The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

marienbad

alma73 wrote: »

@aloyisious.. People can perform whatever activities that like.. But for every action there is a reaction, and the statistics of certain actions speak for themselves. I'm not on any crusade to criminalise or stigmatise the Gay community. As this is a Christian forum I am offering here in this forum a Christian point of view on using our sexuality for its natural purpose.

Lesbian sex is the safest there is so what is that telling us actions and reactions ?

Funny how it is always male sex that seems to draw the ire of certain posters

Cabaal

alma73 wrote: »

most gay couples don't wait until they are in a monogamous relationship before they have sex.

News flash for you, a massive amount of heterosexual couples have one night stands etc as well.

marienbad wrote: »

Lesbian sex is the safest there is so what is that telling us actions and reactions ?

Funny how it is always male sex that seems to draw the ire of certain posters

The male sex is "durty" the female sex they can't seem to get their head around so it never gets a mention :pac:

aloyisious

Cabaal wrote: »

the female sex they can't seem to get their head around so it never gets a mention :pac:

Truly a Victorian hang-up.

solodeogloria

aloyisious wrote: »

Truly a Victorian hang-up.

Good evening!

Not everything the Victorians did was bad. They sent missionaries to pretty much every corner of the British Empire with the Christian Gospel. The London Missionary Society was particularly crucial. Reading some of the accounts of guys who went to take the Gospel to the cannibals on Papua New Guinea or into inner Africa with clear certainty of death is a model of Christian love for others.

I do agree that the 'sex is yacky' part of the debate isn't really authentically based on Christianity and it's disappointing to see it trotted out. I respect that others disagree with my views about sexual morality. I don't expect people to subscribe to my beliefs on this subject. It isn't even my primary aim. My primary hope is that people would know Jesus. Learning to obey Him follows that.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Absolam

aloyisious wrote: »

Truly a Victorian hang-up.

Because tipping the velvet was so unpopular at the time it failed to garner it's own slang term

lazygal

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Not everything the Victorians did was bad. They sent missionaries to pretty much every corner of the British Empire with the Christian Gospel. The London Missionary Society was particularly crucial. Reading some of the accounts of guys who went to take the Gospel to the cannibals on Papua New Guinea or into inner Africa with clear certainty of death is a model of Christian love for others.

Yikes. Why did the missionaries need to go to such places in the first place? Did the people there not have cultures of their own to be getting along with? And would god not have organised things a bit better so people spreading the Christian love wouldn't die?

Cabaal

lazygal wrote: »

Yikes. Why did the missionaries need to go to such places in the first place? Did the people there not have cultures of their own to be getting along with? And would god not have organised things a bit better so people spreading the Christian love wouldn't die?

Course they had their own religion and cultures,
But it was the wrong religion, so it was important for them to try convert them.

Many missionaries wiped out entire cultures, religions and languages from the face of our planet, the world is a culturally poorer place because of this.

While it might bring some people comfort to claim they did "great work", the same people seem to forget the harm caused by them.

Even now asking people to renounce their culture and faith for medical treatment is just wrong on so many levels!

aloyisious

Well, there's the good that missionaries have done the world, the "position". P.S: I'm not referring to the Chris Hitchens book on Mother Theresa.

solodeogloria

Good afternoon!

The Christian faith isn't culturally bound. Jesus said it's for the whole world. And yes, I'm thankful that people risked their lives to bring eternal life. We're told that people of every tongue and tribe and nation will stand before the Lamb (Revelation 7).

So yes, I think that's incredibly brave and incredibly good. These people died but they only died the first death not the second.

There's no record of the people I mentioned in the London Missionary Society that I know of that baited people for conversion with medicine or food. I think that's wrong.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

lazygal

So god, having created communities which knew nothing about him or Jesus, then sends missionaries to tell these communities about him late in the game. And then they get killed in the process. Doesn't that seem a little strange?

tommy2bad

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

The short answer is that God says so in His Word and He has declared what's best for us.

The long answer is in my post to gaynorvader. This post offers definition to sexual immorality from a Biblical point of view.

The heart of the Gospel is loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and strength and loving our neighbour as ourselves. Sexual immorality prevents us from doing both rightly.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

So it's really just an arbitrary prohibition about as moral as not eating meat on a Friday or not eating pork. Didn't it strike you as odd that God, the most powerful being in or out of the universe would take such a dislike to some things and not others, slavery being the most blinding omission in his list of thing that I don't approve of.
Isn't the problem that once you start with because it says so in the bible without that say being contextualized you end up tolerating some pretty nasty stuff and condemning some innocuous things, in fact the prohibition on homosexuality, specifically male homosexuality could be argued as causing the harm it claims to protect us from.
I can understand someone taking biblical prohibitions as a personal discipline but arguing they apply to everyone ( apart from the ones we ignore) is going to require more than because god said so.

solodeogloria

Good afternoon!

I personally don't think what God has spoken in His Word is arbitrary.

It depends on how you see morality. What is good or what is evil is only objectively meaningful if it has an objective source. For the Christian that is God. The buck stops with Him and what He declares.

My post to gaynorvader deals really comprehensively with the Biblical argument in both testaments.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Cabaal

solodeogloria wrote: »

It depends on how you see morality.

morality is based on the culture you live in,
,
If you live in a culture where its ok to rape your wife then you think that is morally right and your god given right to do so.

If you live in a culture that believes women should not be alone with other men and women should cover their face you believe this is also morally right and god supports you in this.

If you live in a culture where you believe single mothers are filthy and should be treated with disgust and not given government support as like what happened in Ireland for decades then you see this as the norm.

In this case people believed they were morally right to destroy other cultures and people's because they didn't agree to follow their religion. They were morally right to do so and their religion backed them.

Funny that,

anyway, this is getting rather off-topic for the thread that this is.

solodeogloria

Good evening!

With all due respect Christians see this issue differently. This is why this thread exists.

I'm not going to accept a secular paradigm of ethics.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

marienbad

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

With all due respect Christians see this issue differently. This is why this thread exists.

I'm not going to accept a secular paradigm of ethics.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

But the question is can you accept and allow others to accept a secular paradigm of ethics , or a paradigm of ethics formed by other religious beliefs ?

solodeogloria

marienbad wrote: »

But the question is can you accept and allow others to accept a secular paradigm of ethics , or a paradigm of ethics formed by other religious beliefs ?

Good evening!

Yes, of course. On a political level I firmly believe in church / state separation. You can see this from my previous posts.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

marienbad

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Yes, of course. On a political level I firmly believe in church / state separation. You can see this from my previous posts.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Then should proselyting just be by attraction rather than by any overt action ?

solodeogloria

marienbad wrote: »

Then should proselyting just be by attraction rather than by any overt action ?

Good evening,

Sharing Christ is the free expression of religion. This is the combination of the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion.

In the same way that you are free to share your views I'm free to share mine.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

marienbad

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening,

Sharing Christ is the free expression of religion. This is the combination of the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion.

In the same way that you are free to share your views I'm free to share mine.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Absolutely , couldn't agree more with you . I was just asking you in reference to your comments about those missionaries that lost their lives in pursuance of converting others .

It wasn't always just always a benign attempt at conversion .

tommy2bad

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I personally don't think what God has spoken in His Word is arbitrary.

It depends on how you see morality. What is good or what is evil is only objectively meaningful if it has an objective source. For the Christian that is God. The buck stops with Him and what He declares.

My post to gaynorvader deals really comprehensively with the Biblical argument in both testaments.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

I don't believe in objective morality, its an notion brought in from Greek thinking and has no place in Christian thought. How can objective morality exist? In relation to what do you measure morality when nothing exists? No point in claiming God exists because on His own he can't act immoral or morally. Yes the trinity is a work around but a week one as all w are 1 being. All morality is subjective, its about how you treat others, once you move the object of morality on to some abstract ideal it becomes easy to act immoral towards others. As long as you can claim you are being true to the abstract morality you can kill, mame and subjugate any other human you decide is failing to reach the lofty high of this abstract truth.
How many times did Jesus place that objective morality above the subjective morality of dealing with sinners where He found them?

solodeogloria

tommy2bad wrote: »

I don't believe in objective morality, its an notion brought in from Greek thinking and has no place in Christian thought. How can objective morality exist? In relation to what do you measure morality when nothing exists? No point in claiming God exists because on His own he can't act immoral or morally. Yes the trinity is a work around but a week one as all w are 1 being. All morality is subjective, its about how you treat others, once you move the object of morality on to some abstract ideal it becomes easy to act immoral towards others. As long as you can claim you are being true to the abstract morality you can kill, mame and subjugate any other human you decide is failing to reach the lofty high of this abstract truth.
How many times did Jesus place that objective morality above the subjective morality of dealing with sinners where He found them?

Good morning!

It seems simple to explain how objective morality exists from a Christian perspective. God is an objective being who has spoken objectively in His Word.

It doesn't matter what I think or what I say but what God has said in His Word certainly does matter and it certainly isn't arbitrary.

This isn't a Greek idea. It's existed in Hebrew thinking since Sinai and Christianity is the rich fulfilment of the Law and the Prophets we see in Christ.

This is getting a bit off topic but I'd love to discuss it.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

tommy2bad

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

It seems simple to explain how objective morality exists from a Christian perspective. God is an objective being who has spoken objectively in His Word.

It doesn't matter what I think or what I say but what God has said in His Word certainly does matter and it certainly isn't arbitrary.

This isn't a Greek idea. It's existed in Hebrew thinking since Sinai and Christianity is the rich fulfilment of the Law and the Prophets we see in Christ.

This is getting a bit off topic but I'd love to discuss it.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,

solodeogloria

Probably it is a tangent but an interesting one and considering because the bible says so seems to be the main argument for the prohibition on male homosexuality an I'mortant one.
As I'm reading you, sorry if I have this wrong but you seem to be saying we should uphold the prohibition because god said so and god has our best interests at heart.
The problem is the prohibition has not resulted in anyone's best interest, it has caused harm and all evidence shows removing it actually produces better results.
Either we are misrepresenting God or God is wrong. It might be time to reconsider how we read the bible if its promises fail to materialise.

tommy2bad

Sorry double post, hit the wrong place on the tablet!

I disagree about objective morality, It isn't a feature of Jewish theology and didn't become mainstream in Christian thinking until Aquinas. The entire old testament is based on covenant not some objective truth. A contract, what could be more subjective? It's a relationship man's morality is subjective to god and gods subjective to man. The morals change as the relationship grows. They are not fixed objective morals but changing subjective morals.

Thanks for the interesting conversation, it may be a tangent but its been a good one.

aloyisious

@solodeogloria: Do you see "subjective morality" as purely a human invention? How do you rate it's societal success?

In regard to human social interaction, do you treat homosexuals differently to other humans, ala seeing them as outside the pale except through what you see as Jesus's message "behave as a good Christian" through what you see as an objective necessity?

Would you treat homosexuals living in single-sex sexually-active partnerships differently to homosexuals in single-sex partnerships NOT sexually-active or would you treat both the same way as needing Jesus's message to behave like good Christians?

Bearing in mind that homosexuals, as a group within Irish society, are as diverse as Irish society is itself now (religiously, ethnically AND non-belief) would you differentiate between the various strands when it came to social contact or would you see them as needing the word of Jesus approach equally?

Have you met homosexuals here whom you see as NOT needing the word of Jesus?

solodeogloria

tommy2bad wrote: »

Sorry double post, hit the wrong place on the tablet!

I disagree about objective morality, It isn't a feature of Jewish theology and didn't become mainstream in Christian thinking until Aquinas. The entire old testament is based on covenant not some objective truth. A contract, what could be more subjective? It's a relationship man's morality is subjective to god and gods subjective to man. The morals change as the relationship grows. They are not fixed objective morals but changing subjective morals.

Thanks for the interesting conversation, it may be a tangent but its been a good one.

Good evening!

I think we have to accept that we see things differently.

I don't think the choice is binary. God could be right and we could be in rebellion against Him. Too frequently I am too for the record. Part of the Christian faith is accepting that we all fall short and that we depend on Jesus alone for salvation. I think God's Word is true and that God loves us. That's both why He gave us the Scriptures and why His Son came into the world to rescue and to save.

I don't believe God is wrong. I trust Him and His Word even when it's difficult or I muck up.

aloyisious wrote: »

@solodeogloria: Do you see "subjective morality" as purely a human invention? How do you rate it's societal success?

In regard to human social interaction, do you treat homosexuals differently to other humans, ala seeing them as outside the pale except through what you see as Jesus's message "behave as a good Christian" through what you see as an objective necessity?

Would you treat homosexuals living in single-sex sexually-active partnerships differently to homosexuals in single-sex partnerships NOT sexually-active or would you treat both the same way as needing Jesus's message to behave like good Christians?

Bearing in mind that homosexuals, as a group within Irish society, are as diverse as Irish society is itself now (religiously, ethnically AND non-belief) would you differentiate between the various strands when it came to social contact or would you see them as needing the word of Jesus approach equally?

Have you met homosexuals here whom you see as NOT needing the word of Jesus?

I don't think subjective morality is founded on truth. It is the fruit of us suppressing our sin in unrighteousness to use Romans 1 language. We redefine what is good and what is evil to suit ourselves but God won't be fooled by it.

In order to get into treating people differently I need to know what you mean by it. My intention isn't to see people differently but to see people as God wants me too see them. That is with the same mercy that the Lord Jesus saw them.

I distinguish actions from people. God loves us but often He does not love what we do. From a Biblical point of view men and women complement each other in marriage and reflect the union between Christ and His church in a way that other partnerships don't. That's the Christian position. The idea of whether or not one is sexually active isn't the be all and end all. Neither are good or right as God has spoken. Are other people free to disagree? Of course but I can't call it Christian. It is s secular outlook on the subject.

As for whether of not people need God's Word, we all do daily! I do daily! We are all sinners before God, but God doesn't say stay in our sin He lifts us out of it and says Go and sin no more.

My hope is that all people everywhere repent before it is too late. Heterosexual and homosexuals. We are all unrighteous. We all sin. We have all turned.

God says turn back, my way is better.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

aloyisious

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening.

I don't think subjective morality is founded on truth. It is the fruit of us suppressing our sin in unrighteousness to use Romans 1 language. We redefine what is good and what is evil to suit ourselves but God won't be fooled by it.

In order to get into treating people differently I need to know what you mean by it. My intention isn't to see people differently but to see people as God wants me too see them. That is with the same mercy that the Lord Jesus saw them.

I distinguish actions from people. God loves us but often He does not love what we do. From a Biblical point of view men and women complement each other in marriage and reflect the union between Christ and His church in a way that other partnerships don't. That's the Christian position. The idea of whether or not one is sexually active isn't the be all and end all. Neither are good or right as God has spoken. Are other people free to disagree? Of course but I can't call it Christian. It is s secular outlook on the subject.

As for whether of not people need God's Word, we all do daily! I do daily! We are all sinners before God, but God doesn't say stay in our sin He lifts us out of it and says Go and sin no more.

My hope is that all people everywhere repent before it is too late. Heterosexual and homosexuals. We are all unrighteous. We all sin. We have all turned.

God says turn back, my way is better.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Ta soldeogloria: you've answered my 2nd question perfectly, so I see no need to define it further. EDIT: Subjective Morality decisions are sometimes based on the here and now and can/will never be fully agreed upon, before or after the decision. The victors of WW2 used the Nazi's prisons and camps to continue to hold the Nazis homosexual prisoners in as to be homosexual was criminal under their civil criminal and military laws.

Cabaal

solodeogloria wrote: »

As for whether of not people need God's Word, we all do daily! (in your personal view) I do daily! (your personal need) We are all sinners before God (a view shared by some people),

You know its not very nice to label everyone immoral, its also not nice to decide what every "needs".

solodeogloria

Cabaal wrote: »

You know its not very nice to label everyone immoral, its also not nice to decide what every "needs".

Good morning!

I include myself in that category. Christianity isn't about what people find nice or about what people want to hear. It is what God declares to us and about the reality we face. There are many good things that God has done in the face of this reality. Rescue from judgement, adoption as sons and daughters with new brothers and sisters in a new family, direct access to our Father in heaven, the hope of a new creation far better than this fallen world we live in and life eternal. This is good news in light of the reality we live in today. God offers a loving relationship with Him through His death and resurrection.

As a single bloke that hope of heaven and that right relationship with God is far better than any sexual fulfilment the world could offer or any human relationship. It lasts unlike the fragile nature of any sexual or romantic relationship into eternity.

Speaking God's truth in love is what I hope to do on this forum. I'm willing to acknowledge my own personal failures in doing this but I can't compromise God's words and claim they are nasty when they are nothing of the sort.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Cabaal

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I include myself in that category. Christianity isn't about what people find nice or about what people want to hear. It is what God declares to us and about the reality we face.

This is exactly the type of mindset of you god knows better that has led to women being treated as second class for generations and many discriminatory laws being passed against the LGBT community.

We don't have to look too far (Russia, USA for example) to see how this mindset can hurt people even in 2016.

The people passing these laws will say the exact same stuff that you are saying, it's a cop out to hide behind god and claim that makes it ok to call people immoral, bad or wrong.

As a single bloke that hope of heaven and that right relationship with God is far better than any sexual fulfilment the world could offer or any human relationship.

Thats a shame you don't find fulfillment from our own species, considering that there's over 7 billion of us and we are a very social species. I certainly don't envy you.

solodeogloria

Hi Cabaal,

Again. I see my function on this forum to convey what God has declared in His Word in an honest, open and God willing respectful manner.

I respect that you disagree with what the Biblical position on this issue is. I also respect that you disagree that mankind is largely sinful and living in opposition to the God who created them.

I understand that. However there isn't much that I can say to you other than I love God and long to live for Him. I respectfully disagree with you and that isn't likely to change.

So my function is to explain the ins and outs of what Biblical Christianity says on varying topics. If you don't like that I understand but I respectfully disagree.

Edit: as for legislation. I remind everyone that I'm not arguing for legislative change. That doesn't change hearts to follow Christ. Only God does.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria