To Be or Not to Be a Homosexual

****sexuality continues to be a hot topic in many forms of media. How is it viewed in the Christian sect? Some people say that they are born as a ****sexual. Do you agree with this view? Or, is it a choice? Many churches are welcoming and accepting ****sexuals. According to the Bible, ****sexuals will not enter into heaven. It seems God is casting judgment on them, even though they cannot help it. Do you agree or disagree?

TruthSeeker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

****sexuality continues to be a hot topic in many forms of media. How is it viewed in the Christian sect? Some people say that they are born as a ****sexual. Do you agree with this view? Or, is it a choice? Many churches are welcoming and accepting ****sexuals. According to the Bible, ****sexuals will not enter into heaven. It seems God is casting judgment on them, even though they cannot help it. Do you agree or disagree?

---

Because of the golden rule we have no permission to mock them, to hurt them, or to make jokes about this condition. The day the churches will preach against the adulterers into their crowds, these churches would become less hypocritical in giving their sermons against the ****sexuals. For me, focussing to only one aspect of the immorality, is very hypocritical. Because half of the people into the churches, are divorced people, the preach against adultery is silenced to not displease the adulterers among us.

Honestly, I cannot answer the questions because I do not know what a ****sexual is experiencing. Also, I am not a psychologist, a neurologist, or a specialist of the brain. I do not know if this is only behavioral or if there is also a metabolical component (chemical of the brain or some variations in the brain).

If stoning an adulterer woman was not the first choice of Jesus, I understand by his behavior, that stoning a ****sexual is not appropriate also. I give them respect as human beings and creatures of God. It is a sin, to do otherwise.

Trinity

****sexuality continues to be a hot topic in many forms of media. How is it viewed in the Christian sect?

Depends of the particular "sect" of the "Christian sect". The range of views in the "visible church" is all the way from Total rejection to total acceptance including leadership, and every shade of understanding in between.

Some people say that they are born as a ****sexual. Do you agree with this view?

My personal opinion is that some folks ARE born with defective gender iden***y, or as in the case of Kleinfelter syndrome (for example) NO gender iden***y without hormonal treatments.

Or, is it a choice?

My personal opinion is that it is often ALSO a choice. My daughter was in "Drama" in High school - we got the chance to spend time with/talk to with many "professing ****sexuals" of both sexes.

Many churches are welcoming and accepting ****sexuals.

True

According to the Bible, ****sexuals will not enter into heaven.

Maybe not so true - NOBODY enters heaven unless he's drawn by Father and places His faith in the Shed Blood of Jesus for his salvation. Engaging in ****sexual conduct is Biblically sinful. SO is sleeping with your neighbor's wife, stealing his stuff, lying about him, killing him, or envying him. BEING of ****sexual orientation isn't necessarily "Sin" if the lusts are not acted upon - any more than recognizing that your neighbor's wife is good look'in and not doing as a result of that observation. As Ockengae once said -"You can't keep the birds from flying overhead, but you CAN keep them from building a nest in your hair".

It seems God is casting judgment on them, even though they cannot help it. Do you agree or disagree?

I disagree with the way the statement is made. YOU see God as ****ing them for BEING ****sexual regardless of any other consideration, so YOU are casting "judgment" upon them.

I see God as ****ing them IF they DIDN'T Trust Jesus as their Savior, along with gluttons, over-libidinous HETERO-sexual folks who practice adultery/fornication/lasciviousness, murder, robbery, lying, seditionists - i.e. they didn't become "saved".

ANd I'm NOT "Judging" (****ing) before the time.

I think that ****sexuality is a spirit sent forth by the devil to confuse and destroy certain individuals. I believe fully that a person who is battling this can be fully delivered from what they are experiencing and can live a perfectly heterosexual life. My God is that big.

I am new at this and just registered - don't understand all the threads etc. However, I absolutely love what Trinity said about ****sexuality - i have never heard it put so well.
What a wonderful world if we could all have the same at***ude and try to reach out to one another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

****sexuality continues to be a hot topic in many forms of media.

---

Because the media is not as impartial as they feign.

Quote:

---

How is it viewed in the Christian sect?

---

Christianity is not a sect.

Quote:

---

Some people say that they are born as a ****sexual. Do you agree with this view?

---

As is the case from humblest beginnings, from potty training to curbing appe***es that range from alcoholism to rage and even murderous desires, our higher calling is to strive to rise above the way we were born. Anything less is hedonistic regression.

And it does not make it right by who or how many agree with a view.

The Creator of all things (including sexuality) decides right from wrong. And he spelled it out in his Manufacturer's Manual the Bible. Thumbs down on ****sexuality, adultery, fornication, incest, bestiality...

Quote:

---

Or, is it a choice?

---

In some cases it is a choice. In others, it's the result of being on a path of many bad choices leading to impotency through desensitization. In other cases its the sociopathic thing to do. Still in other cases it is seeking love in the only place love is offered (since the opposite sex rejects them, or one of their parents was over bearing or they were molested). In some cases it's identification with the gender that wants sex as often and the same way they do, ironically.

None of which makes it right.

Quote:

---

Many churches are welcoming and accepting ****sexuals.

---

The Church is supposed to accept sinners of all types but not embrace sin.

Quote:

---

According to the Bible, ****sexuals will not enter into heaven. It seems God is casting judgment on them, even though they cannot help it. Do you agree or disagree?

TruthSeeker

---

There is a very long list of sins (including ****sexuality) in the Bible.

1 Corinthians 6:9-20
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
13 Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.
14 And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.
15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

I don't buy the argument they cannot help themselves. We can all help it, and we can all avoid compromising situations... when we get caught up in it 99 times out of 100, we did not take precautions and ignored our consciences when they stung us even before we were in over our heads.

So huh uh, I ain't buying what you're (the OP) trying to sell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnd

I don't buy the argument they cannot help themselves. We can all help it, and we can all avoid compromising situations... when we get caught up in it 99 times out of 100, we did not take precautions and ignored our consciences when they stung us even before we were in over our heads.

So huh uh, I ain't buying what you're (the OP) trying to sell.

---

Is thinking about it just as bad as doing it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elizabeth

Is thinking about it just as bad as doing it?

---

Hello Elizabeth,

The answer is no.

Very rare are those who can master their mind in the jungle of their thoughts. Thoughts are just like involuntary spasms from your body.The discipline for your mind is something you can acquire by the prayer (a grace), meditation and spiritual experience.

Even if someone can have explicit, bad thoughts, God still loves him. We all resist to all sorts of temptations. Someone should not feel guilty for his thoughts but just forget them. The perturbation or the discomfort comes when we give too much attention to those thoughts.

Welcome among us Elizabeth. :)

Trinity

I disapprove the ****sexual life style but,...

...I do not mix religion with politics. This is a dangerous mixture.

For now, the ****sexuality is in the agenda of all churches. And the political road is becoming the instrument to ostracize those people from our society. If those persons are seen like citizens of second cl***, tell me what will happen, after, with the Muslims or the Hindus who are living among us.

Just because they are not living according to our christian norms (standards), we will chase them like the poor women in the Middle Ages who were accused of witchcraft. In that time it was more easy for clergymen to burn the daughters of Eve than the sons of Adam. Anyway, that was Eve who was closer to the snake.

Are we intransigeant? As Charlin Chaplin who was chased from America by the Senator McCarthy. Are we seeing communists everywhere? What kind of love is this?

Often, my church (catholic) was accused because of his close relationship with the temporal power, but in our days, the christians evangelical are not doing better. They want to be involved into the presidency as the Catholic church wanted to be involved through a king. Where are the lessons of the history?

A christian government, with an unlimited power, in America, is the most dangerous thing in the hands of imperfect elected men. May that God protects us against this possibility.

Remember what Hitler has done to the Jews, but also to the ****sexuals, to the Jehovah Witnesses, and to the disabled people. This is the kind of society we want? And all those blacks who were hanged on a tree branch just because of the color of their skin.

A lot of Christians are harsh against the feminists. However, I have never encountered, any evangelical woman decided to give up her very legitimate right to cast a vote. All women are feminists. Even when they want a woman as president or vice-president of the United States. To say otherwise is a hypocrisy.

“I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others.”---Thomas Jefferson.

This is the guy who wrote your cons***ution.

Trinity

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trinity

Hello Elizabeth,

The answer is no.

Very rare are those who can master their mind in the jungle of their thoughts. Thoughts are just like involuntary spasms from your body.The discipline for your mind is something you can acquire by the prayer (a grace), meditation and spiritual experience.

Even if someone can have explicit, bad thoughts, God still loves him. We all resist to all sorts of temptations. Someone should not feel guilty for his thoughts but just forget them. The perturbation or the discomfort comes when we give too much attention to those thoughts.


Trinity

---

I think Jesus would disagree with you.

Matthew 5

27 "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY';

28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Matthew 15

18 "But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man.

19 "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.

Keep in mind that it is not a sin to be tempted, unless you're willing to say that Christ sinned. It says that he was tempted in ALL ways, but was without sin.

I think Martin Luther was right here when he said something to the effect of "I'm not responsible for the birds that fly around my head, but I am if I let them nest in my hair." Or something like that.

It's not a sin to be tempted, but it is a sin to give heed to that temptation and dwell on those thoughts.

Elizabeth's question was:

Is thinking about it just as bad as doing it?

I didn't read her question as asking is it bad to be tempted.

To say no, (imo) gives the impression that a person is only committing a smaller offense by entertaining sinful thoughts as long as you don't act on them. There are no lesser sins that aren't as bad.

I agree, it is not a sin to be tempted with a bad thought. But people regularly thinking and getting enjoyment from those thoughts will eventually act on them.

Philippians 4

7 And the peace of God, which surp***es all comprehension, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

8 Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things.

Hello Sayso,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sayso

I agree, it is not a sin to be tempted with a bad thought. But people regularly thinking and getting enjoyment from those thoughts will eventually act on them.

---

Into the normal conditions the length of a temptation (bad thought) can vary between 5 to 7 minutes. To be exposed more than this period of time is definitely a critical zone. Usually, after this length of time our mind is shifted on something else.

Concerning lust, I am more of the opinion that Jesus was referring to a state of desire as what happened between King David and Bathsheba.

Welcome into the Trans-Siberian train. I am wishing you a very comfortable travel among us. :)

Trinity

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

****sexuality continues to be a hot topic in many forms of media. How is it viewed in the Christian sect? Some people say that they are born as a ****sexual. Do you agree with this view? Or, is it a choice? Many churches are welcoming and accepting ****sexuals. According to the Bible, ****sexuals will not enter into heaven. It seems God is casting judgment on them, even though they cannot help it. Do you agree or disagree?

TruthSeeker

---

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...unions_en.html

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...ersons_en.html

It seems to me that the Church's stance is one that labels ****sexuality to be a type of disorder. It is much a disorder as perhaps as an alcoholic faces or perhaps obesity. The Church does not accept ****sexual acts, yet may take in the ****sexual in hopes that God will help them turn around. I have a problem with people who would say that God made them ****sexual, James tell us in chapter 1.14 that we are tempted when we are drawn away and trapped by our own evil desires and the verse prior that God tempts nobody. Hence, the ***ertion that a person says they are ****sexual, but are chaste and refrain from ****sexual acts has a certain problem in saying this in a social context. For one thing, if they are saying it like alcoholics at an AA meeting would be one thing... but we don't have much by way of an ****sexual Anonymous. While alcohol is a legal to drink, it is condemned socially to drink in excess and get behind the wheel and drive drunk. Many people can also get jailed for PI, public intoxication. But what of ****sexuality? Certain we have laws against sodomy on the books, but it is hard to enforce when people do it behind closed doors and consent to it. We have gay pride parades, but we don't have an alcoholics parade or an obesity parade. The ***ertion is taken by most to be a symbol of pride at being a ****sexual and not as a disease.

I therefore would reject any Catholic who says that they are ****sexual, yet are chaste. They can allude to the fact that they have lustful desires, but they should never claim to be "****sexual" as James clearly demonstrates in 1.13-14.

Exactly, by them saying that over and over they are accepting it as fact. "I think therefore I am." So to speak.

They need to rebuke the Devil in the name of Jesus Christ and be delivered from the spirit that is plaguing them. ****sexuality is a spirit, and until you get equipt for spiritual warfare you cannot do anything about it. When the devil tells you that you were born that way and can't help, you tell him he's a liar and the father of all lies. You tell him that God made you and that God doesn't make mistakes, and you tell him that HE decieds what you are and what you are not and the Devil has no right to come to you telling you lies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trinity

I disapprove the ****sexual life style but,...

...I do not mix religion with politics. This is a dangerous mixture.

For now, the ****sexuality is in the agenda of all churches. And the political road is becoming the instrument to ostracize those people from our society. If those persons are seen like citizens of second cl***, tell me what will happen, after, with the Muslims or the Hindus who are living among us.

---

The political road is not an instrument to ostracize the ****sexuals from our society, it is exactly opposite. The ****sexual interest groups are pushing themselves on our society and seeking to subvert our society. Case in point, the last two elections in California voted against gay marriage. The ****sexuals think this is uncons***utional, so they hope to appeal to the judicial system but find it presently difficult. They have in many local instances had field trips for elementary students for their marriages/civil unions, taught from books to elementary students promoting ****sexuality, and attempt to insert themselves into religion by playing the politics within denominations and exert pressures on the religious communities from politics in government. That is what their lobbyists do. To place the Christian community as the offender is simply an over-the-top ***essment. Let's face it, the media is in bed with ****sexuality as is Hollywood. What they present to the viewers is a skewed representation.

As Steve Taylor sang in "Meet the Press"

When the ratings point the camera's eye
They can state the facts while telling a lie.



I think the questions raised by you is not yet able to be staged. Going back to the Salem Witch trails is not possible in such a secular society that we live in today. I see more an attack on Christianity than the other way around. Of course, there are bad apples among us. But I do not think any Christian here, worth their salt, would advocate physical harm on the ****sexual. Such a person would be a professing Christian, and if they are unrepentant, certainly not in favor of our Lord. To better demonstrate how bad it is, I offer you this website:
http://www.gaycatholicforum.org/
And I want hear you tell me that there is no ***ault on Catholicism internally by such advocates!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Columcille

The political road is not an instrument to ostracize the ****sexuals from our society, it is exactly opposite. The ****sexual interest groups are pushing themselves on our society and seeking to subvert our society. Case in point, the last two elections in California voted against gay marriage. The ****sexuals think this is uncons***utional, so they hope to appeal to the judicial system but find it presently difficult. They have in many local instances had field trips for elementary students for their marriages/civil unions, taught from books to elementary students promoting ****sexuality, and attempt to insert themselves into religion by playing the politics within denominations and exert pressures on the religious communities from politics in government. That is what their lobbyists do. To place the Christian community as the offender is simply an over-the-top ***essment. Let's face it, the media is in bed with ****sexuality as is Hollywood. What they present to the viewers is a skewed representation.

As Steve Taylor sang in "Meet the Press"

When the ratings point the camera's eye
They can state the facts while telling a lie.

I think the questions raised by you is not yet able to be staged. Going back to the Salem Witch trails is not possible in such a secular society that we live in today. I see more an attack on Christianity than the other way around. Of course, there are bad apples among us. But I do not think any Christian here, worth their salt, would advocate physical harm on the ****sexual. Such a person would be a professing Christian, and if they are unrepentant, certainly not in favor of our Lord. To better demonstrate how bad it is, I offer you this website:
http://www.gaycatholicforum.org/
And I want hear you tell me that there is no ***ault on Catholicism internally by such advocates!

---

I do not understand why they have referendums on this issue first. According to your cons***ution the state and religion should be separate. Also, the verbal violence always precedes the physical violence. This is not a new thing. People who are irritated from the two sides of the fence are immature. They condition their mental to a hatred confrontation, in an unbalanced emotional state. Because someone believes differently, they are irritated and they want to crush him. They are murderer into their heart. This is most of the time dormant in individuals but, this can bust collectively. In a small group (soldiers or policers who are committing atrocities) or a large mob (riot). A democratic society is not a guaranty for peace. Peace begins into the heart first.

Trinity

The position of the AoG as espoused by the Southwestern ***embly of God University in Waxahachie appears to be that they DO NOT claim that "all ****sexuals are ****sexual by choice", and allow for a natural "flawed gender ***ociation".

They also state accurately that there are any number of "Natural Heterosexual Behaviors" that persons can (and do) engage in that are sinful.

IN THAT light, a "Natural ****sexuality" (whether it exists or not) really doesn't cons***ute any sort of argument for justification of ****sexual/lesbian ACTIVITY - which is ALWAYS and without exception represented as "sinful" behavior in the Bible.

ALL "Sexual sin" is at issue, and ****sexuality isn't a "Super sin" - just another sinful activity that sinful humans fall into - naturally - it's our nature to sin.

What's fascinating to me is that the Stereotypical "effeminate man" - and the "Masculine Woman" are likely to be the PHYSICAL result of known chromosomal disorders which in extreme cases result in sterility, and A-sexuality - no sexual orientation AT ALL without hormonal treatments.

And like or not, a significant percentage of live births are "gender ambiguous" to one degree or another - in some cases to the extent that the hospital is simply incapable without chemical testing of determining the sex of a newborn through an examination of the genitalia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Columcille

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...unions_en.html


I therefore would reject any Catholic who says that they are ****sexual, yet are chaste. They can allude to the fact that they have lustful desires, but they should never claim to be "****sexual" as James clearly demonstrates in 1.13-14.

---

Hi Columcille,

I'm new here, but wanted to ask you, what term would you find acceptable for someone who was celibate, Christian, and yet never had any sexual attraction to members of the opposite gender, and always have had sexual attraction exclusively to members of the same gender? Thanks for your thoughts!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrotherBrian

Hi Columcille,

I'm new here, but wanted to ask you, what term would you find acceptable for someone who was celibate, Christian, and yet never had any sexual attraction to members of the opposite gender, and always have had sexual attraction exclusively to members of the same gender? Thanks for your thoughts!

---

To answer your question, I would not call them anything but what you just described. Celibate and Christian. The deeper aspects of our iden***y is more than just our fleshly bodies. Better the person not reflect on "orientation" and focus more on practicing relational aspects and virtues with and toward the Lord.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a7.htm

I think the above link describes a little about the human and divine virtues. Cardinal and theological virtues. Prudence, Justice, For***ude, and Temperance along with Faith, Hope, and Charity (love of an agape sort).

Trinity,
I've seen the video of the lesbians going into a Christian church and throwing out condoms and yelling Jesus is Gay and kissing. There was even one caught on camera of a ****sexual actually hitting a lady who was a Christian. I have not seen the violence you are suggestion by mainstream Christian groups. Even when there are rougue professing Christians, the Christian churches in America will state their condemnation of such acts. I have not condoned any verbal or physical abuse of the ****sexual. I think because my position shows for***ude, that you mistake that to be something of a vice. You stated the following Trinity:

Quote:

---

According to your cons***ution the state and religion should be separate

---

There is no cons***utional "seperation of Church and State." The United States Cons***ution does not endorse any religion, but does not say to the politicians who are elected and have in their campaign maintained their religious integrity to keep their moral views as held by their religion to sit at the door when they sit down to vote what is before them or to be silent when they is presenting their case before the rest of the Congress. I think it rather an unfair advantage of the Christian to always have to compromise his integrity when he become a politican, but the other folks to advance their own cause. After so much expecting the conservative to give up so much, there comes a time that the conservative has nothing left, and so they must redefine conservativism. You can replace "conservative" and "conservativism" and replace it with whatever you want... compromise of this nature that seeks to moralize the once immoral is a heresy that God does not take lightly, and I sincerely hope you are not part of the same address to the church of Laodicea or of Sardis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Columcille

To answer your question, I would not call them anything but what you just described. Celibate and Christian. The deeper aspects of our iden***y is more than just our fleshly bodies. Better the person not reflect on "orientation" and focus more on practicing relational aspects and virtues with and toward the Lord.

---

Thanks for your thoughts. Can I ask, then what if the person is celibate and Christian and attracted exclusively to members of the opposite gender? Would you be opposed to calling them heterosexual? If not, then why do you oppose calling someone who is celibate and Christian and yet attracted exclusively to members of the same gender ****sexual? It seems to be a disconnect in the Church that somehow even identifying oneself as ****sexual is just as grave an error as someone engaged in ****sexual expressions. Yet we don't see that dicotomy when it comes to one who is heterosexual, even those who engage in heterosexual expressions.

It seems to be a double standard. In other words, the Church seems to treat all sin equally, but to even identify as a sinner in need of grace is only permissable when that person is heterosexual, because to be ****sexual and Christian is viewed as doctrinally impossible, even though the church recognizes there are indeed people in the world who do identify exclusively as ****sexual, not in an effort to identify with a sinful behavior, but to be honest about the nature of their particular nature.

It seems that the Church would rather ****sexuals be dishonest with members of the ***embly and say they are heterosexual or celibate, and actually inadvertently teach it is better to lie, which is as grievous a sin as any. One of the 10 Commandments is thou shall not lie, but there are no commandments saying, thou shall not be ****sexual, and if you are then thou shall lie about it.

What's a gay Christian to do when approaching the church for guidance in this manner? Yes, I am gay, and yes I am Christian, and yes I am celibate.

Not trying to set you up with a trick question here, just really confused as to how a gay person is to navigate Christianity if we cannot even be honest about who we are. Thanks in advance for your time.

Brother Brian, it should be enough to state one's gender and leave it at that. Genesis 1.27c "Male and female he created them." I find it rather annoying to have to tell people I am white, male, or something rather obvious. There is really no need for people to parade around saying I am a heterosexual or a ****sexual. It serves no purpose except to agitate, or even more annoying still as a means of a frank pick-up line. Anyone have to say "I am a heterosexual" in a normal conversation, I find it a little awkward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leslie

I think that ****sexuality is a spirit sent forth by the devil to confuse and destroy certain individuals.

---

That may be "an" explanation which resolves something in certain people, but you can be certain that a guy/gal who has struggled with or accepted ****sexuality since childhood, is not going to likely take that as a viable answer; no more than a 'heterosexual' would.

Ever heard anyone refer to the spirit of heterosexuality?

Quote:

---

I believe fully that a person who is battling this can be fully delivered from what they are experiencing and can live a perfectly heterosexual life. My God is that big.

---

Some people can be relegated to a particular sexual-orientation of choice; but the preponderance of evidence supports the likelihood that most people do not choose their sexual-orientation; and it cannot be struggled out of...etc. At absolute best or as a real option, many can choose to abstain from certain sexual activities (as a heterosexual person surely might).

When discussing something as convoluted, politicized, misunderstood, and misrepresented as ****sexuallity, it is best to return to the holy word of
God for our understanding....

The bible makes no excuse for sins of the flesh, but in fact declares that all sin and unrighteouness will be destroyed; that includes ****sexuals,
fornicators, ****sexuallity, and the like...

The only hope any of us have is through God incarnate, who died that we may live.

The holy writ is clear: The just shall live by faith.


Rom 1:18 ¶ For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;


Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.


Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:


Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.


Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,


Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.


Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:


Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.


Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:


Rom 1:27 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.


Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;


Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,


Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,


Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:


Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oatmeal

When discussing something as convoluted, politicized, misunderstood, and misrepresented as ****sexuallity, it is best to return to the holy word of
God for our understanding....

---

I can respect your view, still... many only imagine that a biblical view of these things (in reality) is all that they need. I try not to badger anyone about it, but I would disagree that the Bible offers ALL that needs to be understood about human sexuality.

(Can't argue it too much, because people will always have differing views about it.)

Most importantly (in my view), no one should be imposing their views upon others; certain things should be left to God's providence, not our own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

****sexuality continues to be a hot topic in many forms of media.

---

Indeed.

Quote:

---

How is it viewed in the Christian sect?

---

There are MANY Christian 'sects' (in my view); and surely not all who are "Christian" view ****sexuality in the exact same ways, nor do that 'handle' it as such.

Quote:

---

Some people say that they are born as a ****sexual.

---

They say that most times, because they have valid reasons to claim the same. It is fair to say, that those of various religious doctrines or mindsets, may not necessarily agree with such claims. Still, that should not ultimately diminish the human rights of those who happen to be ****sexual.

Quote:

---

Do you agree with this view?

---

I would agree that some people may be able to "choose" their sexual-orientation, but generally think that many and most do not have any conscious opportunity to do so.

Quote:

---

Or, is it a choice?

---

What many decide to do as a course of living may indeed be "choice" but I cannot see how most ****sexual people could choose their sexual-orientation.

Quote:

---

Many churches are welcoming and accepting ****sexuals.

---

I believe that is reasonable; I see no evidence that Jesus rejected ****sexual people, as many churches do even today. Not to say that He would agree that ****sexual expressions were 'correct', but that Jesus is not evidenced to be against all ****sexual PEOPLE as many (not all) Christian clearly are today.

Quote:

---

According to the Bible, ****sexuals will not enter into heaven.

---

Really, that depends upon various translations and interpretations. I ultimately think that it (being in Heaven) is between The Lord and the individual human being. That determined by the interpretation to others; I don't believe it is.

Quote:

---

It seems God is casting judgment on them, even though they cannot help it. Do you agree or disagree?

---

I personally cannot think that I would understand "God". I also believe that many who think they understand God, likely do not; it is a human limitation. Even so, I think that the BEST things are those tools Jesus encouraged in all who would consider Him.

Nevertheless, I don't see any cookie-cutter-cut, perfected answers in "words" we can offer humanity; but that the essence of Christ's love remain the primary and positively-affective component of what many would refer to as "Christianity". Beyond that, I think we can and should share our opinions, views and beliefs... in that same love.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Austin Canes

I can respect your view, still... many only imagine that a biblical view of these things (in reality) is all that they need. I try not to badger anyone about it, but I would disagree that the Bible offers ALL that needs to be understood about human sexuality.


Human sexuality was created by God: what would you say is missing from his instruction manual in regards to same?






Most importantly (in my view), no one should be imposing their views upon others; certain things should be left to God's providence, not our own.

---

God's providence towards us and in fact towards this earth is compiled in the very book you discount as being less than what is needed for our understanding of our behavior......



Whether a man is born with a preponderance for ****sexual expression,
or he is born, as was Cain, with murder in his heart, is well illustrated
in this p***age from Ps. 51-"Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

We have no problem condemning murder and sentencing a convicted murderer to receive punishment......
However, ****sexuallity has gained immense lat***ude and has been embraced pollitically; but the word of God does not change, God almighty calls ****sexuallity sin and forecasts the reserved punishment for those
that commit it.

Does that mean that God cannot, nor will not save ****sexuals?
No, it does not mean that at all. He does tell us, however, Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Rom.6:12

****sexual behavior is driven by our lusts; it is thus acted upon by our lusts.
Lusts are very powerful; but through Christ Jesus we have victory over our lusts:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oatmeal

God's providence towards us and in fact towards this earth is compiled in the very book you discount as being less than what is needed for our understanding of our behavior......

---

With all due respect, I know and believe there is more what I'll embrace as a human being, than merely what someone pulls/interprets from the Bible, and demands or insists I must believe or embrace. I don't rule-out what I've gotten from Scripture myself, I just don't believe that book has all the answers, nor do ANY of us likely have a perfect interpretation or understanding of what that book contains.

Quote:

---

Whether a man is born with a preponderance for ****sexual expression, or he is born, as was Cain, with murder in his heart, is well illustrated in this p***age from Ps. 51-"Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

---

Yep; we all have a LOT of 'humanness' to let God work on and work on ourselves.

Quote:

---

We have no problem condemning murder and sentencing a convicted murderer to receive punishment......

---

As is proper; and really in this society we don't really see many seeking to dehumanize even those who have committed 'murder'; I've heard worse things said about ****sexual people from Christians, than I've heard about murderers (almost consistently); to me, that is somewhat amazing.

Quote:

---

However, ****sexuallity has gained immense lat***ude and has been embraced pollitically; but the word of God does not change, God almighty calls ****sexuallity sin and forecasts the reserved punishment for those
that commit it.

---

At the very least, the "interpretation" of and "religion" about the Bible changes from place-to-place, and era-to-era; that need not be argued very much, to know it is true. (We do not put disobedient children to death, and divorce is no longer illegal; but there are MANY MORE examples.)

Quote:

---

Does that mean that God cannot, nor will not save ****sexuals?

---

Of course, Jesus surely hung on the Cross for ****sexual people as well; anyone who says otherwise is talking about a different "Christianity" than I was taught (which is VERY possible in this world).

Quote:

---

No, it does not mean that at all. He does tell us, however, Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Rom.6:12

---

Wise and prudent, indeed; but that isn't for YOU and every other joe-christian to enforce upon other human beings. Mind your own life/behavior, be a living example of what you believe; that is how you should likely witness in the vast majority of cases in this reality.

Quote:

---

****sexual behavior is driven by our lusts; it is thus acted upon by our lusts.

---

Perhaps; but not every person who is ****sexual, is that way because of some 'sin' they are committing. And just as many heterosexuals, many ****sexuals learn to control themselves and their p***ions.

Quote:

---

Lusts are very powerful; but through Christ Jesus we have victory over our lusts:)

---

If you are saying that Christians and religious people don't have to deal with being HORNY... then all I will do is chuckle and say:

Most human beings with healthy bodies (Christians included), have a sex-drive. The degree to which that is controlled is a matter of many factors; and specific sexual-appe***es are not necessarily chosen by an individual. That is, what turns YOU on as opposed to any other person, may certainly not be the same thing(s).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrotherBrian

Thanks for your thoughts. Can I ask, then what if the person is celibate and Christian and attracted exclusively to members of the opposite gender? Would you be opposed to calling them heterosexual? If not, then why do you oppose calling someone who is celibate and Christian and yet attracted exclusively to members of the same gender ****sexual? It seems to be a disconnect in the Church that somehow even identifying oneself as ****sexual is just as grave an error as someone engaged in ****sexual expressions. Yet we don't see that dicotomy when it comes to one who is heterosexual, even those who engage in heterosexual expressions.

It seems to be a double standard. In other words, the Church seems to treat all sin equally, but to even identify as a sinner in need of grace is only permissable when that person is heterosexual, because to be ****sexual and Christian is viewed as doctrinally impossible, even though the church recognizes there are indeed people in the world who do identify exclusively as ****sexual, not in an effort to identify with a sinful behavior, but to be honest about the nature of their particular nature.

It seems that the Church would rather ****sexuals be dishonest with members of the ***embly and say they are heterosexual or celibate, and actually inadvertently teach it is better to lie, which is as grievous a sin as any. One of the 10 Commandments is thou shall not lie, but there are no commandments saying, thou shall not be ****sexual, and if you are then thou shall lie about it.

What's a gay Christian to do when approaching the church for guidance in this manner? Yes, I am gay, and yes I am Christian, and yes I am celibate.

Not trying to set you up with a trick question here, just really confused as to how a gay person is to navigate Christianity if we cannot even be honest about who we are. Thanks in advance for your time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Columcille

Brother Brian, it should be enough to state one's gender and leave it at that. Genesis 1.27c "Male and female he created them." I find it rather annoying to have to tell people I am white, male, or something rather obvious. There is really no need for people to parade around saying I am a heterosexual or a ****sexual. It serves no purpose except to agitate, or even more annoying still as a means of a frank pick-up line. Anyone have to say "I am a heterosexual" in a normal conversation, I find it a little awkward.

---

Thanks for the response....I find your explanation did not actually answer my questions though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oatmeal

When discussing something as convoluted, politicized, misunderstood, and misrepresented as ****sexuallity, it is best to return to the holy word of
God for our understanding....

The bible makes no excuse for sins of the flesh, but in fact declares that all sin and unrighteouness will be destroyed; that includes ****sexuals,
fornicators, ****sexuallity, and the like...

The only hope any of us have is through God incarnate, who died that we may live.

The holy writ is clear: The just shall live by faith.

---

Hi, While I agree we must turn to God's Word, do you think that perhaps Romans 1 is being used as a blanket condemnation of gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender people without considering the following interpretations? Thanks for your time!

26 For this reason God gave them over and abandoned them to vile affections and degrading p***ions. For their women exchanged their natural function for an unnatural and abnormal one,

NOTE: Female GLBT people do not "exchange the natural function" for an unnatural and abnormal one. For a GLBT female, same gender expression is both natural and normal, therefore, this does not apply to GLBT people.

It applies to heterosexual women. For heterosexual women, relations with a woman is not natural, and so for the women listed in these Scriptures who "exchanged their natural function for an unnatural and abnormal one" the women had to have been heterosexual at first or there would have been no "exchange of function", therefore, this does not apply to GLBT Christians. Nor does it apply to heterosexual female Christians (true Christians striving to live holy lives. Obviously some are tempted from time to time)


27 And the men also turned from natural relations with women and were set ablaze (burning out, consumed) with lust for one another--men committing shameful acts with men and suffering in their own bodies and personalities the inevitable consequences and penalty of their wrong-doing and going astray, which was [their] fitting retribution.


NOTE: Male GLBT people do not turn from natural relations with women because it is not in our nature to have relations with women. For a male GLBT person, same gender expression is both natural and normal, therefore, this portion of the Scripture does not apply to GLBT Christians.

It applies to heterosexual men. For heterosexual men, relations with a woman is natural, and so to "turn from natural relations with women and to be set ablaze (burning out, consumed) with lust for one another", or to be "going astray" these men would have had to be heterosexual at first in order to have "turned from natural relations with women", therefore, this does not apply to GLBT Christians. Nor does it apply to male heterosexual Christians (true Christians striving to live holy lives. Obviously some are tempted from time to time)


But what does the term "for this reason" relate to in verse 26? It relates back to verses 21-25. But most Christians p**** down Romans 1 until all we see are details about how these heterosexual people came to be engaging in same gender expressions. I believe that most Christians get this backwards. They don't acknowledge or share what "for this reason" means in verse 26. They interpret it to say that people were gay first, therefore, they reject God and therefore God turned them over. But that's not the order we see at all.


It also fails to study out what Paul was talking about who these people were worshiping instead of God. They were ancient pagan idols, and Paul said they were represented by images of mortal men, birds, four footed beasts and reptiles. Sure enough, if one were to cross reference the ancient Roman and Greek gods, we see that indeed they were represented exactly as Paul said they were:

Zeus: His attribute is the lightning bolt and his symbol the eagle, who is also his messenger (BIRD)

Hermes: The symbols of Mercury are the caduceus (a staff with two intertwined snakes) (REPTILE)

Hestia Goddess of the Fire (both sacred and domestic) and the Hearth. Daughter of Saturn and Ops. Her sacred animal was the a ss. Patroness of bakers. Her chief festival was the Vestalia on June 7. One of the most worshipped of the Roman deities.
(FOUR FOOTED BEAST)

Poseidon: Horse and bull (FOUR FOOTED BEAST)

Aprhodite: dove (BIRD)

Hera: was goddess of marriage and the queen of Olympus. She was Zeus's wife and sister; many myths tell of how she sought revenge when Zeus betrayed her with his lovers. Her symbols include the pea**** and the cow. (BIRD) (FOUR FOOTED BEAST)

Ares: was the god of war. He was both cruel and a coward. Ares was the son of Zeus and Hera, but neither of his parents liked him. His symbols include the vulture and the dog, and he often carried a bloody spear. (BIRD) (FOUR FOOTED BEAST)

Athena was the goddess of wisdom. She was also skilled in the art of war, and helped heroes such as Odysseus and Hercules. Athena sprang full-grown from the forehead of Zeus, and became his favorite child. Her symbols include the owl and the olive tree. (BIRD)

Dionysus was the god of wine, which he invented. In ancient Greece Dionysus was honored with springtime festivals that centered on theater. Dionysus was the son of Zeus and Semele, a mortal. His symbols include ivy, the snake, and grapes. (REPTILE)


These are the gods to whom Paul refers that the Romans were worshiping and returned to worshiping them even after hearing the Word of God, and again, as Paul said, these gods were represented by images of mortal men, birds, reptiles and four footed beasts.

These are the "creatures" they worshiped instead of the Creator, just as Paul describes in Romans 1:21-23, saying:


21Because when they knew and recognized Him as God, they did not honor and glorify Him as God or give Him thanks. But instead they became futile and godless in their thinking [with vain imaginings, foolish reasoning, and ****** speculations] and their senseless minds were darkened.

22Claiming to be wise, they became fools [professing to be smart, they made simpletons of themselves].

23And by them the glory and majesty and excellence of the immortal God were exchanged for and represented by images, resembling mortal man and birds and beasts and reptiles. Romans 1:21-23



But if we start off quoting Romans 1 beginning at verse 26, as most Christians do, we miss the entire context in which these Scriptures are set. Also, many Christians fail to realize that idol worship was nothing new, but that in fact, Romans 1 is a repeat and fulfillment of the prophecies contained in Amos 5:25-27.

We even see that some of the Israelites worshiped these same gods, which is why they built the golden calf, and God even prophesies through Amos that not only were they guilty of worshiping these pagan gods while in the wilderness, but "would do so again." Paul's words in Romans is a description of this original event where God says:

25 Did you bring to Me sacrifices and cereal offerings during those forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?

26 [No] but [instead of bringing Me the appointed sacrifices] you carried about the tent of your king Sakkuth and Kaiwan [names for the gods of the planet Saturn], your images of your star-god which you made for yourselves [and you will do so again].

27Therefore I will cause you to go into exile beyond Damascus, says the Lord, whose name is the God of hosts.
Amos 5:25-27

Romans 1 is fulfillment of this prophecy from God. And guess what lies "beyond Damascus" from Egypt?? ROME!


Finally, we see that even Paul and Barnabas encountered idol worshipers before even arriving in Rome as we review the Book of Acts:


8 Now at Lystra a man sat who found it impossible to use his feet, for he was a cripple from birth and had never walked.

9 He was listening to Paul as he talked, and [Paul] gazing intently at him and observing that he had faith to be healed,

10 Shouted at him, saying, Stand erect on your feet! And he leaped up and walked.

11 And the crowds, when they saw what Paul had done, lifted up their voices, shouting in the Lycaonian language, The gods have come down to us in human form!

12 They called Barnabas Zeus, and they called Paul, because he led in the discourse, Hermes [god of speech].

13 And the priest of Zeus, whose [temple] was at the entrance of the town, brought bulls and garlands to the [city's] gates and wanted to join the people in offering sacrifice. Acts 14:8-13

Now, note again the first 2 gods I listed above:

Zeus: His attribute is the lightning bolt and his symbol the eagle, who is also his messenger (BIRD)

Hermes: The symbols of Mercury are the caduceus (a staff with two intertwined snakes) (REPTILE)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

Some people say that they are born as a ****sexual. Do you agree with this view? Or, is it a choice?

---

a moot point.

it does not matter what you were born with a predisposition toward, the bible is clear in teaching that ****sexual acts are a sin, and therefore you are to avoid them....case closed.

I think I will tell a story that opened my eyes on this topic...

in our church we have speakers come in and give talks about different issues of the day.
one time a person came to talk to us about the local "Home for Boys", run by the catholic monastery.

One of the Brothers of the monastery come to talk to us about the Home.
After the talk, (intended to build support for the Home within the community ) there was a time set aside for Q&A.

A question was asked about the type of boys at the Home?
And the answer was surprising...

I had ***umed that most of the young boys where there because that had lost their parents and had no place else to go, but I was wrong.

It turns out that the vast majority of boys at this home where there because that had committed many sexual crimes and were listed as repeat sexual offenders.

We then learned what they did at this Home to help the boys .
and that is what i wanted to tell you guys here now.

the Brother was asked if "counseling" actually helped any of the boys that were sexual offenders?
The Brother's answer was not what I expected....


The Brother asked me if i was a confirmed Heterosexual ?
I answered that i was.

Then the Brother asked me if I thought that any "counseling" would ever be able to change that and change me into being a guy who was sexually attracted to boys?

My answer was a definite "NO!"

The Brother then pointed out to me , that although I'm never going to be other than a strictly Heterosexual , yet because I also am married I have found that I have been able to "control" my more wild Heterosexual proclivities and thus am not subject to the more base animal sexual nature inside me.

This is what is the hope for the staff there also at the Home for boys.



From this i came away with the following conclusion-
I came away with the idea that when i hear people debating over the question of "Born Gay Or Not?" I have a different answer than most Christians...

My answer is..."Its a moot point"....."It does not matter"...""The bible is clearly speaking to the evils of ****sexual acts, and so even if you are born gay it does not mean you are doomed to be forever in sin"

For i believe that regardless we have the ability to limit our actions to conform to accepted behaviors.

and....I think the AZ law would have been a bad idea.

I think it was a bad idea for a law from the start, and would have only served to bring out the darker side of our human nature.

being gay is a choice, sorry. I have my beliefs and if you don't like it tough, deal with it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

in our church we have speakers come in and give talks about different issues of the day.
one time a person came to talk to us about the local "Home for Boys", run by the catholic monastery.

One of the Brothers of the monastery come to talk to us about the Home.
After the talk, (intended to build support for the Home within the community ) there was a time set aside for Q&A.

A question was asked about the type of boys at the Home?
And the answer was surprising...

I had ***umed that most of the young boys where there because that had lost their parents and had no place else to go, but I was wrong.

It turns out that the vast majority of boys at this home where there because that had committed many sexual crimes and were listed as repeat sexual offenders.

We then learned what they did at this Home to help the boys .
and that is what i wanted to tell you guys here now.

the Brother was asked if "counseling" actually helped any of the boys that were sexual offenders?
The Brother's answer was not what I expected....


The Brother asked me if i was a confirmed Heterosexual ?
I answered that i was.

Then the Brother asked me if I thought that any "counseling" would ever be able to change that and change me into being a guy who was sexually attracted to boys?

My answer was a definite "NO!"

The Brother then pointed out to me , that although I'm never going to be other than a strictly Heterosexual , yet because I also am married I have found that I have been able to "control" my more wild Heterosexual proclivities and thus am not subject to the more base animal sexual nature inside me.

This is what is the hope for the staff there also at the Home for boys.



From this i came away with the following conclusion-
I came away with the idea that when i hear people debating over the question of "Born Gay Or Not?" I have a different answer than most Christians...

My answer is..."Its a moot point"....."It does not matter"...""The bible is clearly speaking to the evils of ****sexual acts, and so even if you are born gay it does not mean you are doomed to be forever in sin"

For i believe that regardless we have the ability to limit our actions to conform to accepted behaviors.

---

another of one of my better posts! :)

I was reading Tony Compolo's book red Letter Christians recently and in it he state that ****sexuals have been ****sexuals for so long that they do not remember it being a choice. ****sexuality is a choice and it is a deception, like transgenderism is, from evil. It is part of its plan to ruin and destroy God's creation