-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Coming from the homosexual lifestyle, I have been to several churches since coming to Christ, and each one of them have welcomed me with open arms, and one of the churches even had a member who was willing to console me. If you are someone who deals with this in your life, and the church is truly following Christ, and not wanting to be popular with the world or whatever, they will totally take you in and help you seek Christ. If a church wants to let people know what they are offering, spread the teaching that Christ came to save all of those that come to Him, that everyone of us is dead in our sins, but He came for anyone who will come to Him. Dont hang a flag that will send those who pass by the message that "God accepts homosexuality". It is way awful from my sight.
Jennymae (cant quote 
) Its not that anyone refuses to let "gays" in their church, of course we all want to see everyone come to Christ and receive His grace. The problem isnt that, its that putting those flags on a church sends people the wrong message, it sends the message that God accepts homosexuality, and anyone who follows His word knows that any and all sexual immorality leads to death.
The flag is a symbol that represents acceptance of homosexuality. Its literally what it means. It is equal to having a flag that represents the nazi party, or islam, or any other thing that goes against Gods word. You can say all are welcomed, but to show support for the sin is wrong, we should encourage those who struggle with the temptation of homosexuality to turn from it and come to God, and not encourage them, just like we do for everyone, with every temptation.
) Its not that anyone refuses to let "gays" in their church, of course we all want to see everyone come to Christ and receive His grace. The problem isnt that, its that putting those flags on a church sends people the wrong message, it sends the message that God accepts homosexuality, and anyone who follows His word knows that any and all sexual immorality leads to death.The flag is a symbol that represents acceptance of homosexuality. Its literally what it means. It is equal to having a flag that represents the nazi party, or islam, or any other thing that goes against Gods word. You can say all are welcomed, but to show support for the sin is wrong, we should encourage those who struggle with the temptation of homosexuality to turn from it and come to God, and not encourage them, just like we do for everyone, with every temptation.
Kayla, putting aside the fact that the motivation for putting these flags up is unknown to any of us, and thus that there is a logical issue with asserting that putting the flag up is motivated out of blatant support for the gay lifestyle, I see something else in your post I'd like to focus on for a moment. It is this line "I think the issue with gays in the church is that people do not know if homosexuality may cause a person to be attracted to young boys". The insinuation that being gay causes people to be attracted to young boys is insidious and false, and to anybody who makes it I would ask this question: does being straight cause grown men and women to be attracted to young girls and young boys respectively?
I would suggest that the answer is no, because sexual orientation (being gay, straight, bisexual or asexual) is not primarily a function of a person's level of adherence to biblical morality, it is primarily a function of biology. And if you disagree, I have simple proof of this: If lack of biblical morality (biblical morality being: we should be straight and anti-homosexual) was a precursory cause of pedophilia, we would see a higher proportion of pederasty among atheists than among the religious, but we don't. We see the opposite. You know why? Because religions tend to ascribe shame to sexuality: priests can't marry, sex before marriage is forbidden, self stimulation is taboo, and sexual education is opposed.
It is utterly unfounded therefore to imply, infer, or state, that pederasty is a common result of homosexuality itself, when most of the pederasty in Western societies has been found among priests, vicars, ministers and clergymen (and don't forget those in positions of political or financial power) unless we could logically assert that most of these pedophiles were gay, which we can't. There is also evidence, on this point, of the opposite being true: a sex research study in the US, carried out by Dr. Carol Jenny, centered on 269 children who were victims of molestation and who could idenityf their attacker. Out of those 269 cases, only two of the attacks were homosexual in nature. Another study carried out by Fruend et al, (1989), where test subjects' penis volumes were measured to gauge sexual arousal, found that homosexual males' responded no more frequently to male children, than heterosexual males did to female children.
Sexual orientation, therefore, cannot rightly be taken as evidence of pedophilic tendencies. What are much more likely to make a person a pedophile are a history of childhood sexual abuse, stunted sexual development, and sexual repression, particularly when these attributes are combined in a person who occupies a position of authority.
You can now stop calling homosexuals pedophiles. Let's move on.
I would suggest that the answer is no, because sexual orientation (being gay, straight, bisexual or asexual) is not primarily a function of a person's level of adherence to biblical morality, it is primarily a function of biology. And if you disagree, I have simple proof of this: If lack of biblical morality (biblical morality being: we should be straight and anti-homosexual) was a precursory cause of pedophilia, we would see a higher proportion of pederasty among atheists than among the religious, but we don't. We see the opposite. You know why? Because religions tend to ascribe shame to sexuality: priests can't marry, sex before marriage is forbidden, self stimulation is taboo, and sexual education is opposed.
It is utterly unfounded therefore to imply, infer, or state, that pederasty is a common result of homosexuality itself, when most of the pederasty in Western societies has been found among priests, vicars, ministers and clergymen (and don't forget those in positions of political or financial power) unless we could logically assert that most of these pedophiles were gay, which we can't. There is also evidence, on this point, of the opposite being true: a sex research study in the US, carried out by Dr. Carol Jenny, centered on 269 children who were victims of molestation and who could idenityf their attacker. Out of those 269 cases, only two of the attacks were homosexual in nature. Another study carried out by Fruend et al, (1989), where test subjects' penis volumes were measured to gauge sexual arousal, found that homosexual males' responded no more frequently to male children, than heterosexual males did to female children.
Sexual orientation, therefore, cannot rightly be taken as evidence of pedophilic tendencies. What are much more likely to make a person a pedophile are a history of childhood sexual abuse, stunted sexual development, and sexual repression, particularly when these attributes are combined in a person who occupies a position of authority.
You can now stop calling homosexuals pedophiles. Let's move on.
Last edited:
Setting aside that your post contains various grammatical errors, you discount my entire previous post, which includes relevant information from genuine scientific research, because I typo'd two letters. I think you might have lost your sense of perspective. The way I see it, you want to shy away from scientific conclusions because the words xxxxxxxxxx offend you. That's not only puerile, but it's a large part of why the "gays are pedophiles" crowd remain willfully ignorant of facts.
Last edited by a moderator:
So I read something about american churches that embrace the 'LGBTQ community.' Those churches show their love of gays, lesbians and the like by displaying rainbows flag on the facades of the church buildings and by using them at gatherings etc. But people keep stealing, 'vandalizing' and even burning those banners:.. understandable, because the flag itself is a provocation for true christians.
Now we shouldn't touch other people's belongings, let alone vandalize or steal them, but sometimes enough is enough. Ofcourse, scripture tells us to submit to governing authorities (Rom 13: 1-7), but isn't some sort of civil disobedience or even further action (in God's name) in order here? Like it says in Acts: We ought to obey God rather than men. (Acts 5: 29)
Now we shouldn't touch other people's belongings, let alone vandalize or steal them, but sometimes enough is enough. Ofcourse, scripture tells us to submit to governing authorities (Rom 13: 1-7), but isn't some sort of civil disobedience or even further action (in God's name) in order here? Like it says in Acts: We ought to obey God rather than men. (Acts 5: 29)
The cure is the Gospel something these liberal churches have long ago discounted.
Last edited:
Noted.
Nazification is useless in front of an audience who can analyze it enough to pick it apart, but for anybody in that audience who lacks the skills necessary to compose an articulate counterargument, even if they oppose it on some basic intuitive level it becomes the end of discussion.
But here's why it's false in this case: putting up a rainbow flag that represents values like equality, personal freedom and individual liberty, can not be equated to putting up a flag of Nazism, which opposes values like equality, personal freedom and individual liberty. You, sir, have defied the logical law of non-contradiction in implying that opposing personal liberties is equivalent to advocating personal liberties.
They are not equivalent things.
Last edited:
K
Quote "Now you can stop calling homosexuals pedophiles".... Now you can stop putting words in my mouth. Id appreciate it.
What I said was churches do not know if homosexuality and pedophilia go hand in hand.The issue of priests molesting young boys has scared many in the church . As I have traveled in churches Ive heard these issues among church people. I did not call anyone a pedophile. Read back and you'll see what I actually said.
Priests are forbidden to marry in the Catholic church.I disagree with it,not in the Bible. I grew up in a Christian family,my mother was a nurse and we knew about sex as was appropriate to our age and understanding. I believe Christian parents want the right to teach abstaining is best to their children where as public school doesnt teach that.I dont think waiting till marriage is a bad thing to teach a child.I never heard that sex was wrong or shameful. I could ask questions openly.I certainly never heard sex was shameful in youth group at church. So I think your comment is rather broad and unfounded.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Talking about 'sense of perspective:' this is still a christian site, no place for your phallometric 'insights.' Puerile is a preoccupation with the human reproductive system, I wouldn't be surprised if you giggled while typing your posts. Maybe that's why you can't get your scientific facts right, typos won't make you graduate though.
K
Oh land,I hear that argument so much. No one is saying there is a relation to Nazism. The point is you can win a Nazi,homosexual,ISIS,Muslim,adulterer,divorced,liar,cheat,thief....name sin and put it in there without hanging a flag. You dont have to put a stripper pole at the alter to win a stripper to Christ. Thats the point. You dont have to support the lifestyle and flying a flag does that. You dont have to lay a bunch of sex toys in the foyer table to tell people struggling with sex "hey you're welcome here"! Thats nonsense. Besides the Holy Spirit is what draws people to seek God and turn from sin.We have churches that spent money to buy a tv and watch the super bowl,we were told it would "bring people to Christ" did it? Nope. We changed songs from the old hymns of the church to the new stuff,some I really like,it was going to bring the young people to Christ.Did it? Nope. Gimmicks dont bring people to Christ.Flags,music,tvs,free gifts...on and on. You invite a person to church and the Holy Spirit convicts them,the Spirit is what draws people to Christ. The church has tried every gimmick to bring people in and it hasnt worked.A few have figured it out,pity that many dont.
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you people just hearing things? Like... what? No one, not one person, in this entire thread has said one thing negative towards homosexuals coming to know Jesus Christ and no one is opposed to a sinner doing such (repenting). Did it just get REALLY PC up in here or something that we can't say that homosexuality is a sin and yet God loves homosexuals? Why are people putting words in others mouths and rebutting arguments that haven't even been presented?
Willie, Omni, and jennymae, whats up with you three today? Are you blind to the fact that there is a growing population of homosexual Christianity with events hosted by the Gay Christian Network? There are gay churches and Christian events being held and you're telling me that this isn't endorsement? Or rather, won't acknowledge the other side to this issue. I get it, no condemnation and welcoming all to Christ. No one has said otherwise. However, don't turn a blind eye to the fact people are coming to Christ and celebrating their sin and rejoicing in their sin all while proclaiming Christ.
I'm not saying His grace isn't sufficient, but don't tell me that flag is only being used to welcome homosexuals into the body of Christ. It is also a political stance and a doctrinal stance on homosexuality not being an abomination and it being okay to be in a homosexual relationship. I mean, come on, such churches have gay pastors. They walk in gay parades. It is far more than welcoming at times, that's all I am saying. It can be just a welcoming, but it isn't always just that.
On the positive side, its good homosexuals are coming to Christ! People ought to reach out to the LGBT community and preach the Gospel without condemnation and in love, full of grace.
Willie, Omni, and jennymae, whats up with you three today? Are you blind to the fact that there is a growing population of homosexual Christianity with events hosted by the Gay Christian Network? There are gay churches and Christian events being held and you're telling me that this isn't endorsement? Or rather, won't acknowledge the other side to this issue. I get it, no condemnation and welcoming all to Christ. No one has said otherwise. However, don't turn a blind eye to the fact people are coming to Christ and celebrating their sin and rejoicing in their sin all while proclaiming Christ.
I'm not saying His grace isn't sufficient, but don't tell me that flag is only being used to welcome homosexuals into the body of Christ. It is also a political stance and a doctrinal stance on homosexuality not being an abomination and it being okay to be in a homosexual relationship. I mean, come on, such churches have gay pastors. They walk in gay parades. It is far more than welcoming at times, that's all I am saying. It can be just a welcoming, but it isn't always just that.
On the positive side, its good homosexuals are coming to Christ! People ought to reach out to the LGBT community and preach the Gospel without condemnation and in love, full of grace.
No I didn't giggle at writing my post, Didymos. I giggle at the childishness of your responses though.
Being Christian and being factually informed aren't mutually exclusive. I would assert the contrary: Christians advocate making informed, thought out decisions in light of whichever circumstances present. A knowledge of facts is fundamental in making those informed decisions.
Having a factual understanding of reproduction in humans, and relaying those facts in a discussion centered around discussion of sexual matters, for instance homosexuality and its relation to pedophilia (as per Kayla's post), is not the same as having a preoccupation with the human reproductive system. This thread and some of the responses, by their very subject matter, are to do with the human reproductive system. I also hold a factual knowledge of modal notation systematized by formulas imposed on major scales, but I doubt that knowledge would be very relevant to this thread.
Being Christian and being factually informed aren't mutually exclusive. I would assert the contrary: Christians advocate making informed, thought out decisions in light of whichever circumstances present. A knowledge of facts is fundamental in making those informed decisions.
Having a factual understanding of reproduction in humans, and relaying those facts in a discussion centered around discussion of sexual matters, for instance homosexuality and its relation to pedophilia (as per Kayla's post), is not the same as having a preoccupation with the human reproductive system. This thread and some of the responses, by their very subject matter, are to do with the human reproductive system. I also hold a factual knowledge of modal notation systematized by formulas imposed on major scales, but I doubt that knowledge would be very relevant to this thread.
Last edited:
K
Well said,I agree with it all but one point I have to ask about. How can you preach the gospel without condemnation? If homosexuality is wrong then preaching from the Bible is going to condemn that sin. Did I misunderstand that,or could you explain better? We're condemned to death if we dont repent of sin,if we continue to live the lifestyle. Its hard to preach the truth without condemnation of sin.