The Instigator
Lee001
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
beachgirl67
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Homosexual Ministers

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Lee001
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/7/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 872 times Debate No: 71294
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (15)
Votes (2)

 

Lee001

Pro

Lets define Homosexual: . Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.

I highly believe its okay for ministers to be homosexual, for it could be greatly beneficial.

Con may or may not post his argument in the first round, or he/she could just accept in the first round.

Good Luck!

Source: https://search.yahoo.com......
beachgirl67

Con

According to the Oxford dictionaries, a minister is "a member of the clergy, especially in Protestant churches." A clergy is "the body of all people ordained for religious duties, especially in the Christian Church." The minister will preach the Christian belief and provide spiritual guidance to the community. How can he do so accurately, when his own beliefs would go against what he would preach? There are several places in the bible that condemn his own behavior. Leviticus 18:22 identifies homosexual behavior as an abomination and a sin. Romans 1:26-27 declares homosexual desires and actions to be shameful and unnatural. I have nothing against homosexual people myself, but wonder how they can preach something to others they themselves don't believe in.
Debate Round No. 1
Lee001

Pro

Thank you for accepting my debate. Good luck.

First off I'd like to say that our god is a loving god. He loves all of his children!
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Let's define the word "Minister"-attend to the needs of (someone) act as a minister of religion.
Notice how the definition doesn't say " A straight Man, A man whom only loves women. *But this person dose attend the needs to act as a minister.

Many Homosexual people feel obligated to going to a church. They are afraid of the congregation and how they would react and judge them because of their orientation. Just because someone is gay, doesn't mean that they CANT love god!
Some people are born gay, how can they help it?
Having a gay Minister should still be able to preach the word of god so other's could get to know god. Isn't that the most important? It doesn't matter if the minister is black, green or purple. But as long as he loves god and wants to share his word.

Sources:

https://dictionary.search.yahoo.com...

http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com...
beachgirl67

Con

The definition of the word 'minister' doesn't include he can't be gay because, as a preacher of the Christian religion, I would think this would be expected of him. I still have one large question you haven't answered: How can he teach something to others he himself doesn't believe? I know he believes in God, but if he's homosexual he obviously doesn't agree with all the bible's teachings.

If God loves all the world, why does the bible call gay people an abomination and a sin? That doesn't make much sense to me. The bible states that a man should be with a woman and vice versa, that's how God wanted it to be. In passages that contain instructions regarding marriage, such as 1 Corinthians 7:2-16 and Ephesians 5:23-33, the Bible clearly states marriage as being between a man and woman.

I think gay people should be able to attend church, but not teach at a church. There are different types of Christians, and some are more religious than others. I get some people are born gay, I can agree with you on that, but they can't be fully religious if some of their own choices go against what they would be trying to teach with others. It's like a math teacher trying to teach a class a formula he doesn't think is true.

Source- http://www.gotquestions.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Lee001

Pro

Con states: "If God loves all the world, why does the bible call gay people an abomination and a sin? " Therefore, she is implying that got hates homosexuals. Yet homosexuals have the desire to serve god and repent of their sins.

I will answer your long awaited question : How can he teach something to others he himself doesn't believe?
My answer: Allot of people have to teach other people things even if they don't necessarily believe in them. For instance, a science teacher will have to teach evolution weather or not she agrees with it. But there comes a point, when you are being discriminated by others of a congregation you don't want to go anymore. It's better to go to a church then to not go to one at all right? and its better to at least follow god in your own way then to not follow him am I correct?
John 3:17 New International Version (NIV) :For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

2 Peter 3:9 New International Version (NIV) T"he Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." God loves us enough to give up his only son for the remission of our sins. He keeps his promise, always to love us, and if we sin then we shall repent and be forgiven by him.


Now back to the gay ministers, homosexual's can only relate to these people. Most churches will have already judged you once they find out your orientation. So how are these people suppose to be saved if they are being condemned by these so called "Christian's"? I say its better to follow god's word than in your own way.


Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org...


http://r.search.yahoo.com...-


https://www.biblegateway.com...



beachgirl67

Con

I get God/Jesus will forgive you and your sins, but technically if you are gay aren't you doing a sin over and over again? Your verses mention God is forgiving and will be patient with you, but if being gay is a sin and you don't change yourself, would he still save you considering the bible calls being gay a sin? Wouldn't this technically be the same in his eyes if you were a murderer or thief and never changed your lifestyle? (I'm not saying those things are even comparable, but they are all sins in the bible.) I think many people would not want somebody teaching them about Christianity when the teacher himself is a sinner. I have nothing against gay people at all, but I know a lot of other more serious Christians do.

I don't think homosexuals can only relate to homosexual ministers as you state. They can connect with people in other ways separate from their orientation. If a gay person feels like they are being judged at their church, there are churches that will accept them. Many churches have already said they accept gay people to attend the services, but gay ministers is another story.

I did not imply God hates gays, but in the bible being gay is a sin and sinners who don't repent don't go to heaven, am I not correct? Romans 1:26-27 states "For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error." There are many verses that imply God does not accept bisexual behavior, including this one.

"Due penalty for their error." This to me says homosexual people don't go to heaven, therefore they aren't accepted by God. I don't think they should teach God's teachings when many bible verses claim their behavior is unacceptable.

Another thing I would like to add is that i'm Christian and support gays. You don't have to believe everything in the bible to believe in God. But, if you want to truly teach His word, I think you should agree with everything in the bible. I would not want a homosexual minister to be bias because of his orientation.

Source- http://www.openbible.info...
Debate Round No. 3
Lee001

Pro

But what about those who are born gay? This can be caused by being born a Hermaphrodite: "an individual in which reproductive organs of both sexes are present.
Compare pseudohermaphrodite." or "combining two opposite qualities. "
This disorder can cause them to be sexually confused and cause them to like both gender's, so how is being gay a sin when god made them that way? You would think that God wouldn't let these things happen but they do, yet it's a sin?

Do you know what people did in Biblical time to homosexual's?

"If a man has sex with another man, kill them both". Leviticus 20:13
Explicit verse #2: Their blood shall be upon them

Honestly, reading this scripture, if you believe in the bible and abide by it, what homosexual would want to go to a regular Christian church knowing that MOST Christians feel this way about gays? I know I wouldn't want to go, knowing that if I was gay they think I should be dead and my blood upon myself.

Last scripture to finish the debate. "God says not to bring any whore, sodomite, or dog into the house of the Lord. For "these things are an abomination to the Lord." Sodomites and dogs are biblical names for homosexuals." Deuteronomy 23:17-18

So basically like you said, "we must follow the bible right?"
Well a dog in the bible refers to a "homosexual" therefore, a homosexual is NOT ALLOWED IN THE HOUSE OF THE LORD thus being a church.

I have successfully proven that churches will judge gays and dislike them for their orientation, while if we had gay ministers, they could relate much better and be saved.

Vote Pro! :)
Sources:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com...

http://dictionary.reference.com...
beachgirl67

Con

First off, making the assumption that most Christians hate gays isn't true. Many churches WILL accept gays and allow them to attend services. But, like you said, if the church wouldn't allow homosexual people to attend, why would they let a homosexual person teach the service? I feel like your argument there is contradictory. If churches judge and dislike gays as you say, why would they let a homosexual minister in their church?

Those who are born gay can't change who they are, you're right. But since the bible calls their behavior a sin, we are back to square one. I don't see how a hermaphrodite's situation would be any different from a regular homosexual persons situation.

Homosexual people can follow the bible and God's word in their own way if they feel they are being judged. But, I don't think they should be able to teach at a church when they themselves don't believe in some of the bible teachings. For these reasons, I believe I should win. The bible states in many place homosexual behavior is a sin and unnatural. Therefore, I don't think technical sinners should teach the bible's word.

Thanks for the awesome debate!
Debate Round No. 4
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
Conduct - Tie. Both had proper conduct throughout the debate.
S&G - Tie. Both had solid spelling and grammar throughout.
Arguments - Con. This was a tough one to vote on. Pro's key argument was that congregations having homosexual ministers would be beneficial in the form of potentially motivating more homosexuals to attend the services. Con's key argument was that being a homosexual minister is a hypocritical notion since the minister would be breaking the Bible's own message, which includes verses that claim participating in homosexual acts is a sin and abomination (even though Pro greatly contributed to this evidence in her own way). These are two arguments that I find incredibly hard to weigh against one another as they are coming from such different angles. It literally falls on the rebuttals. With that said, Pro didn't really provide any rebuttal to Con's main point that it's hypocritical aside from some emotional appeals, whereas Con was able to show that there are many churches who accept homosexuals, but that under Pro's framework it'd be contradictory. In the end, I found Con's rebuttals to be more impactful, whereas Pro's, while noble, just didn't quite rebut Con's key points with the same veracity. For these reasons, Con wins arguments, although only slightly. If Pro can find a means to counter Con's key points with something a little stronger than emotional appeal, I would have most likely ended up awarding arguments to Pro.
Sources - Pro. This is rare for me, because normally the one with better arguments usually has better sources as well. In this case though, I found both debaters to utilize sources of equal quality, with neither really standing out over the other. What it fell on was quantity, and in that case I found Pro's sources to be more numerous, which ultimately led to more support for her arguments. While those arguments ended up being just a little bit too short strength-wise, they were supported better than Con's.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
If I was Pro I would've cited Kedoshim from the Bible and that would've won it right there.
Posted by beachgirl67 1 year ago
beachgirl67
Whoever wins, it was a great debate. Thanks for making it :)
Posted by Lee001 1 year ago
Lee001
Okay, who are you?
Posted by Lee001 1 year ago
Lee001
Yes you. Can you message me?
Posted by Lee001 1 year ago
Lee001
First of all, who are you and why can't I go to your profile?
Posted by Search-The-Scriptures 1 year ago
Search-The-Scriptures
Being gay is an abomination. There is no Scripture that says "homosexuals will inherit the Kingdom".

Leviticus 20:13 (the same goes for women)
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

"shall be" is future tense, will be.

Romans 1:26-27
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
V27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

{In both these verses, both women and men have changed the nature of who their sexual partner is. Today a woman can marry a woman, a man can marry a man, it is no longer only a woman and man can marry, it's anybody can marry anybody, and real soon it's going to be anybody can marry anybody and anything.

Gay's can go to church if they want, but they are not getting the Kingdom if they do no repent. Churches are lying to people telling them, "come as you are" but that is not in the Bible, or "all you gota do is believe and you will be saved" that's also not in the Bible, or "the laws are done away with, we are freed from them" that's not in Scripture either.
Posted by Lee001 1 year ago
Lee001
I agree but what about the gay's who feel obligated not to go to church because their afrad of being judged by others?
Posted by Search-The-Scriptures 1 year ago
Search-The-Scriptures
@Lee001
"A gay person should be allowed to be a minister. Thoose who don't mind him being gay could attend his services/ basically starting his own church."

Do you have Scripture that shows it's okay for a homosexual to be a minister?

I'm not trying to be rude but this is the reason why all the churches around the world today are teaching false doctrine, because they teach off of their feelings, their emotions. No church, anywhere around the world, teaches the truth about the Scriptures. You guys gota stop teaching off of your emotions and start teaching what the Scriptures say.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Mister_Man 1 year ago
Mister_Man
Lee001beachgirl67Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro explained how homosexual ministers are a good thing for the general community. Although Con showed that it's detrimental to Christianity as it doesn't follow traditional Christian teachings, Pro showed how that's irrelevant in the general debate. Good arguments by both sides, but slight edge to Pro.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
Lee001beachgirl67Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments. If any clarification is needed please don't hesitate to PM me :) Great job to the both of you!