| Welcome to Saint Rangers. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Our goal is to equip saints to go out and witness to not only those on the internet, but to those we come into contact with on a daily basis. Through discussion and debate we are confident that growth in the knowledge of Jesus Christ will increase as we learn to perfect holiness in our daily lives, and to also strive for the doctrinal purity and harmony that is to be a primary characteristic in the mature Christian. Members of differings faiths and atheists are welcome here, but we will moderate the behavior of all who come here, and ask that civility be kept in all discussion. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Gay Issue | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 11 2013, 09:39 PM (332 Views) | |
| Random0wl | Jun 11 2013, 09:39 PM Post #1 |
|
Stranger
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Do you treat gay people differently than people that are straight? Think about it. It's a common topic lately considering the gay marriage laws & don't ask don't tell. So it is a legitimate question to ask. Think about this if you owned a company and you were looking to hire someone and you found the perfect employee, but he was gay would you still hire him? Did you just say no? You probably did on the basis that the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin. But then would your search for another employee be one that has no sin? Obviously this isn't possible so would you then just look at your potential employees sins based on different degrees? Why do we judge gay people so harshly in our Christian society? Are we not without sin ourselves to exclude them from the church? In my experience thus far in life, especially as of late, I have met some of the nicest people I've ever met & they just so happened to be gay. Should we not be friends with homosexuals as Christians because they would be considered "worldly" by our terms? But then if we did not befriend them & minister to them how would they become saved? Then the question would arise if they do become saved would they suddenly be "not gay"? Thoughts, comments, questions? (: |
![]() |
|
| theophilus | Jun 12 2013, 09:25 AM Post #2 |
|
Sojourner
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
One problem with discussing this issue is that often people overlook the distinction between homosexual orientation and homosexual practice. People often ask "Is homosexuality a sin?" The problem with that question is that the word "homosexual" is sometimes used to refer to the same sex attraction that some people experience and sometime to homosexual practice. The answer to the question would depend on which meaning the speaker has in mind. If two people are discussing homosexuality and one is thinking of the orientation and one of the practice the result will be a lot of confusion and misinformation. |
![]() |
|
| S.T.Ranger | Jun 12 2013, 11:26 AM Post #3 |
|
Ranger
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sometimes, yes. Not going to lie about it. But, in my defense, I also treat a number of cultures differently, such as the Rock and the Rap culture. However, if you mean am I rude, snide, or unloving to any of these groups, the answer is...I try not to be. Your question/s bring up a good example of how we tend to categorize sin, when in fact homosexuality, just as adultery, falls under a general heading of sexual sin. So as Christians we should be just as opposed to someone committing adultery, or (gasp!), people living together without being married...as we do homosexuality. Now one of the differences between adultery and homosexuality that I would point out is that most who commit adultery do so in private, they do not hold adultery pride parades and flaunt what every one of us as Christians have to admit scripture teaches to be sin. It used to be that sin caused shame for many people, and we have seen sin reclassified and not only removed from the sin list, but actually offered to be an attractive lifestyle. Sin is sin, we all commit it, we all fall short of the glory of God, but, as Christians we are not to reclassify sin and deem it not sin, nor do we encourage others...to sin.
Why is it a common topic? Because the shame once felt for disobedience to God is disappearing, thanks to the efforts of the Homosexual Agenda. A relatively small percentage of people, but they are the ones "turning the world upside down" these days.
Agreed.
Think about it: how would I know if he was gay or not (I don't hire females, by the way, they are quite inadequate to perform the work I do...JUST KIDDING! lol)? The answer would be only if it was so apparent through how they acted...right? So we go back to not only the openness we see concerning those who are gay, but that it impacts how they carry themselves. Better to ask would be if someone was involved in a particular sin, and they did not broadcast this sin, and I found out about it later, then no, I would not fire them unless it was something that hindered their ability to work or imperiled the company or the customers. But not hiring someone because they have an outward appearance that clearly shows they engage in behavior that I as a Christian cannot support, well, you can fault me for that, and call me intolerant, but while you do so, keep in mind I am not going to gay people and behaving in a manner which they disagree with. I would also not hire an applicant that showed up for the interview drunk or on drugs. Nor one that showed up wearing a tutu. Nor one that had not bathed for a week, nor one that... ...well, you get the point. While the grace of God extends to all men, the grace of S.T. has its limits, primarily because I am in the same boat as everyone else: I am not God, but do my best to convey the love of God as best I can. So consider if it would be okay for me not to hire a drunk wearing a tutu that had not bathed for a week who was tripping on acid but not okay for me not to hire someone that feels they must declare what most people keep to themselves, which is, what they do in private?
I did, actually.
In part, yes, but there is also more to it. As I said, homosexuality is clearly denounced in scripture as sin. Just as adultery is. It falls under that general header. This is not open for debate, and most with above a fourth grade education can easily see that in scripture. Along with that comes also certain responsibilities we might have to our company, our customers, and our families. Someone so open about what we should be in agreement is sin being hired would be about as sensible as hiring the tutu wearing drunk. While we do not categorize sin and in fact understand that is SIN, not sins, which separate man from God, neither do we encourage or minimalize sin to the point that the Homosexual Agenda does, going so far as to deny that which scripture teaches. It is not okay to live that lifestyle, just as it is not okay to commit adultery. Just as it is not okay to use drugs. Just as it is not okay to wear tutus, except for certain occasions and only if you have the right shoes.
I can only hope that this is only for the purpose of illustration. It is the right of the business owner to hire who he/she wants to. When it comes to hiring a homosexual, this would not be the primary factor, it would be their character in view, and as far as I am concerned anyone that flaunts their sexuality openly, whether homo or heterosexual would be in my book what used to be called...a tramp. When a man acts effeminate, on purpose, that is, we have to ask why. As I said, refusal to hire would/might occur if, such as this example, a man acting effeminate, would result because of that openness. If someone was openly an adulterer, I would no more wish to hire them. So would it be okay to hire a gay man...but not a drunk? Why not? Categorization of sin? Think about that RandomOwl...if you say yes to the above question you have become guilty of that which you ask of your readers. And if you try to say both SHOULD be hired, you will be thought of as unreasonable.
For the most part, yes. As Christians we know that all will sin while they remain in this body, however, as Christians we are called to be in obedience to God, and there are things that we do and do not do which are not a matter of hypocrisy, but part of our journey in life as we are conformed to the image of Christ. For instance, we don't usually frequent bars and drink alcohol. Right? Would we say that there is no chance someone involved with alcohol is saved? No, because we know all are saved in the midst of their sin, not after they clean themselves up. So too with being gay, we would not say there is no chance they are not saved, but...we also would not say that if they choose to remain in that lifestyle and refuse to acknowledge what the word of God teaches that they are in obedience to God. But one person said, "Give God as much time to fix your life as you took to mess it up," and that is good advice. The sanctification process does not happen overnight, however, usually we are not trying to conform that which is taught in scripture so that it accommodates how we want to live. And that is exactly the goal of the homosexual agenda. To teach it as acceptable, but the truth is, it is no more acceptable for the born again believer than being a drug addict or drunk is. The beauty of salvation is this, though: it is God that will bring conviction to the drunk, to the drug addict, to the homosexual...they will not for themselves decide what is truth. But will eventually concede to the truth God will speak to their hearts.
Do you? Do I? If you refer to those that the media like to broadcast, holding "God hates fags" signs and breathing out threatenings and hatred, then I am afraid you are falling prey to the very agenda which has gained great strides in recent years and which will likely result in opposition to homosexuality being against the law. How often do you see ministers who invest their lives to lead gays to Christ, who perhaps once were gay themselves? Not going to see it on mainstream media, because that doesn't help the agenda. Brother Theophilus is one that has for the years I have known him sought to bring a Christian...a true Christian...approach to this issue. And I think, if you looked, you might see that a Christian approach is out there to counter the media circus and agenda that most people are aware of. Theophilus has offered a number of sites that minister to this issue, and would suggest looking to resources such as that might help you in keeping a balanced perspective of this issue.
Who excludes them from the Church? If you mean the Body of Christ, if they are excluded, then it is the Lord that has done so. If you mean the local building the Church meets in, well, that is going to be different from fellowship to fellowship. But consider the "openness" that some that are gay have, which I try to point out in the beginning of this response: are you going to tell me that if someone is openly gay during a service...we should simply be okay with that? And I am trying to figure out how that might be accomplished, lol. Perhaps a man dressing up as a woman, maybe...what would you think of that? Personally, I think that many in our fellowship would even tolerate that, and seek all the harder to minister to such a one. But now think if one were openly drunk in service...should that be tolerated? Should we not seek to maintain an atmosphere of reverence...when we come to worship God? Okay, just thought of one: how about two of the same sex kissing in the service? First, is this the place for such affection (and if someone mentions greetings with a holy kiss, I would first say that this is not in view, and secondly that I take the view that men should not kiss each other period, call me homophobic if you like, just my view)? Let's make it a little less open, and consider two of the same sex holding hands. Again, I think each congregation would react differently, and I like to think those I fellowship would treat it in a proper fashion. If it not overt, then the goal would first to bring the Gospel, which is the only way any sin can be taken away from our lives.
And as you go, you are going to meet very nice people who are liars, who are thieves, who are adulterers... You yourself caricaturize homosexuals by presenting a strawman argument complete with an answer, which I hate to say, is a pattern I see too often on the forums. In movies, homosexuals are caricaturized (and not without a basis, seeing that some do behave in manners which are depicted, such as overt feministic behavior) as feminine, weak, and perhaps even stupid. The fact is that they are really no different than anybody else, and for this reason we are "shocked" when someone comes out of the closet. Pete Townsend, for example (played guitar for the Who). Worse yet...one of my childhood heroes...Rob Halford, singer of the Metal band, Judas Priest. They presented a picture of...TOUGH. Leather, metal studs, screaming lyrics...and then find out he is gay. The misconception is that all gay people are effeminate. Just not true. Who was it, Rock Hudson that was gay? The difference is that back then, before they came out, no-one knew. Why did they hide it? Well, I think that because Heavy Metal itself has a particular persona identified with it's culture, being gay just didn't fit. And while I don't play Metal anymore, I still look at Rob Halford being gay as a disappointment, sorry, but that is just how I see it. Fortunately my other heroes, Iron Maiden...have not failed to maintain the image of what drew me to Metal in the first place...they rock. lol
I think so. However, that does not mean we change our views, which are hopefully reflections of what God's word teaches. We don't encourage them to sin, just as we wouldn't encourage someone to sin in some other way, but speak the truth in love. And to be honest, when you are dealing with sin that holds such sway over people, and I include alcohol and drug addiction, for instance, not singling out the one sin, the best way and perhaps the ONLY way is by being their friend. "God loves you but I will only love you...if you stop!" just does not convey the true love God places in the hearts of His people for those in need of salvation, or, in need of overcoming the sin we seek to put away in our lives. And that covers more ground than just homosexuality.
Salvation is first and foremost the work of God. Many mistakenly think that their part is what is going to do it. An example of this can be seen in a believer marrying an unbeliever. "My influence will help get them saved," they think, when the usual result is that it is more likely that the believers faith will be effected, not the unbelievers. It is one thing to want to minister to them, but another to keep close company if you are not set apart by God to minister to them. This, I think, is better left to those that have been saved out of this lifestyle, where the danger of influence is lessened because they have already overcome in this area. That is just my opinion. I knew a man that wanted to minister in bars, and I won't say too much about it, but the effect was that this person...began drinking again. That is the danger. And it is not for those that simply want to bring a balance to the hatred expressed by some that say they are Christians, but for those that have been empowered by God to minister in this particular field.
Depends on the person. Conviction of this sin may be the very thing that the Lord used to bring them to salvation in the first place, so it is a very likely possibility. For others, perhaps not. They may struggle with it the rest of their life. I use to use drugs and alcohol, and I can tell you, unlike AA philosophy...I am no longer a drug addict or alcoholic. But some take that mentality, "Once an addict, always an addict." "Once gay, always gay." Baloney. But how their lives go will be determined by their spiritual nourishment. If they get saved, and sit around and ruminate over what they think truth is, they will likely remain babies, in need of milk and never learning to stand on their own two feet. But, if they receive the sincere milk, and invest in learning the will of God which has been given us, they will likely grow, and for them there will not be a debate as to whether it is a sin or not.
As the old Toyota commercial said... ..."you asked for it, you got it..." And now I return the question: Thoughts, comments, questions? (: God bless. |
![]() |
|
| S.T.Ranger | Jun 12 2013, 11:42 AM Post #4 |
|
Ranger
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I would agree with he distinction, brother, but one question arises: when we consider "homosexual orientation," and make that distinction, do we fail to not also balance that with a perspective that sin basically begins in the heart and that when our thoughts are on that which is not pure we should reject it? In other words, while we understand there are those that feel they have no choice, and in fact in one sense they may not seeing that the flesh is weak, would we not still maintain the position that this is sin, and we should not allow thoughts of sin free reign in our hearts? Philippians 4:8-9 King James Version (KJV) 8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. 9 Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you. While I believe firmly that we should minister to all with love, when it comes to this issue, I feel that sometimes there is a failure on our part to keep in mind that we do not have to restructure homosexuality, nor categorize, nor separate it from sin in an effort to reach those involved in it. And I question somewhat giving the impression that one having desires concerning sin and one actually committing those sins can be entirely separated, and would suggest adultery as a good example of what I mean. It is that desire in the heart which leads to the act, usually, and the desire should be dealt with as readily as he act itself, and is in fact the first line of defense. What do you think? God bless. |
![]() |
|
| theophilus | Jun 13 2013, 08:44 AM Post #5 |
|
Sojourner
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sin begins when someone chooses to let his mind dwell on something that is wrong but different people are tempted in different areas. Jesus said that a man who looks lustfully on a woman has sinned. But there are some men who feel no attraction toward women but can look lustfully at another man. The sin lies in choosing to think lustful thoughts. Sexual orientation determines whether those thoughts are directed at someone of the opposite sex or the same sex. A good book on this subject is Washed and Waiting by Wesley Hill. The author is a Christian who believes what the Bible teaches on this subject but who finds that he is sexually attracted to other men rather than to women. You can find a description of the book here: http://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/2011/11/29/washed-and-waiting/ |
![]() |
|
| S.T.Ranger | Jun 13 2013, 10:04 AM Post #6 |
|
Ranger
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But that is what I trying to point out. The lust of the eyes applies to both, and both are wrong, but, do we not still teach that it is wrong to lust for the same sex? What I am getting at is there is the danger of presenting homosexual lust on the same level as heterosexual, in that, whereas we can see in scripture that desire of one of another sex is natural, desire for the same sex is not, and is pointed out in scripture. If we take a position that both are natural (above the point that due to our nature's we could very well say it is "natural to sin," though not the will of God for us), are we not actually (as used by AA and NA) enabling them? By saying, "It's natural for you to desire one of the same sex?" It is just my view that while we do not categorize, neither do we fall into the very thing that the Homosexual Agenda is pushing, and making homosexuality something that is natural. It is natural for fallen flesh to fall into sin, but I have to take the stance that desire for another such as a wife, has it's place, whereas desire for one of the same sex is condemned on all points. Does that make sense? And not sound overly judgmental? The one that commits sexual sin outside of marriage, whether it be homosexuality, pre-marital, adultery, what have you, does have the option of taking a partner and doing so with the blessing of God. The homosexual that is taught that his feelings are natural...does not. If we present to them that it is, then the options are 1) they marry of the same sex and whether this is acceptable is a matter of opinion rather than a straightforward teaching of scripture; 2) they are miserable because they have been taught that they cannot change these desires. And I believe God reveals sin to us through His word, and by His Spirit. I have to take the position that the Lord is not going to coddle us in our sin, but will bring it to our attention, and help us to put away that which is evil, and cling to that which is good, and good because He has declared it thus. Marriage is good, for most. Celibacy is, I believe, a gift. But the plight of those that struggle as they seek to come to grips with what the Lord speaks to their hearts and the desires of the flesh is where our sympathy, and hence the desire to have compassion and show them the love of Christ...should really lie. I do not feel we can help someone by teaching them their desires are natural in the sense that same sex partnerships are natural, rather than sin. I think that if we tone down sin in this area, we will tone it down in others. And I think people deal with adulterous urges far more than homosexual tendencies, though that is just an opinion. Concerning adultery, we are never going to say it is natural, again, above the fact that due to the flesh man naturally sins, so why would we do so for homosexuality? Not sure if I am getting this across as well as I hope, but I do hope you understand what I am saying, brother. God bless. |
![]() |
|
| Shim | Jun 13 2013, 11:33 AM Post #7 |
|
Sojourner
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Personally, I"m past attempting to be nice about the issue. The sin is condemned in the Old Testament, and it is punishable by death, and without guilt upon our part. That is, the blood shall be upon their heads. The NT says that they shall not inherit the kingdom. End of story, I'm sick of the agenda, and think that it right for a church that actually believes Scripture to cast the wicked homo out of the congregation once this is brought to their attention. If they don't repent, they are to be removed from the congregation (1 Corinthians) with reassurance found in Jude that they are those who use the grace from God and us as a license to commit sexual immorality. End of Story. Edited by Shim, Jun 13 2013, 11:48 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| stratcat79 | Jun 17 2013, 01:04 PM Post #8 |
|
Friend
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I must agree with Shim. When we worship, it is to be in spirit and in truth. Unrepentant sinning does not wash. We are to repent. Allowing unrepentant sinners to be members or accept them as Christians brings about corruption and false doctrine emerges, among other evils. We cannot allow contemporary acceptance by big church to redefine sin and freedom. Otherwise we get lesbian bishops... oh, wait... we have them; or women leaders doing male roles in the church... oops! we have them too. See what I mean? All due to societal political pressures. How about gay marriage? No!!! How about repentant gays? Yes!!! If gays want to marry, let them form their own gay religion and get gay "ministers" to marry them? We accept all other religious forms of marriage, so why not gay religion? Only they best not call it "Christian". If feminists want to lead churches, let them form their own feminist religion, but best not call it "Christian". |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Christian Question And Answer · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




7:37 AM Jul 11