

Please explain to us how dudes wanting to be intimate with other dudes is a "consuming beast."

May I please ask what is your intended use of the word, intimate? Are you speaking of intimacy in a true love relationship between a man and a woman or of a mere act of copulation of any two individuals? What is the intended good fruit of the intimacy you are speaking of? If it's anything other than God's prescription, look out!

The consuming beast that I spoke of is the mindset toward wrongs as if they are right that's pushed on us from all around.

As for what you said about numbers in post# 235, how may numbers be discussed in a way to manipulate the meaning of a prohibition so that its message may be bent?

Post #239:

You said,

I'll tell you what I believe; I believe all Christians cherry-pick, no matter how much they claim to hold the entire Bible as sovereign. Of course, I can't exactly prove this, because I can't test every single Christian in the world, but I believe I can show you how even those Christians who eschew the idea of "shelf verses" still do ignore the verses that don't fit with their own morals, beliefs, or conception of God.

May I ask what scriptures do you think I cherry-pick? What anti-gay rhetoric have I used against homosexuals? If you want me against homosexuals, I only need to shut my mouth and let them go on their way and learn the HARD way. Never mind the risk of learning too late for corrective action.

I call myself speaking well to all of you.

DUH, What do you have to say about scriptures that are cherry-picked to be ignored such as those found in Leviticus?

Take care,
Earl

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to post 236 by Erexsaur]

Whether it's evolution vs. the Genesis creation account, or the mounting evidence that there is a genetic basis for gender attraction vs. the Old Testament, those who deny the science remind me of a guy with an old map.

When he sees clear discrepancies between the geography actually in front of him, he clings to his belief in the map rather than trust his senses.

A personal anecdote:
Both my mother and father are/were devout evangelical Christians all their lives, as were their extended families. Of all my nephews, nieces, and cousins on my Dad's side, there is only one homosexual, a nephew. On my mother's side at least a dozen, prob'ly more. It's not something I pay much attention to.

One of my first cousins on my mother's side is active in Republican politics and a devout Christian. He's too well known for me to give more information about his accomplishments and such. In short, he is gay while he has every reason but biology to persuade him to "choose" to be straight, IF it were a choice. It is not.

Condemning people for being "the way God made them," based on a Biblical edict, is just one more acknowledgement that the Bible got it wrong; therefore, the Bible is not authored by God.

When your map has been found defective, throw away the map, not reality.

Hello DanMark,

This post is to answer your post #237.

When it comes to gender attraction, I only know that God made man male and female and that males and females are naturally attracted to each other. Everything was made good before the day that man sinned and fell. Why did God go through the trouble to create a female only to encode genes to defeat His purpose for making the woman?

Thanks for sharing your personal anecdote and a view of your and your familys religious background.

Let me first say that a truly devout Christian supports nothing that scripture prohibits.

Speaking of religious background, have you considered how yours compare with that of the rich young ruler and of Sauls (later to become Paul)? Their stories have much to tell us about dependence on much religion apart from realization of the need for our Savior.

Did the ruler and Pauls backgrounds help them? How so? The rulers question, what must I do to inherit eternal life, indicated confidence in his own goodness as he told Jesus that he kept the commandments Jesus suggested from his youth. But did he keep them all? His problem was with the first and great commandment. When told to give up his riches and to attain treasures in heaven, he went away sad. He failed to recognize Jesus as sovereign as characterized by conformance to the first commandment. Jesus was "Good Master" instead of Sovereign Lord. Is the ruler able to enjoy his earthly treasures now? Heavenly treasures are forever.

Even with riches that are not considered bad in themselves, the ruler suffered the multiple-master syndrome that I discussed earlier. But how is it possible for one to repent from sin by holding on to its yoke that keeps him in servitude? Saul (now Paul) had to be knocked of his horse and ended up face to face with the Savior to be brought to realization of the insufficiency of his great religion. If its bad for the ruler not to give up what of itself is considered good for the sake of our mighty Savior that has an offer thats infinitely better, what is there to be said about not wanting to give up controversial homosexual behavior? Please be informed that God has made power to resist and forsake the choke-hold available to you.

The story of the rich young ruler is the one that convicted me and led to my conversion. The fact that I would have done the exact same thing if I were in the rulers shoes should have been enough to scare me grievously! But God graciously gave me a heart of honesty to honestly admit this fatal guilt. Conversion came to me a short time later. Jesus only requires our honest confession of our wrong for His forgiveness made available by the cross.

Back to the discussion:
You said, Condemning people for being the way God made them, based on a Biblical edict, is just one more acknowledgement that the Bible got it wrong; therefore, the Bible is not authored by God.

Did I condemn you? Do you prefer that I do so by giving you up to let you go your way? Is the commandment for a person not to kill and steal from you (also found in the Bible that got it wrong) not authored by God?

Why double-blame God for the sin of homosexuality and for giving us erroneous documentation that misrepresents His character? We were all born sinners but God did not make us that way. Neither did He make the homosexual to be such. Mistruth does not set free.

I again say what I said before: The homosexual agenda is only a deliberate stumbling block thrown our way to make you and me think there's a fault in the Bible.

Take care,
Earl

[Danmark]

When it comes to gender attraction, I only know that God made man male and female and that males and females are naturally attracted to each other. Everything was made good before the day that man sinned and fell. Why did God go through the trouble to create a female only to encode genes to defeat His purpose for making the woman?

Thanks for sharing your personal anecdote and a view of your and your familys religious background.

Let me first say that a truly devout Christian supports nothing that scripture prohibits.

1st, I note your belief in "God" making only two sexes, strictly defined with no gradation, and 100% opposite sex attraction is contradicted by science as I documented. You really should throw away the map, not dispute the facts that show your map is inaccurate.

And I completely disagree with your unfounded claim about the definition of "devout" and your personal judgement about who is and is not a "true" Christian. The word 'devout' refers to a person having or showing deep religious feeling or commitment. It is not a measure of doctrine, but of the deepness of feeling and commitment.

Many devout Christians understand that portions of the Bible are symbolic and contain myths that are not literally true. A devout Christian does not have to believe in the absolute inherency of scripture.

Your reference to the 'rich young ruler' has nothing to do with the facts of the anecdote I related. Essentially I am presenting facts that demonstrate your interpretation of the Bible, if accurate, shows the Bible is so wrong, so at odds with the facts, we are safe to dismiss it as perfectly representing the knowledge an omnipotent creator would have.

Relying on 'the fall' which is clearly taken from a myth that involves talking serpents, to explain the defects and deviations from the norm in nature, is absolutely, 100% a reliance on faith, rather than reason.

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to Erexsaur]

As for your phrase, "And you know this because," I "know this" through observation: The hardware (male or female body) has no provisions to carry out the homosexual characteristics found only in the virus infected software. Can software cause a scanner to perform as a printer? Neither can the mind cause one sex to perform like the opposite. If someone programs a computer to be a wife, the only way it can carry out its intended function is by it printing on the screen, "I am a wife." But that would be a lie. What would one think of a user that would be satisfied to the point that he thinks he doesn't need a real wife?

Who in his right mind would create software to cause hardware to depart from its intended function to carry out a function unintended and thus impossible for its makeup?

This is an excellent example of the false conclusions one can arrive at when he starts with false assumptions. In this case the false assumption is "intelligent design," when the reality is the natural force of evolution. Those who understand and believe in what we actually observe in nature are not surprised by the variation we find in it. Filled with wonder of course, but not shocked when each individual of a species does not perfectly fit the expectation of one who sees people formed from some specific design as if they were formed by a cosmic cookie cutter.

When one believes in the literal truth of the Bible, including creationism, one works under a terrific handicap when analyzing the reality of the world. Gender is a great example of nature's diversity. Forcing everything to fit into religiously derived categories is blinding.
For some help in seeing the reality of gender one could read:
http://web.uvic.ca/~ahdevor/HowMany/HowMany.html

There's also a good article here with a very helpful Venn diagram:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androphilia_and_gynephilia

Hello again Danmark,

This is an answer to your post #216.

Why do you find it so necessary to attribute nature around us to chancy evolution? If chance is that reliable, why cant it perform a far simpler task of regularly providing you (like paydays) with winning lottery tickets for the rest of your life?

Thanks for illustrating the targeted end result of the push toward evolutionary thinking--a scientific way to deceive ourselves into thinking that the sacred word of God is only a deceptive, discriminatory lie. C. S. Lewis wrote books that warn against scientism, the misuse of science, as a means of usurping political power.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/c-s-l ... ce-128028/

http://www.cslewisweb.com/the-magicians ... d-society/


Thanks for your very clear illustration of the reason that so many prefer the sandy foundation of the belief that supernatural intelligence was not involved in the creation of the magnificent universal order around us so that they may deceive themselves into thinking they are free from divine authority. How would you feel if someone treated you likewise if you were a figure of authority? No problem? The evolutionary mindset is one of the consuming beasts I talked about earlier.

Thanks for illustrating how faithful service to the god of lust leads to denial of the existence of Him that created our ability to love. I also in effect received the implied message that you think that a child works under a terrific handicap when he abides by the authority of his parents.

Compromise of truth is clear evidence of servitude to wrong made to appear right. Is mighty little 3-year old Johnny so smart that he is able to cross the street without assistance? Even though we are far more mature than little Johnny, dont we yet face difficult challenges that throw us back to the status of a toddler that needs guidance? We need God, not a lottery machine.


Take care,
Earl

[rookiebatman]

May I please ask what is your intended use of the word, intimate? Are you speaking of intimacy in a true love relationship between a man and a woman or of a mere act of copulation of any two individuals?

It can be either or both.

What is the intended good fruit of the intimacy you are speaking of?

If you need me to tell you that, you must be doing it wrong.

If it's anything other than God's prescription, look out!

Why would I need to look out? Since I believe there is considerable evidence that God does not exist, it would then follow that "God's prescriptions" are merely man-made.

The consuming beast that I spoke of is the mindset toward wrongs as if they are right that's pushed on us from all around.

How does dudes wanting to be intimate with other dudes push a "mindset toward wrongs as if they were right" on you? They're not asking you to sleep with other dudes.

As for what you said about numbers in post# 235, how may numbers be discussed in a way to manipulate the meaning of a prohibition so that its message may be bent?

I don't really understand your question, so I'll just restate my point from #235 in perhaps a clearer way. You were arguing that the Bible doesn't condone polygamy, but your support of that was a verse that admonishes the king not to "take many wives." My point was that a person could be a polygamist and still not have "many" wives.

May I ask what scriptures do you think I cherry-pick?

I'll bet you ignore all the verses that condone slavery, don't you?

What anti-gay rhetoric have I used against homosexuals?

Well, you did say this:

If you want me against homosexuals, I only need to shut my mouth and let them go on their way and learn the HARD way. Never mind the risk of learning too late for corrective action.

DUH, What do you have to say about scriptures that are cherry-picked to be ignored such as those found in Leviticus?

I don't think you can really say that people are cherry-picking those verses to be ignored, when they're in the same section that tells people not to eat pork, and what to do if there's mold growing on your walls. Do you still follow those verses?

[Danmark]

...
You said, Condemning people for being the way God made them, based on a Biblical edict, is just one more acknowledgement that the Bible got it wrong; therefore, the Bible is not authored by God.

Did I condemn you? Do you prefer that I do so by giving you up to let you go your way? Is the commandment for a person not to kill and steal from you (also found in the Bible that got it wrong) not authored by God?

You did not condemn me, but your belief system condemns homosexuals. And I never said the Bible got everything wrong. But to be from an omniscient God, the bible must be perfect. It isn't.

If you think gender attraction is a choice, try changing which gender you are attracted to. I have never met a heterosexual, including myself, who claims he "chose" to be heterosexual. Despite this obvious proof, and the facts and statistics you've been presented, you cling to your beliefs solely because "The Bible told me so." I suggest this is an irrational route of inquiry.

[rookiebatman]

Thanks for your very clear illustration of the reason that so many prefer the sandy foundation of the belief that supernatural intelligence was not involved in the creation of the magnificent universal order around us so that they may deceive themselves into thinking they are free from divine authority. How would you feel if someone treated you likewise if you were a figure of authority? No problem? The evolutionary mindset is one of the consuming beasts I talked about earlier.

Fun fact, there are a higher percentage of evolutionists in America who believe that God guided the process, than evolutionists who believe it was purely natural. So how can the only reason to believe in evolution be to put God out of a job, if the majority of evolutionists still believe in God?

[Clownboat]

The consuming beast that I spoke of is the mindset toward wrongs as if they are right that's pushed on us from all around.

I love me some irony.

I feel it is wrong for you to hold back something you hold dear for yourself from other members of the human race . This would have you being the consuming beast. You are doing something wrong IMO, discrimination, yet act as if you are doing right.

"But the Bible says", only works to justify this in your mind and the mind of some other believers. To the rest of us, it is seen as the discrimination it is.

Discrimination in the name of a god is still discrimination.

Would you be able to walk into a gay bar, look at a member of the same sex, and choose to have homosexual feelings?

[Danmark]

Why do you find it so necessary to attribute nature around us to chancy evolution? If chance is that reliable, why cant it perform a far simpler task of regularly providing you (like paydays) with winning lottery tickets for the rest of your life?

Thanks for illustrating the targeted end result of the push toward evolutionary thinking--a scientific way to deceive ourselves into thinking that the sacred word of God is only a deceptive, discriminatory lie. C. S. Lewis wrote books that warn against scientism, the misuse of science, as a means of usurping political power.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/c-s-l ... ce-128028/

http://www.cslewisweb.com/the-magicians ... d-society/


Thanks for your very clear illustration of the reason that so many prefer the sandy foundation of the belief that supernatural intelligence was not involved in the creation of the magnificent universal order around us so that they may deceive themselves into thinking they are free from divine authority. How would you feel if someone treated you likewise if you were a figure of authority? No problem? The evolutionary mindset is one of the consuming beasts I talked about earlier.

Thanks for illustrating how faithful service to the god of lust leads to denial of the existence of Him that created our ability to love. I also in effect received the implied message that you think that a child works under a terrific handicap when he abides by the authority of his parents.

Compromise of truth is clear evidence of servitude to wrong made to appear right. Is mighty little 3-year old Johnny so smart that he is able to cross the street without assistance? Even though we are far more mature than little Johnny, dont we yet face difficult challenges that throw us back to the status of a toddler that needs guidance? We need God, not a lottery machine.

Earl, this post suggests to me you do not understand the theory of evolution. There is nothing absolutely "chancy" about evolution. The process of life forms evolving into different species is not entirely random. Let's use your lottery analogy.

If the numbers are selected by picking numbered balls out of a spinning cage, that would be random. However, if certain numbers are lighter or larger, this will affect the result, which will have random elements, yet some numbers would come up more often. The same principle is involved with "loaded" dice.

There are scientific principles, fundamental laws of nature that are involved in the selection process. For example, I'm aware of no life forms that have evolved on Earth that are silicon based.
http://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet ... 13/?no-ist

As far as I know, all mammals are bilaterally symmetrical. The claim that either "God did it" or everything is completely random is a false dichotomy.