How do you reconcile homosexuality and Christianity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

Says you. Jesus never said this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

See... as someone who wasn't raised Christian, I never understood why Jesus has to be crucified in the first place. How does Jesus dying translate to forgiveness of sins? Couldn't God just forgive your sins himself? Why the son/middleman? What about all the thousands of other human beings who were crucified on a cross? Why did they have to die? What was the value in their suffering? Was their suffering less than Jesus, even though they underwent the same horrendous torture?

Ok, this is a theologically complex question, but my understanding is that "sin" has a cost. It is like gravity in that it is part of the reality that God created us in. God could just magically erase sin, I guess, and God could also let us zoom around like Superman but that is not the reality we live in. God could also just make us love him and be perfect, but that is also not the reality we live in- we would just be robots in that case. We have free will, and one of the results of that is sin, and the cost of that sin is death and judgment. Jesus took on that penalty for us. Suffering is the cost of free will and sin. The world we live in is imperfect, which is why there can be great suffering all around us. But our suffering is trivial in the larger scheme of things- that eventually we will live in Heaven with God forever, if we believe in Jesus.

I get that. From a raised-Muslim person like myself it's still strange, as Muslims are taught that it's us against ourselves - we are always judged, and we answer to God fully for everything we did in our lives, no middleman needed. [fwiw I don't believe that either, but it is a little easier to digest].

But so what was the point of Joe Schmoe suffering on the cross, alongside Jesus, and undergoing the same exact amount of pain and torment?

Jesus is God incarnate, there is no middleman. God became human, and experienced everything a regular person experiences- feeling cold, hungry, suffering, friendship, etc. He was not rich or powerful or anything like that, just a regular person. There is no point to any suffering. Not of children in Syria or people on the cross or people in concentration camps or anyone else. We suffer because we live in a broken world. The point is not to make the world perfect, or to be perfect ourselves. We will never completely fix the world or be perfect. The point is to know and love Jesus, and to grow closer to him. Growing closer to Jesus and becoming a better person are two things that feed into each other- as we know God we want to be better, as we become better we want to know God more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

See... as someone who wasn't raised Christian, I never understood why Jesus has to be crucified in the first place. How does Jesus dying translate to forgiveness of sins? Couldn't God just forgive your sins himself? Why the son/middleman? What about all the thousands of other human beings who were crucified on a cross? Why did they have to die? What was the value in their suffering? Was their suffering less than Jesus, even though they underwent the same horrendous torture?

Ok, this is a theologically complex question, but my understanding is that "sin" has a cost. It is like gravity in that it is part of the reality that God created us in. God could just magically erase sin, I guess, and God could also let us zoom around like Superman but that is not the reality we live in. God could also just make us love him and be perfect, but that is also not the reality we live in- we would just be robots in that case. We have free will, and one of the results of that is sin, and the cost of that sin is death and judgment. Jesus took on that penalty for us. Suffering is the cost of free will and sin. The world we live in is imperfect, which is why there can be great suffering all around us. But our suffering is trivial in the larger scheme of things- that eventually we will live in Heaven with God forever, if we believe in Jesus.

I get that. From a raised-Muslim person like myself it's still strange, as Muslims are taught that it's us against ourselves - we are always judged, and we answer to God fully for everything we did in our lives, no middleman needed. [fwiw I don't believe that either, but it is a little easier to digest].

But so what was the point of Joe Schmoe suffering on the cross, alongside Jesus, and undergoing the same exact amount of pain and torment?

Jesus is God incarnate, there is no middleman. God became human, and experienced everything a regular person experiences- feeling cold, hungry, suffering, friendship, etc. He was not rich or powerful or anything like that, just a regular person. There is no point to any suffering. Not of children in Syria or people on the cross or people in concentration camps or anyone else. We suffer because we live in a broken world. The point is not to make the world perfect, or to be perfect ourselves. We will never completely fix the world or be perfect. The point is to know and love Jesus, and to grow closer to him. Growing closer to Jesus and becoming a better person are two things that feed into each other- as we know God we want to be better, as we become better we want to know God more.

Thanks for completely, repeatedly ignoring my question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other faiths don't have the amazing , incomprehensible , unexplainable , impossible to duplicate shroud of Turin .

I'm a Christian, but, wasn't this debunked?

Not even close. It's the most unexplainable artifact in human possession, it is a photographic negative of unknown pigmentation with fractional penetration and 3D properties that cannot be duplicated . It is a crucified man with real blood and crown of thorns/wrist-feet nail wounds and a spear wound in the sides, the back is scourged and the blood has enzymes of a brutal death present. It's like we have a Bigfoot corpse or a ufo in our possession and we cannot figure how in the name of God it was produced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

Of course sin is an issue. Yes, of course, we all agree that murder and greed and adultery and fighting (even fighting your enemy) are all "sins" that Jesus clearly defines in the gospels.

The problem here is that YOU are trying to define "sin" to include homosexuality, in a way that the rest of us don't find scriptural support for.
Jesus is NOT recorded as having talked about homosexuality, your reference to Leviticus seems hypocritical (put down that shellfish) and out of step with Jesus' own attitude to that book, and your attempt to take Paul as God's literal words is inconsistent with the poor man's own representation of himself.

You keep talking about how unimportant Paul is, but your characterization is not consistent with the Bible. You just keep saying it over and over without proving that it is true. Where does the Bible say that we do not have to take Paul literally?

Nobody here says he's unimportant. He's one of the first eye witnesses -- in fact he met the resurrected Jesus, and he met with Peter, James and others who knew Jesus before and after the resurrection. His testimony on these issues, and the very early creed in Corinthians I, are priceless for establishing the authenticity of Jesus' life, death and resurrection. Paul also wrote some beautiful and inspirational passages on faith.

That said, Paul never claimed to be a prophet speaking *for* God. So his opinions on homosexuality, women, and so on are not God's literal words, to me and to others here apparently.

Please prove to me that Paul is a "prophet" in the sense of speaking for God. If you can do that I would certainly take him literally. But you can't do that, you can only use words like "divinely inspired." You'd be contradicting Paul himself, who called hinself a "disciple" and most definitely never called himself a prophet).

NP... *everything* in the Bible is divinely inspired. Even the statements that Jesus made were written by men, not Jesus himself. The Apostles were not prophets. They were disciples. What you are saying is that you don't believe in most of the Bible. That's fine if that is what you believe, but to argue that something in the Bible is not really the Word of God because it wasn't written by a self-prophesed prophet means that you don't believe in the Bible, especially the NT since most of it was not written by prophets. So, then you don't believe the Bible is inspired by God. Then, why do you use the Bible for the basis of of your argument or your belief for that matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

See... as someone who wasn't raised Christian, I never understood why Jesus has to be crucified in the first place. How does Jesus dying translate to forgiveness of sins? Couldn't God just forgive your sins himself? Why the son/middleman? What about all the thousands of other human beings who were crucified on a cross? Why did they have to die? What was the value in their suffering? Was their suffering less than Jesus, even though they underwent the same horrendous torture?

Ok, this is a theologically complex question, but my understanding is that "sin" has a cost. It is like gravity in that it is part of the reality that God created us in. God could just magically erase sin, I guess, and God could also let us zoom around like Superman but that is not the reality we live in. God could also just make us love him and be perfect, but that is also not the reality we live in- we would just be robots in that case. We have free will, and one of the results of that is sin, and the cost of that sin is death and judgment. Jesus took on that penalty for us. Suffering is the cost of free will and sin. The world we live in is imperfect, which is why there can be great suffering all around us. But our suffering is trivial in the larger scheme of things- that eventually we will live in Heaven with God forever, if we believe in Jesus.

I get that. From a raised-Muslim person like myself it's still strange, as Muslims are taught that it's us against ourselves - we are always judged, and we answer to God fully for everything we did in our lives, no middleman needed. [fwiw I don't believe that either, but it is a little easier to digest].

But so what was the point of Joe Schmoe suffering on the cross, alongside Jesus, and undergoing the same exact amount of pain and torment?

Jesus is God incarnate, there is no middleman. God became human, and experienced everything a regular person experiences- feeling cold, hungry, suffering, friendship, etc. He was not rich or powerful or anything like that, just a regular person. There is no point to any suffering. Not of children in Syria or people on the cross or people in concentration camps or anyone else. We suffer because we live in a broken world. The point is not to make the world perfect, or to be perfect ourselves. We will never completely fix the world or be perfect. The point is to know and love Jesus, and to grow closer to him. Growing closer to Jesus and becoming a better person are two things that feed into each other- as we know God we want to be better, as we become better we want to know God more.

Thanks for completely, repeatedly ignoring my question.

Huh? I thought I did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other faiths don't have the amazing , incomprehensible , unexplainable , impossible to duplicate shroud of Turin .

I'm a Christian, but, wasn't this debunked?

Not even close. It's the most unexplainable artifact in human possession, it is a photographic negative of unknown pigmentation with fractional penetration and 3D properties that cannot be duplicated . It is a crucified man with real blood and crown of thorns/wrist-feet nail wounds and a spear wound in the sides, the back is scourged and the blood has enzymes of a brutal death present. It's like we have a Bigfoot corpse or a ufo in our possession and we cannot figure how in the name of God it was produced.

You do know that thousands of people were crucified by the Romans in the exact same manor, and Jesus' crucifixion/suffering was hardly distinct... right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

Says you. Jesus never said this.

Jesus never said pedophilia was a sin either but he did refer to SODOM(y) and Gamorrah saying they deserved punishment .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

Says you. Jesus never said this.

sigh.. Jesus never said pedophilia was a sin, either. Really, does He need to explicitly state something is a sin for a Christian to believe that? Why do we have the OT, and the rest of the 23 books in the NT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:P.S. Arguing with you feels exactly like arguing with Muslima.

Cherry-picking scripture? Check

Claiming "it's all about context" while seeming determined to ignore the actual context? Check

Deliberately missing the big picture, the broad message, of Jesus' words, so long as it conflicts with your position on a narrow issue? Check

And some people only like to hear the feel-good God is love sermon and don't like to hear about sins and facing them. Yes, Jesus was mostly about love and compassion. That doesn't mean Christians should ignore our sinful ways.

Haha. "Mostly."

Thank God -- truly, I thank Him -- for mainline Protestant reformed faiths that have moved beyond literalism and fundamentalism. God bless those churches whose doors are open to ALL, as Jesus intends.

+1. God's spirit is in these liberal churches, I truly believe that

Some of the letters in the Bible that were written by the Apostles to some churches warn of mixing local culture and other religions with Christianity. The letter to Pergamum in Revelations is one example. Liberal churches aren't always Biblicaly based, then again, neither are some conservative ones like Westboro Baptist.

So what do you make of the whole debate about circumcision when early Christians were talking to Gentiles/non-Jews? Jesus was probably circumcised but Paul dropped it. Not that I'm criticizing Paul, I think it's good he dropped it. But things weren't so black and white as you're making out here. Paul's mission did actually involve a lot of mixing of cultures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other faiths don't have the amazing , incomprehensible , unexplainable , impossible to duplicate shroud of Turin .

I'm a Christian, but, wasn't this debunked?

Not even close. It's the most unexplainable artifact in human possession, it is a photographic negative of unknown pigmentation with fractional penetration and 3D properties that cannot be duplicated . It is a crucified man with real blood and crown of thorns/wrist-feet nail wounds and a spear wound in the sides, the back is scourged and the blood has enzymes of a brutal death present. It's like we have a Bigfoot corpse or a ufo in our possession and we cannot figure how in the name of God it was produced.

You do know that thousands of people were crucified by the Romans in the exact same manor, and Jesus' crucifixion/suffering was hardly distinct... right?

Not with a crown of thorns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

Says you. Jesus never said this.

sigh.. Jesus never said pedophilia was a sin, either. Really, does He need to explicitly state something is a sin for a Christian to believe that? Why do we have the OT, and the rest of the 23 books in the NT?

Ugh times two. You can't infer ANYTHING from an absence. Logic, people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

See... as someone who wasn't raised Christian, I never understood why Jesus has to be crucified in the first place. How does Jesus dying translate to forgiveness of sins? Couldn't God just forgive your sins himself? Why the son/middleman? What about all the thousands of other human beings who were crucified on a cross? Why did they have to die? What was the value in their suffering? Was their suffering less than Jesus, even though they underwent the same horrendous torture?

Ok, this is a theologically complex question, but my understanding is that "sin" has a cost. It is like gravity in that it is part of the reality that God created us in. God could just magically erase sin, I guess, and God could also let us zoom around like Superman but that is not the reality we live in. God could also just make us love him and be perfect, but that is also not the reality we live in- we would just be robots in that case. We have free will, and one of the results of that is sin, and the cost of that sin is death and judgment. Jesus took on that penalty for us. Suffering is the cost of free will and sin. The world we live in is imperfect, which is why there can be great suffering all around us. But our suffering is trivial in the larger scheme of things- that eventually we will live in Heaven with God forever, if we believe in Jesus.

I get that. From a raised-Muslim person like myself it's still strange, as Muslims are taught that it's us against ourselves - we are always judged, and we answer to God fully for everything we did in our lives, no middleman needed. [fwiw I don't believe that either, but it is a little easier to digest].

But so what was the point of Joe Schmoe suffering on the cross, alongside Jesus, and undergoing the same exact amount of pain and torment?

Jesus is God incarnate, there is no middleman. God became human, and experienced everything a regular person experiences- feeling cold, hungry, suffering, friendship, etc. He was not rich or powerful or anything like that, just a regular person. There is no point to any suffering. Not of children in Syria or people on the cross or people in concentration camps or anyone else. We suffer because we live in a broken world. The point is not to make the world perfect, or to be perfect ourselves. We will never completely fix the world or be perfect. The point is to know and love Jesus, and to grow closer to him. Growing closer to Jesus and becoming a better person are two things that feed into each other- as we know God we want to be better, as we become better we want to know God more.

Thanks for completely, repeatedly ignoring my question.

Huh? I thought I did.

The thousands of other people crucified by the Romans in the exact same manner, undergoing the exact same suffering as Jesus... what was their gift? Why is their (equal, possibly even elevated) torment ignored? What was the point of them dying on the cross, those thousands of other people who were brutally crucified? Is their suffering less? And if so, why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:P.S. Arguing with you feels exactly like arguing with Muslima.

Cherry-picking scripture? Check

Claiming "it's all about context" while seeming determined to ignore the actual context? Check

Deliberately missing the big picture, the broad message, of Jesus' words, so long as it conflicts with your position on a narrow issue? Check

And some people only like to hear the feel-good God is love sermon and don't like to hear about sins and facing them. Yes, Jesus was mostly about love and compassion. That doesn't mean Christians should ignore our sinful ways.

Haha. "Mostly."

Thank God -- truly, I thank Him -- for mainline Protestant reformed faiths that have moved beyond literalism and fundamentalism. God bless those churches whose doors are open to ALL, as Jesus intends.

+1. God's spirit is in these liberal churches, I truly believe that

Some of the letters in the Bible that were written by the Apostles to some churches warn of mixing local culture and other religions with Christianity. The letter to Pergamum in Revelations is one example. Liberal churches aren't always Biblicaly based, then again, neither are some conservative ones like Westboro Baptist.

So what do you make of the whole debate about circumcision when early Christians were talking to Gentiles/non-Jews? Jesus was probably circumcised but Paul dropped it. Not that I'm criticizing Paul, I think it's good he dropped it. But things weren't so black and white as you're making out here. Paul's mission did actually involve a lot of mixing of cultures.

Actually, Jesus mixed cultures, too (to the Gentile, I became a Gentile, to the Jew, a Jew), but what I am referring to is culture that goes against direct teachings of Christ. Some churches were starting to do that, like the Israelites did when they were roaming the desert. Sorry, that wasn't made clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other faiths don't have the amazing , incomprehensible , unexplainable , impossible to duplicate shroud of Turin .

I'm a Christian, but, wasn't this debunked?

Not even close. It's the most unexplainable artifact in human possession, it is a photographic negative of unknown pigmentation with fractional penetration and 3D properties that cannot be duplicated . It is a crucified man with real blood and crown of thorns/wrist-feet nail wounds and a spear wound in the sides, the back is scourged and the blood has enzymes of a brutal death present. It's like we have a Bigfoot corpse or a ufo in our possession and we cannot figure how in the name of God it was produced.

You do know that thousands of people were crucified by the Romans in the exact same manor, and Jesus' crucifixion/suffering was hardly distinct... right?

Not with a crown of thorns.

You know this how? Did you witness their deaths? Were they all identified and described individual in multi-sourced historical records? Or you know... most likely many underwent the same path, but it just wasn't paid attention to.