Follower of Jesus and Be Gay

i will look into it

 

I don't know how I feel. As a Christian myself, I'm still struggling with my identity as being gay. I've never acted upon my sexual desires (thus far).

There are so many questions I have. Why does it seem to be less of an issue to Christians when people have pre-martial sex, or when someone chests on their spouse? Christians seem to look down upon those acts, but shrug it off when compared to the whole gay issue.

OP, are you Christian? If so, do you believe that gays will go to heaven, even if they act upon their sexual desires?

 

I don't see why someone can't like the same gender and be a Christian. There are several mistranslations in the Bible that refer to homosexuality, when they originally referred to rape and prostitution (not loving and commited homosexual relationships). Despite the bullcrap that the religious-right spits up, there are absolutely NO Biblical records of Jesus saying ANYTHING about homosexuality.

Anyway, don't listen to the people who say you cannot be LGBT and religious. This agnostic has your back.

---------- Post added 31st Jul 2014 at 10:12 PM ----------

Because a lot of Christians are hypocrites, who cheat on their sposes and have sex before marriage. They shrug it off as "not a big deal", since they've done those things before.

My birth-father is proof. He has lost count with the number of women he has slept with, and he's been through 3 marriages (he doesn't even count the marriage with his second ex-wife as a "real marriage" because she did not want to change her last name. Is that sexist or what?). And yet, when I came out to him, he told me that the Bible says I'm obligated to sleep with a man. He claims to accept me, despite that, but it's a huge fucking lie.

Another example is King Henry VIII of England. He deconverted from Catholism and became a Protestant, because the Pope would not give him a divorce.

 

It is possible to be a non-heterosexual person and still be a Christian. Religion is what you make out of it. They say that Yahweh (God) loves all of mankind, his children. It seems to me that if he created everyone, that he would still love them regardless if they are gay or straight.

 

I've recently converted to Episcopalianism, it's like being Catholic but pro gay. We even have gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender priests. And yes, they can have sex as long as they are married.

 

So there's a distinction between being attracted to the same sex, and identifying as gay, with one acceptable and the other not? So yeah it's ok to be attracted to the same sex, as long as you never acknowledge that to anyone god forbid actually act on it! Being gay is fine, as long as you're closeted and self hating with it! Spoken with love!

 

Being atheist l'm sorry if this sounds like a dumb question, but if God loves you anyway then why bother worrying? You were born like that, something that Big Daddy has control over. So why would he torture you forever for something he made you as intentionally?

 

They WANT you to struggle with it. That is about guilt and control. Those are constructs created by the institution.

An act which is not violent and not humiliating to which two able minded adults consent is nothing compared to the wrong people can perpetrate which has NOTHING to do with sex and sexuality.

This is interesting timing for this thread. I had this discussion with a friend last night. We still believe, more than less, in the faiths we were raised in. However, we don't want anything to do with the institution. She was done long before I was. I am done with them within the last handful of years. The only thing I want from them is a service when I am buried someday. That's it.

 

That would be arsenokoites.

Even if we accept that the Greek word is translated correctly to mean homosexual, the passage from 1 Corinthians specifically talks about homosexual perverts/perversions. All too often the focus is on the word homosexual, rather than the more significant word - perverts.

Most reasonable Theologians believe Paul was lashing out at perverted practices, rather than homosexuality in general. The same logic should be applied to the oft quoted passage from Leviticus, which is similarly taken out of context.

 

I beleive the ONLY reasoning for not being gay and christian now is if you marry. Most other arguments cited today mostly revolves around the old testament. Which, by many denominations, was basically thrown out and considered stupid. And even then, if they cite the old testament... Well... Uhm, there's about 50 things they're probably doing that are sins that very instant in the old testament, so if they get to go to heaven, why not gays?

I'm not even sure about the marriage thing. I believe there is a line about it somewhere. But I am relatively sure otherwise it revolves around the Leviticus line about a man lying with another man, and that was in the old testament IIRC. I'm not Christian, but I like to study old mythos, Christianity is just what I consider that.

 

What do you think Paul meant by perverted acts? I know many Christians would say that homosexual sex is a "perversion"...

 

By "perversion", I think he meant sex acts/lust towards animals, children, and angels, and any form of rape/molestation. (althought I'm not an expert)

 

Many Christians might think that homosexual sex is a perversion, but that is their point of view and not necessarily what Paul was talking about. All too often in these debates, people present their point of view as the final definition of truth... and it's not.

Before I answer what Paul *might* have meant, I would reiterate that the translation from arsenokoites (Greek) to homosexual perverts/perversions (English) is highly questionable, so we need to treat that passage from the 1 Corinthians with a degree of caution.

To understand what Paul *might* have meant though, you need to examine the history and context of relationships at that time. It's fairly easy to do this with a bit of research... Homosexual relationships were often far from consensual and involved sex with minors, slaves and servants (who may have been offered around like pawns in a game). Many homosexual relationships at that time were based on a culture of power, dominance and abuse - things that Paul would have found abhorrent and immoral... or perverted. So do I actually.

All of this is quite different to the consensual same sex relationships that we are talking about, but it is convenient for some narrow minded people to use the passage from 1 Corinthians to undergird their own prejudiced world view and launch into a pious critique of LGB people more generally.

I repeat, all of this assumes that the Bible passage has been correctly translated in the first place.

 

Then what can I tell my mom about Romans 1? She threw it in my face the other day about homosexuals getting their due punishment. I don't even know if she considers me a Christian anymore.

 

We need to be clear that the passage from Romans 1 is dealing with a very different point in history and it needs to be read in that context. In the Mediterranean world at that time, homosexual relationships were not based on values of love and respect, but involved power and dominance. The issues Paul raised in Romans 1 were much the same as in 1 Corinthians - there was an unnatural and perverted aspect to what was happening.

It's also necessary to read the contentious verses in Romans within the wider context. Paul clearly states in 3:23 that all (that's right, all) have sinned and fallen short. He then goes on to outline how we are justified through faith in Christ.

The society Paul was dealing with in his letters to Romans and Corinthians was quite different to the world we live in and the values we hold. Relationships then involved minors, slaves and servants who were subjugated by the powerful figures in society - that's nothing like what we are talking about on this forum.

It's utterly ridiculous to quote Romans or Corinthians to justify opposition to consensual same sex relationships. There is no reasonable comparison to be drawn.

 

Thanks so much, Linco!