|
|
Post by Isapop on Sept 14, 2018 11:04:01 GMT
Isn't this "cross to bear" one that has been needlessly placed by God upon gay people? Gay sex causes no harm. If God had just declared that sex outside of marriage is a sin, whether straight or gay, wouldn't that have been fair to all who want to be a Christian? No where in the Bible does it say Christ is against homosexuality. It vaguely references the dangers of promiscuity and "men laying with men". But that is in reference to wreckless hedonism. Not homosexuality. And don't forget, the Bible was written by men. Not God or Jesus Christ. And it was based on the social morays of the time. I am agreeing with mslo79 's premise for the sake of argument. I am interested in how a Christian who believes gay sex is a sin responds to my question. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 14, 2018 12:19:04 GMT
captainbryce Jesus Christ is clearly against two people of the same sex having sex with each other as it's immoral, period. New sentence...Even IF I was interested in your opinion on this, or I believed you could support this statement using any words Jesus said in the bible (the answer to both of those is no by the way), at the end of the day, this is all just an EXCUSE to justify hate. Disowning a child because of something that you personally don’t like, or we’re brainwashed into believe Jesus said something about which he didn’t IS using the Lord’s name in vain. Especially when his most important commandments is to love thy neighbor. Not to mention how it contradicts most of his other teachings about “do unto others as you’d have them do unto you”, “let he who is without sin be the first to cast a stone...”, “judge not that ye be not judged”, etc. Its nothing more than a picking and choosing of different parts of the bible (while wholly ignoring others) in order to justify your agenda. And that is nothing more than “taking the name of the Lord in vain”. You can’t even demonstrate the supposed immortality of homosexual sex without invoking the circular reason of “because the bible says so”. Beyond that, there is nothing immoral about it. Which means that “clearly” you have to be an evil person devoid of morality to justify disowning a child for no apparent reason other than because a book written two thousand years ago told you that they were a sinner. I understand that the book makes you feel justified in the evil you do, but ultimately it’s just an excuse to do something evil. Well then you are a dishonest person and as inconsistent as your bible is. According to the bible (not necessarily Jesus but the Old Testament) you’re supposed to put them to death! Forcing a rape victim to have to marry her rapist is cool. Slavery - totally cool! Slaughtering men women and children who are pagans, no problem. But two men loving each other, must be put to death! Except when a Christian who wants to make excuses for evil thinks that’s going too far. STFU!  A typical parent loves their child and supports them throughout their childhood (whether they are gay or not) because that’s the PRIMARY responsibility of a parent. Any parent who decides to throw that responsibility away because of their own immorality is a failure. Acording to the bible he hates them. It’s called a detestable sin worthy of death. He likes slavery, but he hates gays. But that just proves gay your concept of God is immoral, and by extension so are you for accepting it. There are plenty of gay couples who follow Jesus without doing that. They don’t seem to have a problem being a Christian. Based on everything you’ve said YOU do. I’m not a Christian so I don’t care one way or the other. My point is that you can demonstrate no immorality in homosexual other than by evoking the bible. And that makes your position circular and unreasonable. |
|
