How the Religious View Homosexuality

by serotonin_wraith 93 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  144001

  A couple of points seem to be overlooked here. First, there is no scientific basis for any belief in creationism. Secondly, the bible was written by man, and despite its self-serving claims that it is "inspired by god," it has never been authenticated by any person or thing as being the word of the "god" it purports to be. Therefore, any argument that homosexuality is "sin" because the bible says it is is absolutely devoid of merit or logic. It is strictly an opinion, an opinion that has no more merit than the opinion of a couple of guys at the barber shop.

  The Watchtower experience taught me to question authority, and never assume that things are what they purport to be simply because someone says they are. The scientific method is the best means of determining real "truth," and although science has not conclusively determined the origin of human existence, I'd prefer to rely on science than an entirely unscientific, unauthenticated book written by man in an apparent effort to control and/or exploit other humans.

  It appears to me that man made "god" in his own image, and the bigoted, egotistical god of the bible is not one I would worship.
• 

  littlerockguy

  XJW4EVR:

  Do you consider homosexuality a condition or an act? Since I am gay, am I only a homosexual when I am having sexual relations with another man and "normal" when I am not? and if homosexuality is just a condition, like having a certain color of eyes or being born blind, and thus nothing I can do about it, even if I am celebate and do not commit fornication of any kind, is my mere existence as a homosexual a sin?
• 

  onlycurious

  Little Rock Guy

  You said:

  "Do you consider homosexuality a condition or an act? Since I am gay, am I only a homosexual when I am having sexual relations with another man and "normal" when I am not? and if homosexuality is just a condition, like having a certain color of eyes or being born blind, and thus nothing I can do about it, even if I am celebate and do not commit fornication of any kind, is my mere existence as a homosexual a sin?"

  If you don't mind, I'd like to take a stab at this. As a heterosexual, am I a heterosexual just when I am having sex or is it a "condition"?

  I think most of us would agree that (as heterosexuals) we are heterosexuals regardless of whether or not we are actually HAVING sex. It's basically how we are programed. There is an attraction that distinguishes us as being gay or straight.

  No, according to the Bible (and I think this is the point that is being addressed here) even as a heterosexual, God says to keep the marriage bed pure. Most interpret this as remaining a virgin until marriage. If a heterosexual can choose to abstain because God sees this as a sin outside of marriage, then why can't the same apply to a homosexual person. Pardon me, but I am thinking about a person who is gay and chooses a Christian lifestyle. In this case, it's tough to have some self control for both the homosexual AND the heterosexual. It's no easy road.

  However, if the person (straight or gay) is not walking on a spiritual path, then why not live it up? There is no one higher to themselves that they are answering to themselves so why not just live their lives however they want to as long as 'they aren't hurting anyone else.'

  It really isn't up to the church to determine how everyone else should live their lives. I personally believe in Bible truths and it makes it hard when living in a world that is filled with a mentality that there are no moral absolutes.
• 

  littlerockguy

  In the religious context though onlycurious, the single person can get married and have a sex life, however homosexuals cannot marry. I would not chose a way that goes against my very nature of who I am.
• 

  jgnat

  littlerockguy: In the religious context though onlycurious, the single person can get married and have a sex life, however homosexuals cannot marry.

  Not so. Depends on the denomination:

  http://www.gaychurch.org/Find_a_Church/Denominations/denominations.htm
• 

  brinjen

  littlerockguy: In the religious context though onlycurious, the single person can get married and have a sex life, however homosexuals cannot marry.

  Not so. Depends on the denomination:

  It also depends on where you live. In Australia for instance, gay marriage is illegal. Not just unrecognised, but illegal even for a gay couple to hold a ceremony for themselves. Our beloved prime minister John Howard made it illegal without any warning whatsoever in the 'interests of protecting families'.
• 

  Sirona

  Sirona, had mentioned something of the same on my first post on this thread.

  I also did some reading on Roman culture, and it seems that all Roman men could indulge in sex with anyone subsurvient to him, male or female. For the Roman man, sex was more a tool for dominance, rather than an expression of preference. In that context, dominant sex with a subservient, unwilling partner is wrong.

  If this is so, banning homosexuality was more about not allowing the abuse of the vulnerable. If this is so, prohibition of homosexuality (the orientation) would have as much relevance today as head-covering for women.

  Jgnat, I have been reading your posts with interest on this thread and I was going to mention it to you. I think your approach does biblical believers a lot of good, it helps us realise that not all those who believe are fanatics or bigots. It just goes to show that the bible has to be taken in context - the writers sometimes intended a different idea - and unfortunately some Christians have deliberately mistranslated to support their own doctrines (Jws being one group who clearly have done this). It puts me in mind of the passage which says "thou shall not suffer at witch to live" where the direct translation for witch should read "poisoner". Sirona
• 

  Sirona

  Only curious

  However, if the person (straight or gay) is not walking on a spiritual path, then why not live it up? There is no one higher to themselves that they are answering to themselves so why not just live their lives however they want to as long as 'they aren't hurting anyone else.'

  I have to say something here because it is something which has been getting on my nerves on this forum. People appear to assume that if you are not an atheist then you are a Christian. I realise you said "spiritual path" but I expect you mean a follower of the bible? The thing is, there are those of us out here who follow a spiritual path but who are not bible believers and who don't have any issues with homosexuality.

  Sirona
• 

  bernadette

  Sirona I agree with your points

  the Sins of Scripture by John Shelby Spong takes a look at homosexuality from a modern day spiritual religious perspective.

  If modern day christianity has made changes in perspective with regard to birth control, divorce etc that christians are accepting of and comfortable with why not homosexuality too?

  bernadette
• 

  serotonin_wraith

  drew sagan:

  Seems like you are trying to put some limits on the grace of God.

  I'm just pointing out the laws God wrote in the Bible. Unless you believe he divinely inspired it, but now thinks differently about certain things?

  Sirona:

  I would personally exclude the old testament because we all know that the old law was replaced by Jesus.

  Jesus made it absolutely clear that nothing was to change from the old law (not one stroke, jot, tittle, smallest letter- depending on which translation you prefer), not until his death, but until heaven and earth pass away.

  Matt 5:17-19: 17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
  Mark 7:6-13 again shows Jesus' acknowledgement of the old law, and he says those not obeying the commandments were following the traditions of men.

  Also, if you believe the old law was abandoned, I would be interested in knowing if you follow the Ten Commandments now.

  jgnat:

  Yes, if an Isrealite halted the angry mob and cried, "No, this is not right, he is my brother!" all the power to him. Very much as Jesus did for the woman caught in adultery.

  Then you believe it would be alright for them to have gone against the commands of God. Jesus, being the son of God, or God himself (depending on what you believe) would have had more of a say on the matter - but humans disobeying God? Hmmm. In that case, did the man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath deserve death?

  I think God's morality transcends by far, the morality set out in the bible. It is but a poor reflection.

  How can you know anything of God's morality outside of the Bible?

  You see it as human, I see it as from God. My image of the ideal and pure comes from my image of God.

  If the only thing you know of God's morality is in the Bible, how can you claim to know his morality has now somehow changed?

  onlycurious:

  While God did create the animals, I don't recall anywhere in scripture where God designed a plan for animals to obtain salvation from their sins. The sinful state of man is written as being mans problem, not the animal kingdoms.

  I'm not sure if you have contradicted yourself here. You say the animals had sin which could not be taken away, then you say sin is actually only man's problem. If you believe that animals have sin, can you explain how they came to have it unless God just made them that way? If sin means something that is wrong to God, why would he put it in them from the begining of their existence, with no hope or chance of changing it? Animals being gay seems to be the way they should be naturally in that case.

  It's nothing you haven't heard before I'm sure, but when God created Adam and Eve, He didn't create "Adam and Steve".

  Haha. He didn't create birth control either so is that wrong in your eyes?

  While the parts may 'fit', I've never heard of 2 men or 2 women procreating. This certainly isn't to assume in any way that sex is designed strictly FOR procreation.

  If procreation isn't an issue then, I'm unsure why you even brought it up.

  bernadette:

  If modern day christianity has made changes in perspective with regard to birth control, divorce etc that christians are accepting of and comfortable with why not homosexuality too?

  Why is it then, that such change in attitude is always a few steps behind a people not governed by Scripture, and never the other way around?