• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Can a Person Be Gay and Still Be a Christian?

Status
Not open for further replies.

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This thread reported as homosexuality discussions are against the rules if I remember correctly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Scott J

Active Member
Site Supporter
The Bible doesn't say that any sexual orientation is sinful. Christians have a bad habit of placing demands on someone else's shoulders that they aren't willing to bear.
I'm unsure what you are trying to say with that last sentence. I'm not placing demands on anyone. I am expressing what I believe can very plainly be derived from reading the NT in context and submitting to it.

The Bible does not speak to sexual orientation because it isn't a biblical concept. It is a concept CONTRARY to the Bible in that it ONLY allows for materialistic causation.

That's not a parallel. You can classify sexual orientation against sexual orientation and ACTS of orientations against other ACTS of orientation.
You continue to attempt to foist an unbiblical concept onto the scriptures as a form of pseudo-hermeneutics.

To say that someone is "oriented" in the way it is universally meant in discussions of this issue means that it is an innate, immutable characteristic. MOST who use that term consider acceptance of that term assent to the notion of a biological cause for homosexuality.

If you want to say it is the "spiritual orientation" of some lost people... then I think I could mostly go with you.

So is that how one becomes a heterosexual? The sin nature is tempted and they give in?
God created them male and female... God commanded them to reproduce and fill the earth. Jesus said that a man should leave his family and become one flesh with his wife. Please show a single scripture that suggests anything other than heterosexuality being God's natural, created design or conversely one that shows that the scriptures treat homosexuality as anything but unnatural and sinful.

Homosexuality and heterosexuality AREN'T behaviors.
You are evading.

Behavior is an ACT. That's not an orientation.
Orientation is an attitude. Attitudes determine behavior... ALL THE TIME.

Orientation is a directional term in relation to something else. It doesn't mean someone is predestined for anything. It speaks RELATIONALLY to what they are in the NOW.
If someone IS a sin... then they are NOT a Christian. That would seem crystal clear.

But to your larger point here... I don't think you quite understand what is meant by the term "sexual orientation". If you do... then you are just spinning now.

I think Ann is right in pointing people to the Matt Moore page. You're using words in a way that simply don't make sense.
If you understand the words as they are used... then it will make sense to you.

Sin demands an ACT. Heterosexuality and homosexuality are not acts.
Really? Attitudes cannot be sinful without actions? Thoughts cannot be sinful without actions? What we embrace and love cannot be sinful without outward actions?

Who is talking science?
You should be since the term you keep foisting on scripture is from secular science.
I'm not arguing with you and I'm certainly not arguing with Jesus. ANd I didn't ask if it made them guilty. I asked if it made them gay?
If they ARE (present state of being) gay even if it is just their intent, desire, and attitude then they are guilty of sin according to Jesus even if they do not act it out. Again, the scriptures teach that we become a new creation when saved.... the old man with his lusts dies. To still identify with that lust... is inconsistent with being born again.

Scripture never speaks to sexual orientations as sinful. It speaks to ACTS as sinful.
PROVE that scripture accommodates the notion of sexual orientation AT ALL then we can go forward. We're getting nowhere so long as you do not provide that basis for your argument.

That's the problem though. You're not grouping sin with sin. You're grouping sin with a sexual orientation.
And you are attempting to say someone can be "gay" by nature and a Christian by nature once you boil away the fat.

To JUSTLY do so, you'd have to be privy to all the layers and nuances that go into making someone gay or straight. And if you knew that, I'm sure there are a lot of parents and individuals who would be paying for this information so that they could make sure their child didn't turn gay.
No. I simply have to trust the Bible.



Why would I compare it to any of those things? None of those are sexual orientations.
So now you would change direction and attempt to make sexual sins different from other sins?

People do have weaknesses spiritually that make them susceptible to one sin more than another. That isn't an "orientation" in the way the term is used in discussions of homosexuality. But it IS biblical.

You are attempting a false dichotomy but I am unsure what end you are trying to reach. Are you trying to say it is OK to continue to "be" something that God condemns?

You're just creating some extra-Biblical demands here.
Nope. And you've said absolutely nothing that proves that and to this point have failed to even allude to a scriptural basis for whatever it is you are trying to prove.



Choosing to make into sin something God has not called a sin is also mutually exclusive from submission to God.

I am unsure if you are truly this determined to rationalize something you haven't actually spelled out yet or are just engaging in sophism. The scriptures call sin... sin. That includes homosexual sin. To attach a sin to the name of Christ in labeling one's self brings reproach on the name of Christ. I strongly suspect you are attempting that because you believe with the world that homosexuality is innate and immutable. But the Bible calls sinners to repent... to be changed into a new creature... not to dress up the old one.
 

Scott J

Active Member
Site Supporter
This thread reported as homosexuality discussions are against the rules if I remember correctly.

I haven't been here in a very long time and am unaware if this is a rule.

But why would discussion of sin be a violation of the rules? This is probably THE most consequential issue facing the church today. It could very well end up being the basis for persecution in the US. How we understand and learn to answer this issue in this "safe environment" could be of immense value.
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Scripture condemns the sexual acts. It doesn't condemn the orientation.


So it would be okay to call yourself a pedophile Christian or a murdering Christian?

Something tells me you are trying to justify your own actions.
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
I'm unsure what you are trying to say with that last sentence. I'm not placing demands on anyone.

You are too. You're trying to make being gay a sin. And Scripture doesn't say that anymore than it says being straight is a sin.

I am expressing what I believe can very plainly be derived from reading the NT in context and submitting to it.

You're submitting to something that's not there. You're creating a new sin.

The Bible does not speak to sexual orientation because it isn't a biblical concept. It is a concept CONTRARY to the Bible in that it ONLY allows for materialistic causation.

If it doesn't speak to it, how are you calling it a sin?

You continue to attempt to foist an unbiblical concept onto the scriptures as a form of pseudo-hermeneutics.

I haven't foisted anything upon Scripture. You just admitted that Scripture doesn't speak to it. So why are YOU creating new sin? There must be a motive.

To say that someone is "oriented" in the way it is universally meant in discussions of this issue means that it is an innate, immutable characteristic. MOST who use that term consider acceptance of that term assent to the notion of a biological cause for homosexuality
.

Nope. That's just what you want it to mean because it fits your now argument.

If you want to say it is the "spiritual orientation" of some lost people... then I think I could mostly go with you.

Why would I say that?

God created them male and female... God commanded them to reproduce and fill the earth. Jesus said that a man should leave his family and become one flesh with his wife.

You, again, are talking about specific acts. The sum total of heterosexuality or homosexuality is not boiled down to sex acts.

Please show a single scripture that suggests anything other than heterosexuality being God's natural, created design or conversely one that shows that the scriptures treat homosexuality as anything but unnatural and sinful.

Why would I, again, Scripturally show you something that you've already admitted that Scripture does not speak to?

God's natural, created design was for a man to become one flesh with his one wife. That's not the definition of heterosexuality. It's an act of heterosexuality.



You are evading.

You've obviously been away for a while. There's nothing for me to evade.

Orientation is an attitude. Attitudes determine behavior... ALL THE TIME.

Nope. But nice try to redefine.

If someone IS a sin... then they are NOT a Christian. That would seem crystal clear.

Why would SOMEONE be a sin? Someone's COMMIT sin. They are not sin.

But to your larger point here... I don't think you quite understand what is meant by the term "sexual orientation". If you do... then you are just spinning now.

From the sounds of it, you don't understand what it is. Orientations don't commit sin. People do. Orientations aren't sinful. People are.

If you understand the words as they are used... then it will make sense to you.

Really? Attitudes cannot be sinful without actions? Thoughts cannot be sinful without actions? What we embrace and love cannot be sinful without outward actions?

Everything you mentioned involves an action. So what are you talking about?

You should be since the term you keep foisting on scripture is from secular science.
If they ARE (present state of being) gay even if it is just their intent, desire, and attitude then they are guilty of sin according to Jesus even if they do not act it out.

Even if WHAT is their intent, desire and attitude?

Again, the scriptures teach that we become a new creation when saved.... the old man with his lusts dies. To still identify with that lust... is inconsistent with being born again.

It's not inconsistent. Born again people still commit sin. The old man died. Sin will remain until it is cast into the Lake of Fire.

PROVE that scripture accommodates the notion of sexual orientation AT ALL then we can go forward. We're getting nowhere so long as you do not provide that basis for your argument.

Prove it for what? I didn't say Scripture accommodated a notion of sexual orientation. YOU'RE the one who called sexual orientation sinful. So I ask again, if you admit that Scripture doesn't speak to sexual orientations, why are you trying to create new sin? There's got to be a reason for that.

And you are attempting to say someone can be "gay" by nature and a Christian by nature once you boil away the fat
.

I'm saying that you don't understand what sexual orientation is. God has called sin what He intends to be sin. No need for you to create new ones.

No. I simply have to trust the Bible.

So deeming something sinful that you've admitted the BIBLE does not speak to is your idea of trusting the Bible?


So now you would change direction and attempt to make sexual sins different from other sins?

Nope. Just trying to give you a simple lesson in communication so that you don't breed confusion. You compare LIKE items. You can't compare a gay Christian with a liar. You'd have to compare the gay Christian with a lying Christian.

That's all I was saying. Grammar.

People do have weaknesses spiritually that make them susceptible to one sin more than another. That isn't an "orientation" in the way the term is used in discussions of homosexuality. But it IS biblical.

You obviously have your own idea of what orientation is/isn't. I'm gonna surmise that you are incorrect as you keep trying to make it into a sin while at the same time acknowledging that Scripture doesn't speak to any such thing.

You are attempting a false dichotomy but I am unsure what end you are trying to reach. Are you trying to say it is OK to continue to "be" something that God condemns?

You're talking out both sides of your mouth here. How is God now condemning something you have again acknowledged is NOT spoken to in Scripture?

Nope. And you've said absolutely nothing that proves that and to this point have failed to even allude to a scriptural basis for whatever it is you are trying to prove.

:laugh: You've already admitted that's what you're doing as you said Scripture doesn't speak to it. So if Scripture doesn't speak to it, why are you calling it sinful?

I am unsure if you are truly this determined to rationalize something you haven't actually spelled out yet or are just engaging in sophism. The scriptures call sin... sin. That includes homosexual sin.

Homosexuality is NOT the same as homosexual sin.

To attach a sin to the name of Christ in labeling one's self brings reproach on the name of Christ.

It sounds like it hurts your feelings far more than it could ever hurt Christ's feelings. If someone wants to call themselves a gay Christian and they are following Christ and keeping His commands, it's just a non-issue except with folks who hear gay and immediately think gay sex.


I strongly suspect you are attempting that because you believe with the world that homosexuality is innate and immutable.

You feel free to strongly suspect whatever you wish. I could care less if it's innate or immutable. God hasn't said it's a sin so it's a non-issue.

Now if you want me to preach a sermon against gay sex, I'm with ya. But that's an ACT to which Scripture actually does speak.


But the Bible calls sinners to repent... to be changed into a new creature... not to dress up the old one.

And how do you know that someone who is calling himself a gay Christian has not changed into a new creature?

I believe you are again trying to equate gay with gay sex. Do you equate straight with straight sex?Were you having sex at that point in your life that you realized you were straight?
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
So it would be okay to call yourself a pedophile Christian or a murdering Christian?

Nice try. But pedophilia isn't a sexual orientation. It's fornicative and a whole lot of other things.

You don't have to be committing a sin to identify as gay as you would to identify as a pedophile.

A murdering Christian? Same thing. Murder is a sin that Scripture has spoken to. Scripture doesn't speak to what we are calling sexual orientation.

Thus there's no right comparison to be made between gay Christian and pedophile Christian or murdering Christian.

Something tells me you are trying to justify your own actions.

Funny. People say the same thing about folks who try so hard to make into a sin something God hasn't said is a sin.
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nice try. But pedophilia isn't a sexual orientation. It's fornicative and a whole lot of other things.

Really? Then why place pedophiles on a lifetime list?



Zaac said:
A murdering Christian? Same thing. Murder is a sin that Scripture has spoken to. Scripture doesn't speak to what we are calling sexual orientation.

Really? On the scale of total depravity not every sinner is at the same place. Some individuals are so depraved that they are completely consumed by it. Check into the mind of Ted Bundy.

Zaac said:
Thus there's no right comparison to be made between gay Christian and pedophile Christian or murdering Christian.

They are all differing manifestations of sin. They have that in common. They all have the potential of being acted upon.

I do believe there are gay or homosexual individuals until they engage in homosexual activity. Until then they have same-sex attraction. And yes, Christians can suffer with same-sex attraction. I believe there are Christians who can struggle with the temptation to commit a whole range of perverse sexual sins (some mentioned in their thread and others not). They suffer in private because to admit such temptations would most likely result in being castigated (or worse).

This is not simple issue to discuss. But I am completely convinced that there is no such thing as a gay Christian. There are Christians who are vexed by sin. There are Christians who may fall into sexual perversions, but if they repent they are not to be labeled as X-Christian. They are Christians.

Zaac said:
Funny. People say the same thing about folks who try so hard to make into a sin something God hasn't said is a sin.

It is not funny. Sexual perversion is sad.
 

Dr. Bob

Administrator
Administrator
Thank you for reporting this thread.

What part of the rule that NO DISCUSSION OF HUMAN SEXUALITY is allowed on the BB??

Thread closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top