There has been no shortage of controversy as gay people assume increased roles as parents and married couples in our society, but almost nowhere has this conflict been more intense than in the church. Many religious leaders have condemned homosexuality, calling it a sin or even an abomination, but for millions of gay people around the world, there is nothing inherently sinful about their sexual preferences.
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
A Common Tactic of Those Who Oppose Gays and Lesbians
- From Rick Brentlinger
By Rick Brentlinger - Gay Christian 101
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I agree and disagree.
I agree that it is not right to demonize gays as an entire group, or to try to portray ALL gays and lesbians as having participated in the horrible behaviors that are alluded to here.
However, sin is not sin because it involves things that we deem to be negative. The bottom line for Believers and followers of Christ is that sin is what God says it is. Therefore, as far as the question of sin is concerned, it does not matter if gays and lesbians are monogamous or promiscuous, whether they are abusive or kind to one another. Obviously one is worse than the other in a practical sense, but since we can agree promiscuity and other misbehaviors are not characteristic of homosexuality, their presence or absence is not what makes homosexuality right or wrong.
If you are a follower of Christ, in order to believe that homosexual behavior is not a sin, you must believe that the Bible is fundamentally flawed and that this secret has been hidden from God's people for all of recorded history.
Every mention of homosexuality in the Scriptures clearly calls it a sin--both in the Old and New Testaments. There is no example of a homosexual relationship or behavior that is not called sin. No one can say that homosexuality is an expression of God's design without contradicting God's Word.
You'd have to accept that despite the revelations God gave to the Biblical authors, He was never able to get past their homophobia throughout thousands of years--until this enlightened generation came along and discovered what God really said--nevermind that it happens to be perfectly in line with the direction of secular Western culture. The Bible says a lot about that, too.
"..I say it again with tears in my eyes, that there are many whose conduct shows they are really enemies of the cross of Christ.They are headed for destruction. Their god is their appetite..." Philippians 3:18-19
God's Word is not always convenient for us where we find ourselves, but He is the only one who is good and we can trust Him with our lives--and our sexuality. I struggle with homosexuality and submitting that to God is not always easy or convenient for me--but God has the right to demand obedience that goes against my nature. Which He demands of us all, by the way.
"anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it." Matthew 10:38-39
"...live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other..." Galatians 5:16-17
- Mensley September 8, 2008 8:14AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Well, that all depends.
The Bible, in it's original language and context, doesn't even address homosexuality as we know it today...much less condemn it.
The bottom line here is that most Christians still use all the old arguments about the Bible condemning homosexuality when it has been proven, time and again, that isn't the case.
I live a vibrant Christian life and have a wonderful relationship with my Lord Jesus Christ. I also live a wonderful life with my female partner of 15 years, who is also a committed Christian. It is possible to please the Lord and still be homosexual. I'm nowhere near perfect, but I know from speaking with the Lord and hearing His voice that He is pleased with me.
- mmmmysharona September 8, 2008 6:51PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Proven?
"...it has been proven, time and again, that isn't the case."
I don't know of a single time it's been "proven" that the Bible does not condemn homosexual behavior, let alone "time and time again." Only if you consider it proof for people to promote different ideas based on their own personal preferences.
"The Bible, in it's original language and context, doesn't even address homosexuality as we know it today..."
This is exactly what I was talking about when I said, "He was never able to get past [the Biblical authors'] homophobia throughout thousands of years--until this enlightened generation came along and discovered what God really said." The idea that we have a somehow higher knowledge of homosexuality--a grasp of what it means to be "gay" that hasn't existed in all of human history, is arrogant and self-deceiving.
- Mensley September 9, 2008 5:50AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Yes, proven
"The idea that we have a somehow higher knowledge of homosexuality--a grasp of what it means to be "gay" that hasn't existed in all of human history, is arrogant and self-deceiving."
Okay, so the fact that we progress as human beings and that we know more now about things that were misunderstood in the past is arrogant and self-deceiving?
Case in point... My grandparents were Deaf. When they were growing up, being Deaf was considered the same as being mentally retarded. They were abused and treated as though they were stupid and not worth a whole lot to society. Now, we've learned a lot about deafness and have come to understand that it isn't something that has anything to do with mental dificiency. There are some great minds that are located in people who cannot hear.
That's just one example. To say that progress shouldn't happen because of your own personal views on an issue is what is arrogant. Changes happen all the time. If we don't keep up with it as a society, we will always live in the past. I prefer to go forward, not back. Jesus did too, by the way.
- mmmmysharona September 9, 2008 7:16AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
There are different kinds of progress.
Understanding what causes deafness or other physical conditions--and learning to treat people with dignity and respect--is not the same as inventing a new philosophy on sexuality and gender and pretending it has a basis in science or Biblical tradition. Which again, has not been "proven" at all. You and many other people want to believe it because it works for you, and that's fine. That's not proof of fact and it's not justification for rewriting Scripture.
"We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive."
C. S. Lewis
- Mensley September 9, 2008 7:32AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
what about the pro-homosexual bible verses
Seems to me that the bible has a few verses that support homosexual relationships:
In Samuel 20:41, Jonathan and David kiss each other. When Jonathan dies in battle, David conveys his love for Jonathan when he says, in 2 Samuel 1:26: “I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother! Most dear have you been to me; your love more wonderful to me surpassing the love of women.” (copied/pasted from an article by Irene Morgan)
Does it boil down to how one interprets the book?
It seems to me God deliberately made homosexuality; perhaps as a way to teach people love and acceptance for all. It's too bad the vast majority of "christians" are failing badly, and most seem to want to "judge not lest thee be judged." Shame on the bigots.
- buckeyenutlover
September 13, 2008 10:30AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
just a thought.
first off, both david and johnathan were married - they weren't gay.
second, it was common for people to greet one another back then with a kiss (paul even suggests it in 1 corin 16:20). look at judas and Jesus ... judas gave Jesus a kiss before he betrayed the Son of GOD. does that mean that both were (are) gay? bring it into today's standards, if i kiss my son does that make us both gay? or how about if i give a simple kiss (peck on the cheek) to my best friend - as david and johnathan did - does that make us gay? no. it just means that i have a dear affection for my best friend (and my son). it means that these men in my life mean a lot to me - that i value their relationship. how about when certain ethnic groups greet each other with a kiss; are they all gay too. this is not a good argument for the pro-gay side.
and here's another thought, i will listen and understand someone's argument that homosexuality isn't spoken against in the Bible (even though i do believe it is). so the greek may be misrepresented and misunderstood (though i don't believe it is). still though, one question comes up time and time again for me: where in scripture does GOD say that homosexuality is right?
it seems to me that whenever GOD talks about marriage, it's always between a man and a woman. whenever GOD talks about lusting after another, the issue is between a man and a woman. whenever GOD talks about parents raising kids, it's between a man and a woman.
buckeyenutlover, you state that "GOD deliberately made homosexuality" ... but if HE did, wouldn't you think that HE would have stated positive reasons for it - and not just negative ones?
some things to ponder.
- six11
September 18, 2008 8:03AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
furthermore...
well, we all know the bible has been "edited" throughout the years (i.e. the book of judas). perhaps all the pro-homosexuality references were deleted to justify the extremist position against homosexuality. prior to the printing press, it was left to scribes to copy the bible and we all know what can happen when different hands lay claim on text.
and when david conveys his love for jonathan as "more than any women" I guess you should vilify david for the sin against his marriage, eh? oh, guess not, since you have such a narrow interpretation.
let's not forget there's many married men "of god" who are gay. just look at ted haggerd. unfortunately, when people scream about homosexuality, it tends to force other people in the closet.
god loves everyone. to suggest homosexuality is more of a sin than shaving is ridiculous, and cherry-picking what you think is sin and what is not simply shows that you're defying god...judge not lest ye be judged.
- buckeyenutlover
September 18, 2008 10:36AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
furthermore ... and further ...
ok. so let me get this straight (no pun intended). everyone who copied the bible from its original manuscripts just happened to leave out the 'pro-homosexual' verses? hmm. it's a conspiracy i see. just like who really killed JFK.
i'm sorry buckeye ... but are you serious? that's how you answer my questions, by telling me that some bigoted people back in the day took the pro-gay verses out of the bible because they hated homosexuals? well, why hasn't anyone ever gone back to the original documents - cause some are still around - and put back in the verses that were taken out? i mean that would seem like a logical thing to do.
you make a point that there are many 'men of GOD' who are married and yet come out later to be gay. but honestly, i question them on that - and that's probably a whole other debate. still, i highly would debate david being gay. question: if david was gay, how do you deal with his lust and sexual encounter with bathsheba? i don't know many self-proclaimed gay guys that go after women as well - do you?
according to my bible - which is a common one among all Christians - this is what it says about johnathan's love for david: johnathan loved david as he loved himself (1 samuel 20:17). but isn't that the same command Jesus gave to all of us in new testament (mark 12:31)?
next, i would like to also state that if you were to look at my post, no where do i ever state that homosexuality "is more of a sin than" anything else. no where. so please don't put words into my mouth - post. i know full well that homosexuality is not the greatest sin. last time i checked all sin is sin - regardless of who does it and what occurs.
i agree with you that GOD loves everyone. so true. but don't forget that GOD is also a just and righteous GOD, and therefore HE also hates sin. i'm a sinner. you're a sinner. we're all sinners (romans 3:23). GOD doesn't hate me (the sinner) but HE does hate my sin. this is truth - its all throughout scripture.
when i speak, i am not judging you (or homosexuals) in the way that you are referring to (judge not lest ye be judged). i do suggest though that you know the scripture before you use it against someone. what Jesus is talking about is judging people from a hypocritical spirit/mindset - basically being self-righteous. here's an example: if i condemned you for sinning and said that you needed to be perfect like me, that would be judging like we're not suppose to. because i'm not perfect. but if i called you out on a sin, acknowledging that i too need accountability in my life for sins, than i am not judging.
in fact if you are a christian, i have a right to call you out on doing something wrong just like you have a right to call me out (1 corinthians 5:12, proverbs 27:17).
if you are not a christian - which i am not saying you are either way, cause i don't know - but if you're not, and you are offended by what i have written, i am sorry for offending you. its not my intent to argue (nor am i arguing) - though i also will not back down from defending the truth.
i have spent many years within this issue. i feel confident about where i stand and where to draw the line between fact and fiction. and by the way, i would appreciate you answering my questions, if you wouldn't mind. thanks.
- six11
September 18, 2008 11:23AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Jonathan and David were partners
six11 wrote:
"first off, both david and johnathan were married - they weren't gay."
Many people agree with you about that but many people also disagree with you about that.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Couples-In-The-Bible.html
1. The Jonathan and David love relationship is the most carefully described human love relationship in the Bible.
2. Four times the Holy Spirit tells us this male couple loves each other. The Bible never so extravagantly describes a heterosexual marriage relationship.
3. Their mutual love causes them to make a public covenant in which they strip and exchange clothing, I Samuel 18:1-4.
4. King Saul, who knew both men as well as someone could know them, believed their relationship was sexual. Saul uses a vulgar Hebrew idiomatic expression to describe their relationship, I Samuel 20:30.
5. The NIV Study Bible informs us that Saul's vulgar expression in I Samuel 20:30 mentions Jonathan's mother, Queen Ahinoam but the Hebrew expression intends to characterize Jonathan, not Queen Ahinoam.
6. St. John Chrysostom, around AD 350, in his commentary on I Corinthians 13, the love chapter, mentions the mutual love between Jonathan and David as evidence of genuine love.
7. Chrystostom characterizes Jonathan as one who is mad after men, a man chaser.
six11 wrote:
"it was common for people to greet one another back then with a kiss (paul even suggests it in 1 corin 16:20)... if i kiss my son does that make us both gay? or how about if i give a simple kiss (peck on the cheek) to my best friend - as david and johnathan did"
You are assuming that your description of events in the lives of David and Jonathan equals reality. The description in I Samuel 20:41 portrays genuine reality, a searing emotional scene with excessive weeping and kissing between two men who love each other, as the Holy Spirit has clearly told us.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/David-Loved-Jonathan.html
Do you as a heterosexual man, plan time alone with your heterosexual friends to hug, weep and kiss when you have to part company?
six11 wrote:
"where in scripture does GOD say that homosexuality is right?"
The verses you use to say homosexuality is wrong - Genesis 19, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10 - when read in context, do not even address a committed, faithful, non-cultic, same sex partnership.
So I direct your question back to you:
Where does the Bible, in context, say that homosexuality is wrong?
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Cult-Prostitutes.html
Please provide the verse which, IN CONTEXT, says that committed, faithful, non-cultic same sex partnerships are prohibited.
- Rick Brentlinger
September 18, 2008 9:09PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
a second attemp ...
sorry for taking so long rick - i tried to post a response earlier, but wasn't able to do so for some reason. so i will try and remember what i said in my last response this time around.
i hear what you're saying about david and jonathan, and i have heard these arguments before, but i just am not convinced that this particular situation is talking about two gay guys.
here's how i understand the story of these two guys: david and jonathan were two devoted friends who loved each other - and were even willing to die for each other. i too have a love for my best friend (pete) who i would die for if asked to. i love the guy. but it's not in a homosexual way, as you allude to between david and jonathan.
also, when they are weeping with each other, it's at a time when david and jonathan are going separate ways - most likely never to see each other again. david was running for his life, cause jon's dad wanted to kill him - not to mention kill jonathan too. no wonder they both were crying ... wouldn't you? i know when i moved to another state from pete, we both wept. we both embraced. we both kissed each other goodbye and said 'i love yous'. same was done when pete moved to africa for awhile. there's nothing gay about those situations. i just don't see the connection.
i have read your comments else, so i know you are schooled in this subject, as am i. i also am sure that i won't be able to convince you of my belief, just as i'm sure you won't be able to convince me of yours. though we can agree to disagree, i can still be civil to you. i don't think arguing is going to get anyone anywhere in this issue. truth has been presented from both sides, giving support by their own experts.
in the end only one truth will stand to be correct.
you ask me to give you scripture that condemns "a committed, faithful, non-cultic same sex partnership", and well i can't do that because there aren't any verses. in fact there aren't any positive verses about homosexuality anywhere in the bible - only ones calling it a sin. i am under the belief and conviction that the verses you listed above are in fact in context and speak out against homosexuality (even "committed and faithful" relationships of such).
as i asked the above poster before me, where does GOD approve of homosexuality in the Bible? so far no one has answered that question. i think its a valid one to be asked and should be answered. whenever GOD speaks about marriage, parenting, or even men lusting with their eyes, it is always between a man and a woman. wouldn't you think that if GOD 'made people gay' and allowed them to be gay that HE would have spoken about such relationships in the Bible - positively and not just negatively?
thanks for the conversation.
- six11
September 19, 2008 1:39PM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Scriptures in context
six11 wrote:
"i am under the belief and conviction that the verses you listed above are in fact in context and speak out against homosexuality (even "committed and faithful" relationships of such)."
If we approach the Bible without the presupposition that homosexuality is wrong, it is difficult to conclude from what the Bible says, in context, that committed, faithful, non-cultic homosexual partnerships are wrong.
Take the Sodom story for instance. It is alleged to be a story condemning homosexuality in the strongest fashion possible.
If homosexuality is wrong, we would expect the Bible to say so in some of the 48 places where Sodom is mentioned in the Bible. Instead, we discover that wherever Sodom is mentioned in the Bible, homosexuality is not mentioned or condemned.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Sin-of-Sodom.html
If I cited Genesis 34 (a passage about heterosexual rape) as a proof text against heterosexuality, you would contend that its wrong to take a passage about rape and based on that passage, condemn heterosexuality.
Yet Exodus and most anti-gay Christians feel no remorse in using a passage about attempted violent rape as a proof text that homosexuality is wrong.
In the Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 portion of the Holiness Code, God carefully places His proscription of male male sex in the context of pagan worship, Lev 18:3, taking care to mention Molech in Lev 18:21, just before prohibiting male male sex in Lev 18:22.
In the Leviticus 20:13 passage, we find the same context. God carefully mentions and forbids Molech worship in Lev 20:2, 3, 4, 5 and then prohibits male male sex in Lev 20:13 and then reiterates the pagan worship context in Lev 20:23.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Leviticus.html
*******************************
I wonder then, what informs your "belief and conviction" that the Bible speaks against homosexuality, even "committed and faithful" relationships?
How did you get convicted to believe something the Bible does not say?
*******************************
You asked, Where does God approve of homosexuality in the Bible?
I believe God approves of committed, faithful, non-cultic, same sex partnerships in the true story of the 15 year committed relationship Jonathan and David enjoyed, I Samuel 18 - II Samuel 9.
Of course most scriptures about marriage partnerships deal with the 95% norm. For the other 5%, exclusive, same sex marriage partnerships between two men or two women were NOT the norm in Biblical times.
Therefore, there was no reason to address the issue of gay marriage in the Bible, just as there was no reason to address the issue of nuclear energy back then.
six11 wrote:
"if GOD 'made people gay' and allowed them to be gay... HE would have spoken about such relationships in the Bible - positively"
Okay. Please carefully read Matthew 19:11-12.
"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
Jesus does speak positively about "born eunuchs."
A "born eunuch" is someone who was born without the desire for opposite sex marriage in the Adam and Eve model and Jesus specifically exempts "born eunuchs" from the Adam and Eve marriage paradigm.
The leading anti-gay evangelical, Dr. Robert Gagnon, admits that:
"Probably "born eunuchs" in the ancient world did include people homosexually inclined..."
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Eunuchs-Are-Gay.html
I'm enjoying our conversation.
- Rick Brentlinger
September 19, 2008 8:31PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
sorry for the long wait
hey rick,
my bad for the long wait. i've had some pressing 'youth ministry' issues that i needed to attend to. anyways, let's carry on this conversation.
in regards to your question about sodom ... just because the word "homosexual" doesn't always accompany the passages about sodom's sin, doesn't mean that it wasn't apart of sodom's downfall. notice that i say 'apart'. i agree with you that homosexuality wasn't the only sin that brought destruction upon the city, but it definately played its role. i read your comments about how JESUS never said anything about homosexuality and sodom, so therefore the sin of sodom had nothing to do with homosexuality. i totally disagree with you. i think that the homosexual sin was well known to people, so HE didn't have to explain it. when people spoke of sodom, they connected the sin of homosexuality to it. i can see JESUS talking about the other sins within the town more so because these sins were often overlooked, as 'petty issues' so to say, just as they still are in most american churches today.
jude 1:7 connects sodom with 'sexual immorality' - which includes homosexual relationships: In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire. ( http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=Sodom&version1=31&searchtype=all&limit=none&wholewordsonly=no )
here's a question i have with your argument. knowing that several other towns/cities were rude and had horrible towards GOD'S messengers, why didn't GOD also destroy those places as well? you state in your article that, "The sin of Sodom, according to Jesus, was inhospitality to God’s messengers." but if this is true, then why didn't GOD destroy Jerusalem because the Jews rejected the messages of the disciples. why didn't GOD destroy every other place that rejected HIS messengers?
in speaking about the passages of scripture used to call homosexuality as sin - especially Leviticus - all i can say is that GOD'S word is GOD'S word. the natural order GOD set up in the beginning was male and female, and the charge for them was to produce offspring. i do believe that those verses of homosexuality do condemn it mostly because it went totally against the created order GOD established over us. regardless if it's pagan worship or committed same-sex relationships, is still against what GOD set into place.
in addition to this, there are several other times when GOD talks about things being an abomination (toevah) that are not connected to idol worship, such as Proverbs 6:16-19. as joe dallas notes in his book a strong delusion, "the prohibitions against homosexuality in Leviticus appear alongside other sexual sins ... which are forbidden in both [testaments] ... [these references] show GOD'S displeasure with them whether or not any ceremony or idolatry is involved" (193). he also makes another point stating that if these other practices only pertained to idol worship, then child sacrifice, adultery, incest, and the like would all be permissible as long as it was done apart form idol worship. rick, that's exactly what you're suggesting as well. outside of 'idol worship' is incest a sin? what about adultery? child sacrifice?
again, you mention about david and jonathan and their 'same-sex' relationship. i think we beat that issue over the head enough times. if both men were gay, explain the wives they had - was their 'gayness' like a light switch? it doesn't make sense.
you stated: For the other 5%, exclusive, same sex marriage partnerships between two men or two women were NOT the norm in Biblical times.
well if this is correct, my question is why wasn't it the norm back then? if there was nothing wrong with homosexuality, even back in the day, why wasn't it a norm just like every other couple in a committed relationship? i think it wasn't the norm because everyone knew it was a sin! yeah, JESUS never spoke about it, so the 'silence argument' can be used, but then again i can use the same argument - JESUS never accepted the lifestyle either. never!
**************************************************************************
you asked me why i have a deep conviction of this topic and where i stand on. my conviction simply comes from years of studying this subject by pouring over scripture, reading books (from both sides), praying, and other things.
this past august marked an 8 year journey out of homosexuality. up until that point, i was very active in 'the life', even at one time being engaged to a man (i am 30 now). my convictions are born out of what GOD has done within my life and the revelation HE has given me through HIS word by HIS Spirit. like i said before, this is my conviction.
- six11
September 25, 2008 9:10AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Your assumptions are NOT supported by scripture or history.
six11 wrote:
>>>>>"i think that the homosexual sin was well known to people, so HE [Jesus] didn't have to explain it. when people spoke of sodom, they connected the sin of homosexuality to it."<<<<<
Shawn-
Even ANTI-GAY evangelical Christians now agree with gay Christians, that Sodom was NOT about committed, faithful, non-cultic same sex partnerships.
Bob Davies, former Executive Director of Exodus International, admits that:
"Pro-gay theologians are correct in saying that this passage [Genesis 19] does not provide a strong argument [for] prohibiting all homosexual acts." - from his book, Coming Out Of Homosexuality, published in 1993.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Sodom.html
If it was common knowledge in Jesus' day that Sodom was a warning against homosexual sin, then there would be abundant historical proof in the 1700+ years between the time the events of Sodom took place and the first century AD.
The human authors of inspired scripture and Jewish writers outside of scripture would have identified the sin of Sodom as homosexuality. Instead, what we see is that none of them identified the sin of Sodom as homosexuality until around the first century. Here is what ancient Jews believed about the sin of Sodom.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Sodom.html
Biblical authors identify the sin of Sodom as idolatry [shrine prostitution, for example] or adultery or pride or prosperity and greed or refusal to help the poor and needy [lack of hospitality] - Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel.
Writers outside the inspired scriptures identified the sin of Sodom as pride and refusal to be kind to strangers traveling through their land.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Sin-of-Sodom.html
six11 wrote:
>>>>>"jude 1:7 connects sodom with 'sexual immorality' - which includes homosexual relationships"<<<<<
That statement is inaccurate. Jude used the Greek word, heteros, to identify the kind of sin that was being committed in Sodom.
Had Jude intended us to believe the sin of Sodom was related to same sex activity, he would have used the Greek word, homoios, which is the root of our English word, homosexual.
six11 wrote:
>>>>>"knowing that several other towns/cities were rude and had horrible towards GOD'S messengers, why didn't GOD also destroy those places as well?"<<<<<
History testifies that God is full of grace toward humanity, even in the midst of sin.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/what-is-grace.html
six11 wrote:
>>>>>"joe dallas notes in his book a strong delusion, "the prohibitions against homosexuality in Leviticus appear alongside other sexual sins ... which are forbidden in both [testaments] ... [these references] show GOD'S displeasure with them whether or not any ceremony or idolatry is involved" (193). he also makes another point stating that if these other practices only pertained to idol worship, then child sacrifice, adultery, incest, and the like would all be permissible as long as it was done apart form idol worship. rick, that's exactly what you're suggesting as well. outside of 'idol worship' is incest a sin? what about adultery? child sacrifice?"<<<<<
The problem with this question is that it ASSUMES Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 is talking about homosexuality and is not talking about shrine prostitution.
Philo, the Jewish philosopher, stated 2000 years ago, that he believed Moses was talking about shrine prostitution in Leviticus. This Link gives 9 answers to your question about child sacrifice, adultery, incest and the like [beastiality] for instance.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Beastiality.html
- Rick Brentlinger
September 25, 2008 10:50AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Ancient Jewish beliefs about the sin of Sodom.
Here is the Link I forgot to include in my previous post. It quotes the Babylonian Talmud to prove what ancient Jews believed about the sin of Sodom...
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Babylonian-Talmud-On-Sodom.html
- Rick Brentlinger
September 25, 2008 10:54AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
A question for the Anti-Gay folks
Many anti-gay Christians use the word, sodomite, to describe gay men and lesbians.
What is a sodomite in the Bible?
If we deal honestly with what the Bible actually says, we cannot honestly, factually or ethically say that gay men and lesbians are sodomites.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/sodomites.html
- Rick Brentlinger
September 25, 2008 10:58AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
ITs Wrong in Gods eyes and heres why...
Well, now the bible also never mentions Cars, Computers, Schools, Drugs and other things to… so I guess that means its ok???
does the bible ever condone sex outside of a married man and women? NO.. Does the bible say that women was created for man? YES
“. david and jonathon were actually in love
and as much as people want to say it wasn't like that if you really read the
description of there relationship in the bible it sounds alot like it. it even
says something that could be construed as a marriage. “
I will try to make this as short as possible, but in order for you to understand this is much to say..
People often use the tale above to showcase homosexuals in Gods favor. This is so far from the truth.. first lets point out some thing from that verse….
“I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother;” Huh?? I thought Albert said they were lovers???? But he says brother… ok now that I pointed that out lets move on to the more important verses that disprove of any homosexual acts, and futher more sablize the view of Christians that God is pro man and women marriage”
In Genesis Chapter 2 We read of God forming man out of the dust of the earth.
Then God says, “It is not good for the man to be alone I will make a helper suitable for him” in verse 18
Now, at this point God created Eve, Not from the dust, but from man himself, making her his equal. And what did adam say about this eve??
“This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh...” (2:23)
Thus the stage has been set, man for women, women for man. But lets look further in Gods word.. “...a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.” (2:24).
Notice here that it not only states the women is the mans wife, but they are again “one flesh” now if you fast forward to the new testament in in Mark 10:6-9 Jesus Brings up this “one flesh” and says that no one is to divide it… Clearly a pro heterosexual message here in the bible..
The whole of Scripture echoes this prohibition by God of any sex outside marriage,(the one Flesh) hence adultery, fornication, bestiality and homosexuality etc are forbidden for those seeking to obey their Creator.
Now, We know that God intended man and women to be together, bc that’s how he created it, and his son said again that they are one flesh, and this one flesh is to be fruitful and multiply.. one last thing, look at the word used for love
אהב אהב , 'âhab 'âhêb , aw-hab', aw-habe' This word for love is used in the sence of FRIENDSHIP, not for intimacy or relationships between lovers. You have to understand in English there is only one word love, in greek and Hebrew there are more, some for friends love, mothers love, fathers love, husbands love..
“besides that there is never a law in the bible that says marriage is between a man and a woman. that's just an inference that lot's of people make. “
Almost every qualification for a church leader listed in the bible carries with it the following “ he ( that’s a man) must be the Husband of 1 (one) Wife (that’s a women)
There is a clearly a refrence again to the One Flesh originally started by GOD. And as a law given by GOD to the leaders, there is no reason to believe God would change the law for others.
- joshuajared2000
September 26, 2008 1:59PM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
David & Jonathan
I found this very interesting:
4. King Saul, who knew both men as well as someone could know them, believed their relationship was sexual. Saul uses a vulgar Hebrew idiomatic expression to describe their relationship, I Samuel 20:30.
This does not mean they were sexual, in fact, but rather that someone -- in this case, someone in scripture who has a rather sordid track record :) -- accused one of them of being sexual.
Perhaps it it because he did not know that a man can have deep and abiding connection with another man without sexual intercourse.
Because I try to read the account of David & Jonathan for what it is, and not what I seek it to be, I see no reason to assume that they were sexual just because they were intimate. Intimacy (even kissing or weeping-level intimacy) does not require sexual intercourse as a matter of course.
Frankly, I think a lot of homosexual men (myself included, perhaps), have confused intimacy with sexual intercourse. You can have one without the other, for certain.
- trellus
December 14, 2008 7:03AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Possible, Probable, Certain - Which?
I agree with you that Saul's vulgar sexual characterization of the Jonathan and David relationship does not prove that J & D had a sexual relationship. I make that statement in my book, Gay Christian 101.
On the other hand, Saul's statement provides contemporary eye witness testimony about the sexual intimacy of their partnership, from a man who knew both men.
And the fact that the Holy Spirit chose to include Saul's testimony in the text of scripture raises an interesting question.
If God is as anti-gay as He is alleged to be, why does He include in scripture, this LONG story, chapter after chapter, detailing the loving, intimate, committed partnership of Jonathan and David?
http://www.gaychristian101.com/David-and-Jonathan.html
There is more in the Bible about the Jonathan and David partnership than about the creation of the universe.
Scripture vividly contrasts the loving, committed partnership of Jonathan and David with the failed marriage of David and Princess Michal and with the violent, murderous relationship between King Saul, David and Jonathan. Saul tried to kill both David and Jonathan.
Certainly you are correct that two men can have an intimate friendship without being sexual. Yet that assertion does not in any way support the contention that Jonathan and David were no more than close friends.
Rick Brentlinger
http://www.gaychristian101.com/David-Loved-Jonathan.html
- Rick Brentlinger
December 14, 2008 8:43AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Because "gay" is an artifical construction
I agree with you, Rick, that for most people, they take comfort in believing that David + Jonathan were what I will term "mere" "close friends", as this keeps them from having to approach that "gay" word. :) A simple reading of the text makes it clear to me, at least, that they were much closer than that; their souls were knit together, and does this not speak of some kind of union?
I only say that the lack of the scripture indicating that they DID in fact have *sexual* union is *important*, because to extrapolate that they did merely because the Bible records that their closeness was such that Saul accused them of this is not valid. The same happens today to someone who has a "gay" relationship today, frankly -- some of my close friends cannot believe that I have not had sexual union with my current roommate, for example, because we are both "gay" and very close and from external appearances appear frankly almost as a couple.
What I am positing is that David + Jonathan was something very close to what we would call a "gay" relationship today, but quite possibly (or even probably) without sexual intercourse. Certainly, I will not make the assumption that they were having sexual intercourse merely because of their closeness!
- trellus
December 14, 2008 9:42AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
David was gay?
Hey there,
I have two problems with the view that David was gay. Firstly the Bible never says David and Jonathan "lay together", which supports the cultural view that D&J were not a couple. If the Holy Spirit REALLY wanted to say that same-sex sex is okay, surely telling us D&J had sex would have been the simplest way to say so?
My second problem is a larger than life woman called Bathsheba (2 Sam 11). Surely if David was gay, his adultery would have been to murder her, and chase Uriah, her husband?! His actions with her are VERY inconsistent with those of a gay man, aren't they?
Just a thought... :-)
- Gay Christian
June 15, 2009 11:26AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Bible is pretty clear about David and Jonathan
------- "Firstly the Bible never says David and Jonathan "lay together", which supports the cultural view that D&J were not a couple." -------
God (not gays) chose to emphasize the David and Jonathan story in the Bible, chapter after chapter. This exceptional love story receives major emphasis because God the Holy Spirit, the ultimate Author of scripture, intended to give it major emphasis.
The Holy Spirit spends more time describing the love relationship between David and Jonathan than He spends describing David and Michal’s heterosexual marriage. The Bible never so extravagantly and extensively describes a heterosexual marriage relationship.
David and Princess Michal's partnership was an arranged marriage while David and Crown Prince Jonathan's partnership clearly involved mutual love.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Jonathan-Loved-David.html
I believe this story, part of Hebrew scripture for three thousand years, is God’s way of encouraging the modern Christians to affirm faithful, committed gay partnerships. Will modern Christians listen to God?
------- "My second problem is a larger than life woman called Bathsheba (2 Sam 11). Surely if David was gay, his adultery would have been to murder her, and chase Uriah, her husband?! His actions with her are VERY inconsistent with those of a gay man, aren't they?" -------
Interesting point, Gay Christian. It helps our understanding if we keep the timeline in mind. At the time of the Bathsheba incident, Crown Prince Jonathan has been dead for many years.
The fifteen year partnership between Jonathan and David ended with Jonathan's untimely death in battle. By necessity, David has moved on, taking heterosexual wives, as ancient Kings did, to produce offspring who will inherit his kingdom.
Yet remember David's testimony about Jonathan, given years earlier as a eulogy before David's mighty army.
"I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant have you been to me: your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women." -2 Samuel 1:26
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Couples-In-The-Bible.html
- Rick Brentlinger
June 15, 2009 12:16PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
God is mercy and justice
Your argument only takes in God's mercy and ignores His justice. Given your point of view why would Jesus need to go to the cross? Homosexuality is a sin as any other sexual sin. No different then adultery, fornication, internet porn or premarital sex. Many who look at this argument are stressing a point of perception that the gay and lesbian community and those who support them are trying to incorporate into American culture. God's righteous doesn't change to meets today's modern opinions. He does not condemn the homosexual from eternal life through repentance just as he doesn't bar the theft or internet porn addict, so long as they repent. None of us are permitted a "Mulligan", a sin we are allowed to engage in that is shielded from which God asks us to repent.
The most difficult ideal for gay and lesbian Christians to accept is their active engagement in their lifestyle is asked by the Father to be left at the Cross. Many liberal Christians have developed a pick and chose mentality of Christian faith and it has led many astray. V. Gene Robinson is a classic example, how can one lead a flock while being actively engaged in his most deep rooted sin. It engulfs his entire flock, they thus become embroiled in the entire debate of sexual sin, instead of growing in Christ. Sadly this has shielded active sinners into a false sense of security as they believe they are right with God, when actually they are in bondage to the one thing they won't give to Him. I tell you would a homosexual say it is ok to strike a brother, NO. Would he allow a child to be sexually abused, NO. Thus homosexuals pointing out that they don't live any more differently then straights, means nothing. Because some homosexuals display behavior openly means little, sin is sin whether out in the open or behind closed doors.
- bambino33
October 11, 2008 9:02PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.