Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Gay Christians Choosing Celibacy Emerge....

YYW
Posts: 36,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 10:23:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Pertinent News Story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Brief Summary:

There are some gay Christians who, because of their faith, are not having relationships with or sex with other people of the same sex. They do this because they believe that celibacy allows a person to "give [themselves] more feely to God."

The point of "celibacy" here, is to reconcile the concerns that conservative Christian people have which stem from their belief that the only kind of biblically acceptable sex is heterosexual sex within the bounds of marriage, with growing social acceptance of homosexuality.

Some gay people have objected to celibacy in this way as "untenable and a denial of equality." Church leaders have had mixed reactions; some praise the movement, while others believe that homosexuality is irreconcilable with Christianity (these are usually the people who believe that "reparative therapy" can change sexual identity -despite such efforts being discredited by every scientific and medical board in existence around the world).

So, these gay people who are being celebrate in the name of Christianity are seeking "intimacy" instead -whatever that means.

Why This is Problematic:

There are some gay people who are ashamed of who they are, conforming to what other people want, because they cannot see past a medieval interpretation of scripture. I want to draw a distinction between "feeling" closer to God, and actually being closer to God. Silencing a part of who you were, if you were created in God's image, is to say that God made a mistake in creating you in that way -which is preposterous.

But, the issue of whether God made a mistake in creating people who are gay goes the heart of why most conservative Christians refuse to accept that people are "born" gay. They regard homosexuality as a sin or a "mistake" to be corrected, and they cannot accept that God created people who are born in that way, so homosexuality must, therefore, be a choice. This is a manifestly stupid position.

Whether homosexuality is or is not a sin has no bearing on whether it is reconcilable with Christianity or not because, if you are a Christian, then you must accept that all people are born with original sin. That means that we're all always already sinners. We cannot not be sinners. Sin is everywhere and everything that we do, because we are human, and thus fallen, and not perfect in that way.

The question then becomes whether homosexuality, if a sin, is so different from other sins that it could exclude people from the kingdom of heaven. But, if you are a Christian, then you also accept that all sins other than denial of the Holy Spirit are forgivable. In that homosexuality is NOT denial of the Holy Spirit, it must be forgivable, which means that to believe that homosexuality is a sin which could exclude someone from the kingdom of heaven is inconsistent with Christian doctrine.

The more broad problem here is the impact that this "celibacy movement" is going to have on people, and it's why I think the entire idea here is stupid. While it attempts to logically reconcile "being gay" with "being a Christian," (a dichotomy which does not, in reality, exist), it reinforces the notion that (1) homosexuality is unique among sins in terms of the gravity it carries -which has no scriptural basis, (2) that homosexuality is inherently evil -for which there is also no scriptural basis, and (3) that gay people are inferior to straight people -which also has no scriptural basis. So, in effort to reconcile a nonexistent scriptural issue, these people are acting in ways that are going to have seriously negative impacts on the church and also probably continue to prevent people who are gay from seeking salvation.

The ultimate, overarching principle here is that things which prevent people from seeking salvation are serious issues. Where the church, by its acts or omissions, creates hostility and resistance to the Christian faith, we've got a problem -and that problem is just as poignant here as in situations where you have psychopathic southern baptist ministers preaching that "all f@gs go to hell." There is no distinction, ethically, because the result will still alienate gay people from Christendom.
Tsar of DDO
mortsdor
Posts: 1,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 11:05:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/14/2014 10:23:45 AM, YYW wrote:
There are some gay people who are ashamed of who they are, conforming to what other people want, because they cannot see past a medieval interpretation of scripture.

I'd characterize it more as Acceptance of Anti-gay scripture.

There's not much to Interpret when Leviticus says to Stone Gays and that they will bear the burden of their own killing b/c lying with other men is an abomination.

It's not a Medieval interpretation of Leviticus which causes christians to reject gay sex, it's an acceptance of the scripture.

I want to draw a distinction between "feeling" closer to God, and actually being closer to God. Silencing a part of who you were, if you were created in God's image, is to say that God made a mistake in creating you in that way -which is preposterous.

People may very well face different temptations.

But, the issue of whether God made a mistake in creating people who are gay goes the heart of why most conservative Christians refuse to accept that people are "born" gay. They regard homosexuality as a sin or a "mistake" to be corrected, and they cannot accept that God created people who are born in that way, so homosexuality must, therefore, be a choice. This is a manifestly stupid position.

I agree that it's silly to see who you're attracted to as a choice.

Whether homosexuality is or is not a sin has no bearing on whether it is reconcilable with Christianity or not because, if you are a Christian, then you must accept that all people are born with original sin. That means that we're all always already sinners. We cannot not be sinners. Sin is everywhere and everything that we do, because we are human, and thus fallen, and not perfect in that way.

Sure...

The question then becomes whether homosexuality, if a sin, is so different from other sins that it could exclude people from the kingdom of heaven.

Well, it's on par with some other sins in that the bible says that those who do it should be killed...
But yeah, I don't think too many christians would suggest that it would Absolutely Deny someone the ability to go to heaven.

But, if you are a Christian, then you also accept that all sins other than denial of the Holy Spirit are forgivable. In that homosexuality is NOT denial of the Holy Spirit, it must be forgivable, which means that to believe that homosexuality is a sin which could exclude someone from the kingdom of heaven is inconsistent with Christian doctrine.

It may very well be forgivable...

BUT, that's not to say it's acceptable. And not acceptable to Continue to live in that manner.
(note, I'm not anti-gay at all... just playing devil's advocate for what would be a sensible christian perspective... [sensible given acceptance of the christian framework at least] )

Just as commiting Pre-marital sex may not mean you ABSOLUTELY go to hell... But that doesn't mean it's OK to keep engaging in it.

The more broad problem here is the impact that this "celibacy movement" is going to have on people, and it's why I think the entire idea here is stupid. While it attempts to logically reconcile "being gay" with "being a Christian,"

(a dichotomy which does not, in reality, exist)
Depends on the extent to which you Accept the scipture.

If you fully accept it, I would think you'd advocate stoning/killing those who engage in gay-sex.

Now Jesus may've confused the issue a bit, saying he confirms the law, but not letting people stone the sinful lady as the law required...

But at the least, one who accepts the scriptures should think that Gay-Sex is as sinful, detestable, and Unacceptable as other sins that had been termed Abomination and had such punishments associated with them.

it reinforces the notion that (1) homosexuality is unique among sins in terms of the gravity it carries -which has no scriptural basis,
not Unique, it's on the level with some other sex-crimes.. and Abominations worthy of being killed for.

(2) that homosexuality is inherently evil -for which there is also no scriptural basis, and

Gay-sex is obviously characterized as Abominable and Unacceptable Sin in the scripture.

(3) that gay people are inferior to straight people -which also has no scriptural basis.
yeah, I don't think there's anything that suggests that.

So, in effort to reconcile a nonexistent scriptural issue, these people are acting in ways that are going to have seriously negative impacts on the church and also probably continue to prevent people who are gay from seeking salvation.

I'd say it's the Most Consistent position for Christians that accept the scripture.

Gay-sex is a sin, but those who are tempted to it, those who are tempted by Lust of that variety are not inherently bad or inferior.

I think most christians of this perspective do NOT think that gay-sex is unforgivable as you seem to suggest.
Rather, I think they think it a serious sin that should be turned away from, and Resisted.

Leviticus, Without Any Doubt, clearly says that gay sex is such an abominable sin...
Jesus may say don't throw stones, but that doesn't mean it's not a sin.

It makes sense that those who believe it a serious sin would suggest that those who engage in it should repent, feel bad, and stop...
That's their posiiton toward all sin.. and usually is kinda suggested to be a demonstration that the person its truly sorry, and truly seeking god's forgiveness.

The ultimate, overarching principle here is that things which prevent people from seeking salvation are serious issues.
clearly the OT suggests that Gay-sex is ITSELF also a Serious issue to be addressed.

It doesn't make sense to fully compromise one important thing for another.

Trying to be approachable is good, but compromising on Important notions of what is Horrible, Abominable, sin... is not.

Where the church, by its acts or omissions, creates hostility and resistance to the Christian faith, we've got a problem -and that problem is just as poignant here as in situations where you have psychopathic southern baptist ministers preaching that "all f@gs go to hell." There is no distinction, ethically, because the result will still alienate gay people from Christendom.

I'd say there's a difference, that is that those who preach for Gay-celibacy are basically treating gay-sex as any other sin, whereas those who preach that Gays all go to hell are preaching in a reactionary fashion and, it would seem, singling out the particular sin that sexually active gays involve in over other such sins that other's engage in.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,138
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 12:54:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'd say there's a difference, that is that those who preach for Gay-celibacy are basically treating gay-sex as any other sin, whereas those who preach that Gays all go to hell are preaching in a reactionary fashion and, it would seem, singling out the particular sin that sexually active gays involve in over other such sins that other's engage in.

This was essentially what I would have typed in response, so excellent work. I definitely consider gay sex to be on the same level as adultery, pre-marital sex, and divorce. They are all sins, and therefore good Christians should make every attempt to avoid committing them. However, i do not think one is worse in Gods eyes than the rest. Makes no sense to exclude gay people from the possibility of salvation, unless you also want to exclude everyone who has ever had sex outside of marriage, and people who divorce and remarry.

Therefore, I have always endorsed celibacy for gay Christians as an excellent way to avoid temptation, in much the same way that I would endorse sobriety for recovering alcoholics. Ironically, the celibate gay Christian will be in much better shape to attain the kingdom of God than many non celibate straight Christians.
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 1:31:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/14/2014 10:23:45 AM, YYW wrote:
The Pertinent News Story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Brief Summary:

There are some gay Christians who, because of their faith, are not having relationships with or sex with other people of the same sex. They do this because they believe that celibacy allows a person to "give [themselves] more feely to God."

The point of "celibacy" here, is to reconcile the concerns that conservative Christian people have which stem from their belief that the only kind of biblically acceptable sex is heterosexual sex within the bounds of marriage, with growing social acceptance of homosexuality.

Some gay people have objected to celibacy in this way as "untenable and a denial of equality."

Is it really a denial of equality though? Even if it was, what is the moral relevance of equality?

Church leaders have had mixed reactions; some praise the movement, while others believe that homosexuality is irreconcilable with Christianity (these are usually the people who believe that "reparative therapy" can change sexual identity -despite such efforts being discredited by every scientific and medical board in existence around the world).

So, these gay people who are being celebrate in the name of Christianity are seeking "intimacy" instead -whatever that means.

Why This is Problematic:

There are some gay people who are ashamed of who they are, conforming to what other people want, because they cannot see past a medieval interpretation of scripture. I want to draw a distinction between "feeling" closer to God, and actually being closer to God.

Silencing a part of who you were, if you were created in God's image, is to say that God made a mistake in creating you in that way -which is preposterous.

This can be applied to a lot of things which are immoral. Some people have a tendency towards necrophilia; is it silencing a part of them by arguing that necrophilia is wrong?
God cannot make a mistake in his creation, it is humans that messed things up. All things wrong with this world stem back to original sin. the necrophile possesses disordered sexual desire because of original sin. And as offensive as it may sound, all disorderments, including homosexuality, were created from original sin. However, we can take our flaws and offer them up to God. Just because you are homosexual, or because you may have a desire to have sex with dead bodies does not mean that you are sinning or acting against God, but it does mean you need God's help to work past such temptations and live a chaste and good life.

I cringe at my own words. Not because they are false, but that considering current societal beliefs such a notion not only sounds absurd, but also offensive.

Whether homosexuality is or is not a sin has no bearing on whether it is reconcilable with Christianity or not because, if you are a Christian, then you must accept that all people are born with original sin. That means that we're all always already sinners. We cannot not be sinners. Sin is everywhere and everything that we do, because we are human, and thus fallen, and not perfect in that way.

Acting upon homosexuality is irreconcilable with Christianity in the since that we are called to act in accordance with God's will, and we cannot act in accordance with God's will if we are sinning. A Christian must at least try to act in accordance with God's will, and seek forgiveness when he does not.

The question then becomes whether homosexuality, if a sin, is so different from other sins that it could exclude people from the kingdom of heaven.

No sin is so bad that it cannot be forgiven. However, this isn't the point. The point is that we ought not sin, and that if we are doing something sinful (especially with knowledge and intent), then we should stop doing it.

(1) homosexuality is unique among sins in terms of the gravity it carries -which has no scriptural basis

it isn't, but again, that isn't the point. The point is that all sin should be avoided. The reason so much emphasis has been put on homosexuality lately is because there are huge gay rights and equality movements going on across the world right now. its a hot topic issue.

(2) that homosexuality is inherently evil -for which there is also no scriptural basis,

Homosexuality in of itself is not. Acting upon it is. And that does have scriptural basis.

(3) that gay people are inferior to straight people -which also has no scriptural basis. So, in effort to reconcile a nonexistent scriptural issue, these people are acting in ways that are going to have seriously negative impacts on the church and also probably continue to prevent people who are gay from seeking salvation.

That isn't true, nor is it what Christians (or at least the Catholic Church) advocates. Christians aren't defending that heterosexuals are superior, only that acting upon homosexuality is sinful. Looking at it in your way is simply a misrepresentation of the Christian view.

The ultimate, overarching principle here is that things which prevent people from seeking salvation are serious issues. Where the church, by its acts or omissions, creates hostility and resistance to the Christian faith, we've got a problem -and that problem is just as poignant here as in situations where you have psychopathic southern baptist ministers preaching that "all f@gs go to hell." There is no distinction, ethically, because the result will still alienate gay people from Christendom.

The Church cannot change dogma in the name of accepting all people. That is not how it works. People must conform to the church. The Church never conforms to the people.
Nolite Timere
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 3:26:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/14/2014 10:23:45 AM, YYW wrote:
The Pertinent News Story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Brief Summary:

There are some gay Christians who, because of their faith, are not having relationships with or sex with other people of the same sex. They do this because they believe that celibacy allows a person to "give [themselves] more feely to God."

The point of "celibacy" here, is to reconcile the concerns that conservative Christian people have which stem from their belief that the only kind of biblically acceptable sex is heterosexual sex within the bounds of marriage, with growing social acceptance of homosexuality.

Some gay people have objected to celibacy in this way as "untenable and a denial of equality." Church leaders have had mixed reactions; some praise the movement, while others believe that homosexuality is irreconcilable with Christianity (these are usually the people who believe that "reparative therapy" can change sexual identity -despite such efforts being discredited by every scientific and medical board in existence around the world).

So, these gay people who are being celebrate in the name of Christianity are seeking "intimacy" instead -whatever that means.

Why This is Problematic:

There are some gay people who are ashamed of who they are, conforming to what other people want, because they cannot see past a medieval interpretation of scripture. I want to draw a distinction between "feeling" closer to God, and actually being closer to God. Silencing a part of who you were, if you were created in God's image, is to say that God made a mistake in creating you in that way -which is preposterous.

But, the issue of whether God made a mistake in creating people who are gay goes the heart of why most conservative Christians refuse to accept that people are "born" gay. They regard homosexuality as a sin or a "mistake" to be corrected, and they cannot accept that God created people who are born in that way, so homosexuality must, therefore, be a choice. This is a manifestly stupid position.

Whether homosexuality is or is not a sin has no bearing on whether it is reconcilable with Christianity or not because, if you are a Christian, then you must accept that all people are born with original sin. That means that we're all always already sinners. We cannot not be sinners. Sin is everywhere and everything that we do, because we are human, and thus fallen, and not perfect in that way.

The question then becomes whether homosexuality, if a sin, is so different from other sins that it could exclude people from the kingdom of heaven. But, if you are a Christian, then you also accept that all sins other than denial of the Holy Spirit are forgivable. In that homosexuality is NOT denial of the Holy Spirit, it must be forgivable, which means that to believe that homosexuality is a sin which could exclude someone from the kingdom of heaven is inconsistent with Christian doctrine.

The more broad problem here is the impact that this "celibacy movement" is going to have on people, and it's why I think the entire idea here is stupid. While it attempts to logically reconcile "being gay" with "being a Christian," (a dichotomy which does not, in reality, exist), it reinforces the notion that (1) homosexuality is unique among sins in terms of the gravity it carries -which has no scriptural basis, (2) that homosexuality is inherently evil -for which there is also no scriptural basis, and (3) that gay people are inferior to straight people -which also has no scriptural basis. So, in effort to reconcile a nonexistent scriptural issue, these people are acting in ways that are going to have seriously negative impacts on the church and also probably continue to prevent people who are gay from seeking salvation.

The ultimate, overarching principle here is that things which prevent people from seeking salvation are serious issues. Where the church, by its acts or omissions, creates hostility and resistance to the Christian faith, we've got a problem -and that problem is just as poignant here as in situations where you have psychopathic southern baptist ministers preaching that "all f@gs go to hell." There is no distinction, ethically, because the result will still alienate gay people from Christendom.

This isn't a surprise at all. Having homosexual urges or even being homosexual is not a problem, the sexual acts are. By refusing to have these immoral sexual relations they are denying sin and coming in line with church doctrine. Nothing wrong with that.

Furthermore, according to church doctrine any sex that is had that is not for the explicit purpose of marital relations or childbearing is sinful. So I don't understand the issue. Anything that can consume a person and remove them from God is wrong in the eyes of the church and sex is just one of the more prevelent ones. Its no different than lying or stealing or blaspheming.
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2014 12:07:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/14/2014 10:23:45 AM, YYW wrote:
The Pertinent News Story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Brief Summary:

There are some gay Christians who, because of their faith, are not having relationships with or sex with other people of the same sex. They do this because they believe that celibacy allows a person to "give [themselves] more feely to God."

The point of "celibacy" here, is to reconcile the concerns that conservative Christian people have which stem from their belief that the only kind of biblically acceptable sex is heterosexual sex within the bounds of marriage, with growing social acceptance of homosexuality.

Some gay people have objected to celibacy in this way as "untenable and a denial of equality." Church leaders have had mixed reactions; some praise the movement, while others believe that homosexuality is irreconcilable with Christianity (these are usually the people who believe that "reparative therapy" can change sexual identity -despite such efforts being discredited by every scientific and medical board in existence around the world).

So, these gay people who are being celebrate in the name of Christianity are seeking "intimacy" instead -whatever that means.

Why This is Problematic:

There are some gay people who are ashamed of who they are, conforming to what other people want, because they cannot see past a medieval interpretation of scripture. I want to draw a distinction between "feeling" closer to God, and actually being closer to God. Silencing a part of who you were, if you were created in God's image, is to say that God made a mistake in creating you in that way -which is preposterous.

But, the issue of whether God made a mistake in creating people who are gay goes the heart of why most conservative Christians refuse to accept that people are "born" gay. They regard homosexuality as a sin or a "mistake" to be corrected, and they cannot accept that God created people who are born in that way, so homosexuality must, therefore, be a choice. This is a manifestly stupid position.

Whether homosexuality is or is not a sin has no bearing on whether it is reconcilable with Christianity or not because, if you are a Christian, then you must accept that all people are born with original sin. That means that we're all always already sinners. We cannot not be sinners. Sin is everywhere and everything that we do, because we are human, and thus fallen, and not perfect in that way.

The question then becomes whether homosexuality, if a sin, is so different from other sins that it could exclude people from the kingdom of heaven. But, if you are a Christian, then you also accept that all sins other than denial of the Holy Spirit are forgivable. In that homosexuality is NOT denial of the Holy Spirit, it must be forgivable, which means that to believe that homosexuality is a sin which could exclude someone from the kingdom of heaven is inconsistent with Christian doctrine.

The more broad problem here is the impact that this "celibacy movement" is going to have on people, and it's why I think the entire idea here is stupid. While it attempts to logically reconcile "being gay" with "being a Christian," (a dichotomy which does not, in reality, exist), it reinforces the notion that (1) homosexuality is unique among sins in terms of the gravity it carries -which has no scriptural basis, (2) that homosexuality is inherently evil -for which there is also no scriptural basis, and (3) that gay people are inferior to straight people -which also has no scriptural basis. So, in effort to reconcile a nonexistent scriptural issue, these people are acting in ways that are going to have seriously negative impacts on the church and also probably continue to prevent people who are gay from seeking salvation.

The ultimate, overarching principle here is that things which prevent people from seeking salvation are serious issues. Where the church, by its acts or omissions, creates hostility and resistance to the Christian faith, we've got a problem -and that problem is just as poignant here as in situations where you have psychopathic southern baptist ministers preaching that "all f@gs go to hell." There is no distinction, ethically, because the result will still alienate gay people from Christendom.

Homosexuality is not a sin defined in the bible.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2014 1:03:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/23/2014 12:07:42 AM, ChristianPunk wrote:

Homosexuality is not a sin defined in the bible.

Even if it were, I don't see how it would require celibacy. In medieval Europe usury was seen as a horrendous sin, yet you don't see churches telling bankers that they need to quit their jobs in order to be forgiven. Historically, the severe asceticism of which celibacy has been a part has been considered a calling, to which certain individuals would dedicate themselves and be treated with some reverence as a way of respecting their piety. Even the most rabidly anti-carnal sect which I can think of, the Cathars, who discouraged marriage because all sex was seen as sinful, made a distinction between a class of priests who strove for perfection (the perfecti) and the laity.

In short, the modern drive towards celibacy is driven by animus, not any sort of genuine doctrinal concern. If it were, the treatment would be applied equally and the churches would all be remodelled into cloisters.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -