Gay & Believing - Is there room for both?

CorsetRibbons

I don't know where to start but I guess it's in the title. I'm gay and have been for as long as I can remember. I can't really remember being any other way. And I believe in God...a God, (but I'm not sure if it's in the biblical sense of the word). To me, God explains the unexplainable and the miracles that happen and I frequently talk to it in my head and pray to it in my heart. It's just with all the constant negative attitude from the church and countless religious devotees toward same sex relationships, I'm finding it increasingly hard to stay focused and make room for God. For a while I wondered if I actually believed in God but on a visit to my very good friend who lives across the other side of the world, I found that we were had so much in common in terms of our beliefs and our morals...only she is straight (and practicing) and I am not.
I'm in a relationship with a woman I love and cherish with all of my heart and somewhere in there I love God too. Is there room for both or am I kidding myself?

Asry

of course there's room for God. I'm gay too. Hello gay believer! Well, partly gay I find it very difficult to find where I come into all this. I read the bible every day, and I try really hard to live life as Jesus said we should.

This way of being, though, the whole LGBT thing...it's not a choice. I've been bisexual for as long as I can ever remember, realising when I was about 10 that other people weren't like me. I didn't make a choice then or later to say, okay, I'm going to be dirty and sinful and deviant and gay.

Rather it's the other way around. I'm going to try really hard to not be gay because the act is wrong in the eyes of God. Stuff like that really f*cked me up, and continues to do so.

All of this can be really harmful.
Are you finding a way around it?

Lady Chuckles

Of course there is!
If you want there to be room for God as well, there will be room for God

It saddens me to hear that all the negativite statements regarding same sex relationships is putting you off practicing your religion, but I can't say I blame you. It truly hurts my feelings when the church and fellow Christians object to homosexuality. Surely, everyone is welcome to church so why go around making church-going uncomfortable for homosexuals who really, really want to practice religion?

It is my firm belief God doesn't care about who you love as long as you love. God is good and loving and He would prefer us to love rather than hate. Love is a beautiful thing.

I hope you can find the strenght to make room for God. Be strong and do it despite the negative attitudes you may encounter. Do it because it is your desire

antiskeptic

CorsetRibbons wrote: »

I don't know where to start but I guess it's in the title. I'm gay and have been for as long as I can remember. I can't really remember being any other way. And I believe in God...a God, (but I'm not sure if it's in the biblical sense of the word). To me, God explains the unexplainable and the miracles that happen and I frequently talk to it in my head and pray to it in my heart. It's just with all the constant negative attitude from the church and countless religious devotees toward same sex relationships, I'm finding it increasingly hard to stay focused and make room for God. For a while I wondered if I actually believed in God but on a visit to my very good friend who lives across the other side of the world, I found that we were had so much in common in terms of our beliefs and our morals...only she is straight (and practicing) and I am not.

I'm in a relationship with a woman I love and cherish with all of my heart and somewhere in there I love God too. Is there room for both or am I kidding myself?

I think the person who has the least problem with you being gay is God. This, not because gay sexuality fits with the ideal God had in mind in creating the world but because he is accepting of a person despite their not conforming to the ideal he had in mind when he created the world. His acceptance of you isn't dependent on your behavior - is a drumbeat gospel message.

Nobodies sexuality conforms to the ideal that God had when he created the world because nobody uses their sexuality in the way God intended it to be used when he created the world. Yes, the gay aspect of a relationship steps outside the order God had in mind when creating the world. But loving and cherishing with all of your heart stands within it. There are heterosexuals aplenty who can't say what you say about that.

The ultimate relevance of sexuality in God's economy is that it will have no relevance. The children of God who go to be with God for all eternity will exist in an environment where there is no male or female, no gays or straights. It will be an environment where intimacy between me and others and me and God is of such intensity and liberty and ease that it will transcend the ability of sexuality to provide and enable intimacy.

God's end purpose is to restore a humanity that is broken and twisted in so many ways it makes my head spin when I think about it. Gay or straight is but a drop in the ocean of things that need sorting out in a person. I don't think God focus' on gay/straight any more than he does anything else. Nor do I think his main concern is to straighten you out in this particular area.

His main concern is that you come into a relationship with him and that you allow him to guide and instruct and change you in the manner and in the time he see's fit and suitable for you. That might involve your sexuality. It might not. Perhaps you are in that relationship with him already. Perhaps not. That you are would be the thing I'd focus on first. To ask him if you could establish that relationship on firm footing - safe in the knowledge that complex issues like his view of your sexuality is something he will bring up in his own time.

God is a place to find rest in. The first thing to do is to find him.

ISAW

Lady Chuckles wrote: »

Of course there is!
If you want there to be room for God as well, there will be room for God

It saddens me to hear that all the negativite statements regarding same sex relationships is putting you off practicing your religion, but I can't say I blame you. It truly hurts my feelings when the church and fellow Christians object to homosexuality.

Yes i agree. Because the church itself does not object to homosexuality. It only objects to homosexuality being institutionalized with Gay marriage and other acts like that. Most people quoting the Bible as being anti Gay don't understand the Bible and they are usually fundamentalist Protestants. The Roman Or Orthodox or Anglican denominations do not think being gay is evil and that is about 90 per cent or so of Christianity.

slavedave

I would not routinely post in this forum but Antiskeptic's reply above was so well penned, gracious and, in my opinion, full of truth that I made an exception this time.
Thank you. I hope it informed the OP's thinking.

SonOfAdam

@ antiskeptic - I really appreciated your post - it's not often the compassion of the gospel is put in such words and is a refreshing change from the, sometimes found, rhetoric in these parts. No doubt others will disagree but you've summed up the 'drumbeat' of the gospel pretty well.

antiskeptic

SonOfAdam wrote: »

@ antiskeptic - I really appreciated your post - it's not often the compassion of the gospel is put in such words and is a refreshing change from the, sometimes found, rhetoric in these parts. No doubt others will disagree but you've summed up the 'drumbeat' of the gospel pretty well.

Thanks SoA

I think it unavoidable that the focus on the mechanics of the theology ensures that the the heart sitting above it all, get's lost.

It's not that the mechanics are necessarily in error - but without the heart it's impossible for the gospel to sound anything other than, well coldly mechanical. And unattractive. And condemning.

Fanny Cradock

CorsetRibbons, I wont add anything to this beyond a link to the words of a gay Christian, Wesley Hill, who has struggled with the very same question - http://www.ransomfellowship.org/articledetail.asp?AID=506&B=Wesley%20Hill&TID=7

The book he wrote is called Washed and Waiting.

ShooterSF

As a non-believer, if believing helps you, there are thousands of gods out there OP as well as Yahweh. Perhaps you could do some reading on other ones and see which fits your ideas best? I'm sure many have no concerns with gay lifestyles. If you are just looking for an answer to questions no one can answer and someone you can attribute miracles to I'm sure there are better options out there imo.

wolfsbane

Hi, CorsetRibbons

You said:

I'm in a relationship with a woman I love and cherish with all of my heart and somewhere in there I love God too. Is there room for both or am I kidding myself?

You are kidding yourself. Like the heterosexual Christian who is in love with someone else's wife and they run off together. I've heard them trying to excuse it as beyond their control - or indeed that not doing so would have been unnatural - and yet say God understands and accepts them. He doesn't.

Heterosexual love is the only type of sexual love God endorses, and that only in the confines of marriage. The New Testament is especially clear about it.

So you and all others who are outside that boundary of sexual love have a choice: do your will, or submit it to God's will. There will be former homosexuals, adulterers, fornicators, thieves, etc. in heaven - but none who continue in their sinful practice. We all have to repent of our sins and trust in Christ if we are to be saved.

Your dilemma is that you feel you are naturally homosexual, and that to go against that would be perverse. I appreciate your feeling. But others have the same feeling about things you and I would agree are sinful - some paedophiles say they never had sexual attraction to anyone but children. Are they born with that? Or did it come as a result of their childhood experiences, their psychological responses to all that they experienced? It doesn't matter. We are all born with sinful natures and are called to reject them by turning to Christ. We all experience evil influences or have evil thoughts in response to things that conflict with our will. We are called to bring those to the cross of Christ and leave them there.

There is nothing too hard for God, and nothing His grace cannot enable you to overcome.

**********************************************************************
1 Corinthians 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

mcmoustache

I've butted into a similar thread here before and I'll offer the same, if unhelpful, information.

From a Christian perspective, there is nothing wrong with being gay in God's eyes. What isn't OK is actually acting on your gay impulses. A man can't sleep with another man. The bible is quite clear on that.

If you want to be a Christian, you need to either become celibate, behave heterosexually or get fixed via conversion therapy. I think there are some Christian churches up north which provide this service.

What I'm trying to say is that God doesn't hate the sinner, just the sin. He doesn't mind you being gay, he just doesn't want you behaving gay.

EDIT: I just re-read your post and spotted that you are a woman. I'm pretty sure that the bible has nothing to say on female homosexuality and therefore, God should be OK with it.

In your case, I'd say that there should be no problem in God's eyes should you act on your homosexuality.

RE-EDIT: Wolfsbane below has corrected my assertion that lesbianism is OK. I wasn't aware that women were prohibited from practicing homosexuality. Disregard the bit in orange as it is false.

wolfsbane

mcmoustache wrote: »

I've butted into a similar thread here before and I'll offer the same, if unhelpful, information.

From a Christian perspective, there is nothing wrong with being gay in God's eyes. What isn't OK is actually acting on your gay impulses. A man can't sleep with another man. The bible is quite clear on that.

If you want to be a Christian, you need to either become celibate, behave heterosexually or get fixed via conversion therapy. I think there are some Christian churches up north which provide this service.

What I'm trying to say is that God doesn't hate the sinner, just the sin. He doesn't mind you being gay, he just doesn't want you behaving gay.

EDIT: I just re-read your post and spotted that you are a woman. I'm pretty sure that the bible has nothing to say on female homosexuality and therefore, God should be OK with it.

In your case, I'd say that there should be no problem in God's eyes should you act on your homosexuality.

It is one thing to experience evil thoughts. Another thing to harbour them, to wish for their fulfilment. From time to time I see sexually attractive women wearing too little. I have to avert my eyes and put it out of my head, not ogle them or store up the image for later perusal. The sexual temptation offered is not welcome nor welcomed.

If one has homosexual attractions, they are to be likewise excised. But one can go further here, since such feelings are not natural. One can ask God to remove them altogether and replace them with proper heterosexual attraction.

And the Bible does indeed condemn lesbianism:
Romans 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

****************************************************************
1 Corinthians 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

recedite

mcmoustache wrote: »

From a Christian perspective, there is nothing wrong with being gay in God's eyes. What isn't OK is actually acting on your gay impulses. A man can't sleep with another man. The bible is quite clear on that.

What I'm trying to say is that God doesn't hate the sinner, just the sin. He doesn't mind you being gay, he just doesn't want you behaving gay.

EDIT: I just re-read your post and spotted that you are a woman. I'm pretty sure that the bible has nothing to say on female homosexuality and therefore, God should be OK with it.

In your case, I'd say that there should be no problem in God's eyes should you act on your homosexuality.

So lesbian sex is OK then? That's good to know. I suppose it compensates in some small way for the lack of opportunities for women, in other areas of church thinking.

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

I think the person who has the least problem with you being gay is God. This, not because gay sexuality fits with the ideal God had in mind in creating the world but because he is accepting of a person despite their not conforming to the ideal he had in mind when he created the world. His acceptance of you isn't dependent on your behavior - is a drumbeat gospel message.

How is God accepting of homosexuals when he punishes those who indulge in homosexual behaviour?

It seems clear that God's acceptance of you is entirely dependent on your behaviour.

Onesimus

MagicMarker wrote: »

How is God accepting of homosexuals when he punishes those who indulge in homosexual behaviour?

It seems clear that God's acceptance of you is entirely dependent on your behaviour.

People punish themselves by indulging in such behaviour. No point in blaming God for your hangover mate.

Putting your penis up the rectum of another mans bum is against the natural law and ye all know it.

To be gay is a pshychological disability and not a physical one. However it isnt a sin per se but only the actual act of homosexuality is a mortal sin.

All those who are gay are called to unite themselves to the cross of Christ and live a life of chastity.

MagicMarker

Onesimus wrote: »

People punish themselves by indulging in such behaviour. No point in blaming God for your hangover mate.

Putting your penis up the rectum of another mans bum is against the natural law and ye all know it.

To be gay is a pshychological disability and not a physical one. However it isnt a sin per se but only the actual act of homosexuality is a mortal sin.

All those who are gay are called to unite themselves to the cross of Christ and live a life of chastity.

I'm not in here often so I can't really tell if you're taking the piss or not tbh.

recedite

Was this thread designed specifically to illustrate Poe's law, or did it just evolve that way?

FurryFace

It's only the Judaic myth that causes a problem.
Your god is personal not belonging to a church or ridiculous belief system.
I'm not Catholic and straight (well roundy actually)but I believe in a God and my god loves Gay people and my god is better than their rotten Judaic god.
Free yourself from their awful god and still believe.

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

How is God accepting of homosexuals when he punishes those who indulge in homosexual behaviour?

It would be more constructive to examine God's acceptance of sinners rather than singling out one particular class of sin.

God is accepting of sinners in the sense that he doesn't let sin stand as an impenetrable barrier to coming into relationship with him. This doesn't mean he condones sin or delights in it - he doesn't. But he see's past the sin to the person held captive by it and after establishing relationship with a person, he works with them at disentangling them from sin.

As for punishment? You presumably mean punishment "in Hell"?

The offer presented to sinful man is available for a season. A season when man can cast his vote for God or against. It's a time when God holds out the opportunity for man to have the consequences of his sin born by God himself. If that offer is rejected, then a man shall bear the consequences himself. To persist in holding out an offer forever, or to ask man to cast his vote again would be as disrespectful to man as Lisbon II was to us.

Hell is the product of a mans own choice. Not even God can force a man to accept Him.

It seems clear that God's acceptance of you is entirely dependent on your behaviour.

Thus not.

Spacedog

The church welcomes gays and can even arrange special retreats to help cure you with the power of faith and prayer.

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

It would be more constructive to examine God's acceptance of sinners rather than singling out one particular class of sin.

Well this particular class of sin happens to be what the thread is about so....

antiskeptic wrote: »

God is accepting of sinners in the sense that he doesn't let sin stand as an impenetrable barrier to coming into relationship with him. This doesn't mean he condones sin or delights in it - he doesn't. But he see's past the sin to the person held captive by it and after establishing relationship with a person, he works with them at disentangling them from sin.

As for punishment? You presumably mean punishment "in Hell"?

The offer presented to sinful man is available for a season. A season when man can cast his vote for God or against. It's a time when God holds out the opportunity for man to have the consequences of his sin born by God himself. If that offer is rejected, then a man shall bear the consequences himself. To persist in holding out an offer forever, or to ask man to cast his vote again would be as disrespectful to man as Lisbon II was to us.

Hell is the product of a mans own choice. Not even God can force a man to accept Him.

OP, I hope you pay close attention to this post, in antiskeptic's first post he presents an appearance of understanding, telling you God loves you no matter what. The caveat is, however, that you cannot continue as you are or else you will be punished.

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well this particular class of sin happens to be what the thread is about so....

You can insert whatever sin you like into the equation. I thought it worthwhile to ensure the proper context

OP, I hope you pay close attention to this post, in antiskeptic's first post he presents an appearance of understanding, telling you God loves you no matter what. The caveat is, however, that you cannot continue as you are or else you will be punished.

If the OP pays more a tad more attention than you apparently did, she would read that God accepts a person into relationship with him despite their brokenness and despite their sin. "Whilst we were still sinners, Christ died for us". We don't have to get our act together first in order to come into relationship with God.

And that once having accepted a person into relationship with him (I encouraged the OP to ensure that to start with), a persons brokenness and sin won't cause that relationship to be ruptured. That God is understanding of the where's and whyfores and might never get around to tackling any one particular form of brokeness or sinfulness. There is so much for him to choose from in that regard afterall

There is no punishment or condemnation for one who becomes a child of God - not temporally, not eternally. Which is the context in which my comments were made. And again the reason why I urged the OP to establish that relationship.

-

But if you figure you can find me saying that God loves you, no matter what (and even if you aren't a child of God) then get hunting..

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

You can insert whatever sin you like into the equation. I thought it worthwhile to ensure the proper context




If the OP pays more a tad more attention than you apparently did, she would read that God accepts a person into relationship with him despite their brokenness and despite their sin. "Whilst we were still sinners, Christ died for us". We don't have to get our act together first in order to come into relationship with God.

And that once having accepted a person into relationship with him (I encouraged the OP to ensure that to start with), a persons brokenness and sin won't cause that relationship to be ruptured. That God is understanding of the where's and whyfores and might never get around to tackling any one particular form of brokeness or sinfulness. There is so much for him to choose from in that regard afterall

There is no punishment or condemnation for one who becomes a child of God - not temporally, not eternally.

-

But if you figure you can find me saying that God loves you no matter what then get hunting..

So just to clarify, you're saying that if a person continues acting on their homosexual impulses up until the day they die, they won't be punished in the after life?

Lady Chuckles

ISAW wrote: »

Yes i agree. Because the church itself does not object to homosexuality. It only objects to homosexuality being institutionalized with Gay marriage and other acts like that. Most people quoting the Bible as being anti Gay don't understand the Bible and they are usually fundamentalist Protestants. The Roman Or Orthodox or Anglican denominations do not think being gay is evil and that is about 90 per cent or so of Christianity.

Just for the record... I'm a protestant and where I live it is possible for gay couples to get married in church, provided that the priest is OK with performing the ceremony. We do not think gay is evil. I feel, to be fair, you should've added protestants on your list of who doesn't think being gay is evil.

Also, fundamentalists from any religion are usually not OK with anything.

ISAW

Lady Chuckles wrote: »

Just for the record... I'm a protestant and where I live it is possible for gay couples to get married in church, provided that the priest is OK with performing the ceremony. We do not think gay is evil. I feel, to be fair, you should've added protestants on your list of who doesn't think being gay is evil.

I accept non fundamentalist protestants may go to the other extreme of accepting gay marriage. Most Christians don't want gay marraige but it is usually the visiously anti Gay "God hates fags" fundie Christians quoting Bibles who are trotted out as representing Christianity just as fundie Muslims are for Islam.

Also, fundamentalists from any religion are usually not OK with anything.

The point is that it isn't all about the exact word of the Bible.
By the way before people start down the line of "different Bibles" of all the texts in all languages worldwide the difference from one Bible to another ( not incuding unaccepted Bibles such as the JW's one) is at most about 1.5%

Lady Chuckles

I didn't mean to start debate, I just didn't want the OP to think all protestants are against gays

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

So just to clarify, you're saying that if a person continues acting on their homosexual impulses up until the day they die, they won't be punished in the after life?

Biblically speaking, there are but two categories of people in this world. They are variously described in the bible as: the lost/the found, children of the devil / children of God, those who are dead in sin / those who are alive to God.

If a person is in the former category, if they haven't the kind of relationship with God that places them in the second category, then they will 'go to Hell'. Gay, straight, practicing or otherwise.

If a person is in the latter category, if they have the kind of relationship with God that renders them children of God then they will 'go to Heaven'. Gay, straight, practicing or otherwise.

Note I:

If a person is in the latter category, if they have the kind of relationship with God that renders them children of God, then God's activity in their life can be expected (whether bit-by-bit or suddenly and dramtically or a combination of both) to divert them away from their life of sin and steer them more and more towards a path of righteous living. Their eternal destination isn't dependent on how well the person responds to God's steering however. To heaven they shall surely go.

Note II:

The way a person moves from the former relationship with God (lost) to the latter relationship with God (found) isn't dependent on their behavior. They can move from one to the other whether gay, straight, practicing or otherwise.



Does that clarify? Do you now realize that when you ask a question about a homosexual, you need to specify whether they are a lost homosexual or a found homosexual?

recedite

antiskeptic wrote: »

The offer presented to sinful man is available for a season. A season when man can cast his vote for God or against. It's a time when God holds out the opportunity for man to have the consequences of his sin born by God himself. If that offer is rejected, then a man shall bear the consequences himself. To persist in holding out an offer forever, or to ask man to cast his vote again would be as disrespectful to man as Lisbon II was to us.

Hell is the product of a mans own choice. Not even God can force a man to accept Him.

Are we talking about 3 months here, as in "the offer remains open for the summer season" or "the autumn season"? Seriously, how long is a season?

Then after 3 months of wild Gay Christian sex, its time to make your mind up?
Give it up or go to hell.

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

Biblically speaking, there are but two categories of people in this world. They are variously described in the bible as: the lost/the found, children of the devil / children of God, those who are dead in sin / those who are alive to God.

If a person is in the former category, if they haven't the kind of relationship with God that places them in the second category, then they will 'go to Hell'. Gay, straight, practicing or otherwise.

If a person is in the latter category, if they have the kind of relationship with God that renders them children of God then they will 'go to Heaven'. Gay, straight, practicing or otherwise.

Note I:

If a person is in the latter category, if they have the kind of relationship with God that renders them children of God, then God's activity in their life can be expected (whether bit-by-bit or suddenly and dramtically or a combination of both) to divert them away from their life of sin and steer them more and more towards a path of righteous living. Their eternal destination isn't dependent on how well the person responds to God's steering however. To heaven they shall surely go.

Note II:

The way a person moves from the former relationship with God (lost) to the latter relationship with God (found) isn't dependent on their behavior. They can move from one to the other whether gay, straight, practicing or otherwise.



Does that clarify? Do you now realize that when you ask a question about a homosexual, you need to specify whether they are a lost homosexual or a found homosexual?

Surely an active homosexual by definition cannot be considered a ‘’found’’ child of God? How can a person who wilfully disobeys God be considered ‘’found’’? Where is the distinction made between the lost and found?

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

Surely an active homosexual by definition cannot be considered a ‘’found’’ child of God?

I don't see why not since found-ness, as I have been saying, isn't established or maintained by your behaving a certain way.

How can a person who wilfully disobeys God be considered ‘’found’’?

For the reason given above.

I sincerely doubt that there's a Christian here who would claim other than that there isn't a day that goes by during which they don't wilfully disobey God.

Disobeying God is sin, Christians are sinners. They don't claim otherwise.

Where is the distinction made between the lost and found?

It's not based on behavior at at any rate. Get that much clear in your head.

It would appear consistent with both my own experience, the experience of others around me and the stories of many people who encountered Jesus in the gospels .. as well as the testimony of those in Old Testament and New that:

.. coming into relationship with God occurs when* a person reaches a point in their life when the only possible person who could fill the unbearable need the person finds themselves as having .. is God.

The need that drives a person to the edge might vary from person to person - it could be sickness (think the woman with the bleeding issue), it could be a sense of being outcast and ostracized (think of the tax collector), it could be approaching death (think the thief on the cross), it could be anguish at loss (think the Centurian whose child lay dying), it could be all sorts of things.

The person might not even believe that God exists at the time. But when they reach the very** bottom of their own personal barrel and there is no place/escape/salve/drug/distraction/hope/person/ left to turn to then they might turn to God.

And God will turn up in response.

Or they might continue the resistance and pop a fuse and go mad. Or they might continue the resistance and attempt to escape surrender by killing themselves***. But escape from the torment they must - to God or to otherwise


* when ..it need not be that a person reaches this point. We are permitted to evade and deny and avoid being brought to this place. Some people will get through their lives without ever hitting a personal crisis. Others will hit personal crises but work through them without God.

** very ..means the absolute rock bottom. And it won't be arrived at by the same means in every case. The Roman Centurian's daughter lying dying brought HIM to HIS own personal bottom of the barrel moment. It might not bring another person to that place.

*** which isn't to say that everyone who goes mad or everyone who kills themselves is saying no finally to God in their doing so

antiskeptic

recedite wrote: »

Are we talking about 3 months here, as in "the offer remains open for the summer season" or "the autumn season"? Seriously, how long is a season?

However long God decides is sufficient to extract a final answer from a man I'm inclined to suppose.

Timescales would vary from person to person based on their own response I imagine. It might be too that with some personality types and circumstances influence things - that God takes a slower approach in his attempt to save this person and with that one, a fast approach.

Since circumstance and a persons own sin are both used a levers by God in his attempt to prise the person loose from their attachment to independence, there isn't likely to be a set formula used.

Then after 3 months of wild Gay Christian sex, its time to make your mind up? Give it up or go to hell.

The offer is presented to fallen people for a season. Once a person accepts the offer and becomes a Christian (Christian as defined by God, not man) they are no longer fallen and so 'for a season' no longer applies to them.

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

I don't see why not since found-ness, as I have been saying, isn't established or maintained by your behaving a certain way.




For the reason given above.

I sincerely doubt that there's a Christian here who would claim other than that there isn't a day that goes by during which they don't wilfully disobey God.

Disobeying God is sin, Christians are sinners. They don't claim otherwise.



It's not based on behavior at at any rate. Get that much clear in your head.

It would appear consistent with both my own experience, the experience of others around me and the stories of many people who encountered Jesus in the gospels .. as well as the testimony of those in Old Testament and New that:

.. coming into relationship with God occurs when* a person reaches a point in their life when the only possible person who could fill the unbearable need the person finds themselves as having .. is God.

The need that drives a person to the edge might vary from person to person - it could be sickness (think the woman with the bleeding issue), it could be a sense of being outcast and ostracized (think of the tax collector), it could be approaching death (think the thief on the cross), it could be anguish at loss (think the Centurian whose child lay dying), it could be all sorts of things.

The person might not even believe that God exists at the time. But when they reach the very** bottom of their own personal barrel and there is no place/escape/salve/drug/distraction/hope/person/ left to turn to then they might turn to God.

And God will turn up in response.

Or they might continue the resistance and pop a fuse and go mad. Or they might continue the resistance and attempt to escape surrender by killing themselves***. But escape from the torment they must - to God or to otherwise


* when ..it need not be that a person reaches this point. We are permitted to evade and deny and avoid being brought to this place. Some people will get through their lives without ever hitting a personal crisis. Others will hit personal crises but work through them without God.

** very ..means the absolute rock bottom. And it won't be arrived at by the same means in every case. The Roman Centurian's daughter lying dying brought HIM to HIS own personal bottom of the barrel moment. It might not bring another person to that place.

*** which isn't to say that everyone who goes mad or everyone who kills themselves is saying no finally to God in their doing so

Seriously?

Okay then, here are two scenarios.

Person A: As far as behaviour goes, this person is almost the perfect Christian. Tries to live according to Christ’s teachings where possible and genuinely repents when not. However this person has never had an ‘’unbearable need’’ that needs to be filled, has never hit rock bottom in any sense in the way you describe.

Person B: Abjectly amoral in every sense, does not live according to any biblical teachings, has broken every commandment etc, and is also a homosexual. However this person does hit rock bottom where there is an ‘’unbearable need’’ that only God can fill. As a result, God’s influence attempts to steer them onto a ‘’righteous path’’. However, this person doesn’t respond to God’s influence. Person B continues living as they always had, amoral, breaking all the commandments, continues indulging in homosexual behaviour, never to repent.

According to you, Person A is lost and will go to hell, and Person B is found and will go to heaven?

old hippy

Spacedog wrote: »

The church welcomes gays and can even arrange special retreats to help cure you with the power of faith and prayer.

You can't "cure" people of their sexuality.

Why anyone would actively seek to associate with people who have oppressed and victimised them over centuries is beyond me.

Of course there's room for "God" or any other deities in a persons life. Not sure if there's room for organised religion.

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

Person A: As far as behaviour goes, this person is almost the perfect Christian. Tries to live according to Christ’s teachings where possible and genuinely repents when not.
However this person has never had an ‘’unbearable need’’ that needs to be filled, has never hit rock bottom in any sense in the way you describe.

Okay. One thing we can say for sure is that whilst their sin produces a genuine repentance, that genuine repentance isn't of a kind that makes them mourn over the fact that they repeatedly find themselves sinning.

Can we call a repentance that doesn't desire the only actual solution to the problem of a persons sinning "genuine"? I don't think so.

Person B: Abjectly amoral in every sense, does not live according to any biblical teachings, has broken every commandment etc, and is also a homosexual. However this person does hit rock bottom where there is an ‘’unbearable need’’ that only God can fill.

Shall we assume you mean they've reached the bottom of the barrel described by me earlier? Okay. They've reached that point and cry out / turn to God. God's criterion for saving them is now met (them crying out), God changes their status from 'lost' to (irrevocably) "found". They are now a Christian (per God's definition of the word), they are now a child of God.

God now "takes up residence" and begins a process called sanctification, where the person is influenced to walk more and more in step with God. This doesn't mean the person won't sin anymore, they will.

As a result, God’s influence attempts to steer them onto a ‘’righteous path’’. However, this person doesn’t respond to God’s influence. Person B continues living as they always had, amoral, breaking all the commandments, continues indulging in homosexual behaviour, never to repent.

The person will find a change coming about in themselves. It doesn't necessarily mean a homosexual will stop having homosexual sex - it might be that gossiping or mean-ness are things that God chooses to work on in them. Or it might be that he diverts them from casual sex and perhaps later from homosex and later from homosexuality altogether. Or he may not get to dealing with homosexuality at all before the person pops their clogs.

According to you, Person A is lost and will go to hell, and Person B is found and will go to heaven?

The trouble with Person A's performance is that you haven't actually marked it on a scale to show us how good it is in absolute terms. Using terms like "where possible" allows for any kind of non-Christian behaviour.

If measuring against God's standards (and taking the fullest measure of what "Christ's teachings" involves) Person A would score abominably. The "where possible" card would be played all day every day.

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

Okay. One thing we can say for sure is that whilst their sin produces a genuine repentance, that genuine repentance isn't of a kind that makes them mourn over the fact that they repeatedly find themselves sinning.

Can we call a repentance that doesn't desire the only actual solution to the problem of a persons sinning "genuine"? I don't think so.





Shall we assume you mean they've reached the bottom of the barrel described by me earlier? Okay. They've reached that point and cry out / turn to God. God's criterion for saving them is now met (them crying out), God changes their status from 'lost' to (irrevocably) "found". They are now a Christian (per God's definition of the word), they are now a child of God.

God now "takes up residence" and begins a process called sanctification, where the person is influenced to walk more and more in step with God. This doesn't mean the person won't sin anymore, they will.




The person will find a change coming about in themselves. It doesn't necessarily mean a homosexual will stop having homosexual sex - it might be that gossiping or mean-ness are things that God chooses to work on in them. Or it might be that he diverts them from casual sex and perhaps later from homosex and later from homosexuality altogether. Or he may not get to dealing with homosexuality at all before the person pops their clogs.




The trouble with Person A's performance is that you haven't actually marked it on a scale to show us how good it is in absolute terms. Using terms like "where possible" allows for any kind of non-Christian behaviour.

If measuring against God's standards (and taking the fullest measure of what "Christ's teachings" involves) Person A would score abominably. The "where possible" card would be played all day every day.

Now you’re contradicting yourself. Originally you said the distinction between the lost and found is ‘’not based on behaviour at any rate’’, but now you’re saying that by God’s standards Person A ‘’would score abominably’’. You say yourself that all Christians sin on a daily basis, why would Person A score ‘abominably’ and not Person B? Why is God taking Person A’s ‘’non-Christian’’ behaviour into account and not Person B’s?

Why does God punish someone who tries as hard as they can to be a good Christian person in all aspects of their life, but reward another who does the exact opposite?

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

Now you’re contradicting yourself.

I can assure you I'm not

Originally you said the distinction between the lost and found is ‘’not based on behaviour at any rate’’,

My apologies. I wasn't clear enough.

The distinction between a lost person and a found person is one of status. The found person has a relationship with God (for instance) and the lost persons doesn't. The found person has God residing within them (creating a 'God awareness') and the lost person doesn't.

What isn't based on behavior is a person's coming to be transferred from the lost position to the found position.

Clearly, a found person can steal a Mars just as a lost person can.

but now you’re saying that by God’s standards Person A ‘’would score abominably’’. You say yourself that all Christians sin on a daily basis, why would Person A score ‘abominably’ and not Person B? Why is God taking Person A’s ‘’non-Christian’’ behaviour into account and not Person B’s?

He is taking both their behaviors into account - but in different ways because of their different status' before him.

The lost person's transgressions only add to the charge sheet that will face them if they remain lost and come to stand before God at Judgement.

The found person's transgressions are dealt with by God in the same way a good father will deal with a child's transgressions. The good father might well discipline the child because of his transgressions - in order to correct the child and encourage him to navigate the right path.

Even though God's action in both cases might be the same (the bible speaks of God's disciplining of his children including the extremes of their being struck sick .. or dead), the motivation is different.

Why does God punish someone who tries as hard as they can to be a good Christian person in all aspects of their life, but reward another who does the exact opposite?

He rewards the one ( with salvation) because they are obedient to God. He has commanded that they stop going their own way, under own steam, according to own ideas (giving a nod in his direction "where possible") and they have stopped.

The other person, the person who "tries their best" are disobeying God in a fundamental way. They are ignoring that all their 'good' acts are sourced in a person who is steeped in sin up to their neck - so much so that they can't even see that their motivations are very often rotten.

To argue the point (assuming I am correctly representing the gospel) is to argue with God that he is wrong in his assessment and that somehow you are in a position to judge the goodness of your actions. You couldn't grant that power to yourself - you have no way of accurately judging your motivations.

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

I can assure you I'm not




My apologies. I wasn't clear enough.

The distinction between a lost person and a found person is one of status. The found person has a relationship with God (for instance) and the lost persons doesn't. The found person has God residing within them (creating a 'God awareness') and the lost person doesn't.

What isn't based on behavior is a person's coming to be transferred from the lost position to the found position.

Clearly, a found person can steal a Mars just as a lost person can.




He is taking both their behaviors into account - but in different ways because of their different status' before him.

The lost person's transgressions only add to the charge sheet that will face them if they remain lost and come to stand before God at Judgement.

The found person's transgressions are dealt with by God in the same way a good father will deal with a child's transgressions. The good father might well discipline the child because of his transgressions - in order to correct the child and encourage him to navigate the right path.

Even though God's action in both cases might be the same (the bible speaks of God's disciplining of his children including the extremes of their being struck sick .. or dead), the motivation is different.





He rewards the one ( with salvation) because they are obedient to God. He has commanded that they stop going their own way, under own steam, according to own ideas (giving a nod in his direction "where possible") and they have stopped.

The other person, the person who "tries their best" are disobeying God in a fundamental way. They are ignoring that all their 'good' acts are sourced in a person who is steeped in sin up to their neck - so much so that they can't even see that their motivations are very often rotten.

To argue the point (assuming I am correctly representing the gospel) is to argue with God that he is wrong in his assessment and that somehow you are in a position to judge the goodness of your actions. You couldn't grant that power to yourself - you have no way of accurately judging your motivations.

But we’re all steeped in sin, you said yourself we are all sinners. Why is Person A’s sins being punished and Person B’s isn’t? Person A has good acts, Person B has none at all, person B in fact has done abhorrent acts, they’ve broken the commandments, including murder. But Person B will be rewarded for his misdeeds because of his status?

Why does God give us rules to live by if they are ultimately meaningless?

Where in the Gospel does it tell us that we are only ‘’found’’ in the way that you describe? Where does it say that you can disobey God’s will throughout your life until your death and still be rewarded because of your status?

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

But we’re all steeped in sin, you said yourself we are all sinners. Why is Person A’s sins being punished and Person B’s isn’t? Person A has good acts, Person B has none at all, person B in fact has done abhorrent acts, they’ve broken the commandments, including murder.

Even one sin on your account earns you Hell. That means person A and person B are both on their way to Hell unless that can be averted by salvation. If B wasn't saved, Hell would be arguably worse for him and so all is fair in that regard: B gets is worse than A because B behaved worse than A.

But Person B will be rewarded for his misdeeds because of his status?

Person B has no misdeeds on his account. The penalty for them is borne by Christ. Salvation isn't a reward (a reward is something you earn), it's a gift. You don't have to earn it.

Why does God give us rules to live by if they are ultimately meaningless?

The rules are anything but meaningless.

For lost people, breaking rules brings with it consequences from which there is no effective escape: guilt and shame follow rule breaking. A lost person can suppress guilt and shame - they can bury it out of sight if they like. God permits that.

But the potential exists for God to cause all this guilt and shame to rise up before your eyes in a devastating way that will cause to you to fall to your knees in despair over how rotten you actually are. Then you will cry out to him and he will save you.

He uses your law breaking as a means to propel you into salvation.

Alternatively, if you refuse to the bitter end, all your lawbreaking will be brought before you at Judgment and will be used to justify your being cast forever from God's presence.

He uses your law breaking as a means to propel you into Hell.


That's a twofold function of the law. Hardly meaningless

Where in the Gospel does it tell us that we are only ‘’found’’ in the way that you describe? Where does it say that you can disobey God’s will throughout your life until your death and still be rewarded because of your status?

You can't really quote mine your way to large doctrines like that - it's a bigger discussion. Needless to say that if "going to heaven" relied on a person not disobeying God post-salvation then heaven would be empty

But the outline I've given is pretty much (non-Roman Catholic) orthodox Christian understanding

soterpisc

Gay & Believing - Is there room for both?

Answer no.

If you mean Gay as defined by modern society with the culture that has built up around it then you can't be Gay and be a Christian at the same time.

Any before any Gay groups go jumping down my neck.. You also can't be Hetersexual and play the field and then want to be a believer at the same time.

If you are a person who has same sex attraction, but have chosen to follow your faith there is nothing wrong. But you can't choose a Gay life and at the same time be a Christian.

Our sexuality has a finality,,, And as much as society has moved on, to have same sex attraction is not the normal function of sexuality. Same as not being able to see properly is not the normal functionality of ones eye.

There is no sin in having same sex attractions, but to say this is normal and should be acted on is where Religion and Society diverge.

So if you are asking can you be Gay as understood by a liberal society and at the same time be a Christian Believer, then then answer is sadly no.

Same as I can't have consensual heterosexual with a girl after a night out.

Society will judge my religious beliefs as ancient, offensive, but going on the teachings the Christ left these are the beliefs we have to follow.

old hippy

I'm sorry for gay people who genuinely believe in God and are excluded by ignorance, fundamentalism and prejudice. I believe in Jesus (not in an organised religious way) I'm of the opinion he just wanted people to love one another.

I do what I like with who I like and try not to hurt others, luckily, society and religion's judgements have no bearing on my day to day existence.

Peace :cool:

soterpisc

old hippy wrote: »

I'm sorry for gay people who genuinely believe in God and are excluded by ignorance, fundamentalism and prejudice. I believe in Jesus (not in an organised religious way) I'm of the opinion he just wanted people to love one another.

I do what I like with who I like and try not to hurt others, luckily, society and religion's judgements have no bearing on my day to day existence.

Peace :cool:

We don't exclude them by "ignorance, fundamentalism and prejudice." They exclude themselves.

And todays gay and liberal culture is equally ignorant, fundamentalist and prejudiced.

old hippy

soterpisc wrote: »

We don't exclude them by "ignorance, fundamentalism and prejudice." They exclude themselves.

And todays gay and liberal culture is equally ignorant, fundamentalist and prejudiced.

keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better.

What would Jesus say?

soterpisc

old hippy wrote: »

What would Jesus say?

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Matthew 5:27-28 [/FONT]Matthew 19:4-5

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

Even one sin on your account earns you Hell. That means person A and person B are both on their way to Hell unless that can be averted by salvation. If B wasn't saved, Hell would be arguably worse for him and so all is fair in that regard: B gets is worse than A because B behaved worse than A.

Person B has no misdeeds on his account. The penalty for them is borne by Christ. Salvation isn't a reward (a reward is something you earn), it's a gift. You don't have to earn it.

The rules are anything but meaningless.

For lost people, breaking rules brings with it consequences from which there is no effective escape: guilt and shame follow rule breaking. A lost person can suppress guilt and shame - they can bury it out of sight if they like. God permits that.

But the potential exists for God to cause all this guilt and shame to rise up before your eyes in a devastating way that will cause to you to fall to your knees in despair over how rotten you actually are. Then you will cry out to him and he will save you.

He uses your law breaking as a means to propel you into salvation.

Alternatively, if you refuse to the bitter end, all your lawbreaking will be brought before you at Judgment and will be used to justify your being cast forever from God's presence.

He uses your law breaking as a means to propel you into Hell.

That's a twofold function of the law. Hardly meaningless

You can't really quote mine your way to large doctrines like that - it's a bigger discussion. Needless to say that if "going to heaven" relied on a person not disobeying God post-salvation then heaven would be empty

But the outline I've given is pretty much (non-Roman Catholic) orthodox Christian understanding

Okay, so let me just make sure I get this straight...

Pre-salvation: Your are lost, no matter how good or bad you are you're going to hell.
Eureka Salvation Moment: You reach rock bottom and accept God as you saviour, you realise the only person who could fill the unbearable need you have is God.
Post Salvation: You are found, no matter how good or bad you are you're going to heaven.

Is that about right?

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

Okay, so let me just make sure I get this straight...

Okay

Pre-salvation: Your are lost, no matter how good or bad you are you're going to hell.

Correct. All are just various shades of bad.

Eureka Salvation Moment: You reach rock bottom and accept God as you saviour, you realise the only person who could fill the unbearable need you have is God.

Incorrect.

You reach rock bottom, have nowhere left to turn and if not opting for the remaining options (go mad, commit suicide, etc) then you will cry out to God. He's makes that option available at that point (don't worry about the details)

You are saved and as a result you have a Eureka moment (although it need not always be a Damascus road like moment). "God actually exists!!"

Post Salvation: You are found, no matter how good or bad you are you're going to heaven.

Correct. In God's sight you are completely righteous - despite your sin. Your sin is transferred to Christ and your account is seen as always spotless.

And because you are seen so you are fit for heaven and "to heaven" you will go

MagicMarker

antiskeptic wrote: »

Okay



Correct. All are just various shades of bad.



Incorrect.

You reach rock bottom, have nowhere left to turn and if not opting for the remaining options (go mad, commit suicide, etc) then you will cry out to God. He's makes that option available at that point (don't worry about the details)

You are saved and as a result you have a Eureka moment (although it need not always be a Damascus road like moment). "God actually exists!!"




Correct. In God's sight you are completely righteous - despite your sin. Your sin is transferred to Christ and your account is seen as always spotless.

And because you are seen so you are fit for heaven and "to heaven" you will go

It's not particular fair on those believers who don't reach rock bottom is it? I mean, it's hardly their fault that they're living perfectly happy lives with what they think is a perfectly acceptable belief in God?

That's not even taking into account the children who die every year who were too young to even understand such a concept, let lone hit rock bottom. It's pretty sad that they're in hell, no?

alex73

MagicMarker wrote: »

It's not particular fair on those believers who don't reach rock bottom is it? I mean, it's hardly their fault that they're living perfectly happy lives with what they think is a perfectly acceptable belief in God?

That's not even taking into account the children who die every year who were too young to even understand such a concept, let lone hit rock bottom. It's pretty sad that they're in hell, no?

OK... When did this thread get from Gay & Believing - Is there room for both? to Children in hell??

The whole thing is very simply... If you are Gay and have Gay sex then you can't be a Christian and follow Christ... Same as if you are heterosexual and have casual sex.

The whole salvation issue has already been discussed ad-neaseum.


As for un-baptised kids.. For sure God has called them to himself..Souls that pure belong to God.

MagicMarker

alex73 wrote: »

OK... When did this thread get from Gay & Believing - Is there room for both? to Children in hell??

The whole thing is very simply... If you are Gay and have Gay sex then you can't be a Christian and follow Christ... Same as if you are heterosexual and have casual sex.

The whole salvation issue has already been discussed ad-neaseum.


As for un-baptised kids.. For sure God has called them to himself..Souls that pure belong to God.

You might want to tell antiskeptic this, as he doesn't agree with you.

Festus

Can you be homosexual and believing?

Of course you can. Just as Satan and the demons believe.
No doubt there are plenty of demons in Satan's cohort who are so inclined or maybe even swing both ways.

Can you be homosexual and have faith? Of course you can.

But what does it mean for a homosexual who wants to be a practising Christian?
It means accepting the teachings in the Bible and the teachings of Christ.
In a word - Chastity.

There is nothing in the Bible or the teachings of Christ that makes sexual relationships between members of the same sex acceptable to God. They are sinful, and while there is nothing sinful in being a homosexual, engaging in homosexual activity is sinful.

antiskeptic

MagicMarker wrote: »

It's not particular fair on those believers who don't reach rock bottom is it? I mean, it's hardly their fault that they're living perfectly happy lives with what they think is a perfectly acceptable belief in God?

The way you live a happy life in false belief is by utilising the ability sinners have to "suppress the truth". Let's take an example of a perfectly happy person who does something nasty to someone else. Guilt and shame are the natural consequences of this (for God has equipped us so).

How can a person be perfectly happy when they've got to contend with guilt and shame? Well they can't - not if they don't suppress the guilt and shame.

How is this done? Well, self-justification is one method, forgetting is another, denying that any harm was done is another. And so the guilt and shame that rightfully attach to the sin is suppressed. All you need is a god made in own image and likeness who won't ruin the party.

If the person wants to suppress a life time of guilt and shame (and a whole host of other stimuli aimed at bringing them to their knees - of necessity I've to present a simple enough model of the whole) then that is a matter for their will.

It's perfectly fair that they be held to account for the expression of their will. Which includes maintaining a model of god who won't stand in the way of all their suppression

That's not even taking into account the children who die every year who were too young to even understand such a concept, let lone hit rock bottom. It's pretty sad that they're in hell, no?

I don't do "what about babies and idiots?" discussion. It's too diverting when the discussion is with a person who is neither. Eg: You.