How do you reconcile homosexuality and Christianity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus talks about homosexuality indirectly:

Matthew 19:4–6
"4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."

Matthew 15:19–20:
"19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. 20 These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”

Notice that "adultery" and "sexual immorality" are separated. In this case, what does "sexual immorality" refer to? Who was Jesus addressing at the time?
In Matthew 15, Jesus was addressing the Pharisees, and to them homosexuality was immoral. So, one can conclude that "sexual immorality" here does include homosexuality.

Again, folks, you have to read the Bible versus within its context, who He was addressing.

"Sexual immorality" could easily be pre-marital sex or pedophelia. The Pharisees thought these were immoral too. It would be a big leap to conclude that that passage is only or even partially about homosexuality.

It's not a leap. I stated it includes homosexuality, not that "sexual immorality" only = homosexuality. Pharisees were Jews, and they knew that homosexuality was condemned, just as yes, beastiality was condemned, too.

PP here again... actuality, I'm not sure that the Bible even talks about pedophelia, so does that mean pedophelia is not a sin? I would google it but I'm afraid if I enter "pedophelia and Bible" on google search engine I'll get kiddie porn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't go to church or call myself a Christian if I were expected to believe that being gay is a sin. How can you read what Jesus (not Paul) said about loving our neighbors and still think that He would want us to judge and condemn something that is (1) inborn and (2) harmless?

OP here- I have a question, what do you think a "sin" is? Some people on this board don't seem to have the same understanding of the word that I do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't go to church or call myself a Christian if I were expected to believe that being gay is a sin. How can you read what Jesus (not Paul) said about loving our neighbors and still think that He would want us to judge and condemn something that is (1) inborn and (2) harmless?

OP here- I have a question, what do you think a "sin" is? Some people on this board don't seem to have the same understanding of the word that I do.

I think it's something that runs counter to what God wants for his kingdom (namely, for us to love Him and love one another).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus talks about homosexuality indirectly:

Matthew 19:4–6
"4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."

Matthew 15:19–20:
"19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. 20 These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”

Notice that "adultery" and "sexual immorality" are separated. In this case, what does "sexual immorality" refer to? Who was Jesus addressing at the time?
In Matthew 15, Jesus was addressing the Pharisees, and to them homosexuality was immoral. So, one can conclude that "sexual immorality" here does include homosexuality.

Again, folks, you have to read the Bible versus within its context, who He was addressing.

"Sexual immorality" could easily be pre-marital sex or pedophelia. The Pharisees thought these were immoral too. It would be a big leap to conclude that that passage is only or even partially about homosexuality.

Or bestiality. Some Christian denominations don't tolerate masturbation.

yes, the OT does talk about beastiality as sexual immorality, like it talks about homosexuality. I don't think beastiality is talked about in the NT, does that mean it's no longer a sin?

Again, just because it is not explicitly talked about by Jesus in the NT, it doesn't mean it's no longer a sin. It doesn't make it all a free for all so long as you just follow his NT teachings. He didn't come to negate the OT laws. He came to fulfill all the Levitical laws that Jews had to follow in order to be "right" with God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't go to church or call myself a Christian if I were expected to believe that being gay is a sin. How can you read what Jesus (not Paul) said about loving our neighbors and still think that He would want us to judge and condemn something that is (1) inborn and (2) harmless?

OP here- I have a question, what do you think a "sin" is? Some people on this board don't seem to have the same understanding of the word that I do.

I think it's something that runs counter to what God wants for his kingdom (namely, for us to love Him and love one another).

So hating the gays because they're gay would be... a sin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't go to church or call myself a Christian if I were expected to believe that being gay is a sin. How can you read what Jesus (not Paul) said about loving our neighbors and still think that He would want us to judge and condemn something that is (1) inborn and (2) harmless?

You can love your neighbor without loving their sin. If we were to only love people that don't sin, regardless of what kind of sin, we would love nobody on this earth.

Right, but I don't think it's a sin so that's not an issue for me. I believe God made people gay and it's just as okay to be gay as it is to be left-handed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Your quotes are from Paul again. Some think Paul was divinely inspired. But he most definitely was not Jesus, in fact he's not even counted as a "prophet" (he called himself a disciple). Taking his every word literally is elevating him to a status that he didn't claim for himself.

PS, I think you've missed the point. Jesus lifted most Old Testament bans--yes, including shellfish and blended fabrics. So we're starting over; the ground has totally shifted; and it's not necessarily OK to assume that everything in the Old Testament is still valid. Jesus cared enough about adultery to condemn it, but he never mentioned homosexuality.

Jesus' focus was on peace, loving your enemy, sharing your worldly goods, and so on. That's a focus that's meaningful to me, instead of worrying about who's sleeping with who. As others here have said, Jesus got away from all the bean counting and to a larger message of acceptance and love.

OP here. I don't know, a casual dismissal of the apostle Paul strikes me as more like exploiting some sort of Biblical loophole. Paul wrote half the New Testament and is largely responsible for Christianity in all of its forms. Paul is elevated, at least in my church, as equal to the disciples. Paul is a big deal.

Further, I'm not engaging in bean counting or being judgmental. I don't personally feel strongly about homosexuality, which is why I posted. But I do believe that is it is a serious matter to accept something that has been unaccepted by the church for 2000 years. A sin is something that misses the mark, that pulls you farther away from God. Christians are not supposed to condemn others, but they also cannot accept sin in their midst. You can love a person and accept that person but you cannot accept sin. For example, if homosexual behavior is a sin, then the church cannot legitimize it by having gay weddings, or a gay pastor/priest who is not celibate. No, Jesus did not mention homosexuality, but he also did not condone it, or any other sexual behavior that is considered "impure" by the church. It is not like homosexuality was a completely foreign concept to people at that time, the Romans engaged in homosexual acts in their society. So... yeah, this is where I struggle. I don't really think it is right to dismiss Paul or be like "aw everybody sins but Jesus is about acceptance." Yes, of course we love and accept people as they are, but we cannot accept sins.

TL; DR, but it sounds like you are trying really hard to justify homophobia even though you know in your heart that it's okay to be gay. Good luck with that. I recommend visiting an Episcopalian or Presbyterian church and talking with their priest or pastor. They are usually more highly educated in theology than conservative evangelical ministers, too.

I think it is really sad that you threw in homophobia in what has otherwise been a completely civil discussion. I made clear I have absolutely no animus towards gay people, what makes me homophobic? Deal with your bugaboos before you call other people names.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't go to church or call myself a Christian if I were expected to believe that being gay is a sin. How can you read what Jesus (not Paul) said about loving our neighbors and still think that He would want us to judge and condemn something that is (1) inborn and (2) harmless?

OP here- I have a question, what do you think a "sin" is? Some people on this board don't seem to have the same understanding of the word that I do.

I think it's something that runs counter to what God wants for his kingdom (namely, for us to love Him and love one another).

So hating the gays because they're gay would be... a sin.

Yep!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus talks about homosexuality indirectly:

Matthew 19:4–6
"4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."

Matthew 15:19–20:
"19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. 20 These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”

Notice that "adultery" and "sexual immorality" are separated. In this case, what does "sexual immorality" refer to? Who was Jesus addressing at the time?
In Matthew 15, Jesus was addressing the Pharisees, and to them homosexuality was immoral. So, one can conclude that "sexual immorality" here does include homosexuality.

Again, folks, you have to read the Bible versus within its context, who He was addressing.

"Sexual immorality" could easily be pre-marital sex or pedophelia. The Pharisees thought these were immoral too. It would be a big leap to conclude that that passage is only or even partially about homosexuality.

It's not a leap. I stated it includes homosexuality, not that "sexual immorality" only = homosexuality. Pharisees were Jews, and they knew that homosexuality was condemned, just as yes, beastiality was condemned, too.

Yes, you "stated" this, but your reading of this passage is very different from how others read it. You can "state" what you think about this set of words, but others of us don't see much there about homosexuality. For one thing, why didn't the author just say the word "homosexuality" if that's what he really meant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't go to church or call myself a Christian if I were expected to believe that being gay is a sin. How can you read what Jesus (not Paul) said about loving our neighbors and still think that He would want us to judge and condemn something that is (1) inborn and (2) harmless?

OP here- I have a question, what do you think a "sin" is? Some people on this board don't seem to have the same understanding of the word that I do.

I think it's something that runs counter to what God wants for his kingdom (namely, for us to love Him and love one another).

So hating the gays because they're gay would be... a sin.

Yep!

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Christian, but I genuinely do not feel that homosexuality is wrong. I just never have. I do see that homosexual acts are condemned by the Bible. I go to a very conservative church that will never perform gay marriages, for example. But in my heart, in my conscience, I just really do not feel homosexuality is wrong. I do not see anything immoral about it. If you have felt similar and found a way to reconcile this, I would love to know! I have been thinking about it for awhile.

OP, what you have to understand as a Christian is that it is not your opinion that matters. What if I don't believe that dishonoring my parents is wrong? Or lying? You can't pick and choose. The Bible is very clear that homosexuality is a sin. God didn't ask for your opinion.

I agree that God is the ultimate judge. How many times did Jesus say exactly that? "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" and so on. To me, that's yet another reason why it's none of our business who is sleeping with whom.

I disagree completely that the Bible--the New Testament--is "very clear" on homosexuality.

Read Romans 1: 18 - 32. Read it carefully.

OP, you are confusing judging and calling a sin a sin. Yes, of course, God is the ultimate judge of all of our actions. We are all sinners and have already been judged such. We all sin in different ways, every day. Our only hope is redemption through Jesus Christ.

That does not mean that we cannot call out specific actions as sin, based on the Bible's teaching. Stealing is wrong. Lying is wrong. Coveting your neighbor's wife is wrong. Homosexual acts are wrong, as is any sex outside of marriage, which God Himself created as a union between one man and one woman.

I'm not a homosexual, but that doesn't mean I don't sin. Personally, I am one of the biggest sinner's I know, because I know my own heart and the dark that can be there. But that doesn't mean it's not wrong for me to say, hey, Joe, you shouldn't lie. You are wrong to steal. And your homosexual tendencies, if you think you have them, are wrong and should be taken to God as sin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't go to church or call myself a Christian if I were expected to believe that being gay is a sin. How can you read what Jesus (not Paul) said about loving our neighbors and still think that He would want us to judge and condemn something that is (1) inborn and (2) harmless?

You can love your neighbor without loving their sin. If we were to only love people that don't sin, regardless of what kind of sin, we would love nobody on this earth.

Right, but I don't think it's a sin so that's not an issue for me. I believe God made people gay and it's just as okay to be gay as it is to be left-handed.

I agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Your quotes are from Paul again. Some think Paul was divinely inspired. But he most definitely was not Jesus, in fact he's not even counted as a "prophet" (he called himself a disciple). Taking his every word literally is elevating him to a status that he didn't claim for himself.

PS, I think you've missed the point. Jesus lifted most Old Testament bans--yes, including shellfish and blended fabrics. So we're starting over; the ground has totally shifted; and it's not necessarily OK to assume that everything in the Old Testament is still valid. Jesus cared enough about adultery to condemn it, but he never mentioned homosexuality.

Jesus' focus was on peace, loving your enemy, sharing your worldly goods, and so on. That's a focus that's meaningful to me, instead of worrying about who's sleeping with who. As others here have said, Jesus got away from all the bean counting and to a larger message of acceptance and love.

OP here. I don't know, a casual dismissal of the apostle Paul strikes me as more like exploiting some sort of Biblical loophole. Paul wrote half the New Testament and is largely responsible for Christianity in all of its forms. Paul is elevated, at least in my church, as equal to the disciples. Paul is a big deal.

Further, I'm not engaging in bean counting or being judgmental. I don't personally feel strongly about homosexuality, which is why I posted. But I do believe that is it is a serious matter to accept something that has been unaccepted by the church for 2000 years. A sin is something that misses the mark, that pulls you farther away from God. Christians are not supposed to condemn others, but they also cannot accept sin in their midst. You can love a person and accept that person but you cannot accept sin. For example, if homosexual behavior is a sin, then the church cannot legitimize it by having gay weddings, or a gay pastor/priest who is not celibate. No, Jesus did not mention homosexuality, but he also did not condone it, or any other sexual behavior that is considered "impure" by the church. It is not like homosexuality was a completely foreign concept to people at that time, the Romans engaged in homosexual acts in their society. So... yeah, this is where I struggle. I don't really think it is right to dismiss Paul or be like "aw everybody sins but Jesus is about acceptance." Yes, of course we love and accept people as they are, but we cannot accept sins.

TL; DR, but it sounds like you are trying really hard to justify homophobia even though you know in your heart that it's okay to be gay. Good luck with that. I recommend visiting an Episcopalian or Presbyterian church and talking with their priest or pastor. They are usually more highly educated in theology than conservative evangelical ministers, too.

I think it is really sad that you threw in homophobia in what has otherwise been a completely civil discussion. I made clear I have absolutely no animus towards gay people, what makes me homophobic? Deal with your bugaboos before you call other people names.

If you try to convince yourself and other people that being gay is a sin, that's homophobia. If that word makes you react, maybe you want to reconsider trying so hard to justify your church's position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus talks about homosexuality indirectly:

Matthew 19:4–6
"4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."

Matthew 15:19–20:
"19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. 20 These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”

Notice that "adultery" and "sexual immorality" are separated. In this case, what does "sexual immorality" refer to? Who was Jesus addressing at the time?
In Matthew 15, Jesus was addressing the Pharisees, and to them homosexuality was immoral. So, one can conclude that "sexual immorality" here does include homosexuality.

Again, folks, you have to read the Bible versus within its context, who He was addressing.

"Sexual immorality" could easily be pre-marital sex or pedophelia. The Pharisees thought these were immoral too. It would be a big leap to conclude that that passage is only or even partially about homosexuality.

It's not a leap. I stated it includes homosexuality, not that "sexual immorality" only = homosexuality. Pharisees were Jews, and they knew that homosexuality was condemned, just as yes, beastiality was condemned, too.

Yes, you "stated" this, but your reading of this passage is very different from how others read it. You can "state" what you think about this set of words, but others of us don't see much there about homosexuality. For one thing, why didn't the author just say the word "homosexuality" if that's what he really meant?

because he was including all kinds of sexual immorality, like beastiality. Why didn't the author state "beastiality" separately, then. Because it was lumped together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Your quotes are from Paul again. Some think Paul was divinely inspired. But he most definitely was not Jesus, in fact he's not even counted as a "prophet" (he called himself a disciple). Taking his every word literally is elevating him to a status that he didn't claim for himself.

PS, I think you've missed the point. Jesus lifted most Old Testament bans--yes, including shellfish and blended fabrics. So we're starting over; the ground has totally shifted; and it's not necessarily OK to assume that everything in the Old Testament is still valid. Jesus cared enough about adultery to condemn it, but he never mentioned homosexuality.

Jesus' focus was on peace, loving your enemy, sharing your worldly goods, and so on. That's a focus that's meaningful to me, instead of worrying about who's sleeping with who. As others here have said, Jesus got away from all the bean counting and to a larger message of acceptance and love.

OP here. I don't know, a casual dismissal of the apostle Paul strikes me as more like exploiting some sort of Biblical loophole. Paul wrote half the New Testament and is largely responsible for Christianity in all of its forms. Paul is elevated, at least in my church, as equal to the disciples. Paul is a big deal.

Further, I'm not engaging in bean counting or being judgmental. I don't personally feel strongly about homosexuality, which is why I posted. But I do believe that is it is a serious matter to accept something that has been unaccepted by the church for 2000 years. A sin is something that misses the mark, that pulls you farther away from God. Christians are not supposed to condemn others, but they also cannot accept sin in their midst. You can love a person and accept that person but you cannot accept sin. For example, if homosexual behavior is a sin, then the church cannot legitimize it by having gay weddings, or a gay pastor/priest who is not celibate. No, Jesus did not mention homosexuality, but he also did not condone it, or any other sexual behavior that is considered "impure" by the church. It is not like homosexuality was a completely foreign concept to people at that time, the Romans engaged in homosexual acts in their society. So... yeah, this is where I struggle. I don't really think it is right to dismiss Paul or be like "aw everybody sins but Jesus is about acceptance." Yes, of course we love and accept people as they are, but we cannot accept sins.

TL; DR, but it sounds like you are trying really hard to justify homophobia even though you know in your heart that it's okay to be gay. Good luck with that. I recommend visiting an Episcopalian or Presbyterian church and talking with their priest or pastor. They are usually more highly educated in theology than conservative evangelical ministers, too.

I think it is really sad that you threw in homophobia in what has otherwise been a completely civil discussion. I made clear I have absolutely no animus towards gay people, what makes me homophobic? Deal with your bugaboos before you call other people names.

If you try to convince yourself and other people that being gay is a sin, that's homophobia. If that word makes you react, maybe you want to reconsider trying so hard to justify your church's position.

I disagree. Homophobia is when you are afraid of and hate gay people, hence the term "phobia" in homophobia.

As a christian, you know that being an alcoholic and drug abuser is a sin, that's not called something-phobia.

In all cases, you can still love and care about the person.