Generational divide on Israel vs Hamas

[RabbiKnife]

Homosexuality is a sin.  Period.

Like any other sin, it can be forgiven, but it cannot be actively pursued or endorsed or accepted by a follower of Jesus

What a local church or denomination or group may accept is irrelevant of the standard set out in Scripture

Homosexuals must be loved, and challenged with the gospel, but that does not mean their sin can be ignored, any more than any other sin

And yea, I preach against anger and gluttony and lust and materialism and self righteousness too

Society and culture do not get the Perignat I’ve if defining God or His word

[Athanasius]

I don’t know any gay or trans Christians that are actually happy about the current expression of their lifestyle.

It certainly isn't something I would have chosen.
It is certainly not something I'd celebrate.
It certainly comes with its unique challenges.

I'm certainly sick of Christians, and the church, in the mode in which I encounter it, who seem to think I'm an easy way to avoid examining the log in their own eye. But as with them, and they with me, Jesus is my only hope.

You know a while ago I would have said something like, "If Jesus were to suddenly appear before me, the first thing he'd say is 'wtf dude?!". But then I realised that he could just as easily say that to every single Christian. I too participate in these notions that I'm worse, and other people are better.

[RabbiKnife]

We owe all that “degree of sin” crap to the aspects of Phariseeism and legalism that predated the resurrection

We label the sins we don’t have struggles with as bad sins and the ones we struggle with as little sins

The truth is that all sin is sin.  And only the grace of God enables any believer to deal with the struggles of sin ii. Our lives.

Paul, of all people….
Oh wretched man that I am…

Yet grace demands the struggle, not the acceptance , and each of us struggles in or own way as God provides the grace

We are not saved because if our lack of sin.  We are saved because of our trust in the atoning  work of Jesus in spite of our sin.  Salvation is not a formula but a relationship

[tango]

Is christianity A church or is Christianity The Church? It seems to be one or the other when it is convenient for a particular point from where I stand. Besides that there are LGBT people that literally do support churches or the Church that has them do conversion therapy or other things to deny or repress those aspects of themselves , heck the church I grew up in had a gay parishioner who everyone assumed was gay but they were wiling to kind of ignore it until he admitted it, he stayed in the church and was sort of tolerated like Jim Crow was tolerant of black people. He was willing to live that second class kind of life in a church, I considered his treatment disgusting. All that to say people do what you say they do not everyday. The mere fact that you might have to hop around and seek a church that will accept you or accept you enough that you can live with it is a big problem in my eyes. Look if you're cool with the idea that if you're gay or the other things  you better shop around, which by your defense of it you seem to be, I'm not going to stop you of course, I just disagree that even this is a situation that is entirely dissimilar from supporting hamas, and even if it were there are situations that even fit your definition. You love the Church or your very specific church, I don't, so what you are willing to apologize for or overlook I am not.It is what it is.

As I'm sure you know there are lots of groups that interpret the same texts in different ways, so it's not that difficult to find a church that is more or less tolerant of any particular viewpoint you want to take as long as it's at least vaguely in line with Scripture.

There's a big difference between supporting a church that treats you as a second class citizen and supporting a group that would literally behead you given the chance. There's also the matter of determining what is meant by terms like "gay" and "homosexuality". I personally know a Christian guy who is gay and believes that homosexual acts are banned by Scripture, so he remains celibate. His attractions are to other men - he can't change that - but he can decide what to do with those attractions and he chooses not to act on them. It's hard not to respect someone like that. Some people might feel uncomfortable around him but the simple reality is he's a really nice guy who is very giving in lots of good ways. His situation isn't really all that different from the person who can't help but find another man's wife to be stunningly beautiful and who chooses to not pursue her. The difference is that Hamas would most likely execute the gay guy.

The whole gay issue gets thorny because in western society we have ideas about equal treatment and all that, whereas in Scripture we have a call to be holy. If Scripture says something isn't holy then we need to be avoiding it rather than insisting that people can go ahead and do it anyway because, you know, anything goes and peace and love and all that. If we're using the example of sexual activity it makes more sense to compare it to the issue of consent. In secular society you can have sexual relations with more or less anyone you want as long as they are consenting adults. If they aren't adult they can't legally consent, and if they don't consent we call the activity rape. We don't insist that it's all OK because anything goes or because we don't judge or whatever else, we punish people for breaking the law. If you choose to follow Scripture you are adding God's rules to the existing collection of man's rules.

[Athanasius]

I personally know a Christian guy who is gay and believes that homosexual acts are banned by Scripture, so he remains celibate. His attractions are to other men - he can't change that - but he can decide what to do with those attractions and he chooses not to act on them.

Side B

[Oscar_Kipling]

As I'm sure you know there are lots of groups that interpret the same texts in different ways, so it's not that difficult to find a church that is more or less tolerant of any particular viewpoint you want to take as long as it's at least vaguely in line with Scripture.

I do indeed know, it's like a big part of my understanding of how Christianity actually functions, i'm glad you said it and not me. Still in your mind, what does this imply about Christianity or the church? Does nothing matter to salvation or whatever it is that is supposed to be important about Christianity so long as it's at least vaguely in line with Scripture? If something does matter, then what value is there in finding a church that will treat you with respect and embrace you fully and that is at least vaguely in line with Scripture if your salvation or whatever it is that is supposed to be important about Christianity is jeopardized or not fulfilled by this church relationship?

There's a big difference between supporting a church that treats you as a second class citizen and supporting a group that would literally behead you given the chance. There's also the matter of determining what is meant by terms like "gay" and "homosexuality". I personally know a Christian guy who is gay and believes that homosexual acts are banned by Scripture, so he remains celibate. His attractions are to other men - he can't change that - but he can decide what to do with those attractions and he chooses not to act on them. It's hard not to respect someone like that. Some people might feel uncomfortable around him but the simple reality is he's a really nice guy who is very giving in lots of good ways. His situation isn't really all that different from the person who can't help but find another man's wife to be stunningly beautiful and who chooses to not pursue her. The difference is that Hamas would most likely execute the gay guy.


The whole gay issue gets thorny because in western society we have ideas about equal treatment and all that, whereas in Scripture we have a call to be holy. If Scripture says something isn't holy then we need to be avoiding it rather than insisting that people can go ahead and do it anyway because, you know, anything goes and peace and love and all that. If we're using the example of sexual activity it makes more sense to compare it to the issue of consent. In secular society you can have sexual relations with more or less anyone you want as long as they are consenting adults. If they aren't adult they can't legally consent, and if they don't consent we call the activity rape. We don't insist that it's all OK because anything goes or because we don't judge or whatever else, we punish people for breaking the law. If you choose to follow Scripture you are adding God's rules to the existing collection of man's rules.

Being gay in church is sort of like not trying to have sex with someone else's wife. Being gay is sort of like how statutory rape / child rape is unacceptable. Its respectable to have celibacy compelled by the threat of eternal damnation. And to be sure ,however gays are treated or treat themselves in pursuit of Christian community it is definitely not as bad as beheading. Does that about sum it up?

[tango]

As I'm sure you know there are lots of groups that interpret the same texts in different ways, so it's not that difficult to find a church that is more or less tolerant of any particular viewpoint you want to take as long as it's at least vaguely in line with Scripture.

I do indeed know, it's like a big part of my understanding of how Christianity actually functions, i'm glad you said it and not me. Still in your mind, what does this imply about Christianity or the church? Does nothing matter to salvation or whatever it is that is supposed to be important about Christianity so long as it's at least vaguely in line with Scripture? If something does matter, then what value is there in finding a church that will treat you with respect and embrace you fully and that is at least vaguely in line with Scripture if your salvation or whatever it is that is supposed to be important about Christianity is jeopardized or not fulfilled by this church relationship?

If something is essential to salvation you'd hope churches would agree on it. But people being what they are we seek out things that are familiar, we seek out things that appeal to us, and we don't always agree on stuff, so it's hardly surprising that there are disagreements over some matters. To an extent there's also a degree of personal preference thrown in, and a degree of people trying to claim some status by imposing their own rules and so on. Much of it seems to be about how badly we can miss the point - when Jesus said he came to serve rather than to be served you'd have thought people might learn something from that but, you know, people....

The gay issue is arguably a little tricker than some because it's expressly mentioned in the Old Testament, clearly mentioned in the New Testament (mostly by Paul) and yet Jesus didn't appear to consider it important enough to mention it even once. So there's ammunition available for both sides of the discussion to use.

There's a big difference between supporting a church that treats you as a second class citizen and supporting a group that would literally behead you given the chance. There's also the matter of determining what is meant by terms like "gay" and "homosexuality". I personally know a Christian guy who is gay and believes that homosexual acts are banned by Scripture, so he remains celibate. His attractions are to other men - he can't change that - but he can decide what to do with those attractions and he chooses not to act on them. It's hard not to respect someone like that. Some people might feel uncomfortable around him but the simple reality is he's a really nice guy who is very giving in lots of good ways. His situation isn't really all that different from the person who can't help but find another man's wife to be stunningly beautiful and who chooses to not pursue her. The difference is that Hamas would most likely execute the gay guy.


The whole gay issue gets thorny because in western society we have ideas about equal treatment and all that, whereas in Scripture we have a call to be holy. If Scripture says something isn't holy then we need to be avoiding it rather than insisting that people can go ahead and do it anyway because, you know, anything goes and peace and love and all that. If we're using the example of sexual activity it makes more sense to compare it to the issue of consent. In secular society you can have sexual relations with more or less anyone you want as long as they are consenting adults. If they aren't adult they can't legally consent, and if they don't consent we call the activity rape. We don't insist that it's all OK because anything goes or because we don't judge or whatever else, we punish people for breaking the law. If you choose to follow Scripture you are adding God's rules to the existing collection of man's rules.

Being gay in church is sort of like not trying to have sex with someone else's wife. Being gay is sort of like how statutory rape / child rape is unacceptable. Its respectable to have celibacy compelled by the threat of eternal damnation. And to be sure ,however gays are treated or treat themselves in pursuit of Christian community it is definitely not as bad as beheading. Does that about sum it up?

I guess kinda sorta. If you take a more conservative reading of Scripture that says homosexual activity is sinful just as adultery is sinful then attraction to other members of your own sex is much like attraction to someone else's wife in that you can't necessarily help it but can choose what you do about it. If you want to take it a bit further you could say it's equally comparable to people who are attracted to children but know that sort of thing is wrong and so choose not to act on their desires.

There's naturally a difference between disapproval of a voluntary action and disapproval of an involuntary desire, regardless of whether that disapproval is expressed through not-quite-silent tutting at someone or cutting their head off.

[Oscar_Kipling]

If something is essential to salvation you'd hope churches would agree on it. But people being what they are we seek out things that are familiar, we seek out things that appeal to us, and we don't always agree on stuff, so it's hardly surprising that there are disagreements over some matters. To an extent there's also a degree of personal preference thrown in, and a degree of people trying to claim some status by imposing their own rules and so on. Much of it seems to be about how badly we can miss the point - when Jesus said he came to serve rather than to be served you'd have thought people might learn something from that but, you know, people....

for me It's not surprising if there isn't a God whose like whole deal is that he really really really wants us to get the right message because he loves the absolute stuffing out of us and wants to spend eternity with us and not have us suffer for eternity in the pits of hell. If there is a God like that I would think there would be a consistent way to distinguish such things, but I would not say that this is what you've described or what I've observed. Sincerely hoping that you picked the right parish is not what i'd call a consistent strategy, and definitely not how i'd expect an extremely interested God to play it.

 

The gay issue is arguably a little tricker than some because it's expressly mentioned in the Old Testament, clearly mentioned in the New Testament (mostly by Paul) and yet Jesus didn't appear to consider it important enough to mention it even once. So there's ammunition available for both sides of the discussion to use.

Yeah, that's just a rookie procedure writing faux pas. If you write instructions for how to change oil, but if you read it in a perfectly reasonable but different way you actually change the wiper fluid, then these are not clear instructions. Is the bible an example of bad writing in your opinion? Can you get everything you need from the bible  in order to receive whatever it is that is supposed to be important about the Bible no matter who you are?

I guess kinda sorta. If you take a more conservative reading of Scripture that says homosexual activity is sinful just as adultery is sinful then attraction to other members of your own sex is much like attraction to someone else's wife in that you can't necessarily help it but can choose what you do about it. If you want to take it a bit further you could say it's equally comparable to people who are attracted to children but know that sort of thing is wrong and so choose not to act on their desires.

There's naturally a difference between disapproval of a voluntary action and disapproval of an involuntary desire, regardless of whether that disapproval is expressed through not-quite-silent tutting at someone or cutting their head off.

Okay then.

[RabbiKnife]

God is not Q from Star Trek

[Oscar_Kipling]

God is not Q from Star Trek

I mean, He's not not like Q from Star Trek either. like isn't god supposed to have wrestled a guy once, stopped the sun in the sky for like a war as like a favor, just totally screwed with and ruined a guy's life over a bet, and he got a human woman pregnant...

[RabbiKnife]

And?

If man views God from a purely humanistic perspective, man can accuse God of just about anything.

Doesn’t change the goodness of God or His love for His creation

[Oscar_Kipling]

And?

If man views God from a purely humanistic perspective, man can accuse God of just about anything.

Doesn’t change the goodness of God or His love for His creation

And, you opened the door to the comparison, and I just quipped back to you in the same vein, and You didn't actually make a clear point just a drive by quip,  and if you want to be understood you should be more clear about what you are trying to say, and you should smile more sweetie, you're so much prettier when you smile.

[RabbiKnife]

The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”

[Oscar_Kipling]

The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”

Weren't we in the middle of an actual conversation? quipping back and forth with you is fun and all but i sincerely doubt that it's like the best mode for these heady issues.

[tango]

If something is essential to salvation you'd hope churches would agree on it. But people being what they are we seek out things that are familiar, we seek out things that appeal to us, and we don't always agree on stuff, so it's hardly surprising that there are disagreements over some matters. To an extent there's also a degree of personal preference thrown in, and a degree of people trying to claim some status by imposing their own rules and so on. Much of it seems to be about how badly we can miss the point - when Jesus said he came to serve rather than to be served you'd have thought people might learn something from that but, you know, people....

for me It's not surprising if there isn't a God whose like whole deal is that he really really really wants us to get the right message because he loves the absolute stuffing out of us and wants to spend eternity with us and not have us suffer for eternity in the pits of hell. If there is a God like that I would think there would be a consistent way to distinguish such things, but I would not say that this is what you've described or what I've observed. Sincerely hoping that you picked the right parish is not what i'd call a consistent strategy, and definitely not how i'd expect an extremely interested God to play it.

I suppose it's just another reason to read Scripture for yourself and not blindly accept what the guy in the pulpit says. If you attend church for a while you'd hopefully get a feel for the pastor/preachers to figure if they are the kind of people you'd want to listen to. If you have a pastor who's about a power trip you might decide not to listen to him. If you have a pastor who is very humble and lives a life consistent with the teachings of Jesus you're more likely to accept what he says.

If I read your posts on here and went out into the world expressing how much Oscar_Kipling loves Mohammed would the problem be with you or me?

The gay issue is arguably a little tricker than some because it's expressly mentioned in the Old Testament, clearly mentioned in the New Testament (mostly by Paul) and yet Jesus didn't appear to consider it important enough to mention it even once. So there's ammunition available for both sides of the discussion to use.

Yeah, that's just a rookie procedure writing faux pas. If you write instructions for how to change oil, but if you read it in a perfectly reasonable but different way you actually change the wiper fluid, then these are not clear instructions. Is the bible an example of bad writing in your opinion? Can you get everything you need from the bible  in order to receive whatever it is that is supposed to be important about the Bible no matter who you are?

I think sometimes we need to look at what is important to us. As a straight man the issue of whether or not I'm allowed to have sex with another man is a distraction, because it's something I have no desire to do. For a gay man it's obviously a more personal concern, at which point I'd refer back to what Jesus said about sending the Holy Spirit and how he (the Spirit) will convict people of their sins. The Spirit will never convict me of my desires towards other men because I have no such desires.

It's very easy to spend a lot of time focussing on this or that particular thing, as if it were the most important thing to us. Some people talk as if their sexuality is the core defining feature of who they are - their entire identity is wrapped up in the fact they are gay and nothing else matters. Others talk as if their political affiliation is first and foremost, for others it's something else. And a recurring theme throughout Scripture is to put God first. So whatever your sexuality, would you put God first and refrain from acting on your desires? Whatever your political affiliation, would you put God first and vote for the other guy if he called you to do that? If we put some aspect of ourselves first and foremost then we've made that into our god.

As an aside, that touches on something else we mentioned further up in the thread about why gay people would attend a church that believes the gay lifestyle is sinful, you might as well ask the same question about anyone else who attends church. Yes, there are people for whom church is little more than a back-slapping social club where they huddle together and affirm how good they all are. The people who seek to follow Christ more closely are well aware of their own failings, whatever their nature. Living according to Scripture is inconvenient in many ways, yet people choose to do it. There's no need to single out gay people as if their issue is unique.