0
0

Two honest questions regarding homosexuality. (self.Christianity)

ReformedCptQuestionMark が 投稿

Many people on this subreddit have a favorable view of homosexuality. In their attempts to justify this way of life, they say that the Old Testament's sexual laws are obsolete or overruled by the New Testament.
Why is it that homosexuality is okay, whereas other sexual sins denounced in the Old Testament, such as incest, are still held in disgust by liberal revisionist Christianity?

Until very recently, the belief that the only acceptable sexual activity was between a man and a woman was common church doctrine. This was the law for thousands of years of church history. Now, it's trendy for Christians to support homosexuality. (This subreddit being case in point).
When did homosexuality become acceptable among Christians?
Surely it can't be because of the New Testament, since Romans 1 is a thorough rebuke of it. Are Christians insinuating God changed his mind about homosexuality sometime 5 years ago?

全 27 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]AtheistEbonShadow 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

As a non Christian I don't feel I can accurately comment for Christians here but I can tell you is marriage has been around way before Christianity and many cultures had many types of marriage. https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200505/marriage-history

[–]United Methodistgnurdette 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

There is no mystery in the prohibition of incest. It harms people. Prohibiting it fits the character of our loving God. Most conservative Christians who don't feel contempt for gay people genuinely struggle with a prohibition that, very strangely for a loving God, seems to single a group of people out for lifetime struggle and loneliness and more or less guarantees that most of them won't find Christ, all for reasons that are far from clear. As conservatives, they may conclude that the prohibition is genuine, but they're still hardly happy about it and they recognize the strangeness of it.

Our culture has a word and a concept, "homosexuality", covering everything from guys married to women going on the "down-low" to lifelong faithful married couples. That word and that concept didn't exist in Biblical times - well, the down-low certainly did, but the latter didn't, so it's far from obvious that words like "arsenokoitai" should be translated to our modern all-encompassing term.

So I don't think that "homosexuality" is OK, because like "heterosexuality" it encompasses all sorts of practices, many of them definitely sinful. I do think that, now that same sex-couples can and want to have permanent faithful marriages, we should, because it is indeed better to marry than to burn.

There's no point in me writing a whole book here when others have done a better job, like Jusin Lee here and here.

Your assertion that your fellow Christian only cares about being "trendy", not about the genuine challenges of Biblical interpretation and about concern for the genuine human beings impacted by your theology, is not seemly. Seeing Christians motivation by compassion, even when you disagree with them, should not be met with sneers.

[–]ReformedCptQuestionMark[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

If I use protection (so no one is harmed), and it's consensual, what exactly is wrong with having sexual relations with my sister?
Justify that the same way people justify gay sex.

[–]United Methodistgnurdette 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't believe in sex outside marriage. A marriage with your sister would be genetically disastrous for your children. You could try to never have children, but no birth control is perfect, and if either of you ever wanted to have children eventually, you'd have to divorce.

(Aside from the very real questions about how genuinely mutually consensual a marriage between siblings could be - I've never heard of people in sound mind and healthy circumstances wanting such a thing.)

[–]BaptistGemmabeta 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

What objective harms have teh ghey done to society that the heterosexuals have not already perpetrated tenfold?

[–]ReformedCptQuestionMark[S] -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

This isn't about the welfare of society, stop changing the subject and avoiding the questions. It's about whether or not you love God enough to obey his commandments.

[–]Red Letter Christiantheluppijackal 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

http://smile.amazon.com/God-Gay-Christian-Biblical-Relationships/dp/1601425163/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=8-1&qid=1432485005

[–]HeelsDownEyesUp 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hey bud! I appreciate you going out on a limb with a sensitive subject.

It's really quite the mash up of problems that have led to this. How are gender roles seen in western society? Masculinity? Marriage? Dating? Raising children, family life?

I'm not saying to go lynch homosexuals. I'm saying homosexuality is itself a dysfunction. Not the person. The thing. Marriage offers a "safe" place for sex, as it is a legal and public declaration of commitment. On the compassionate side, we want people to be safe, and be content. There is a push for gay marriage right now so they have a safe place to practice. We've come to accept that homosexual sex and romance is going to happen often enough, as much as promiscuity at a young age and premarital sex is happening. There is a load of controversy over celibacy and changing one's orientation, so might as well give a safer route to the people who are not driven toward the latter.

Looking at humans as animals for a second here; I think we can all agree to some extent that the default human is polygamous or monogamous, sexually dimorphic, cares for its offspring, and is heterosexual. Right now, in western society, humans in adolescence will commonly mate recreationally and choose lifetime partners in their older adult lives. The 13yo to 30yo span is marked by feelings and personal freedom moments at a time. Men are still the more sexually driven ones; women are more selective and more desired. The primary selection men have in mind are youth/beauty and availability in the women; if a desired woman finally accepts him and will be exclusive, he'll commit and hold onto her rather than try his luck on other women. Women select for status. They choose according to how that man compares to other men. What's going on right now is that older men are committing to young women they like due to the sexual availability of them now and the desirability of an older man who can provide for them. Older women on the other hand... Some may be alright with the few men to choose from at their age that are interested in them, others are completely embittered about it. An older man who as gathered resources and a career is desired by many young, beautiful women. I am a woman and I honestly say we don't age like men. After 30, we're not the cute chicks we were at 22yo. An older woman is not going to draw the same handsome, energetic crowd she did before. An older woman with resources and a career just isn't desired by the majority of men. There is nothing wrong with what men and women find attractive, that's natural. The older, working woman is going to find more low-ambition sorts of men who probably don't want to work. The desire is for maybe a stay home husband instead. How does society view those men? Deadbeats. Double standard, but lo and behold.

Yes, there are exceptions, these are broad terms, etc.

Heck I haven't found a traditional Christian in years. A "Christian" today is someone who believe God exists and Jesus died for us, the end, give or take any commandments and biblical stories. There is no direction on how men or women are beneficially, beautifully different, we are becoming the same. If you say otherwise, you are a bigoted double standard'ing misogynist. It doesn't matter if men marry men and women marry women, because we are all women. Society is feminized and becoming more of a matriarchal system in at least the social sphere, if not more in previously neutral or male workplaces. In my university's doctoral classes this year, there were only 2-5 men present. All others were women.

Tl'rdr: Homosexuality is acceptable because why not? We're all being pressured to be the same, the family and dating system that would have been incompatible with homosexuality has now collapsed. It is as acceptable as promiscuity and others mentioned. The slippery slope started at gender issues. Christians need to get back to their core traditional values before poking at homosexuality with a ten foot pole. I would certainly not encourage homosexuality or see it as good, but exclusivity in homosexuals is the best option now, so I'll support my gay friends' desire to marry and find lifetime partners if they do not feel called to change their orientation or be celibate.

This is entirely my opinion and observation of the topic, no "oppression" or hate intended. Continue respecting and caring for one another.

[–]CampusTour 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

If you had spent ten minutes on Google, you could have found plenty of material that explains some of the ways that Romans 1 can be looked out.

As for changing our views, please do a little reading on the practice of slavery, and what the New Testament says about it, and how many people thought they were on firm ground as Christian slave owners, based on the Bible.

[–]ReformedCptQuestionMark[S] -3ポイント-2ポイント  (4子コメント)

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. Is there another way to look at that without performing mental gymnastics?
Because the New Testament mentions slavery as an institution, (and never says "capture people and exploit their cheap labor") we should disregard it's stance on homosexuality?
Another perfect example of avoiding the questions.

[–]Christian (Canterbury Cross)WeAllNeedMirrors 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Advising you to do your own research is not the same thing as avoiding your question though. This subject has been talked about ad nauseam, and if you really wanted to understand how people justify their positions you could easily do so without coming here and implying that everyone who disagrees with you is being intellectually dishonest. Your post and demeanor are coming off as being really disingenuous and combative, which is why few people are going to try to engage you in a dialogue.

[–]CampusTour 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, if you consider studying the context, style, intended audience, as well as exploring some different translations of that verse to be "mental gymnastics" then no.

As for slavery, it does more than just mention the institution. It gives specific instructions for both slave and master, and you know what's missing from those instructions? "Free your slaves and don't ever own any, because it's wrong".

[–]AtheistDuke_of_New_Dallas 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

leaving the natural use of the woman

What does that mean? That women are nothing more than sperm receptacles?

[–]Aur0raJ 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Of course not! They also cook and clean the house.