Should Christians oppose gay civil marriage?

Nadiine

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2006
52,800
48,336
Obama: 53% deserve him ;)
✟292,219.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
^ This post could be used as a definition of circular reasoning in an encyclopedia. :p

You're basically saying:
Homosexuality harms people because it's a sin, and homosexuality is a sin because it harms people spiritually. That's totally wrong logic. :)
No, this is a CHRISTIAN website, I'm arguing w/ people who use Christian icons here for the most part.

There are plenty of other reason for harm in the world of homosexuality - go to the websites like Exodus who help gays leave that lifestyle...
there's many harms in homosexuality just like there's many harms in ALL sinful moral actions.

http://exodus.to/content/view/150/56/

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/234004/homosexuality_a_chosen_harm.html
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
LETTING someone continue in their sin?
First off - you have grossly misinterpreted scripture.
Secondly, it's not up to you to LET somebody do anything.

What you have described is FAR from compassion - it's an excellent example of colossal arrogance, though! :wave:
I've been accused of that before, but nobody has been able to show an acceptable alternate interpretation showing that homosexual acts are not sinful. The burden of proof is on you, with such a high accusation.
 
Upvote 0

Nadiine

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2006
52,800
48,336
Obama: 53% deserve him ;)
✟292,219.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
LETTING someone continue in their sin?
First off - you have grossly misinterpreted scripture.
Secondly, it's not up to you to LET somebody do anything.

What you have described is FAR from compassion - it's an excellent example of colossal arrogance, though! :wave:
What's arrogant about scripture stating that it's sinful in BOTH testaments?

AND Jesus defines the marriage covenant as a male and female FOR THE REASON OF GENDER alone at the creation.
You cannot get around the definition which then usurps all your arguments that somehow law changed and says NOTHING against same sex relationships.
It does - and it also GIVES YOU NO EXAMPLES OF GAYS in the NT church to top it all off.
Where are all the examples of gays being embraced in the churches?
NONE exist.

Instead, we have these instructions about marriage:

1 Corinthians 7:2
Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.

Luke 16:18
“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.


What part of these aren't clear to homosexual supporters?
Where are your gay examples for us?? I'll wait for you to produce scripture that shows me 2 men or 2 women are shown as married and covenanted together in the church.
 
Upvote 0

Nadiine

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2006
52,800
48,336
Obama: 53% deserve him ;)
✟292,219.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I've been accused of that before, but nobody has been able to show an acceptable alternate interpretation showing that homosexual acts are not sinful. The burden of proof is on you, with such a high accusation.
(pssssst. when people lack evidence & support, they head for accusations or personal attacks - and other deflections...)
things like.......... oh.... racism?
 
Upvote 0

Nadiine

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2006
52,800
48,336
Obama: 53% deserve him ;)
✟292,219.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I agree, if you cannot be Christian in behavior, then you should not call yourself one.
... in other words, don't ever say or do anything that others might construe as "not being nice" or else you need to stop calling yourself a Christian?
If so, then I'd equally say that of people pushing this false PC love version today that is NOT biblical - nor loving.

However, that is not directed at people trying to behave morally in respect to an attraction to persons of the same sex. The arrant violation of God's own commands on how to treat others is equally sinful and equally to be condemned in people who claim the name of Christian. And we see these debates bringing out the worst of it in some people.
You MIGHT want to have a read of some NT verses that include Jesus Himself.

1 Timothy 5:20
Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all,
that the rest also may fear.

Mark 9:42
[ Jesus Warns of Offenses ] “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble,
it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.


Mt. 23
13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.
14 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayers. Therefore you will receive greater condemnation.
15 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.
16 “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘Whoever swears by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple, he is obliged to perform it.’

17 Fools and blind!

Titus 1:13
This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,

  1. Matthew 3:7
    But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
    Matthew 3:6-8 (in Context) Matthew 3 (Whole Chapter)
  2. Matthew 12:34
    Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
    Matthew 12:33-35 (in Context) Matthew 12 (Whole Chapter)
  3. Matthew 23:33
    Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?
    Matthew 23:32-34 (in Context) Matthew 23 (Whole Chapter)
 
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
What's arrogant about scripture stating that it's sinful in BOTH testaments?

AND Jesus defines the marriage covenant as a male and female FOR THE REASON OF GENDER alone at the creation.
You cannot get around the definition which then usurps all your arguments that somehow law changed and says NOTHING against same sex relationships.
It does - and it also GIVES YOU NO EXAMPLES OF GAYS in the NT church to top it all off.
Where are all the examples of gays being embraced in the churches?
NONE exist.

Instead, we have these instructions about marriage:

1 Corinthians 7:2
Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.

Luke 16:18
“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.


What part of these aren't clear to homosexual supporters?
Where are your gay examples for us?? I'll wait for you to produce scripture that shows me 2 men or 2 women are shown as married and covenanted together in the church.

Again - you and others continue to grossly misinterpret scripture over and over - and you seem to do so quite willingly.

That is your choice.
 
Upvote 0

OllieFranz

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
5,328
351
✟23,548.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I've been accused of that before, but nobody has been able to show an acceptable alternate interpretation showing that homosexual acts are not sinful. The burden of proof is on you, with such a high accusation.

Define "acceptable alternate interpretation showing that homosexual acts are not sinful," please. It is only fair that anyone attempting to meet your challenge understand the standards needed to do so. It will, among other things, cut down on the ill-thought-through responses.
 
Upvote 0

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
  • Like
Reactions: Nadiine
Upvote 0

David Brider

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2004
6,513
700
With the Lord
✟81,010.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Greens
Jumped in a little late there buddy....you missed crucial points of the argument.

We were differentiating being homosexual from acting on it. Read all the thread please.

Odd, because the post to which I was replying (and many others in this thread) seem to be blurring that distinction, rather than making it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
Nadine wrote
What part of these aren't clear to homosexual supporters?

A good point.
Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.
So sexual immorality is where there isn’t a faithful husband and wife or celibacy. That’s what Matthew 19 offers and of course Genesis 2 that God’s purpose in creating woman was for woman to be united with man.
 
Upvote 0
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
Romans 1: 26 “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”

How do people interpret it? It isn’t about ungodliness and wickedness? It isn’t unnatural? Men lusting after men isn’t error? Men didn’t commit indecent acts with other men? Men with men, instead of women isn’t indecent? Men committing indecent acts with other men isn’t error?

The big red bus went up the hill?

Romans 1 couldn’t be clearer, promoting same sex unions is a massive and major departure from the historic apostolic faith once delivered and represents an increasingly counterfit version of Christianity, along with the likes of pluralism and marcionism . Many church leaders are saying this sort of thing now, such as those in the Anglican Communion who were are GAFCON.
 
Upvote 0

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
To Chalice Thunder,
The scripture quoted is how it is written in the NIV Bible, what interpretation can you possibly be seeing?
All we can see is that you don’t believe the Bible… :)
Most people living in sin reject the parts of the Bible that condemns their sin. That is very common. Yet they are quick to point out the "feel good" aspects of Christianity. For example, they all love the "don't judge" passages, and the "love everyone" passages. There's never disagreement on them.

Nobody said the Christian life was easy. We sometimes have to give up stuff we like. Sure, the easy way out of that would be to simply reject the parts of Scripture that make your life difficult, but that's not acceptable. That's not what God calls us to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brennin
Upvote 0

Polycarp1

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian
Sep 4, 2003
9,588
1,669
USA
✟25,875.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Most people living in sin reject the parts of the Bible that condemns their sin. That is very common.


You're entirely right here. There's plenty of evidence of it in this thread. People justifying doing exactly what Jesus condemned the Pharisees for doing on the basis that it's "Christian love" and "compassion" to condemn others for supposed sins that the condemners are not even tempted to. Some of the justifications for this behavior sound like Orwell's "Newspeak" where every word means its exact opposite.

Yet they are quick to point out the "feel good" aspects of Christianity. For example, they all love the "don't judge" passages, and the "love everyone" passages. There's never disagreement on them.

So you can pick and choose the passages you prefer, as some have accused others of doing? The "don't judge" and "love everyone" passages somehow don't apply if you're a conservative evangelical? I think that's absurd.

On the other hand, I do consider that there is a point to some of the arguments here. Matthew 7:1-2 is 'monitory' not 'prohibitive' -- that is, it counsels against behavior on the basis of the consequences of that behavior, rather than being a divine prohibition of the behavior. Put another way (and out of character for how He taught), Jesus is saying, "Okay, go ahead and judge others, but be warned: how you judge them is how you too will be judged."

When He commands to judge righteous judgments and warns that one's righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, that goes right along with this warning. Do not forget that the "judge not" passage is followed almost immediately by the Golden Rule. A righteous judgment is not, as Nadiine seems to be suggesting if I'm reading her posts correctly, one that staunchly refuses to countenance sin -- it's one that itself conforms to God's commandments -- and Jesus makes clear what the key commandments are. If you hold another to a precise following of all Biblical commandments, or at least the ones you haven't invented a rationalization to avoid following, with no room for charity, compassion or forgiveness, then you too will be judged by hat same harsh standard -- without charity, compassion, or forgiveness. The parable of the unjust steward makes that quite clear. For one's righteousness to exceed that of the Pharisees (who, remember, kept the tenets of the Law), one must love one's neighbor as oneself, doing unto him as you would have him do unto you, remembering that at the last judgment, Christ will take how one has dealt with each other person as how one has dealt with Him.

Now, notice the thread title. This was not supposed to be Thread DCCXVII on how "homosexuality is condemned in the Bible" -- there's a specific question asked. And in my opinion the enforcing of one's opinion of what the Bible calls for by act of civil law is the sort of thing the Pharisees did, not what Jesus would do. And in any case there are going to be some very surprised self-proclaimed Christians at the judgment, when God asks them why they were living in sin, and they proclaim they were married, and He points out where they judged others' marriages invalid, and sought to prohibit them legally -- and He warned, as you judge so you will be judged.

I might also point out that as a man married to the same woman for 33 years and shooting for lifelong, I could give a rat's patootie about these passages as involves my own sexual conduct -- but it's my duty as a Christian to stand by people whom the world condemns -- and a lot of that world are carnal wolves dressed in the clothing of the Good Shepherd's sheep. I am convinced that God did not set out to condemn specific sexual behaviors but rather abuses of people by other people for either selfish lusts or false gods.

And I'm flat-out disgusted at the behavior of some "Christians" -- not meaning permissiveness but rather being Mrs. Grundy minding the neighbors' business. If I were not already someone who has encountered Christ and made Him Lord of my life, some of the attitudes I've seen held up as 'true Christianity' would have turned me away.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
To Polycarp1,

You're entirely right here. There's plenty of evidence of it in this thread. People justifying doing exactly what Jesus condemned the Pharisees for doing on the basis that it's "Christian love" and "compassion" to condemn others for supposed sins that the condemners are not even tempted to.
I think you are doing what the Pharisees did. People here are repeating what Jesus said to the Pharisees, most significantly in Matthew 19, it was the Pharisees that disputed what Jesus said. There is no condemnation for those in Christ because in Christ they have been set free from the sin that leads to death. Anyone seeing condemnation from quoting Jesus words to the Pharisees cant yet have been set free by Christ.

What I see happening is people feeling condemned by what the scriptures say and blaming those who quote it as condemning them.
So you can pick and choose the passages you prefer, as some have accused others of doing? The "don't judge" and "love everyone" passages somehow don't apply if you're a conservative evangelical? I think that's absurd.
But Dogbean has never disputed those passages don’t apply as far as I can see, but you have disputed passages that condemn and exclude same sex unions.


Now, notice the thread title. This was not supposed to be Thread DCCXVII on how "homosexuality is condemned in the Bible" -- there's a specific question asked. And in my opinion the enforcing of one's opinion of what the Bible calls for by act of civil law is the sort of thing the Pharisees did, not what Jesus would do.
Ah but in a democracy, something the Jews at the time didn’t have, all are allowed an equal say, and Jesus never compromised the truth. So no.

And in any case there are going to be some very surprised self-proclaimed Christians at the judgment, when God asks them why they were living in sin, and they proclaim they were married, and He points out where they judged others' marriages invalid, and sought to prohibit them legally -- and He warned, as you judge so you will be judged.
Hmmn, no scripture supports this idea. Jesus has made available forgiveness for all sin once and for all on the cross, so if we repent, though we may expect to account for it, we are forgiven. Marriage is man and woman.

-- but it's my duty as a Christian to stand by people whom the world condemns -- and a lot of that world are carnal wolves dressed in the clothing of the Good Shepherd's sheep. I am convinced that God did not set out to condemn specific sexual behaviors but rather abuses of people by other people for either selfish lusts or false gods.
I can see the world condemns people and seduces them into sin which leads to death, same sex unions being an example, and I can also see there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. I can see there are carnal wolves seducing people into what the world thinks and sexual immorality outside faithful man woman marriage. I believe all of Romans 1 and 2.


And I'm flat-out disgusted at the behavior of some "Christians" -- not meaning permissiveness but rather being Mrs. Grundy minding the neighbors' business.
That’s a contrast with me being flat out in prayer for those who are lead astray and have missed the truth, God doesn’t wish that any should perish but all to come to repentance, so its not my place to be disgusted with anyone.

If I were not already someone who has encountered Christ and made Him Lord of my life, some of the attitudes I've seen held up as 'true Christianity' would have turned me away.
To have Jesus as Lord of ones life, one has to obey His commands and teaching, according to Jesus Christ, (John 14), so ‘true Christianity’ is often at odds with people’s own gods and versions of Christianity.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
To Chalice_Thunder,
I havent been giving any interpretations, I have been quoting the Bible. I dont believe in your rejection of the Bible under the pretext of interpretation.
But bless you all the same :)

Well - no, you haven't been quoting the Bible.

By your own admission you are quoting the NIV, which is a translation.
A translation is an interpretation.

Then you appear to take the words on WHAT YOU SEE as face value.
Unfortunately (actually, fortunately;)), there are plenty of Christians who see it differently than you.
 
Upvote 0