Yet Another "Gay Sex and the Bible" Thread

Great Debates
61

As I’ve said before, I don’t judge them. What other people do in their beds is between them and God.

I am comfortable calling sex outside of traditional male/female marriage a sin because of how I, and centuries of church tradition, interpret the relevant scripture passages. How I live up to that conviction is between me and God, and how you live up to it is between you and God. After all, I could be wrong.

God doesn’t command me to judge people; he commands me to love them. (Jeez, I feel like I’m channeling Poly when I say that.)

62

lissener, if I’m reading Skammer right, he’s saying that his understanding of Scripture and the traditions of our church compel him to regard certain things, gay sex acts included, as forbidden by God, and that therefore he himself is obliged to abstain from them, or at least those which he has any temptation to commit. As regards you and all other people, gay or straight, male or female, black or white, he and I are constrained by our church’s closest thing to a fullfledged confession of faith, the Baptismal Covenant, to “seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself” and “strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being.” And we’re taught explicitly that we will be judged even as we judge, so we should refrain from judging others except in mercy and compassion and a sense of brotherhood, just as we would wish to be judged for our own faults.

Seems fairly slender grounds for an accusation of homophobia to me. BTW, while I don’t regard gay sex as any more or less sinful than straight sex (it is sometimes and not other times, depending on intent, love, and commitment), it would be for me – not because of any inherent wrongness to it, but because it would be going against my vows to Barb. I would hope that would not make me a homophobe in your eyes as well.

63

Thank you Polycarp! Those are just the words I was looking for.

I gotta remember to start taking my Book of Common Prayer to work with me…

64

Over and over again, when I read the “relevant” passages that are quoted to support people’s assertions that this or that other person is sinful, I find support for me to consider my own acts, and what is in my heart. I can’t seem to find the part where the Lord tells me to go out and prevent the sins of other people, for their own good, or my good, or His good.

Perhaps I am self absorbed, and selfish to really understand the compelling reason that other people’s sins are so important. I have enough trouble with my own sins. I can’t consider myself a source of advice on how to be without sin, and the log in my eye is only a small part of the problem. I just think He would find you a better spiritual guide than me, if that was what you needed.

I don’t know what to do. I don’t know “what Jesus would do.” I think that righteousness would involve a whole lot more than avoiding certain behaviors. Just doing nothing doesn’t seem all that saintly to me. Jesus hung around with sinners, and let me tell you, that is good news for me, because it means I might have a chance of running into Him, eventually.

Tris

65

Coming to this debate rather late in the day, I just want to echo what has been said by others, namely that whatever my views/beliefs on the rightness or wrongness of gay sex, they should be superceded by the command to love my neighbour as myself.

I agree with Skammer that the very broad definition of “homophobe” is as useful as labelling all those parts of the spectrum from green through indigo (inclusive) as “blue”, but I think that it is important to acknowledge the prejudice that holding the view that gay sex is a sin must create within a person. It is possible to fight against allowing that prejudice to influence the way you think, act and treat others, but it will be a constant battle.

One thing that does concern me is the notion, expressed by some, that my moral beliefs apply only to me, and there is no imperetive to try and influence the world around me to bring it in line with what I see to be right. Freyr mentioned Cain’s question “Am I my brother’s keeper?” - my understanding has always been that we are to look out for each other and to enact laws and regulations that prevent people from doing evil to one another. To me, the attitude that I must make my own moral decisions, and leave you to make yours is to abdicate one’s responsibility. As Edmund Burke put it: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that enough good men do nothing.” I realise that the issue of homosexuality is vastly different to that of, say, slavery (the context of the quote, I think), concerning as it does two (consenting) adults, but it seems to me that is far to easy to let your morality end at the edge of your world.

Grim

66

a slight hijack…

I also suppose I’m a homophobe by the definition applied to Skammer, with whom I’m in a great deal of agreement, so I have to ask this…

I am a Christian who believes that Jesus Christ is God Incarnate, that faith in Him is essential for salvation, but that someday all people will see Him for Who He truly is & only any who then reject Him risk going into Final Death; I also believe that those who in this life COULD trust in Jesus but will not are sinning against the Truth (I am not speaking of those who just are unable to believe but those who are able but unwilling); I even believe that it is quite possible that every person will embrace Jesus at that Final Revelation & thus be saved but until they do will undergo some form of judgement…

I have always treated people of any religion with respect & dignity in sharing my faith with them. Am I a religious bigot? An anti-Semite, for example?

Also, RE Skammer’s gay friends, assuming they know his beliefs, are they blinded to or somehow complicit in his alleged
“homophobia”? Should they continue being his friends if he persists in such beliefs?

67

Skammer, you didn’t answer my question.

Hasn’t it been roundly proven around here that Jesus never spoke any words against homosexuality? That the only proscriptions against it are in the Old Testament? That in order to justify your judgment of homosexuals you’d have to consider the wearing of blended fibers an equal sin?

Why do you choose this one proscription to adhere to, if it’s not to rationalize your own preexisting prejudices?

68

grimpixie, what I see far more often is not people who let their morality end at the edge of their world, but people who want to appropriate space in my world to stash it without asking permission or paying rent.

I’ve got my own morality; I’ve got no time for systems that forward positions that I consider immoral, no matter how earnest and well-meaning the proponents may be. By their fruits be they known; I have seen nothing but nightshade berries from the “homosexuality is immoral” canard, among others, and I will not eat from those vines.

69

And Friar Ted, yes, Skammer’s friends are complicit, to the extent they’re not actively trying to get through to him. If they’ve given up on him, the non-hypocritical thing to do would be not to remain his friend.

I cannot consider as a friend someone who thinks my existence is somehow more evil than his. To simply roll my eyes an write it off as his “opinion” is to be the worst kind of Uncle Tom.

I only have one visit to this planet, and I’m through wasting my time with people who consider me an aberration.

70

Sorry, Grim, hadn’t read your post. I agree with every word of it.

I acknowledge that by giving up on people like Skammer and Fryar Ted, I’m making an immoral choice: I should continue to work actively to change their minds, to make this world a better place for those who come after me.

But I’m tired of being an activist, and have decided, at least for the time being, to take the lazy route and try to enjoy my time on the planet, selfishly, and leave the bigots and the homophobes to stew in their diminished world.

And I use the term homophobe advisedly: this prejudiced is based on fear, not on religious conviction–at least that’s the accusation I explicitly make by insisting on the word homophobe. Which is entirely intentional: I do make that accusation.

71

What Triskadecamus said so wonderfully (i.e., worry about yourself more and my sins less), and then what Lilairen said so succinctly (i.e., please stop forcing your morality on me).

But they said it better. :slight_smile:

Esprix

72

Sorry if I missed something, lissener, I’m not trying to avoid your questions.

You’re right that there is no proof that Jesus ever addressed this issue (or many others); there is no record in the Gospels of Jesus talking about homosexuality one way or the other.

No, that’s not quite accurate. FriarTed gives a nicely succint explanation in this thread about why some of the Old Testament Law has been fulfilled and/or is no longer applicable to Christians, and why other parts (like Leviticus 18, the passage on on forbidden sex) are still applicable.

Furthermore, in Romans ch. 1 and I Corinthians ch. 6, Paul reiterates the prohibition on gay sex along with other sins. So even if we completely disregarded the Mosaic Law, we still have it spoken against in the New Testament.

Finally, the Bible gives a clear example of the ideal human sexual relationship in the first two chapters of Genesis – a monogamous heterosexual relationship. Of all the marriages and sexual relationships talked about in the scriptures, no homosexual relationships are held up as positive examples.

Having said all that, there are many who disagree with this interpretation of the ‘relevant’ passages. For example, some will claim that Paul is talking about casual sexual relationships and not necessarily all gay sex. Another argument is that the Biblical attitude about homosexuality is irrelevent, because it is a product of the culture in which it was written. There are numerous threads about it in this forum that go into much more detail. But, the traditional interpretation is certainly defensible, using the plain meaning of the text, and is the one that the Church has had since apostolic times.

I’m not saying that because I can find it in the Bible it proves I’m right; I’m just saying that the old argument about picking and choosing what part of Leviticus you want to follow isn’t really on point.

73

Of course it is. You come down on one side of this argument because it back-justifies your own prejudices. If you’d been born gay, even if you became a Christian, you’d have come down on the other side of the issue. Don’t pretend that you’re able to make this judgment wholly divorced from your unexamined bias.

You agree with those who point to Paul and who dance on the head of Leviticus because homosexuality feels wrong to you. If it felt right to you, if you lived in my skin and understood that it’s simply who I am and is therefore utterly irrelevant to the concept of sin, you’d just as easily disagree with them.

That you choose to rationalize your gut distaste rather than believe the experiences of those, like me, who have lived that life, shows not piety but fear.

74

I am amazed at the anti-christian rhetoric which is so easily accepted. It is highly doubtful that the same vitrolic attitude would be directed towards those of “minority religions”, i.e. Islam, atheism, and others which are protected by their status as “victims” of a faceless mass of evil right-wing bible-thumpin’ fun’mentalists (B-TF).

If one brands any who holds a dissenting view as “homophobic”, which immediately disqualifies their arguments and often shuts them up, well, that’s not really logic, is it?

The basic assumptions about “programmed” gay-ness are accepted without question. What about the fact that gay relationships produce no progeny and therefore, were gayness genetic, gays would be very swiftly erased from the gene pool? Or the fact that there are many cases of one gay twin (identical) and one straight one? Or that many gays have, through the grace of God (and watch all those lightbulbs click on in my opponents’ heads as they sieze the opportunity to use a overt expression of religion in branding one as a B-TF) have been able to assume a straight orientation?

Now, I am sure that many will now try to discredit these statements by questioning the truth of the “straight-ness” of the other twin and converted gays. But by doing so, they are following your own accusation of “doing what feels right to them”, shaping facts to fit preconceptions rather than vice versa.

And of course, there’s the whole thing about how gay sex is a sin, but so is adultery and other sins commited by everyone…sawdust/plank, etc.

Do not judge: well, IANA theologian, but the way it is used here is rather illogical and thus is probably misinterpreted somehow. I’ll look it up, but for now, consider that if no judgement is possible, then positive judgements as well as negative judgements will be impossible (one cannot say that a painting is beautiful or that the food is too salty, because they are judgements). Furthermore, why would God give humans the ability to reason and give rules for right and wrong unless such faculties could be exercised correctly somehow?

In haste,
Athelas

75

But that’s not entirely true either. Have you heard of the work of John Boswell? His research shows that until the 13th Century homosexual relationships were accepted; the church even having rites for same-sex unions.

76

Then come back when you’ve got to the time to contribute something original.

77

lissener, you make a lot of assumptions about my motives and prejudices, without knowing anything about me except my opinion on this issue and the fact that I’m not gay myself.

I don’t think there is anything I can say to convince you that I’m not judging or condemning gay people in general or you specifically. By that, I mean both that I would be unable to prove it, and that you would be unwilling to accept it.

Naturally we all bring our own bias and experience to the issue, and I can’t say what my opinion would be if I were a different person than who I am. I’m sure I would struggle to reconcile traditional Christian teaching about sexuality with my own feelings and desires, if I were gay. But the fact that I’m not sexually attracted to men is not the overriding factor in my interpretation of those teachings. Again, I don’t see any way to convince you of that.

And although I never claimed to have reached a special level of piety, I wonder what you think I’m afraid of.

athelas, I’m making a distinction between judging the righteousness of an individual person (which only God can do) and judging between right and wrong, or the beauty of a painting, or how much salt I need in my lunch. Instead of trying to find sin in a another person, I try to “seek and serve Christ” in them (thanks for that quote, Polycarp).

78

No, Skammer, you will never be able to convince me of the reconcilability of your judgment that my existence is an evil with your contradictory refusal to acknowledge that this is a condemnation of me as a person.

The fear is an old one: fear of the unknown, the uncomfortable, the “new” (to your view of the universe). Your arguments are not vehement enough to suggest the fear of homosexuality within oneself that homophobia often indicates sub[/sub]. Nonetheless, that the fear drives you to do something that you claim is against your nature–to condemn the existance of a fellow human being–tells me that the fear is real.

79

So just so we have this straight: you’re telling me that your having read an Nth generation translation of an ancient text gives you better insight into the very nature of my being than I can have by living it?

80

{sigh} I sometimes wonder why we bother…

Please point out the specific instances of “anti-Christian rhetoric” in this thread. Disagreement? Of course. But when people feel free to tell you the way you live your life is one big SIN, I’m surprised you’re surprised.

Dissenting views do not make one homophobic. Espousing bigotry, discrimination and an anti-gay stance does.

Have you read any of the research available on the topic of homosexuality? There’s quite a bit of it out there, and it points to the fact that you do not choose your sexual orientation.

The only thing that shows is that you know absolutely nothing about genetics.

It again shows you know nothing about genetics, plus you haven’t read the research mentioned above.

For the record, what reputable research does show is that human sexuality is determined by a complex combination of genetics, environment, biology, biochemistry, upbringing, psychology, ad nauseum - so complex, it will likely never be fully understood, nor controlled. Sexuality remains something that happens, and is not chosen.

Because they can now act in a heterosexual pattern of behavior does not change their innate orientation. Even the most radical “reparative therapy” organizations admit that now. If conditioned, forced, and/or I willed myself into it, I could have sex with a turtle, but that wouldn’t change the fact that I still love my boyfriend.

No need to question when the research spells it all out quite clearly and logically. You really ought to look into it.

The “sawdust/plank” would be applicable to Christians. Not being Christian, I’m not held to that particular maxim. You, however, ought to consider it yourself. Don’t you have some sins of your own to worry about before telling me all about mine?

You do that, and you be sure to get back to us, m’kay?

Well I suppose being equated with judging a piece of art is a start…

That’s a very interesting question. Have you ever thought about applying that reason to the world around you? Have you ever reasoned that some people might not believe the same things you do?

Shocking, I know.

Truer words were never spoken.

Esprix