H
Discerning homosexuality & same sex marriage in the light of the gospel.
- Status
D
Dokimas
Guest
You’re repeating yourself.
H
hosemonkey
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
Of course I did. Reading it twice didn’t change my opinion of your attitude.
H
hosemonkey
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
Nothing to get over, friend. Have a good night.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
I would like to reopen this thread again. Here’s the OP.
B
benidict
Guest
not only do you find only 8 scriptures that deal with homosexuality, but you only find 1 thats right 1 that may allude to lesbianism…and thats in the new testament in romans…i had to research the rabbinic sages on this topic, and although there was widespread condemnation for male homosexuality, when it came to lebianism there was a huge- eeer, uhhhh, wellll. basically the rabbis came to the conclusion that a woman who did this could no longer be considered a virgin, and she could not marry a levite priest. also husbands were encouraged to discourage their wives for such behaviour. just an interesting way of getting things started i guess. i all for not for condoning the sin, but loving the sinner. i as a divorced male have to watch my step. if i went out having illicit relations with women, would i be any better? i think not. peace!
A
AmateurPianist
Guest
The theology of gay marriage is a nice new creative interpretation that was invented say 30 years ago. 50 years ago it would have been unheard of at all in any Christian setting.
Thus the theology of gay marriage is outside of anybody’s tradition at all, historical Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox.
So what I am wondering is this.
Do I even have to open up my Bible to give this nice new idea a fair hearing and evaluation. Or can I summarily reject it out of hand as an instance of “Solo Scriptura” (which is interpreting the Bible outside of any authoritative rule of faith) and therefore just…wrong.
Thus the theology of gay marriage is outside of anybody’s tradition at all, historical Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox.
So what I am wondering is this.
Do I even have to open up my Bible to give this nice new idea a fair hearing and evaluation. Or can I summarily reject it out of hand as an instance of “Solo Scriptura” (which is interpreting the Bible outside of any authoritative rule of faith) and therefore just…wrong.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
http://menscrhp.com/images/cross_sunset.jpg
he one who states his case first seems right,
until the other comes and examines him. - Proverbs 18:17
amazon.com/Jesus-Bible-Homosexuality-Revised-Expanded/dp/066423397X/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259079444&sr=8-4
Please consider reading this book, especially if you know Christians who happen to be gay or a lesbian. You might learn that the view that you have is not supported in the Scriptures when considering all of Scirpture.
A
AmateurPianist
Guest
My question here is more fundamental. Why should I?
…unless you can make a case that this particular interpretation of Scripture is consistent with the Rule of Faith of at least some historical tradition of the church, and not an invention of say 30 years or so.
…unless you want to make the argument that I as a Christian even have the license to interpret Scripture outside of the rule of faith of any Christian tradition (which is what Keith Matthison calls “Solo Scriptura”)
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
I think our goal should always be to love the Lord and love our neighbors as ourselves, and to glorify God and enjoy Him forever as Christians. To love our neighbors who happen to be gay or a lesbian (believers and unbelievers), how do we see and treat them? Or more so, how does God see the Christian gay and lesbian, and how does God see the unbelieving gay and lesbian in context of major themes in the Bible?
On a practical level, you will find that many Christian teens and adults commit suicide over their homosexuality because they are unable to reconcile their sexuality with what some churches tell them about homosexuality. Most of us start off on the subject with the typical view that we have. However, when you take homosexuality in it’s historical context and all Scrpiture reveals or does not reveals, I think you will come to see that the church has discrimated against those who are of a different sexual orientation than most of us. It is not the first time the visible church has discriminated against minority groups such as women, racial minorities, slavery, divorced, etc.
It’s interesting that you mentioned Keith Matthison who adheres to the Westminster Confession of Faith. The author of the book that I posted appeals to the Westminster Confession of Faith and Reformed hermenutics in regards to the subject of homosexuality. Here’s an Amazon customer review on the book:
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
58 of 70 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars An opportunity to heal the church, May 16, 2006
By Janine Adams (Louisville, CO USA) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality: Explode the Myths, Heal the Church (Paperback)
The issue of whether to allow ordination and marriage of people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender is being debated in almost every major Christian denomination. This book is essential reading for anyone who wants to be informed about this issue. It’s meticulously researched (483 footnotes!) but also very clear and accessible. It’s thoroughly Biblical–something that I believe will be appreciated by people on both sides of the debate. Dr. Rogers wrote the book from his own Presbyterian perspective but it will be a wonderful resource for people of all Christian denominations. Looking at each chapter in turn:
Chapter 1, “Studying Homosexuality for the First Time,” describes Dr. Rogers’ background as an evangelical and how he first began to study the issue of homosexuality in his local congregation.
Chapter 2, “A Pattern of Misusing the Bible to Justify Oppression,” documents how leading theologians, for two hundred years, misused the Bible to try to justify the enslavement of people of African descent and the subordination of women to men.
Chapter 3, “A Breakthrough in Understanding the Word of God,” shows how Biblical interpretation has changed for the better over the last two hundred years.
Chapter 4, “Interpreting the Bible in Times of Controversy,” outlines the 7 guidelines on Biblical interpretation officially adopted by the Presbyterian Church and applies them to the issue of homosexuality.
Chapter 5, “What the Bible Says and Doesn’t Say about Homosexuality,” takes a close look at each of the passages that supposedly condemn people who are LGBT and shows that much of the conventional wisdom about these passages is simply incorrect. There’s also a great discussion in here about how Acts 10-15 provides a helpful model for how the church can resolve this issue.
Chapter 6, “Real People and Real Marriage,” shares the stories of actual gay and lesbian Christians and debunks the stereotypes and cliches that so often characterize this debate.
Chapter 7, “Healing the Church,” includes recommendations for what the Presbyterian Church needs to do to make things right and to heal the divisions in the church.
If we choose to listen, the thoughtful scholarship in this book presents a tremendous opportunity for the church to affirm its biblical and confessional tradition while also welcoming people who are LGBT as full and equal members.
A
AmateurPianist
Guest
OK. Now you are really confusing me.
Keith Matthison believes that Scripture must be interpreted within the rule of faith of the tradition of the church. He would reject any interpretation of Scripture outside of what he calls Tradition 1.
Now you are proposing an interpretation of Scripture that is of say age 30 years or so.
Now it seems to me that any interpretation of Scripture that is very recent is by definition outside of the rule of faith of historical Catholicism, historical Orthodxy, and historical Protestant. According to Mathison, this would be outside of Tradition 1 and would be a prime example of what he calls “Solo Scriptura” which should be rejected.
Now you are asking me to consider an interpretation of Scripture that is 30 years old and outside of everybody’s tradition. If this interpretation is correct, that means everybody has been wrong for a little under 2000 years. It also seems to me that if I were to give this interpretation consideration, I would be practicing what Matthison calls Solo Scriptura, which he condemns.
Either Keith Mathison, or the author of your book, is not practicing Reformed hermeneutics. I think I will go with Mathison.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
You know, Jesus Himself said that man would leave his family, and a woman hers, and the two of them would become one flesh. He said that specifically in the context of speaking of marriage, for the question that had been asked of Him was whether divorce was lawful or not.
here is the PERFECT opportunity for Jesus, who doesn’t just speak for 1st century AD people but for all time, to state that marriage is ‘two people’ (no genders specified) who ‘love each other’ and want to have sex in the construct of ‘marriage’.
Does He? No. If there were even the most remote idea that ‘marriage’ is simply related to two ‘human beings’ who possess (among other things) the desire to engage in sexual relations with each other, whether it is male/male, female/female, or male/female. . .Jesus (who CERTAINLY ‘knew’ how smart and tolerant we would be in AD 2009) could have made it quite clear that it is ‘loving’ that matters in a marriage and gender and especially the whole idea of procreation (so frowned upon by the ‘ZPG’ ranters and the ‘anti’breeders’) aren’t important.
But. . .He didn’t.
And trying to ignore Him is a major characteristic of those attempting to ‘redefine’ marriage.’
here is the PERFECT opportunity for Jesus, who doesn’t just speak for 1st century AD people but for all time, to state that marriage is ‘two people’ (no genders specified) who ‘love each other’ and want to have sex in the construct of ‘marriage’.
Does He? No. If there were even the most remote idea that ‘marriage’ is simply related to two ‘human beings’ who possess (among other things) the desire to engage in sexual relations with each other, whether it is male/male, female/female, or male/female. . .Jesus (who CERTAINLY ‘knew’ how smart and tolerant we would be in AD 2009) could have made it quite clear that it is ‘loving’ that matters in a marriage and gender and especially the whole idea of procreation (so frowned upon by the ‘ZPG’ ranters and the ‘anti’breeders’) aren’t important.
But. . .He didn’t.
And trying to ignore Him is a major characteristic of those attempting to ‘redefine’ marriage.’
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
Here’s the problem. You have already made up your mind without a deep reflective study of the Scriptures in light of homosexuality.
he one who states his case first seems right,
until the other comes and examines him. - Proverbs 18:17
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. - Galatians 3:28
We as believers makeup the body of Christ which is also the bride of Chrsit. Yet, some of us consisting of the bride of Christ are male. For those who are a Christian male, do you see Christ as the bridegroom and you as being part of the bride of Christ?
Wives and Husbands
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. [1] 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. - Ephesians 4
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
I’m a woman but even if I were a male, I’d go along with consistent and authoritative teaching on marriage and on homosexuality. I don’t ask ‘more’ of them than I do of myself; chastity outside of marriage, and if marriage is not possible (not all of us, even if ‘free’ to marry by virtue of being wishful to enter the state, are able to do so. I am not married myself though I wish I were), then service to God in the single state.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
I have been married for 23 years with three children. I have never had homosexuality tendencies, therefore I cannot truly understand what Christian homosexuals struggle with. Because I am blessed with a godly marriage, I wonder if same sex marriage would be the answer for Christian homosexuals who have not been given the gift of celibacy? The choices for single hetrosexual and homosexual Christians are
- celibacy
- marriage
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
in your world, would they have to be married in a Church or by civil ceremony?
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
At the risk of sounding brusque (believe me, I sympathize), the fact is, you cannot make marriage into something it is not.
It isn’t a question of people not getting something they’re entitled to, or deserve, but are unfairly denied.
Since when are we entitled to demand that God redefine his teachings to suit people who don’t want to obey the ones He has given?
It isn’t a question of people not getting something they’re entitled to, or deserve, but are unfairly denied.
Since when are we entitled to demand that God redefine his teachings to suit people who don’t want to obey the ones He has given?
- Status