-
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.
M
I don't think that's necessarily the best approach when dealing with this specific religious context. Primarily, it leaves us grasping for straws when trying to understand reactions from God over actions we might not see as sin thusly defined; this thread, I think, is a good example. Another might be Uzzah who directly contravened divine law and reached out to steady the Ark of the Covenant when the oxen carrying it stumbled:
I don't think we can reasonably argue that Uzzah's attempt to keep the Ark from falling over hurt anybody in itself. Under the definition given, it really doesn't sound like sin. Whether or not we believe the story, whether or not we believe the punishment fit the crime, I think the message here is that there are principles beyond the sanctity of creation that we must consider if we're to avoid sin.
If we define sin as a violation of creation, we really ignore the whole question of the creator and revealed truth, and the system that results isn't really Christian. The sanctity of creation is secondary to the creator's own purposes, which may be expressed in commands that either ignore or contravene the sanctity of creation. For example, I'd recommended reading all the purity laws, many of which do not find justification in the sanctity of creation.
In other words, homosexuality doesn't need to harm creation to be considered sin in what I think is the Christian understanding of sin. In fact, I'd argue that treatment of homosexuals by Christians is more sinful under either definition, but especially in terms of harm done. I'd also argue that this sort of grasping at straws does more harm than good; if we're unconvinced that what someone does is harmful (even if we believe it's sin) but go looking for harm, we'll find it even if it's not there.
Another thing to keep in mind is that sin in most Christian cultures has become a list of actions which one should not do. There are other less common meanings that might be helpful in these questions. In Hebrew, sinning can also mean to miss a mark, such as in Judges 20:16:
I've replaced the word there, as that's how it's translated almost everywhere else. Any lack of perfection can be attributed to sin. This may be helpful in understanding why certain things are classified as sin without having to go hurt-hunting.
I don't think we can reasonably argue that Uzzah's attempt to keep the Ark from falling over hurt anybody in itself. Under the definition given, it really doesn't sound like sin. Whether or not we believe the story, whether or not we believe the punishment fit the crime, I think the message here is that there are principles beyond the sanctity of creation that we must consider if we're to avoid sin.
If we define sin as a violation of creation, we really ignore the whole question of the creator and revealed truth, and the system that results isn't really Christian. The sanctity of creation is secondary to the creator's own purposes, which may be expressed in commands that either ignore or contravene the sanctity of creation. For example, I'd recommended reading all the purity laws, many of which do not find justification in the sanctity of creation.
In other words, homosexuality doesn't need to harm creation to be considered sin in what I think is the Christian understanding of sin. In fact, I'd argue that treatment of homosexuals by Christians is more sinful under either definition, but especially in terms of harm done. I'd also argue that this sort of grasping at straws does more harm than good; if we're unconvinced that what someone does is harmful (even if we believe it's sin) but go looking for harm, we'll find it even if it's not there.
Another thing to keep in mind is that sin in most Christian cultures has become a list of actions which one should not do. There are other less common meanings that might be helpful in these questions. In Hebrew, sinning can also mean to miss a mark, such as in Judges 20:16:
I've replaced the word there, as that's how it's translated almost everywhere else. Any lack of perfection can be attributed to sin. This may be helpful in understanding why certain things are classified as sin without having to go hurt-hunting.
M
This really doesn't sound like a fair question. To begin with, any homosexual with any history with Christianity has probably not ignored, but has actually struggled with those passages. I think many Christians would be surprised to know how biblically literate some homosexuals are, especially as it concerns those passages, and how much serious prayer they've devoted to the topic. Now, we do not necessarily think we need to change anything according to those passages, but that's hardly ignoring them.
Peter's vision in Acts 10 is a good example of what I'm talking about - Peter was instructed to kill and eat what he understood to be unclean animals. Whether we interpret this admission of the gentiles and/or dietary advice, Peter was shocked as he was commanded to go against something he believed the scriptures taught. Did this mean he ignored what came before?
Very likely not. That would be to misunderstand this moment in the history of salvation. In fact, Peter would probably honor what came before while rejoicing in the new direction the gospel was going. Given that he ate with the uncircumcised, he probably couldn't have kept kashrut, but that doesn't mean he simply ignored dietary laws. He probably marveled at what God was doing.
In fact, many homosexuals begin here with their understanding of homosexuality and Christianity. We are not under the restrictions given in the Hebrew scriptures and find that most fellow Christians agree; for example, most don't have any problems with wearing mixed fabrics, eating shrimp, or being completely clean-shaven. That quote from Leviticus is as binding on us as are the those in its neighborhood binding on our fellow Christians - i.e. not at all.
In fact, we notice that even those prohibitions which Jesus actually discussed aren't enough to keep someone out of the Christian communion. We would phrase the question, why do we get to ignore what Jesus said about divorce, anger, the poor, etc.? We understand that the modern Christian emphasis on homosexuality, with its zealous pursuit of legal restrictions on homosexuals(*), is not actually based in scriptures. Otherwise, they'd take the scriptures seriously and also address things like divorce, etc., through law. They don't. We therefore don't take too seriously the idea that the modern push against homosexuals is from biblical reasoning.
The next passage we're usually asked to deal with is the prologue to Romans, in which it's stated that God gave people over to shameful lusts because they ignored his self-revelation in creation and worshiped created things. But is that all the passage says about these people?
Is that so? I'm gay, but I pray that God help me with my anger. I try to be humble, faithful, and think that the insolent or arrogant should be back-handed. I do not worship created things and definitely don't try to suppress the truth. I honestly don't think it's talking about me. I do not believe this passage is meant to explain the origins of homosexuality as a punishment for worshiping the wrong thing. I would ask - isn't it possible to have shameful lusts with one's spouse? I think so. There is a healthy sexuality in marriage and there are unhealthy manifestations. Then, that doesn't mean that all heterosexual practice is shameful. Why doesn't the same sort of reasoning apply here?
In terms of it being natural, I'd ask a heterosexual to contemplate having sex with a member of the same gender. It feels unnatural, right? That's precisely what we feel when we contemplate opposite gender relationships. Finally, and in passing, I'd like to point out that 95% of a healthy homosexual relationship is not the sex. This is what separates lust from love, which is not discussed in the passage as a punishment for sin.
I agree - those who worship the wrong things are given over to dissipation. But it's complete and total. And it doesn't have to mean homosexuality - this is one out of many attributes these people can display. There are many other things listed in that passage which we conveniently overlook. And yes, we're familiar with the arsenokoitai and malakoi, and yes, Paul is probably quoting the LXX and thinks the Levitical prohibition still applies. But again, we don't. We have sought God in prayer and had experiences similar to Peter's. I find this helpful:
This is his commandment: believe in the name of his son and love one another. We try, sometimes harder than those who seemingly cheerfully condemn us.
All in all, we tend not to ignore the passages. We struggle with them, sometimes more than other Christians struggle with their pet sins. But we're unconvinced by the argument that the particular focus on homosexuality comes from the Christian's concern with the Bible. We tend to believe, rather, that it comes from a prejudice the Christian is using the Bible to justify. This is why we often don't feel compelled to answer it - someone's bigotry has no authority over us.
If, however, I were approached by a more mature brother in the faith who expressed genuine concern for me because he observed not only a particular sexual attraction but the active fight against God described in Romans, I would take his counsel seriously. I have been to a number of confessors, however, and we've always ended up talking about my anger or sloth or unwillingness to reconcile with family members. These sins my conscience does condemn, but I rarely get help from most Christians on them.
(*) It is often portrayed that homosexuals are looking for extra rights. I would like to point out that in my state, not only is gay marriage illegal, but any legal protections even similar to marriage have been forbidden by the state by a popular vote. I cannot even enter into private agreements if they too closely approximate marriage; e.g. Christians have made sure I can't even visit my husband in the hospital. This is not theoretical - it's happened at a nearby Catholic hospital after a car wreck.
Peter's vision in Acts 10 is a good example of what I'm talking about - Peter was instructed to kill and eat what he understood to be unclean animals. Whether we interpret this admission of the gentiles and/or dietary advice, Peter was shocked as he was commanded to go against something he believed the scriptures taught. Did this mean he ignored what came before?
Very likely not. That would be to misunderstand this moment in the history of salvation. In fact, Peter would probably honor what came before while rejoicing in the new direction the gospel was going. Given that he ate with the uncircumcised, he probably couldn't have kept kashrut, but that doesn't mean he simply ignored dietary laws. He probably marveled at what God was doing.
In fact, many homosexuals begin here with their understanding of homosexuality and Christianity. We are not under the restrictions given in the Hebrew scriptures and find that most fellow Christians agree; for example, most don't have any problems with wearing mixed fabrics, eating shrimp, or being completely clean-shaven. That quote from Leviticus is as binding on us as are the those in its neighborhood binding on our fellow Christians - i.e. not at all.
In fact, we notice that even those prohibitions which Jesus actually discussed aren't enough to keep someone out of the Christian communion. We would phrase the question, why do we get to ignore what Jesus said about divorce, anger, the poor, etc.? We understand that the modern Christian emphasis on homosexuality, with its zealous pursuit of legal restrictions on homosexuals(*), is not actually based in scriptures. Otherwise, they'd take the scriptures seriously and also address things like divorce, etc., through law. They don't. We therefore don't take too seriously the idea that the modern push against homosexuals is from biblical reasoning.
The next passage we're usually asked to deal with is the prologue to Romans, in which it's stated that God gave people over to shameful lusts because they ignored his self-revelation in creation and worshiped created things. But is that all the passage says about these people?
Is that so? I'm gay, but I pray that God help me with my anger. I try to be humble, faithful, and think that the insolent or arrogant should be back-handed. I do not worship created things and definitely don't try to suppress the truth. I honestly don't think it's talking about me. I do not believe this passage is meant to explain the origins of homosexuality as a punishment for worshiping the wrong thing. I would ask - isn't it possible to have shameful lusts with one's spouse? I think so. There is a healthy sexuality in marriage and there are unhealthy manifestations. Then, that doesn't mean that all heterosexual practice is shameful. Why doesn't the same sort of reasoning apply here?
In terms of it being natural, I'd ask a heterosexual to contemplate having sex with a member of the same gender. It feels unnatural, right? That's precisely what we feel when we contemplate opposite gender relationships. Finally, and in passing, I'd like to point out that 95% of a healthy homosexual relationship is not the sex. This is what separates lust from love, which is not discussed in the passage as a punishment for sin.
I agree - those who worship the wrong things are given over to dissipation. But it's complete and total. And it doesn't have to mean homosexuality - this is one out of many attributes these people can display. There are many other things listed in that passage which we conveniently overlook. And yes, we're familiar with the arsenokoitai and malakoi, and yes, Paul is probably quoting the LXX and thinks the Levitical prohibition still applies. But again, we don't. We have sought God in prayer and had experiences similar to Peter's. I find this helpful:
This is his commandment: believe in the name of his son and love one another. We try, sometimes harder than those who seemingly cheerfully condemn us.
All in all, we tend not to ignore the passages. We struggle with them, sometimes more than other Christians struggle with their pet sins. But we're unconvinced by the argument that the particular focus on homosexuality comes from the Christian's concern with the Bible. We tend to believe, rather, that it comes from a prejudice the Christian is using the Bible to justify. This is why we often don't feel compelled to answer it - someone's bigotry has no authority over us.
If, however, I were approached by a more mature brother in the faith who expressed genuine concern for me because he observed not only a particular sexual attraction but the active fight against God described in Romans, I would take his counsel seriously. I have been to a number of confessors, however, and we've always ended up talking about my anger or sloth or unwillingness to reconcile with family members. These sins my conscience does condemn, but I rarely get help from most Christians on them.
(*) It is often portrayed that homosexuals are looking for extra rights. I would like to point out that in my state, not only is gay marriage illegal, but any legal protections even similar to marriage have been forbidden by the state by a popular vote. I cannot even enter into private agreements if they too closely approximate marriage; e.g. Christians have made sure I can't even visit my husband in the hospital. This is not theoretical - it's happened at a nearby Catholic hospital after a car wreck.
Last edited:
E
I will probably make alot of my legalistic friends here angry. But this is my belief.
God said marraige is between a man and woman. Any sex outside of this union (heterosexual or homosexual) is sin.
One can consider themselves to be gay, This is no more sin than one considers themselves to be heterosexual. The sin happens when one acts on their sexual thoughts outside of the way God intended it to be.
God said fornication is sin.
God said adultry is sin
God said homosexual sex is sin.
It does not matter why he said it. he did. To disagree with this. is to disagree with God.
I find it odd that those in the church will look the other way when their friends are fornicating outside of marriage, but call for the death penalty when someone is seen to have a homosexual experience. Sexual sin is sexual sin, It does not matter if it is straight or gay, when it is done outside Gods guidelines for sex. Period!
God said we are to give the gospel to sinners. the world today wants to judge first, save later. (Stop being gay, then you can come to Christ and he will save you)
Jesus showed us the way, The legilsts of the day hated him because he hung out with drunks and prostitutes. Bring people to Christ. then allow God to work on them with their sin. we are all sinners. Let he who has no sin cast the first stone.
God said marraige is between a man and woman. Any sex outside of this union (heterosexual or homosexual) is sin.
One can consider themselves to be gay, This is no more sin than one considers themselves to be heterosexual. The sin happens when one acts on their sexual thoughts outside of the way God intended it to be.
God said fornication is sin.
God said adultry is sin
God said homosexual sex is sin.
It does not matter why he said it. he did. To disagree with this. is to disagree with God.
I find it odd that those in the church will look the other way when their friends are fornicating outside of marriage, but call for the death penalty when someone is seen to have a homosexual experience. Sexual sin is sexual sin, It does not matter if it is straight or gay, when it is done outside Gods guidelines for sex. Period!
God said we are to give the gospel to sinners. the world today wants to judge first, save later. (Stop being gay, then you can come to Christ and he will save you)
Jesus showed us the way, The legilsts of the day hated him because he hung out with drunks and prostitutes. Bring people to Christ. then allow God to work on them with their sin. we are all sinners. Let he who has no sin cast the first stone.
C
I agree that the church does tend to judge first then teach salvation later. I also agree that we need to be just as hard on fornication outside of marriage. I believe there is a concept of temptation to be gay, usually caused by childhood things (though not always), BUT the moment one chooses to accept that and live their life that way, even if they are not have homosexual sex, it is sinful. 1 John talks alot about how you live you life, the question really comes down to are you striving to life your life biblically or are you living your life contrary to the bible.
C
I don't agree with the definition that sin is just something that hurts the world, BUT for the sake of your situation I will give you an obvious and simple way that homosexuality hurts the world. One primary way it hurts the world is AIDS, a homosexual man is 50 times (or more) more likely to have AIDS and many don't even realize they have it which means they are also more likely to transmit it. This hurts the world because of the drain on medical resources. Don't get me wrong it is not the only hurtful drain on our medical resources, BUT many drains of medical resources are sin related.
P
Yeah... the more I consider it, the more I feel like there is a flaw in the definition and that may be a valid point in my next discussion with this group. This was just the definition presented by one contributor. I think the conclusion we're trying to reach is - if he becomes the head pastor at a church he already knows he'll welcome everyone into the church to participate, but he's wondering what he'll say when someone who is gay asks if they can be in leadership. And he wants to be able to backup his answer... this is all very helpful 
Thanks.
Thanks.
M
Yeah... the more I consider it, the more I feel like there is a flaw in the definition and that may be a valid point in my next discussion with this group. This was just the definition presented by one contributor. I think the conclusion we're trying to reach is - if he becomes the head pastor at a church he already knows he'll welcome everyone into the church to participate, but he's wondering what he'll say when someone who is gay asks if they can be in leadership. And he wants to be able to backup his answer... this is all very helpful Thanks.
Thanks.
C
There is a church in the US that I think does a really good job of making sure the men in leadership are men of integrity. I believe they interview them, and then if they are happy with them, the person works with the leaders of the church for 1 year before any chance of being paid. Would weed out alot of the potential people in it for the wrong reasons.
A sin is an act that violates a known moral rule or teaching of GOD. Homosexuality is known to be against GOD’s moral Law the Bible said this in many places. Sin is progressive it may start out as something we as people think is not a big deal but it gets bigger and darker as it grows. Ezekiel 16:49-50 lets us know that homosexuality was not the only sin of Sodom. Sodom was arrogant, overfed, unconcerned about what was going on around them, they did not help the poor, needy or strangers, they thought highly of themselves, and did detestable things (unmoral sex acts) before the LORD. It was the other sins that lead Sodom into homosexuality. If they had not aloud the other sins to grow people would not have started worshiping themselves and go into homosexuality. The reason Sodom was given over to destruction is they let sin run wild and it grow to include the sexual sin that if committed by a people they will be thrown out of the land as the bible has said in Leviticus 18:28, and Leviticus 20:22. Homosexuality that is openly excepted by a people is the last step before GOD throws people out of the land. This will be my third visit to you. Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses 2 cor 13:1. We are told by more than to witnesses what will happen if we stay on this path. Just in case he missed it we can go to Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Search the web and se what Sodom and Gomorrha look like today. We need to has a country not let this teach of whatever in your eyes is ok. We need to start turning back the clock on sin, because Homosexuality is the sin that comes full force before judgment. If we stand by and say nothing we are allowing the sin to grow at our own peril. The LORD has said in Luke 12:47-48 that the person who knew what the will of GOD is and did not do it will beaten with many stripes. We have his word and to whom much is given much is required. We are held responsible for what he has given us. In many places the word of GOD is avalible to anyone who wants it. If we chooses by our own will not to learn of our creator and his will for us we have no excuse when we stand before him.
One last thing as in the days of Noah and the days of Lot so will it be when the son of man is revealed Luke 17:26-30. Have you noticed that the homosexual movement use the very sign of Noah the rainbow? Look up our redemption draws near!
Romans 1:21-27 "21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
Leviticus 18:22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."
Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
Jude 1:7
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire
Gen 19: 5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where [are] the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them
Leviticus 18:24-28
Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:
25And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.
26Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you:
27(For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled
28That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you
Lev 20:22' You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out
One last thing as in the days of Noah and the days of Lot so will it be when the son of man is revealed Luke 17:26-30. Have you noticed that the homosexual movement use the very sign of Noah the rainbow? Look up our redemption draws near!
Romans 1:21-27 "21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
Leviticus 18:22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."
Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
Jude 1:7
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire
Gen 19: 5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where [are] the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them
Leviticus 18:24-28
Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:
25And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.
26Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you:
27(For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled
28That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you
Lev 20:22' You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out
