The church is in many ways homophobic-- your thoughts on this?

[B_Castello]

Romans 1:26-27



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

Leviticus 18:22


22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.



1 Corinthians 6:9-10



9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God


There is many other place in the old and new testament that mentions and condamn hommosexuality.

Anyway, I just wanted to point some of them.

 

[chicagosam]

The "Good Book," while there is much wisdom in it, is a book that has been used for great evil in the world. It is not the word of God, but the work of men attributed to God with translations and variations of text over thousands of year based on the agenda of the translator and those that use it.

Interesting how there are over six hundred laws in Leviticus and only one of them is fanatically quoted by the the self-righteous in the religious community. When all of them are observed, I'll reconsider my position on Leviticus 18:22. However, if they do observe all of them and exact the appropriate punishments, there will be a lot of dead people and how will they justify "Thou shalt not kill."

 

[B_Castello]

The "Good Book," while there is much wisdom in it, is a book that has been used for great evil in the world. It is not the word of God, but the work of men attributed to God with translations and variations of text over thousands of year based on the agenda of the translator and those that use it.

Is this the truth and nothing but the truth, or you own and personnal beleive?

 

[chicagosam]

Is this the truth and nothing but the truth, or you own and personnal beleive?

It is my "own and personal" belief and "truth" based on information you can find all over the internet.

 

[B_Nick8]

There is many other place in the old and new testament that mentions and condamn hommosexuality.

Anyway, I just wanted to point some of them.

I assume you're not buying any of that crap for a moment.

 

[B_Castello]

Is this the truth and nothing but the truth, or you own and personnal beleive?

You have to be carefull with what you read on internet. It could be a great source of information but also be great lies.

 

[B_Castello]

I assume you're not buying any of that crap for a moment.

Beleive it or not, i'm someone that is questionning my self a lot, about spirituality and other things. I just dont blind my self with first apparences, is it funny for a immature guy

 

[D_Harry_Crax]

After browsing through the site, i noticed there are is an exceptionally large amount of gays living here. As you know, i am a christian, and my religion states that being gay is wrong. I do not beleive this at all, its the one part of my beautiful religion that is total bollox. I couldnt give two hoots about it! Just want to know your views on the way the church views homosexuality?

Which "church" are you referring to? Christianity alone has 34,000 different denominations, and their views about homosexuality vary all over the map. Stop talking as if there is only one monolithic Christianity.

 

[sexplease]

I most assuredly appreciate the Life Force (God,Mother Nature, The Grand Poobah, your choice) of the universe, but, as a sentient and reasoning conglomerate of atoms, I do not fear the unknown and thus have no need for any failed philosophies in the form of cults, dogmas or religions.
Thank you, and have a pleasant life.

 

[OzCock2009]

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

Yup, the is almost always the very first passage mentioned.The problem is that this passage does not mention homosexuality. Those who have already decided that being gay is "aganinst nature" and "unseemly" assume that's what this passage is talking about. The TRUTH of the matter is that we do not know specifically what the author was referring to when he says things like "leaving the natural use of the woman" which could be just about anything. Maybe it's cooking, cleaning and taking care of the family. Maybe the women in question here have neglected their families to hang out with their female friends. We simply DO NOT KNOW what this passage refers to. To ASSUME it talks about homosexuality is just that, an ASSUMPTION and nothing more. It carries no theological weight and is the weakest kind of theological deduction.

Leviticus 18:22
22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

This is usually the second most often cited verse but it poses a couple of serious theological problems.

Leviticus is a book that details the specifics of the Hebrew Law for the fledgling nation of Israel. It outlines what Christian theologians call the "Old Dispensation." The New Testament and the teachings of Christ are the "New Dispensation." According to both Catholic and Protestand Christian Theology, when Christ came, he fulfilled the old Hebrew law on our behalf thereby FREEING us from its bonds.

Leviticus is FULL of laws that no longer apply ot Christians under the New Dispensation. Christ himself says the Law is One, meaning that you either follow it all or you follow none of it. And for Christians, because Christ has satisfied the requirements of the Old Law on our behalf, Christians are not bound by it. In other words Christians follow the teachings of Christ which sum up the whole of the OT Law and do not follow the letter of the OT Law.

That's the theology, now here's the practice: Anyone who cites this Levitican law as "proof" that homosexuality is a sin is probably among the greatest sinners themselves. They may eat pork (banned in Leviticus), they may eat shelfish (also banned), they probably violate the Law by what they wear, by how their ouse is positioned, and by not leaving town when mentsurating. In short anyone who uses this verse is cherry picking what they like and what they don't like. If you're a Christian you can't do that. You are either Jewish and follow Jewish Law or your a Christian and follow Christ's teachings. You can't pick and choose what you want form both just to try to support a point of view. Well I suppose one can but if they do they're on tremendously weak theological ground.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God

Ok, so where's the mention of homosexuality in here? It's not there. Maybe you think "abusers of mankind" is homosexuality? If you think that then that's somethign YOU'VE APPLIED to the text. It's not there in the text itself.

Adultry and fornication is not unique to gays so adulterers isn't a "no gay" admonition.

Are you referring ot the word translated "effeminate"? This word is translated a number of different ways and it is unclear what it referrs to. There's no evidence that suggests it referrs to homosexuality.

So again just as with the Romans passage any understanding that this text is talking about beign gay, is an understanding that is APPLIED to the text, NOT FOUND WITHIN it.

There is many other place in the old and new testament that mentions and condamn hommosexuality.

Anyway, I just wanted to point some of them.

As we can see, you have not yet pointed out even one. What are the others?

 

[B_Castello]

OzCock2009, if we beleive in God for what we want to ear then we dont beleive in God, beleiving in God means having faith on everything he says.

You can interprete as much as you wish, but the message is clear...

Now I have says what I wanted to say, and I retreat myself from this post.

 

[chicagosam]

Belief in God and belief in the Bible as the word of God are two different things, Castello. Bigotry, discrimination, and hatred endorsed by the religious community based on ancient texts is unacceptable.

 

[B_thickjohnny]

I'm a born and raised Catholic - gay Catholic to be specific. I never ever thought that I was damned because of my sexuality. I have always felt that God and I have a personal relationship. He made me in HIS image and likeness so therefore, He's gay too. And He loves me for it. I think what He hates is the promiscuity that is so rampant these days. Any committed, loving relationship is blessed regardless of whether or not it's two men, two women or man and woman.

I go back to what someone said earlier and agree that the right wing, protestant moral majority in the United States should be considered a hate group and monitored by the government for some of its subversive actions. Yes, people can stand up for their beliefs but some of their actions go beyond what might be considered normal.

 

[B_Bonky]

It'll be interesting when the Abrahamic religions are as dead as those of the ancient Greeks and Romans. What will historians say about them I wonder...

 

[B_Castello]

Belief in God and belief in the Bible as the word of God are two different things, Castello. Bigotry, discrimination, and hatred endorsed by the religious community based on ancient texts is unacceptable.

I was talking about the Christian point of vue.

 

[B_Castello]

Which "church" are you referring to? Christianity alone has 34,000 different denominations, and their views about homosexuality vary all over the map. Stop talking as if there is only one monolithic Christianity.

No matter how many Christian dénomination there is, there is the New Testament, wich either you are Christian, and beleive. Or either dont beleive, and make you NOT Christian, commun sence.

Like you can't say: I'm Jewish and beleive that Jesus was the Messie, right!

But anyway, all this is not easy.

 

[OzCock2009]

OzCock2009, if we beleive in God for what we want to ear then we dont beleive in God,

It interesting that you level this criticism of me when the fact of the matter is that YOU are the one who's only hearing what they want to hear. And what you want to hear is that being gay is wrong. So what you do is begin with that assumption and then try to find anything the Bible that you think can be used to support your argument. In contrast what I am doing is setting aside all preconceptions and looking closely at EXACTLY what the Bible says in a VERY LITERAL way.

It's also interesting that when faced with hardcore facts about the literal meaning of those Biblical passages your response is not to change your mind and believe what the Bible says, or not even to do what any sincere seeker of spiritual truth would do, carefully examine the Bible and think about and discuss very carefully the fine details of what it very literally and very precisely says. Instead you've chosen to adopt an "I'm right and you're wrong and that's the end of it" attitude. That's neither indicative of spiritual growth nor maturity.

You can interprete as much as you wish, but the message is clear...

Again it is interesting that say I'm the one doing the interpreting when I'm actually the one who is being very purist and sticking very closely to the very literal meaning of what the Bible says. Contrast that with your approach which takes a particular preconceived point of view (an anti-gay one) and then finds that point of view in Bible verses that are either silent on the subject of homosexuality (like the Romans passage) or terribly vague on the subject. It is clear that you are the one applying a HEAVY layer of interpretation on these passages.

I agree with you the Biblical message is clear, and that message is that the Bible is very silent on the issue of homosexuality. This is a fact. You can read into the Bible whatever you want, and you obviously do.

Now I have says what I wanted to say, and I retreat myself from this post.

Typical reaction for people who's positions can't hold up to the facts.

-------------

The bottom line here is that as a spiritual path Christianity can be enlightening and rewarding and when taken literally at face value is not the seething anti-gay monster some would have us believe. Unfortunately people like Castello have afixed all sorts of political and bigoted baggage onto Christianity to the point where it is nearly unrecognizable. He's not the only one to do this. We have things like the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, and more currently the extreme right-wing "Christian" Fundamentalists which ironically are neither Christian nor Fundamental in their beliefs.

 

[B_Castello]

OzCock, for many reasons that we will desagree on this mather... I just think that you dont want to understand at this moment and maybe never.

You see, I like talking about religion, politic and culture, and I have open my mind in many of those interest. When you wanna to understand a point of view of something and want to make a judgement, you have to put a side your own interest and prejudice. You have to be very ''neutral'' that is a open mind. This discussion is about church (Christian) I had read the bible, I mean some part of it. I am gay and I had and still do question my self about it, and I would have wish that the bible would approved on hommosexuality, I would have been very happy. But the truth and the fact are that it disaprouve, and the position of the church can only fallows what the Bible says.

Now, if you're not Christian, Jewish or Musulman or simply dont beleive in God, those facts are meanless, but since we talk about that, when I read that some of you said that the Bible doesn't say that, I put a hold on that and tell you, that yes it does. Just very simple, I dont want to argue, I'm just telling a simple thing.

On a more personnal point of view, I'm gay and I'm learning to accept this. Even douh I have read that it is forbidden to fornicate and love another men, I will always do. I think that we all carry our own cross in our back (figure of speach) and this is mine.

 

[chicagosam]

Isn't it time for ChurchBoyDavid to make an appearance?

 

[Jason]

The Bible is a complex text written for cultures which no longer exist in languages now dead and subject to the standard problems of transmission and interpretation. Scholarship can often elucidate the meaning of the Bible, but it is always imperfect. We can get an impression of what the original writer meant, no more. Whenever I hear someone start "the Bible says ..." I feel like pointing out to them that basic linguistic theory sets out that there is always a difference between what the producer of a text meant and what the receiver understands.

It is a delusion to think we can read the Bible on a verse by verse basis. Rather we have to take it in total. Some themes come through very strongly - the gospel of love and the doctrine of salvation - and lots fall away (basically much of the Book of Leviticus, or the justification of slavery, or the justifications of rape, murder, human sacrifice and genocide).

The Bible is NOT the word of God. Indeed the Bible tells us that Christ is the word of God (John 1:1). Rather the Bible is a reflection of the word of God by error-prone humans. The Bible may or may not have something to say specifically on homosexuality - the quotes usually given are subject to different interpretations as has been pointed out. It certainly has a lot to say about love, tolerance, forgiveness and charity. I do not see the Bible as some anti-gay text, and I think efforts to interpret it in this way are seriously misguided.