Total Posts:173|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Homosexual Christians

Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 11:29:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

I don't think the Bible condemns homosexuals, but it does condemn the act of homosexuality, hence my question of how they justify being Christian while going against its principles.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 11:44:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 11:29:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

The 2nd link was the only compelling piece you shared. The other two were based on emotional appeal. Still though, doesn't really cover much. For instance, the guy says "and God is not going to kick you out for being attracted to the same sex, the bible doesn't say that".

Uhhh...

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. - Leviticus 18:22

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. -1 Corinthians 6:9-11

I could go on... but I think the only compelling video still had flaws in the message it was sharing. In the video he goes on to say that these passages don't apply to modern couples... it's silly nonsense. If we went by his word then anyone could merely say the Bible doesn't apply to modern times, which would end up causing the Bible to lose it's validity. At this point, it's becoming a book that we can pick and choose from, which doesn't seem reasonable to me.

If you have a better response, I'm all ears.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 11:49:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

Every Christian in the world does things that the Bible condemns. If you had to be perfect before you could be a Christian, nobody would be a Christian.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:08:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 11:49:08 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

Every Christian in the world does things that the Bible condemns. If you had to be perfect before you could be a Christian, nobody would be a Christian.

I get what you're saying, I really do, but that doesn't seem like a justification for partaking in actions that go against the Bible. Is it the clause that you can repent for your sins that saves them? Like, they can be gay their whole life, partaking in homosexual activities, and then repent before they die and be saved? Seems kinda cheap. I mean, if that's the case then I can partake in murder and just repent before I die and be saved. I know most Christians say you must mean it when you repent, but I highly doubt every gay christian is going to drop to their knees and honestly repent for a lifestyle they partook in the entire time they were on Earth.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:08:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 11:44:35 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

The 2nd link was the only compelling piece you shared. The other two were based on emotional appeal. Still though, doesn't really cover much. For instance, the guy says "and God is not going to kick you out for being attracted to the same sex, the bible doesn't say that".

Uhhh...

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. - Leviticus 18:22

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. -1 Corinthians 6:9-11

I could go on... but I think the only compelling video still had flaws in the message it was sharing. In the video he goes on to say that these passages don't apply to modern couples... it's silly nonsense. If we went by his word then anyone could merely say the Bible doesn't apply to modern times, which would end up causing the Bible to lose it's validity. At this point, it's becoming a book that we can pick and choose from, which doesn't seem reasonable to me.

If you have a better response, I'm all ears.

I'm not gay, but a Christian. As soon as I got saved and read those verses, I read them once and didn't see gay condemnation. If you think Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 condemns the orientation and love, then apparently your idea of love is that unless sex is involved at some point, you don't really love the person. You can be gay and not have sex. I'll let that same guy explain.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:11:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:08:55 AM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:44:35 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

The 2nd link was the only compelling piece you shared. The other two were based on emotional appeal. Still though, doesn't really cover much. For instance, the guy says "and God is not going to kick you out for being attracted to the same sex, the bible doesn't say that".

Uhhh...

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. - Leviticus 18:22

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. -1 Corinthians 6:9-11

I could go on... but I think the only compelling video still had flaws in the message it was sharing. In the video he goes on to say that these passages don't apply to modern couples... it's silly nonsense. If we went by his word then anyone could merely say the Bible doesn't apply to modern times, which would end up causing the Bible to lose it's validity. At this point, it's becoming a book that we can pick and choose from, which doesn't seem reasonable to me.

If you have a better response, I'm all ears.

I'm not gay, but a Christian. As soon as I got saved and read those verses, I read them once and didn't see gay condemnation. If you think Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 condemns the orientation and love, then apparently your idea of love is that unless sex is involved at some point, you don't really love the person. You can be gay and not have sex. I'll let that same guy explain.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

Okay, so if you are gay but never have homosexual sex you are good to go. That doesn't explain or cover any justification for gay Christians that partake in homosexual sex yet still call themselves christian.

so....
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:17:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

I don't think the Bible condemns homosexuals, but it does condemn the act of homosexuality, hence my question of how they justify being Christian while going against its principles.

The trouble with Christianity is that there is no one "flavor" or one set doctrine. There are thousands of Christian religious sects that spun off from the Protestants after having already left Catholicism. The doctrines have been modified and are antiquated with several layers of interpretation. I'm not sure why a gay person would want to be Christian because I honestly can't see how anyone would want to be. It's difficult to find truth when it's so loosely interpreted in different protestant religions.

Anyway, I digress. What I mean say is this. According to Christ in the New Testament, you will find life and happiness if you just follow him and hear what he says (know him). That's easy. You don't need a Christian church to read the words that Jesus spoke and follow them. Therefore anyone can follow Jesus and he allegedly loves them all just the same.

I personally don't subscribe to anything that promotes the God of Abraham. My belief is ignostic atheist in regards to the Bible, OT and NT, as well as the Qur'an.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:18:29 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:08:22 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:49:08 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

Every Christian in the world does things that the Bible condemns. If you had to be perfect before you could be a Christian, nobody would be a Christian.

I get what you're saying, I really do, but that doesn't seem like a justification for partaking in actions that go against the Bible.

It wasn't meant to be a justification for acting contrary to the Bible. It was meant to show that acting contrary to the Bible doesn't, by itself, mean that somebody isn't a Christian.

But as far as how gay Christians reconcile being gay and Christian at the same time, they do so in a number of ways.

1. Some don't think the Bible condemns homosexuality.

2. Some give up the gay lifestyle in spite of their feelings.

3. Some simply throw themselves at the mercy of God.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:26:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:17:46 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

I don't think the Bible condemns homosexuals, but it does condemn the act of homosexuality, hence my question of how they justify being Christian while going against its principles.

The trouble with Christianity is that there is no one "flavor" or one set doctrine. There are thousands of Christian religious sects that spun off from the Protestants after having already left Catholicism. The doctrines have been modified and are antiquated with several layers of interpretation. I'm not sure why a gay person would want to be Christian because I honestly can't see how anyone would want to be. It's difficult to find truth when it's so loosely interpreted in different protestant religions.

Fair point. I agree fully.

Anyway, I digress. What I mean say is this. According to Christ in the New Testament, you will find life and happiness if you just follow him and hear what he says (know him). That's easy. You don't need a Christian church to read the words that Jesus spoke and follow them. Therefore anyone can follow Jesus and he allegedly loves them all just the same.

But is that not just following the specific text in the Bible that says if we follow Christ we'll be met with love? How can one follow one part of the full text, but not the other? It doesn't seem right to just be able to pick and choose which parts of the Bible we believe in. Kinda diminishes the power of the Bible... I mean, I get what you're saying, but ultimately I feel like that's just choosing to follow one part of the Bible over the other.

I personally don't subscribe to anything that promotes the God of Abraham. My belief is ignostic atheist in regards to the Bible, OT and NT, as well as the Qur'an.

I'm an agnostic as well. I just hoped that someone who is gay and also a christian could provide me with some sort of reasonable justification. I might make a debate out of this if I can frame it right.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:29:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:26:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I might make a debate out of this if I can frame it right.

You might ought to talk to YYW. If memory serves me right, he doesn't think the Bible condemns homosexuality. Maybe you could debate him on that.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:35:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:29:17 AM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/29/2015 12:26:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I might make a debate out of this if I can frame it right.

You might ought to talk to YYW. If memory serves me right, he doesn't think the Bible condemns homosexuality. Maybe you could debate him on that.

I'd love to, and think he'd be the best person to debate this on. I'm going to give this thread a day or two and see if anyone can provide some reasonable justification. I'm always curious over certain hypocrisy found in religions and their followers, so if having sex with someone who is the same gender as you isn't going against Christianity, I'd love to hear how and why.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 12:47:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:26:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/29/2015 12:17:46 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

I don't think the Bible condemns homosexuals, but it does condemn the act of homosexuality, hence my question of how they justify being Christian while going against its principles.

The trouble with Christianity is that there is no one "flavor" or one set doctrine. There are thousands of Christian religious sects that spun off from the Protestants after having already left Catholicism. The doctrines have been modified and are antiquated with several layers of interpretation. I'm not sure why a gay person would want to be Christian because I honestly can't see how anyone would want to be. It's difficult to find truth when it's so loosely interpreted in different protestant religions.

Fair point. I agree fully.

Anyway, I digress. What I mean say is this. According to Christ in the New Testament, you will find life and happiness if you just follow him and hear what he says (know him). That's easy. You don't need a Christian church to read the words that Jesus spoke and follow them. Therefore anyone can follow Jesus and he allegedly loves them all just the same.

But is that not just following the specific text in the Bible that says if we follow Christ we'll be met with love? How can one follow one part of the full text, but not the other? It doesn't seem right to just be able to pick and choose which parts of the Bible we believe in. Kinda diminishes the power of the Bible... I mean, I get what you're saying, but ultimately I feel like that's just choosing to follow one part of the Bible over the other.

I personally don't subscribe to anything that promotes the God of Abraham. My belief is ignostic atheist in regards to the Bible, OT and NT, as well as the Qur'an.

I'm an agnostic as well. I just hoped that someone who is gay and also a christian could provide me with some sort of reasonable justification. I might make a debate out of this if I can frame it right.

From the Christian perspective what is Jesus? He is literally God made flesh, right? In the Bible he is the Messiah. His word should be the only thing that Christians, if they truly follow Christ, should be concerned about. He didn't condemn gays. He loved and accepted everyone. Sounds like Christians need to accept gays, instead of the other way around (gays accepting Christianity).

YYW would be the one I'd debate with if I wanted a good debate on this subject.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 1:04:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:47:57 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/29/2015 12:26:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/29/2015 12:17:46 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:36:03 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

I don't see why someone can't be gay and practice Christ's philosophies, because Christianity is mainly (at least should be) based on the philosophies of Jesus. You can interpret the words that he allegedly said as being very tolerant and accepting. It is the bible in its entirety that becomes contradictory and convoluted, not Jesus's principles.

There are few gay Christians here. I think I know of two... YYW and SitaraMusica. There are probably many more.

Anyway, it is biased to say that because someone is gay they cannot practice theistic philosophy. But a "biased attitude" seems to be what most religions teach.

But Christianity directly condemns the act of homosexuality. So wouldn't partaking in that activity be going against the Christian principles found within the religion?

I don't think the Bible condemns homosexuals, but it does condemn the act of homosexuality, hence my question of how they justify being Christian while going against its principles.

The trouble with Christianity is that there is no one "flavor" or one set doctrine. There are thousands of Christian religious sects that spun off from the Protestants after having already left Catholicism. The doctrines have been modified and are antiquated with several layers of interpretation. I'm not sure why a gay person would want to be Christian because I honestly can't see how anyone would want to be. It's difficult to find truth when it's so loosely interpreted in different protestant religions.

Fair point. I agree fully.

Anyway, I digress. What I mean say is this. According to Christ in the New Testament, you will find life and happiness if you just follow him and hear what he says (know him). That's easy. You don't need a Christian church to read the words that Jesus spoke and follow them. Therefore anyone can follow Jesus and he allegedly loves them all just the same.

But is that not just following the specific text in the Bible that says if we follow Christ we'll be met with love? How can one follow one part of the full text, but not the other? It doesn't seem right to just be able to pick and choose which parts of the Bible we believe in. Kinda diminishes the power of the Bible... I mean, I get what you're saying, but ultimately I feel like that's just choosing to follow one part of the Bible over the other.

I personally don't subscribe to anything that promotes the God of Abraham. My belief is ignostic atheist in regards to the Bible, OT and NT, as well as the Qur'an.

I'm an agnostic as well. I just hoped that someone who is gay and also a christian could provide me with some sort of reasonable justification. I might make a debate out of this if I can frame it right.

From the Christian perspective what is Jesus? He is literally God made flesh, right? In the Bible he is the Messiah. His word should be the only thing that Christians, if they truly follow Christ, should be concerned about. He didn't condemn gays. He loved and accepted everyone. Sounds like Christians need to accept gays, instead of the other way around (gays accepting Christianity).

YYW would be the one I'd debate with if I wanted a good debate on this subject.

Yeah I'm chatting with him in a PM as we speak. Hopefully it won't need to come down to a debate, hence why I posed this as a forum topic instead of debate challenge in the first place :) I just have alot of random questions regarding different religions, lol.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
iSpy
Posts: 41
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 1:28:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

Christianity condemns a lot of behaviors. Can you still be Christian if you wear a shirt containing a cotton and polyester blend? Can you still be a Christian if you treat yourself to a lobster dinner? How about if you trim your beard?

The Bible says a lot of silly things, so I imagine that gay Christians rationalize in the same way that every other Christian does.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 2:53:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 1:28:25 AM, iSpy wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

Christianity condemns a lot of behaviors. Can you still be Christian if you wear a shirt containing a cotton and polyester blend? Can you still be a Christian if you treat yourself to a lobster dinner? How about if you trim your beard?

The Bible says a lot of silly things, so I imagine that gay Christians rationalize in the same way that every other Christian does.

I completely understand what you are saying, but I can't help feeling like that just cheapens the validity of the religion... being able to pick and choose what parts to follow or not... idk maybe it's just me, but even as a non-christian I don't think that's right.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
gingerbread-man
Posts: 301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 3:32:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

Pretty much all Christians lie (well all people generally do) and that doesn't preclude them from being christians.

They have affairs, they steal, they don't look after the poor etc etc. They can do all these sinful things and it still doesn't stop them from being Christian - so why should homosexuality be such a deal breaker?
Not my gumdrop buttons!

Debates currently in voting period:

http://www.debate.org...
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 4:53:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
As there is nothing wrong with being gay, it is totally normal, only sick bigots and an even sicker deity would condemn homosexuality. Jesus could have been gay as he had a disciple, presumably male, whom he loved.
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 5:40:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 12:11:06 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/29/2015 12:08:55 AM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:44:35 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/28/2015 11:29:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

The 2nd link was the only compelling piece you shared. The other two were based on emotional appeal. Still though, doesn't really cover much. For instance, the guy says "and God is not going to kick you out for being attracted to the same sex, the bible doesn't say that".

Uhhh...

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. - Leviticus 18:22

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. -1 Corinthians 6:9-11

I could go on... but I think the only compelling video still had flaws in the message it was sharing. In the video he goes on to say that these passages don't apply to modern couples... it's silly nonsense. If we went by his word then anyone could merely say the Bible doesn't apply to modern times, which would end up causing the Bible to lose it's validity. At this point, it's becoming a book that we can pick and choose from, which doesn't seem reasonable to me.

If you have a better response, I'm all ears.

I'm not gay, but a Christian. As soon as I got saved and read those verses, I read them once and didn't see gay condemnation. If you think Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 condemns the orientation and love, then apparently your idea of love is that unless sex is involved at some point, you don't really love the person. You can be gay and not have sex. I'll let that same guy explain.

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

Okay, so if you are gay but never have homosexual sex you are good to go. That doesn't explain or cover any justification for gay Christians that partake in homosexual sex yet still call themselves christian.

so....

You may wanna make yourself some coffee or save this because this same guy offers a long post on almost all the questions you'd have. He explains his side in the gay debate.

https://www.gaychristian.net...
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 5:47:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
It would be so funny if a deity does exist, and it turns out to be a lesbian. The look on the faces of idiot Christian bigots would be hugely entertaining, lol!
Martley
Posts: 126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 7:04:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

Many denominations of christianity are pro-gay, and have gay pastors... ELCA Lutheran for example, they are even working on a gay marriage rite. Homosexually is only mentioned 3 times in the new testament and there is debate whether the translation even refers to homosexuality. The greek word used is "malakia" which means a "soft" or a "weak" man... Some bibles have translated the term to mean "male prostitute" or an effeminate man. Still others have translated it to mean someone who is morally weak... and not necessarily a male.

Homosexually is not a focus of the New Testament and is only mentioned a few times in passing, which is a topic of debate. Also it is not mentioned by Jesus but that doesn't mean he condones it... the only thing Jesus himself condemns is "sexual immorality" which is a broad term that includes alot of stuff. He does define marriage as between a man and woman, but thats not the same as condemning gays. There is the Old Testament but most modern christians don't care too much what the OT says, as much of that stuff is in opposition of the christian message of love and fellowship. There is a lot of wiggle room here, and people have interpreted it as they wish.
A Black Belt is a white belt who never quit.

The best time to do something was 20 years ago.... the second best to do something is now.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 7:36:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 7:04:22 AM, Martley wrote:
At 1/28/2015 8:52:00 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
How do you justify being gay and Christian at the same time?

I'm merely looking for a Christian homosexual to justify remaining Christian when Christianity condemns the act of homosexuality.

Many denominations of christianity are pro-gay, and have gay pastors... ELCA Lutheran for example, they are even working on a gay marriage rite. Homosexually is only mentioned 3 times in the new testament and there is debate whether the translation even refers to homosexuality. The greek word used is "malakia" which means a "soft" or a "weak" man... Some bibles have translated the term to mean "male prostitute" or an effeminate man. Still others have translated it to mean someone who is morally weak... and not necessarily a male.

Homosexually is not a focus of the New Testament and is only mentioned a few times in passing, which is a topic of debate. Also it is not mentioned by Jesus but that doesn't mean he condones it... the only thing Jesus himself condemns is "sexual immorality" which is a broad term that includes alot of stuff. He does define marriage as between a man and woman, but thats not the same as condemning gays. There is the Old Testament but most modern christians don't care too much what the OT says, as much of that stuff is in opposition of the christian message of love and fellowship. There is a lot of wiggle room here, and people have interpreted it as they wish.

I would term sexual immorality as cheating on one's partner, gay or straight and sexual abuse.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 7:38:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I actually meant to debate this with someone. I maintain it's perfectly okay to be in a loving, monogamous relationship as a homosexual AND in a right relationship with God.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 8:18:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 7:38:04 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
I actually meant to debate this with someone. I maintain it's perfectly okay to be in a loving, monogamous relationship as a homosexual AND in a right relationship with God.

No deity should object as there is NOTHING wrong with sex, gay or straight, in a loving monogamous relationship
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 8:22:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
There are two terms here that are worth mentioning before I talk about this topic.

1. Synchronic - adj, concerned with something, especially a language.
2. Diachronic - adj, concerned with the way in which something, especially language, has developed and evolved through time.

The history of the word "homosexual" begins in the 19th century. Homosexuality is a sexual identity. Sexual identity, as a concept, first existed in the 19th century as well. What that means is that the concept of sexual identity did not exist before the 19th century, and in that biblical times were before the 19th century, homosexuality as a concept did not exist when the bible was written.

What did exist at the time the bible was written was a particularly unfortunate kind of pederasty, as practiced by the Romans. The basic idea of it was this: freeborn male citizens would sexually abuse young male adolescent boys between the ages of about 11-18 or so who were from lower social classes. Roman sexuality did not recognize homosexuality in the way that we do today; the idea of ongoing consensual relationships between males who were of similar ages just didn't happen on any kind of a substantial scale. It also didn't happen in Sodom or Gomorrah, but that's another issue.

The reason that pederasty like that was so common in the ancient world was because there was no birth control. So, when men needed or wanted to get off, but did not desire to produce children, boys were often who they had sex with. This repulsed Paul, and many other writers. The relationships were "homosexual" in that they were "male on male" sexual interaction, but they were not "homosexual" in the sense that we think of homosexuality today, as between consenting people of equal social status.

But, the Catholic church, when it translated ancient biblical manuscripts into Latin, did not appreciate that difference. And when the vulgate was translated into German by Martin Luther, Luther did not know that the latin word for "sodomy" was actually a mistranslation from ancient biblical manuscripts. The latin word for "sodomy" got changed to "homosexuality" in the 19th century. So, here and again we're talking about a translational error, that has more or less defined the theology of a considerable number of religious denomination's doctrines for quite some number of years.

The point to take away from this is that "homosexuality" is not a sin, and almost all biblical scholars (both Catholic and protestant) accept that. There are certain redneck seminaries that disagree with that, but the reason that they disagree with that is because of their "literalist" interpretation of the bible as it has been translated (and periodically mistranslated) five or six times over hundreds and hundreds of years. It's more or less an exercise in hermeneutical absurdity to claim a literalist interpretation of the bible is the "only" way when the language itself is only reliable to the extent that it has been correctly translated.

The reason that's absurd is because the way we use language changes over time; which is to say that the synchronic definition of a term (the way it is used at a particular time and geographical place in history) is not the only way that word can be used, which means that the synchronic definition (which entails a linguistic history of usage) really is required to elicit meaning. But, if you went to Gordon Comwell, (very prominent seminary in MA), and you were taught literalist-reform theology, you're probably not going to appreciate the nuance of how truly precarious language can be.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 8:39:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
But beyond that, there are some other things that bear consideration:

There is definitely a historical trend to recognize homosexuality as a sin. This has more to do with the linguistic imperiousness of Catholic monks (read: human error) than the literal meaning of scripture, for the reasons I said in an earlier post, but the logic of homosexuality's being a sin is incredibly weak.

The argument goes like this...

1. The bible says that thou shalt not lay with mankind as with womankind.
2. This refers to homosexuality.
3. Homosexuality, a sexual identity predicated upon the acts in (1) must therefore be sinful.

If it is the case that homosexuality is a sin, there is no more reason to think that homosexuality is any worse, as a sin, than adultery because even in the old testament (as it is mistranslated), the punishment for both adultery and homosexuality was death. And yet, if adultery is forgivable (which it is; see the new testament) then so is homosexuality.

To argue that homosexuality is "so bad" that "all gay people will burn in hell" is really nothing more than an affront to Christ. The reason is because in order for it to be the case that "all gay people must burn in hell," that would mean that there are "some" acts which are "so bad" (other than apostasy) that God could not forgive. So, in that any person claims "if gay people are gay, they will burn in hell" they are really saying that "God's power is so constrained that he can not extend salvation as he deems fit." That is a false statement (insofar as it is literally inconsistent with the Christian understanding of God's power to forgive).

But, most redneck theologians aren't intellectually capable of following their own dumb logic to its extension. So, they preach stupidity like "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." And the reason they preach that is because they were taught by stupid people who came before them. The implication there is that I don't *blame* people, individually, for being taught something wrong, so much as I blame them for failing to understand the weakness of their own perspective.

Most people who study Christian theology, though, have the tendency to read it through the lens of what they believe are their own "values." That is to say, if one of your "values" is "the sanctity of the nuclear family," you are going to regard anything other than a man, wife, 2.3 kids an a dog as "inconsistent with God's will." But, the reason you're going to oppose homosexuality is because you're going to believe that heterosexuals are existentially "harmed" by regarding gay people as of equal worth to straight people.

Now, in order to hold that view, you've got to regard social status as existing in a zero-sum. What that means is that to the extent that one group rises, the other falls. That is an absurd worldview, but it's the ultimate reason that fundamentalist Christians and most Catholics regard gay marriage is a "wrong" which posits "existential harms" to people. It's absurd... but here and again, this is how a lot of people think, because that's how they've been taught to think -and they have been taught incorrectly by people who were not intellectually capable of seeing how manifestly absurd their worldview is.

All of that to say this...

Reconciling Christianity with homosexuality is not a hard thing to do. All that is required is to understand why the Church regards homosexuality the way it does, and correct for historical error.

The thing that most fundamentalists forget (or never knew, because this isn't something that they are comfortable with because it's a fact that more or less erodes the hermeneutical method by which they interpret scripture) is that the Bible has been translated MANY times, into MANY languages by PEOPLE. Those people are fallible, which is to say they make mistakes, and there are some glaring mistakes like that have changed the course of history. This is one such occasion.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 8:43:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 7:38:04 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
I actually meant to debate this with someone. I maintain it's perfectly okay to be in a loving, monogamous relationship as a homosexual AND in a right relationship with God.

There is no indication that being gay, married, and sexually involved is any more sinful than being heterosexual, divorced, remarried, and sexually involved.
Tsar of DDO
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 9:02:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/29/2015 8:22:12 AM, YYW wrote:
There are two terms here that are worth mentioning before I talk about this topic.

1. Synchronic - adj, concerned with something, especially a language.
2. Diachronic - adj, concerned with the way in which something, especially language, has developed and evolved through time.

The history of the word "homosexual" begins in the 19th century. Homosexuality is a sexual identity. Sexual identity, as a concept, first existed in the 19th century as well. What that means is that the concept of sexual identity did not exist before the 19th century, and in that biblical times were before the 19th century, homosexuality as a concept did not exist when the bible was written.


The word "homosexual," didn't exist until recent history, but to argue that the concept that many believe to be prohibited did not exist is another thing all together.

The Greek word used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:9 is "arsenokoitai," which is basically a compound of two root words that means, "male," and "bed." This denotes two men sleeping with each other. The word Paul did not use was the Greek word "paiderastia," which is the word we get pederasty from, which would have clearly denoted what you are describing.

What did exist at the time the bible was written was a particularly unfortunate kind of pederasty, as practiced by the Romans. The basic idea of it was this: freeborn male citizens would sexually abuse young male adolescent boys between the ages of about 11-18 or so who were from lower social classes. Roman sexuality did not recognize homosexuality in the way that we do today; the idea of ongoing consensual relationships between males who were of similar ages just didn't happen on any kind of a substantial scale. It also didn't happen in Sodom or Gomorrah, but that's another issue.


Roman's did acknowledge homosexuality, and they even outlawed the practice. You can't simply rewrite history in order to substantiate an already faulty interpretation. Homosexuality has existed throughout human history and even beyond in other parts of the animal kingdom. It was expressed culturally in some different ways, and pederasty was indeed popular, but Paul didn't refer to that specifically when he could have.

The reason that pederasty like that was so common in the ancient world was because there was no birth control. So, when men needed or wanted to get off, but did not desire to produce children, boys were often who they had sex with. This repulsed Paul, and many other writers. The relationships were "homosexual" in that they were "male on male" sexual interaction, but they were not "homosexual" in the sense that we think of homosexuality today, as between consenting people of equal social status.


Yet, Paul doesn't just reference homosexuality between men, but also women.

"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." Romans 1:26-27 (ESV)

But, the Catholic church, when it translated ancient biblical manuscripts into Latin, did not appreciate that difference. And when the vulgate was translated into German by Martin Luther, Luther did not know that the latin word for "sodomy" was actually a mistranslation from ancient biblical manuscripts. The latin word for "sodomy" got changed to "homosexuality" in the 19th century. So, here and again we're talking about a translational error, that has more or less defined the theology of a considerable number of religious denomination's doctrines for quite some number of years.


Jerome's translation of the Latin Vulgate reflects the perspective of Christians at the time, and indeed the consistent understanding of these texts even among the Early Church Fathers. I would agree that they also were outspoken against pederasty, but that doesn't mean that they approved of homosexuality either.

The fact also remains that there is no representation of a homosexual act or relationship within the Bible that is favorably characterized, but all sexual interaction is framed within the context of marriage between one man and one woman.

The point to take away from this is that "homosexuality" is not a sin, and almost all biblical scholars (both Catholic and protestant) accept that.

I would really like to see where you get this from, being someone who is familiar with Biblical scholarship.

There are certain redneck seminaries that disagree with that, but the reason that they disagree with that is because of their "literalist" interpretation of the bible as it has been translated (and periodically mistranslated) five or six times over hundreds and hundreds of years.

Hello logical fallacy. As if scholars who believe the Bible condemns homosexuality are ignorant of Koine Greek and merely go off of the English Translation. Good one.

It's more or less an exercise in hermeneutical absurdity to claim a literalist interpretation of the bible is the "only" way when the language itself is only reliable to the extent that it has been correctly translated.


What is important to note is the literary genre, and the remarks in the NT about homosexuality are all contained in the Epistles, which we have no reason not to read literally.

The reason that's absurd is because the way we use language changes over time; which is to say that the synchronic definition of a term (the way it is used at a particular time and geographical place in history) is not the only way that word can be used, which means that the synchronic definition (which entails a linguistic history of usage) really is required to elicit meaning. But, if you went to Gordon Comwell, (very prominent seminary in MA), and you were taught literalist-reform theology, you're probably not going to appreciate the nuance of how truly precarious language can be.

Indeed, it is important to understand that in Greek, there was a particular word used for pederasty, which Paul did not use. He rather used a word to denote same sex interaction between males. The context of that same sex interaction whether it be pederasty or consensual was prohibited. Also, nothing in the Bible is favorable towards homosexuality, but assumes the Jewish understanding of the created order.

So I applaud your effort, but as someone who actually knows Koine Greek, I must disagree.