Anti Gay?

Discussion in 'Marriage and Relationships' started by Dapa, Jun 22, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. I just read an article about the American family Association and I am a bit disturbed by how they go about their Christian walk. For those that are in support of actions that bring light to God's apparent wrath against homosexuals, or deliberately believe that homosexuals should be out of public office etc., I would like to know how you reconcile Jesus love and organizations such as this displaying more obvious hatred.
     
  2. Disclaimer: My comment below is not meant to be misconstrued to be interpreted as support for any person's hatred or hateful actions.

    HOWEVER, that being said, I believe the Bible AS A WHOLE teaches over and over again these two things: Jesus loves the sinner (person) AND Jesus hates sin (thought, deed, or act).

    There is no doubt (in my mind) that homosexuality is deemed sinful behavior in the Word of God - See Rom 1:20-27.


    20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-- his eternal power and divine nature-- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-- who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (underline and bold emphasis mine)

    His hating the sin does not in any way diminish His love for the person committing the sin. For nothing can separate the Love of God from us which is found in Christ. The Apostle Paul says in Rom. 8:38-39 (NLT)

    "And I am convinced that nothing can ever separate us from God's love. Neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither our fears for today nor our worries about tomorrow--not even the powers of hell can separate us from God's love. No power in the sky above or in the earth below--indeed, nothing in all creation will ever be able to separate us from the love of God that is revealed in Christ Jesus our Lord."

    Ok. That being said any person who continues in the acts of sin is separated from right relationship with God. ....whole 'nuther subject...imho.


    Unfortunately, we as humans living in this world of justice and injustice, decided amongst ourselves that we could be a judge and declare that some sins are worse than others. The fundamentals and conservatives (of whom I count myself) think it's our job to point out all of the planks in people's eyes when our eyes are rarely clear enough to see where we are pointing. (Caveat: believers are instructed to uphold other believers to Christ's standard of living which is clearly outlined in the Bible - hence all of our "pointing-out."

    Much love and blessings to you, in Christ Jesus, as you search for the Truth!


     
    JG27_chili likes this.
  3. Without seeing the article to which you refer, I cannot adress the specific organizations or comments you have in mind. However, pointing out sin and seeking to discourage the exercise of what one considers sin is not necessarily hateful. We do not hate our children because we discipline them and set boundaries. The Bible points out that God disciplines those He loves. That is, He sets boundaries and sets negative consequences for disobedience. It doesn't seem very loving to me to not confront others with their sin and allow them to continue on the path of destruction and spread their sin to others. It seems far more loving to tell them the truth and give them the opportunity to repent, and to tell society the truth and keep the sin from leavening the rest of society.

    Of course, there is hatred and prejudice out there, but opposition to a lifestyle, set of choices, or set of values does not automatically equate to hate. I am thinking of an individual at this moment who was afraid to tell me what was going on in an area of their life, afraid that I would oppose their plans and decisions. Now that person is suffering lifelong consequences because they did not want to hear what I might say. For the record, it would have been more understanding and generous than they expected. In any case, I would have advised them and, yes, probably would have tried to talk them out of some things, out of my love for them and my desire for them to make choices that would lead to health, blessing, and joy, not out of a desire to make them miserable or bend them to my will.

    I think James 5:19 is appropriate to consider here, and may be a more accurate representation of some people's motives than attributing hatred to them.
     
    covered_by_grace likes this.
  4. And, if you would have had the opportunity and would have "tried to talk them out of some things" what would you have done if you weren't able to talk them out of those things? Just curious.
     
  5. Pretty much what I have done, tried to be there to help pick up the pieces. The point, in context of the OP, is that my opposition to their choices* was motivated by love, rather than hatred. I can't speak for the articles the OP has read or the American Family Association since I haven't seen the articles and am not that familiar with the AFA, so I can't guess at their motives without doing some research. What bothers me is the tactics employed where any opposing viewpoint is characterised as hate. The person with the opposing viewpoint is labeled a "-phobe". Islamophobe, homophobe, etc. Any opinion expressed is called hate speech. These are propaganda tactics, employing stereotyping, prejudice, intolerance, emotional manipulation, and labeling, among other things. Some parties on both sides of this and other issues have been guilty of this, and whichever side uses it, it precludes thoughtful discussion and honest dialogue.

    Let me say this: if the AFA is, in fact, saying hateful things and they desire that harm come to those who identify as "gay", then they are being hypocritical. If they are expressing principled opposition to something they see as harmful to society and to the individuals who embrace that identity, then they are not being hypocritical. If the writers of the articles about the AFA are saying anything other than the unvarnished truth, then THEIR motives are suspect.

    *BTW, just for clarity. The choices of this individual did not have to to with sexual identity, just so we don't derail into a discussion about whether "being gay" is a choice.
     
  6. Amen! Continue in LOVE ~ GOD'S LOVE!

    Too many Christians today dis-associate themselves from anyone who is different. They condemn and hate those who believe differently, but that is not what Jesus tells us to do. Jesus did not participate in people's sin, but He didn't abandon them for it either. He associated with them and all the while spoke truth to them while associating with them.

    Matthew 9:10-13 ... "Later, Matthew invited Jesus and his disciples to his home as dinner guests, along with many tax collectors and other disreputable sinners. But when the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with such scum? When Jesus heard this, he said, "Healthy people don't need a doctor -- sick people do." (NLT)

    I have several gay friends. I don't hate them. I love them. We go out to eat together, and I talk about God. Some days they are very receptive. Other days they don't want to hear it. But, some day if I just keep loving them with the love of the Lord they will accept Christ as their Savior and live for Him. If I abandon them and dis-associate myself from them I would NOT be showing them the love of God. JMHO
     
    aha, Rumely and covered_by_grace says Amen and like this.
  7. I always hesitate to comment on any subject which is put in the context of homosexuality because it tends to involve very strong viewpoints and emotions and it is easy to be misunderstood. My complete and nuanced view of the subject would require a lengthy treatise which would be too cumbersome to reference every time I make a comment. For this reason I am hoping that this thread will stay focused on whether the AFA is being hypocritical, as the OP seems to suggest. In fact, I think I will insist that this thread stay so focused. I think there is plenty to discuss within this specific topic without wandering off into all the other minefields tangentally related to this one.

    One question to keep in mind going forward in this thread is: Suppose we determine that the AFA is being inconsistent with the idea of Christian love, which, at this point, has not been established. What then? How do we respond to that in a way that edifies the Body of Christ and glorifies God? In other words, if all we are doing is gathering around to burn the AFA in effigy, we have engaged in a pointless activity.
     
    covered_by_grace likes this.
  8. .
    You have a good point, here!!
     
  9. There is a brother in my parish who had a gay son. When he told his father about his homosexuality, the father freaked out. He beat his son, and threw him out of the house so that he got homeless. It was the last one which we heard of him that he had committed suicide.
    I wonder since then whether our Savior really would like that we condemned homosexuality? Would Jesus really would like it, that a part of God's children becoming homeless, be expelled by their families/friends or commit suicide?
     
    Theo Fane likes this.
  10. I do not in any way condone the father's reaction to his son. It seems extreme to me, but I am not God to know the motives of the heart. With that said, "we" didn't condemn homosexuality, God did. See the verses in the above posts. Every person is born with desires, both sinful and honorable. Every Chrisitian has the ability to deny the sinful desire it's fruition into an act. Jesus provided that ability to every one of us along with free will to make a choice whether or not to engage in a sinful behavior. By His grace we are saved for future good works.
     
  11. Does God really condemn homosexuality? I have my doubts so there. I had me employed this quotations a little (textually and historically) primarily because with the original texts and the context from the Bible. I had help also by the theological dictionary published by Kittel about the new testament and a German Bible dictionary.
    Therefore God does not condemn the homosexuality at itself; but he sees it in connection with temple prostitution of heathen gods as well as the withdrawal from God. Moreover, you can find enough sources to this on the Internet. Here only some:

    http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/Bible...ww.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/Malakos.php; (about 1 Corinthians 6:9 & 1 Timothy 1:10)

    http://www.lionking.org/~kovu/bible/section05.html; http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/UsesOfAbomination.php (Leviticus Chaper 18 & 20)

    http://www.libchrist.com/other/homosexual/romanwomen.html (Romans 1)

    About Bible and Homosexuality, written by an evangelical Pastor: http://www.soulforce.org/pdf/whatthebiblesays.pdf

    And some interesting books are:


    Fee, Gordon: The first epistle to the Corinthians.

    Harrison, R K: Leviticus : an introduction and commentary.-

    Noth, Martin: Leviticus : a commentary

    The New Layman's Bible Commentary in one volume

     
  12. My impression with Paul’s letter to the Romans is:

    Chapter 1 to 7 is similar to a lawyer building a case step by step, chapter by chapter

    To arrive at the climax of the case:

    Romans 7:24-25
    24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death?
    25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

    And after the climax was stated…..

    We are being taught on Christian living…. then a discussion regarding the children of Israel … and then back again to teaching on Christian living.
     
  13. My friend, the Word of God speaks for itself. Rom. 1:20-27
    20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-- his eternal power and divine nature-- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-- who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."

    I only need the authority of the Word as it is written. Furthermore, out of respect for the OP and the moderator's instructions in post # 7 above, this will be my final reply to you on this subject as it is a continuation of being off topic as presented by the OP. Please feel free to PM me to continue this discussion further. Blessing to you on your pursuit of The Truth!
     
  14. Paul used two differend words: natural (Greek "Physin" (German writing) and unnatural (Greek "Paraphysin" (German writing).

    What do these two words mean? That something is "natural", so in which nature happens or is "normal"? Or it means something else. Seeing where these words are still used. First "natural":

    1. Corinthians 11:14 (German Bible):

    Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? (KJV)

    Is it natural to have long hair for a man? Was it a law, an opinion or an order of Paul? This has to do something with the Gospel, the traditions of the society then and their gender roles they have had?

    Than "unnatural":

    Romans 11:17-21 (German Bible 11: 7):

    17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
    18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
    19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
    20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
    21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. (KJV)

    Even God acts unnaturally here but since he is God, it can not be a sin which he does. However, what do these words mean? What are really "natural", what "unnatural" now?
    Is it not about the nature of the thing concerned which is natural or unnatural?
    Would it be natural for a heterosexual person to have homosexual sex or to have to perform because it requires a religion or society? Or living heterosexually for a homosexual person although this is contrary to his nature?
    The body of evidence on hand makes it rather clear for me:

    God does not find the homosexuality as a sin at itself because sin is the withdrawal from God and, want to make himself to God. Being Godless has many facets and some also have to do with the human sexuality. Particularly if this sexuality is defining for these people therefore is "idolized". And in what e.g. an otherwise heterosexual person practices a homosexual sexuality also can happen or what, a more homosexually man performs sex with a person of the other sex.

    PS: Don't kill me for my real bad English. ;)
     
  15. Moderator's note:

    I am pausing this thread for review. The OP has not returned since starting the thread, so I have to wonder if it was meant to start a meaningful discussion or just to stir things up. Secondly, this thread has taken a turn down a well-worn path which, however often travelled, never seems to lead to any conclusion or resolution. I think CBG's invitation to a private discussion is an excellent idea. In the meantime, staff will review the thread and, based on that review, will either reopen it, edit it, or close it.
     
    SuZQ1959 likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page