Do other Christian denominations accept homosexuality for their own convenience?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter_J said:
Well sure … by some people. But reasonably I think much of a “gay pride parade” could be considered flaunting.
Click to expand...
If “gay pride parades” are a form of “flaunting,” is a St. Patrick’s day parade a parade where Irish people “flaunt” their Irishness? Should we get rid of any St. Patrick’s day parades? 🤷
 
jlhargus said:
Can you name any Christian Tradition or Denomination before 1960 who questioned the bible is not speaking specifically of what we consider homosexual acts today? Not even your own tradition questioned the bible’s clear teaching on homosexual acts.
Click to expand...
At one time, there were many Christians who believed that black people were inferior to white people because they bore the “curse of Cain” and they used this to justify slavery. To these Christians, this teaching was very clear in the Bible.
The split between the Northern and Southern Baptist organizations arose over doctrinal issues pertaining to slavery and the education of slaves. At the time of the split, the Southern Baptist group used the curse of Cain as a justification for slavery. Some 19th- and 20th-century Baptist ministers in the Southern United States taught that there were two separate heavens; one for blacks, and one for whites.[22] Baptists have taught or practiced various forms of racial segregation well into the mid-to-late-20th century, though members of all races were accepted at worship services.[23] In 1995, the Southern Baptist Convention officially denounced racism and apologized for its past defense of slavery.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain

Just because something was taught and believed in the past does not make it correct.
 
Thorolfr said:
If “gay pride parades” are a form of “flaunting,” is a St. Patrick’s day parade a parade where Irish people “flaunt” their Irishness? Should we get rid of any St. Patrick’s day parades? 🤷
Click to expand...
Those awful Irish and their parades. 😉

But seriously, I said much of a “gay pride parade” could be considered flaunting one’s sexuality.

I’ve never been to one, but I believe that’s true.
 
P.P.S. Plus it’s a silly question since those Irish persons would be flaunting their ethnicity, not their sexuality.
 
Peter_J said:
P.P.S. Plus it’s a silly question since those Irish persons would be flaunting their ethnicity, not their sexuality.
Click to expand...
Why is it OK for someone to “flaunt” their ethnicity, but not their sexuality?
 
Flaunting one’s sexuality on a public street is never in good taste. I don’t care what that form of sexuality is. A flag or a t shirt isn’t going to hurt anyone, but a lot of those pride parades are far too raunchy for children to be present (it’s a case of the few ruining it for the many). For the same reason, I would be wary about going to Disney World during their Pride Days. I have spoken to other families that went and the public displays of affection went far beyond good taste (straight or gay). If I want raunchy, I’ll go to New Orleans at night.

I lived in San Francisco as a kid. It’s a cultural thing, unfortunately.
 
Thorolfr said:
At one time, there were many Christians who believed that black people were inferior to white people because they bore the “curse of Cain” and they used this to justify slavery. To these Christians, this teaching was very clear in the Bible.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain

Just because something was taught and believed in the past does not make it correct.
Click to expand...
This is not theologically sound. Many biblical scholars over the last 2,000 have been black and would be able to readily dismiss the information in this Wikipedia article (not a reliable source). I’m sure the KKK would be happy with this take, though.

This really isn’t an accurate comparison. The key difference is something that was UNIVERSALLY understood for almost 2,000 years (even back to the Apostles- see the writings of St. Paul in various letters) versus a racist view drummed up by a group of people with an agenda. It is well known that slaves did exist in Roman times, but they were all races.
 
Thorolfr said:
If “gay pride parades” are a form of “flaunting,” is a St. Patrick’s day parade a parade where Irish people “flaunt” their Irishness? Should we get rid of any St. Patrick’s day parades? 🤷
Click to expand...
Most St. Patrick’s Day parades in the US have nothing to do with St. Patrick and very little to do with Ireland. Dressing in green and getting smashed is not celebrating being Irish. Some cities may have more tasteful, historical, or even cultural additions to their parades, but most I have seen are just random drunks wearing green. Most St. Patrick’s Day parades in the US wouldn’t be appropriate to take children to either. Again, New Orleans at night would give me the same experience.
 
Catholic_farmer said:
This is not theologically sound. Many biblical scholars over the last 2,000 have been black and would be able to readily dismiss the information in this Wikipedia article (not a reliable source). I’m sure the KKK would be happy with this take, though.

This really isn’t an accurate comparison. The key difference is something that was UNIVERSALLY understood for almost 2,000 years (even back to the Apostles- see the writings of St. Paul in various letters) versus a racist view drummed up by a group of people with an agenda. It is well known that slaves did exist in Roman times, but they were all races.
Click to expand...
Just because if something was, to use your words, “UNIVERSALLY understood for almost 2000 years”, does not assure me that humans with finite minds have been infallible in their understanding for all of that time. It takes faith to believe that just as it does for those today whose understanding of God’s word has grown and evolved over the course of time.

But your last sentence I don’t understand. Slavery is okay as long as the slaves are not limited to a single race?
 
Catholic_farmer said:
Flaunting one’s sexuality on a public street is never in good taste. I don’t care what that form of sexuality is. A flag or a t shirt isn’t going to hurt anyone, but a lot of those pride parades are far too raunchy for children to be present (it’s a case of the few ruining it for the many). For the same reason, I would be wary about going to Disney World during their Pride Days. I have spoken to other families that went and the public displays of affection went far beyond good taste (straight or gay). If I want raunchy, I’ll go to New Orleans at night.

I lived in San Francisco as a kid. It’s a cultural thing, unfortunately.
Click to expand...
I lived in San Francisco, too.

So would it be acceptable and not be considered “flaunting” for two gay men to hold hands in public and introduce themselves to others as a couple and kiss each other goodbye or when meeting in public (I’m not talking about heavy or passionate kissing but just a quick kiss)?
 
Thorolfr said:
I lived in San Francisco, too.

So would it be acceptable and not be considered “flaunting” for two gay men to hold hands in public and introduce themselves to others as a couple and kiss each other goodbye or when meeting in public (I’m not talking about heavy or passionate kissing but just a quick kiss)?
Click to expand...
You mean hold hands and kiss each other good bye like straight couples do all the time in public? No that would be no more flaunting to me than the straight couples. And for the record I’ve never even been to San Francisco. 🙂
 
Sy_Noe said:
You mean hold hands and kiss each other good bye like straight couples do all the time in public? No that would be no more flaunting to me than the straight couples. And for the record I’ve never even been to San Francisco. 🙂
Click to expand...
Goodness, people do this all the time - gay and straight. It is a common greeting. People hug and kiss to say hello and goodbye. People hold hands walking down the street. I see this in many, many places in the US and in other countries.
 
Thorolfr said:
I lived in San Francisco, too.

So would it be acceptable and not be considered “flaunting” for two gay men to hold hands in public and introduce themselves to others as a couple and kiss each other goodbye or when meeting in public (I’m not talking about heavy or passionate kissing but just a quick kiss)?
Click to expand...
Sy_Noe said:
You mean hold hands and kiss each other good bye like straight couples do all the time in public? No that would be no more flaunting to me than the straight couples. And for the record I’ve never even been to San Francisco. 🙂
Click to expand...
I agree that isn’t flaunting … well, to me anyhow. I’m sure some conservative would say it is. We’re not a completely monolithic group you know. 🙂
 
Sy_Noe said:
Just because if something was, to use your words, “UNIVERSALLY understood for almost 2000 years”, does not assure me that humans with finite minds have been infallible in their understanding for all of that time. It takes faith to believe that just as it does for those today whose understanding of God’s word has grown and evolved over the course of time.
Click to expand...
But would you agree with the assertion that it isn’t obvious how the previous generation was wrong?

That is to say, say we agree that the previous generation’s “double standard” (if we want to call it that) was wrong … would you agree it isn’t obvious that the way to fix it is to liberalize their stance on homosexuality? (As opposed to conservatizing their stances on divorce, fornication etc.)
 
Thorolfr said:
Just because something was taught and believed in the past does not make it correct.
Click to expand...
True.
But also confer G. K. Chesterton’s view, on the “Democracy of the Dead”, in **Orthodoxy **et alia.
If you find a fence, it is possible it serves no useful purpose; maybe it used to serve a need that no longer exists. But hesitate before ripping it down, until you find out why it was built in the first place. Our ancestors weren’t stupid. They put things up for a reason.

I would be especially reluctant to abruptly rip down fences prematurely, if this just happened to be the rage this season, “everybody’s doing it, we just **gotta **rip down a fence, **this **week, don’t make us the only family in the neighborhood with a fence still standing”! Hurry!

Maybe after we carefully analyze the fence origin, and purpose, we may only then decide to tear it down. Not because the Kardashians or CNN are doing it.

In the case of marriage, Christians find not a secular custom here or a denominational curiosity there, but a universal doctrine closely reinforced by Scripture and 2000 years of ****Christian ****tradition. If man-woman-only marriage can be thrown out - if something ****that ****deeply rooted in Christianity can be thrown out - there really is nothing secure left to base Lutheranism or Anglicanism or any Christianity on. Essentially churches are turned into social clubs: without Scripture or tradition, they are glued to the media. They may justify their actions by bible verses in the future, but obviously they choose their actions by peer pressure, and find bible verses to justify them.

Read Chesterton.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top