The Christian Response to Homosexuality

[micatala]

Many Christians consider homosexual practices to be immoral. The forum has multiple threads which include arguments as to whether or not homosexuality should be considered immoral, and even whether this position is supported Biblically.

In this thread, we will take it is a given that homosexuality is immoral.

Under this assumption, what should the response of Christians be to the existence of homosexuality? How should we interact with or treat persons who are homosexuals?

In terms of political society, what sort of laws should Christians support with respect to homosexuality? If there is to be unequal treatment of homosexuals under the law, what is the Biblical basis for this?


Again, arguments concerning the morality of homosexuality are not relevant to the thread. What is relevant is discussion of the possible Christian responses to homosexuality, and what valid rationale there are for these responses.

[1John2_26]

1John wrote:
My prediction is that indeed liberal Christians (if they are Christians at all) will foist this gay culture into the Church with historical disastrous results.

The Catholic Church has shown what sneaky people do when they are in leadership. Propping up gay culture within orthodox Christian Churches is literally allowing the fox to grow chickens.

Again, I will encourage to remain on topic. Predictions about what might happen in the future or other statements not related to the OP are not relevant.

It is very appropriate to this topic. What may happen is a very real apologia to Christians. Indeed I would say that it is the basis of many epistles being written.

Quote:
But if she, or any other kind of person, wants to a"change" and, or, "alter" Christianity to become a homosexual sub-culture, God will not allow that.

Let's focus on what the response of humans should be. What God might or might not do is outside of the scope of the thread.

The Gospel is the place to start. Indeed to we Christians God is talking and is quoted. Telling children to celebrate and embrace homosexuality finds only condemnation. That marriage is man-woman and children is seriously not debateable in Christianity.

THere are several relevant statements in the post.

Quote:

anyone is indeed allowed to call themself a Christian and live as if they were.

And to have their doctrina tested time and time again. The comparison of gay culture to Mormonism is a good one.

. . . .

The Christian response to Homosexuality should be to live and let live until they are attacked.

A good shepherd protects the flock. Homosexuals do not desire to repent and change their behavior and indeed demand to be accepted or will deal with Churches through secular means.

. . . .

I believe completely that Christians should never trust Gay (homosexual) Culture ever. And according to the Bible and especially the Gospels they cannot. But allowing individuals into the Christian fold is allowable. How many people will be saved out of Gay Culture by living within the Christian culture called to be lived in by God? THAT is a good response to homosexuality by any Christian, "worth their salt."

The parables of the workers receiving the same pay for doing only a little work at the end of the day proclaims that it is never to let to hope people will do the work of an evangelist.

. . . .

Once the evil that is so prevelent within Gay Culture, materializes in a Church, Christians have shown the speed and mercy to drive it away. Not speed and mercy toward the unrepentant wrong-doer, but the speed and mercy to protect the flock.

There comes a time when the evil person must be turned out. For the protection of the good.

. . . .

Interacting with homosexuals by Christians in responding to them will and can only benefit some homosexuals by binging some the True Life that dwells in the light of Christ Jesus.

Getting near the Light can only save some of the lost.

So, what I am gathering is that it is OK for Christians to evangelize, show the love and light of God, etc. in interacting with homosexuals, but also that Christians need to 'protect themselves' or their churches from homosexuality.

That would be in keeping with the lessons taught in the New Testament writings.

This seems to be promoting a sort of balancing act between contradictory approaches. On the one hand, interacting with homosexuals can only benefit some of the homosexuals, but on the other hand, homosexuals are to be 'driven away' in order to protect the flock.

Should Christians or can Christians allow their children to have deviants influencing their children? I think a group of good parents can ask the leadership to expect that change is necessary to remain in a Church after the necessary process is played out.

Now, to get to the details.

What would be the specific Biblical passages supporting these positions?

Pick one. There is actually no texts supporting homosexuality be promoted, supported, celebrated are preached as acceptable anywhere in the New Testament. The Christian Response to Homosexuals is that the behavior has to change. As can be seen from Blackbirds input, Christianity is not the side to change its behavior.

For example, what supports the position that Christians should live and let live unless they are attacked? In addition, what constitutes an attack and what should be the response if attacked?

Celebrating sodomy within a Church is so heinous it cannot be allowed. Putting sin in front of children in a Church community and teaching that it is OK and indeed promoted to be accepted is satanic. Trying to list all of the NT texts to show the unacceptabilty of supporting same-gender sexuality is rather rude to ask. What should be asked is where is any support for allowing the practioners of same-gender sex to remain in that behavior FROM the New Testament texts.

Jude, Peter, John, James, Paul and the Gospels show no approval of celebrating homosexuality. That issue would have to be presented as where is the support for homosexuality found?

One relevant passage of course would be Jesus saying 'if your enemy strikes you on the cheek, offer him the other cheek.' THis suggest the response to an attack is to offer to be attacked again.

Which of course is validation for the Christian to respond to Gay Culture and the Gay Community as attackers of Christians.

Certainly there is nothing here to support the idea that Christians should respond to an attack with a counter attack.

Not in any physical sense correct. But "telling" an unrepentant member to leave the Church is completely acceptable.

"Contending for the faith" is going to seen as an attack on the heretic and evil person wanting to fleece the flock or influence the membership.

If the Pastor of sheep goes looking for the lost individual and finds on returning that this individual will poison the flock with its disease - in this case unrepentance and celebration of their sins, and encouraging others to embrace sins - then it is the duty of the Pastor - elected by God - to cast away the harmful individual.

The Christian Response to Homosexuality is: "Not here."

The divocee is not told that they are to continue getting wives and divorcing them, and getting wives and divorcing them etc., etc.. They are told the same thing Jesus told the prostitute. Go, and sin no more. Since within the culture of the Bible, this woman - an adulterer - could get married and live the life she was supposed to live,"She was not condemned, and therefore it seems logical that she could choose to live a Godly from then on.

Same-gender marriage was never given license from the talk Jesus had with the Sanhedrin members. Like it or not, teaching repentance and returning to a Godly life is seen as hate speech to the Gay Community. In the Christian Community it is seen as the truth. Once you are forgiven, you never sinned in the eyes of God, He threw your sins to the bottom of the ocean and as far as the east is from the west. METAPHORS for a new start. That is also seen as unacceptable to the Gay Community. The Response the Christian should have to Homosexuality is that a Christian cannot change the Gospel for political correctness.

If it is the lot of this current Christian Community to suffer for not altering the Bible to fit in homosexuality, the Christian response should be "where is my cell?" Or to remember the brothers and sisters that suffered from the same kinds of social politics at the beginning of the Church. Paul and Peter were not executed for altering the word of God to excuse away sin and sinning.

The Christian response to homosexuality should be the same as it was when Paul and Peter were contending for the faith delivered only once to the Saints.

I'll be happy to post their letters for the Biblical texts.

[Joe Blackbird]

I believe completely that Christians should never trust Gay (homosexual) Culture ever...

Once the evil that is so prevelent within Gay Culture, materializes in a Church, Christians have shown the speed and mercy to drive it away...

It is not the homosexualization of Christyianity that can ever happen. The only good thing that can come from interacting with Gays and Lesbians within the Church setting, is the Christanization of homosexual cultures...

I am grateful that reasonable people will be reading this to see the fruits of your faith. Could atheism and non-Christian religions have better free advertising?

[Easyrider]

When heaven and earth cease to exist, only then will 'all be accomplished', according to this passage. Re-read it. Heaven and earth still exist. According to Jesus, the Law should still be taught and practiced while heaven and earth exist.

As the Bible states, the Law is a tutor that defines sin, to lead people to Christ for salvation. The Law has 4 main purposes:

1. It shows us the moral character of God and his views on various behaviors.

2. It is a tutor to lead people to Christ.

3. It is a guide to godly living.

4. It helps keep people from suffering the adverse consequences of sin.

It is not a means of achieving salvation, because no one besides Christ has ever kept the Law. And, as God, Jesus clarified new truths about how it should be viewed in the New Testament (i.e. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone").

Perhaps you forget, the Bible is not 'proof' of anything to a non-Christian, yet you use it like it's conclusive evidence that something is true. Why not the Bhagivad Gita? Why not the Dhamapada? Why not the Tao Te Ching? Why not the Quran? Why not the PotMeetKettle?

The latter are false religions. Jesus is God and rose from the dead to prove it.

I have access to the annotations in, pretty much any given study bible on the market. Remember, I work in a Christian bookstore. Commentary and text are not even in the same ballpark friend- surely you must know this. Do you always trust the annotations and commentaries as Gospel? You should try reading the Bible sometime without the comments of a hundred evangelicals interpreting everything you read. It's quite breathtaking.

I did that before I bought various study Bibles, Joe. And while no one commentator is free from some kind of occasional flaky interpretation on one thing or another, generally speaking, their commentaries quite often are in line with Biblical truths.

I know quite a few pastors from work. The ones I know are NOT idiots. Most of them are quite humble and intelligent and are generally good natured people that I have a lot of respect for. Some can be pretty rude sometimes, but overall I have no beef with them. Still, I maintain that my comment is accurate and not malicious, because almost all of these pastors would echo the very things that most of the Christians at this site claim; beliefs which are based soley on myth, superstition and a 2000 year old book that has talking donkeys, people living inside of fish for three days and the dead coming back to life.

As far as I know, science, rationalism and secularism have never been able to disprove God or the supernatural. Not even close. Which makes your argument suspect without some kind compelling evidence to back it up.

If America did not legally protect homosexuals from hate crimes, it wouldn't just be shadowy groups like the KKK and the Creation movement that hunt and kill gays and you know it. Do you think Pat Robertson wouldn't kill a homosexual if it was legal?

No, I don't. But I think gays and others are killing their partners and others off via AIDS and domestic violence, etc., in far greater numbers.

But there are also MANY people out there who are just itching for the opportunity. Gay people are beaten and killed all the time, and the hate that causes it doesn't just come from 'disagreeing with their lifestyle'. It comes from zeal. The same kind of zeal that caused those planes to crash into the WTC, and it doesn't care what religion you belong to- as long as you have a cause that means more to you than your own life.

I wonder how many gays are killed by secularists who don't like them? I'd be interested in seeing some studies if any are available. What I do believe is that most people - Christian and non-Christian - don't hunt out anyone to beat or kill unless someone gets in their face pretty bad. And, as the Bible says, if you hate your neighbor you are pretty much a charlatan in the Christian faith. I also think more Christians were killed or persecuted around the world for their beliefs last year than gays killed for their beliefs / practices, so we need to look at that in context.

God bless!

[1John2_26]

I am grateful that reasonable people will be reading this to see the fruits of your faith. Could atheism and non-Christian religions have better free advertising?

Soundbite rebuttal Joe?

Might work for Air America and the anti-war apathists, but in thise thread I have posted how Christians in a Church should respond to homosexuality being embraced by people within their Church Community. I am, after all, a Christian that goes to Church now and again.

It would be nice if anyone believing that homosexuality should be taught as acceptable and celebrated within the Christian Culture and Community would list some Biblical texts supporting the teaching of Christians to practice homosexuality, and by reason, promote those that do. That would indeed be a Christian Response to Homosexuality.

What we can glean from your kurt response is that indeed Christians must accpet the homosexualization of their Churches and not the historic reality inherent in the authentic Christian Culture and Community represented in the New Testament where you have an amazingly appropriate and relevent treatise from Paul writing to a "Greek" Christian community:

Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were.

But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

I can see know reason to deny anyone a place within a Christian Church on the grounds that they have committed sins. Willfully celebrating those sins continue, I do not see how that can be justified from "what" Christianity "is."

If you have some texts that could help out in this area plaese advise us. If not, then see my position as one of asking the homosexual to become a Christian the way that all Christians do.

The two greatest commandments are indeed relevent here. How can you love God with all of your heart and let your brother practice sin without sooner or later trying to preach the Gospel to him?

Do not Christians constantly desire to try not to sin, and when it is embraced, to repent of it?

This thread can be used to make this an issue of insulting me but I would like to (in this thread), to follow the advice of Melikio and stay with the thread topic.

The Christian Response to Homosexuality has already been written in the pages of the New Testament. That is why Christainity is so attacked by the revisionliberal crowd.

Though this is also relevent to The Christian Response to Homosexuality:

The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated?

Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.

And of course this also:

. . . The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh." But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit.

Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.

One of Paul's Christian Responses to Homosexuality. Written to Greek Christians.

[Cathar1950]

I am grateful that reasonable people will be reading this to see the fruits of your faith. Could atheism and non-Christian religions have better free advertising?

Makes you wonder doesn't it?

1John wrote:

My prediction is that indeed liberal Christians (if they are Christians at all) will foist this gay culture into the Church with historical disastrous results.

The Catholic Church has shown what sneaky people do when they are in leadership. Propping up gay culture within orthodox Christian Churches is literally allowing the fox to grow chickens.

I don't think much of your predictions. There are no horrible disastrous results unless you go nuts and hurt people. They hardly seem sneaky and by the way how to you take an analogy or metaphor literally?
It is bad enough you said it wrong. It is the fox watching the hen house.
Raccoons are worse.

That marriage is man-woman and children is seriously not debateable in Christianity.

Yes it is debatable and it is being done in churches now.
It is being done in this country now also. It is election time.
My prediction is they might make a law but it will be overturned and found unconstitutional. Even with conservatives.

And to have their doctrina tested time and time again. The comparison of gay culture to Mormonism is a good one.

Not it is not a good comparison and I can't see how you think it is. But go ahead let the Mormons know how you feel about them.

A good shepherd protects the flock.

You are neither good or a Sheperd. You might want to be a Sheperd with power over a bunch of sheep like people.

There comes a time when the evil person must be turned out. For the protection of the good.

When are they cutting you loose?

[melikio]

I believe completely that Christians should never trust Gay (homosexual) Culture ever...

Once the evil that is so prevelent within Gay Culture, materializes in a Church, Christians have shown the speed and mercy to drive it away...

It is not the homosexualization of Christyianity that can ever happen. The only good thing that can come from interacting with Gays and Lesbians within the Church setting, is the Christanization of homosexual cultures...

Yep. I really don't blame many atheists, agnostics or homosexuals from distancing themselves from "Christian" views of this sort. (I'm fairly distanced from them myself, and actually oppose them in certain ways.)

Still, it should ultimately be about various dialogues and civil laws which permit people to live in freedom and liberty (regarding their human sexuality). If someone commits to God or religion in a particular way, then that can certainly be honored, as long as the rights of others are reasonably observed and regarded. But the idea of taking "Christianity", the "Bible" or "God" as a PROD, to force a change in homosexuals, is a rather HYPOCRITICAL approach to an issue that will face mankind for as long as mankind exists.

Love, is indeed the better way. (And I don't mean that "tough" love that few would actually TURN ON THEMSELVES, to correct their own way/s.) Compassion is something to be expressed, not just an idea that seems "nice" (in one's own mind); Christians need to promote the fruit expressed in Galatians 5:22 (not find every legalistic exception to it).

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

1John2_26 wrote:

It appears that homosexuals are Christianizing (marriage and family values).

The 'marriage (joining together)' of two human beings is much older than Christianity. So are 'family values'.

Joe, can you give a list of civilizations that didn't hold the view that "marriage" was exclusively man-woman and that families were a man and a woman producing offspring.

And I hope you realize that same-sex matings do not produce offspring. Just thought you'ld want to know and yes, I welcome your research into my assertion on that.

[1John2_26]

Quote:
I am grateful that reasonable people will be reading this to see the fruits of your faith. Could atheism and non-Christian religions have better free advertising?

Makes you wonder doesn't it?

1John wrote:
Quote:
My prediction is that indeed liberal Christians (if they are Christians at all) will foist this gay culture into the Church with historical disastrous results.

The Catholic Church has shown what sneaky people do when they are in leadership. Propping up gay culture within orthodox Christian Churches is literally allowing the fox to grow chickens.

I don't think much of your predictions.

No surprise there. I am confident that horror will come from embracing anti-Christians within the walls of the Church. Satan is having his day that is for sure.

There are no horrible disastrous results unless you go nuts and hurt people.

The spirit is willing but the flesh is week. That is why my kids are in private schools. If they came home with a how-to book on homosexual oral sex techniques, I would be rather upset at the pederast that gave them the teachings.

They hardly seem sneaky and by the way how to you take an analogy or metaphor literally?

It is bad enough you said it wrong. It is the fox watching the hen house.
Raccoons are worse.

I know the saying all too well. I meant what I wrote, and in the context of gay evangelicalism my point is perfect. That you didn't understand my analogy does not surprise me.

Quote:
That marriage is man-woman and children is seriously not debateable in Christianity.

Yes it is debatable and it is being done in churches now.

Like I wrote: Satan is having his day. Nothing new here.

It is being done in this country now also. It is election time.
My prediction is they might make a law but it will be overturned and found unconstitutional. Even with conservatives.

The USA is nothing that special on the stage of history, though I like this idea:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Ooooo baby.

Quote:
And to have their doctrina tested time and time again. The comparison of gay culture to Mormonism is a good one.

Not it is not a good comparison and I can't see how you think it is. But go ahead let the Mormons know how you feel about them.

Heresy of one kind should not be included for the support of preaching of celebrating "arsenokoitai." Why not include the Mormons be celebrated in orthodoxy? Scientologists next? Where does this slippery slope lead?

Quote:
A good shepherd protects the flock.

You are neither good or a Sheperd. You might want to be a Sheperd with power over a bunch of sheep like people.

Liberals have proven to be the crowd led.

Quote:
There comes a time when the evil person must be turned out. For the protection of the good.

When are they cutting you loose?

When I embrace the heresy of supporting the teaching that homosexuality and same-gender marriage is to be celebrated, supported, condoned, promoted and taught as acceptable to Christians in Christian Churches.

Thanks for the lead in.

[1John2_26]

Quote:
I believe completely that Christians should never trust Gay (homosexual) Culture ever...

Once the evil that is so prevelent within Gay Culture, materializes in a Church, Christians have shown the speed and mercy to drive it away...

It is not the homosexualization of Christianity that can ever happen. The only good thing that can come from interacting with Gays and Lesbians within the Church setting, is the Christanization of homosexual cultures...

Yep. I really don't blame many atheists, agnostics or homosexuals from distancing themselves from "Christian" views of this sort.

The clubmembers? I didn't know they were embracing Christianity. Silly me for driving atheists, and agnostics from orthodox Christianity.

(I'm fairly distanced from them myself, and actually oppose them in certain ways.)

Christians? Or, atheists and agnostics?

Still, it should ultimately be about various dialogues and civil laws which permit people to live in freedom and liberty (regarding their human sexuality).

Let's hope so, because the atheists, agnostics, homosexuals and their many expressions (liberals, progressives, humanists, socialists, etc., etc.,) are hell-bent to deny religious freedom if it is not supporting homosexuality.

If someone commits to God or religion in a particular way, then that can certainly be honored, as long as the rights of others are reasonably observed and regarded. But the idea of taking "Christianity", the "Bible" or "God" as a PROD, to force a change in homosexuals, is a rather HYPOCRITICAL approach to an issue that will face mankind for as long as mankind exists.

Within that very long sentence is the ominous foreboding "reasonable." Who gets to decide what is "reasonable is a terrifying proposition if it is the hands of hedonists.

Love, is indeed the better way. (And I don't mean that "tough" love that few would actually TURN ON THEMSELVES, to correct their own way/s.)

Children would have rotted teeth if it were not for "tough" love. "But mommy (mommies?) I don't want dinner I want ice cream!"

The good parent says: "Tough! Eat your vegetables!" before going to bed at a decent hour.

Compassion is something to be expressed, not just an idea that seems "nice" (in one's own mind); Christians need to promote the fruit expressed in Galatians 5:22 (not find every legalistic exception to it).

Yes Amen. The fruit of Galatians 5:22 but it doesn't stop at just 22:

22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

See the comma?

23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Looks like I need to repent here. Unfortunately for we Christians there are laws being passed to silence us outside in the secular world and inside some Christian "denominations." Gentleness and self-control is good advice.

But it is good to read "the context" of any certain Biblical offering of textual support. So:

24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

Hmm, homosexuals and liberals "in the Church," envying normality, orthodox evengelicals, and marriage, may need some time on their knees praying too.

That is another Christian Response to Homosexuality.

[1John2_26]

Yes Amen. The fruit of Galatians 5:22 but it doesn't stop at just 22:

Quote:
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,


See the comma?

Quote:
23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.


Looks like I need to repent here.

Easyrider and any other Christians reading and posting here, I do apologize for being sarcastic in this thread. I will endeavor to present my point of view with orthodox textual support (with no further sarcasm on my part) from now on.

The Christian Response to Homosexuality must be orthodox in apologia, while "contending for the faith."

That, is no laughing matter.