Confused how two groups of church-goers can have such conflicting views about whether it's OK to be gay?

Both sides of the debate about homosexuality in the church, which threatens to split the worldwide Anglican church, hold their views sincerely and after much study. So how can their views be so contradictory?

The Bible makes very few mentions of homosexuality - lesbianism isn't mentioned at all in the Old Testament - and as the examples below show, interpretations of the verses that do exist differ hugely.

Following each of the verses below is a brief illustration of what a hardline pro- and anti-gay position might be. (Most Christians hold views somewhere in between these two stances.)

An illustration of the division can be seen by what either side might say about the friendship in the Old Testament between David and Jonathan. One verse reads: "I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; dear and delightful you were to me; your love for me was wonderful, surpassing the love of women."

PRO-GAY
A pro-gay position might be that this is a clear indication that King David had a gay relationship, and to pretend otherwise is naive.
ANTI-GAY
An anti-gay opinion might be that the friendship between the two men was exactly that - a very close and loyal allegiance.

Similarly, the tale of Sodom is often debated. In it, Lot has two angels staying in his house. The men of Sodom surrounded the house. "They called to Lot and asked him where the men were who had entered his house that night. 'Bring them out,' they shouted, 'so that we might have intercourse with them.'"

To protect his visitors from an act which Lot describes as "wicked", he offers the crowd his two virgin daughters instead. The crowd are not satisfied and break the door down - the angels then make the intruders blind and Sodom is eventually destroyed by "fire and brimstone".

ANTI-GAY
An anti-gay argument might say this story demonstrates the immorality of homosexuality, as has been accepted for generations, hence the term sodomy. Elsewhere in Genesis, God says of the men: "Their sin is very grave." It's an example of behaviour degenerating.
PRO-GAY
Of course the men's behaviour was wicked, but it was wicked because it's a tale of sexual assault and rape. When Jesus mentions Sodom, hundreds of years later, it appears to be in a context of a discussion of hospitality, rather than one of sexual morality.

There are several verses in the Bible which are similarly contested - there are however a much smaller number of seemingly clear statements. The most famous of them is probably from Leviticus: "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; that is an abomination."

ANTI-GAY
An anti-gay position would be that this line is unambiguous. It is also repeated elsewhere in the book. The speaker of the words is God, so this is an explicit indication that homosexuality is wrong in God's eyes. It was one of the sins that justified God in giving the land of Canaan to the Israelites
PRO-GAY
A pro-gay argument might say that other verses in the same book forbid a wide range of sexual activities, including having sex with a woman who is having her period. This is an indication that the passage embodies specific cultural values rather than God's law.

There is some debate about how relevant rules in the Old Testament are to Christians. Some would say they are binding, since Jesus said he did not come to abolish the old laws. Others would say that Jesus set Christians free from the old laws, highlighting instead that people should love God and their neighbour.

Jesus himself says nothing explicitly about homosexuality. There are though two statements by him which have been interpreted as having a bearing on the subject.

"[A] man shall leave his father and mother, and be made one with his wife; and the two shall become one flesh."

ANTI-GAY
This indicates Jesus saw heterosexual relations as the proper way of behaving.
PRO-GAY
Jesus is actually talking about the sanctity of heterosexual marriage

Later in the same conversation, after Jesus has spoken about divorce, the disciples say to him it is better not to marry at all. Jesus says: "That is something which not everyone can accept, but only those for whom God has appointed it. For while some are incapable of marriage because they were born so, or made so by men, there are others who have themselves renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven. Let those accept it who can."

PRO-GAY
This shows that Jesus is more concerned with people looking after their own relationship with God, than with enforcement of rules. The reference to being "born so" indicates that heterosexual marriage is fine for those who are heterosexual, but it's OK to be different. Again and again Jesus reaches out to those on the margins of society, like prostitutes and tax collectors, to include them.
ANTI-GAY
Jesus here is actually talking about people who were born incapable of having children, or people who were castrated - not about gays. He is actually saying that marriage and chastity are both within God's purpose. Jesus does appeal to the sinners, but once he has called them, he tells them to go and sin no more.

The letters of St Paul provide the other traditional support for the position that homosexuality is sinful. He writes: "God has given [people who worship false gods] up to shameful passions. Their women have exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and their men in turn, giving up natural relations with women burn with lust for one another; males behave indecently with males and paid in their own persons the fitting wage of such perversion."

Paul later writes: "Make no mistake: no fornicator or idolator, none who are guilty either of adultery or of homosexual perversion, no thieves or grabbers of drunkards of slanderers or swindlers, will possess the kingdom of God."

PRO-GAY
A pro-gay position might be that the word Paul uses for homosexual here could alternatively be translated as "male prostitute". In any case, Paul's writings are clearly of his time, and there are plenty of other verses which people have no difficulty in ignoring - for instance: "a woman brings shame on her head if she prays or prophesies bare-headed; it is as bad as if her head were shaved." This should be viewed like that.
ANTI-GAY
Anti-gay argument might say this line is crystal clear in establishing that Christianity and homosexuality are incompatible. Paul is actually quite clearly referring to homosexual behaviour, and includes lesbianism. You can't just pretend that St Paul, who did so much to influence our understanding of Jesus, didn't know what he was talking about. He's clear that homosexuality is an offence against God and against people's own bodies.

Part of the reason the views diverge so much is because Christians think of the Bible differently. Some see it as literally the word of God, divine inspiration which humans should not question. Others see it rather as a book which is a witness to God's message, but one which was written by humans and thus has flaws.

Trying to find common ground between the two positions is no simple matter - one of the reasons that Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, is having such a tricky job keeping everyone on board.

From BBC News

More rubbish, aren't you gullible?

Homosexuality is clearly described as a sin and abomination and as sexual immorality in the Bible.

Please humble yourself to accept that my explanation is spot on.

It is not for Christians to ignore or hide away the warning of scriptures from others with regards to morality or sin.

your explanation is not spot on. Homosexual behaviour according to the Bible is sexual immorality and an abomination to God. Why are you lying so much? Are you living a gay lifestyle? God wants to save everyone (including those living as gays) and have us all repent from our sins through faith in Jesus

Jesus loved everyone. You're just throwing stones again.

Jesus was very close to holy and righteous men in his life. Be humble and accept the will of the Lord Jesus.

Jesus was not gay, that is a wicked lie that you are perpetuating and you will be accountable and pay the price for that blasphemy one day unless you repent and seek forgiveness through faith in Christ.

Jesus rarely spent nights in the company of women, except for the prostitutes.

Jesus loves gays, God loves gays. Read your scripture and be like He who God sent from Heaven to die for our sins.

Question is what would Jesus have done? I think he'd have washed their feet.

Homosexuality is probably not the ideal but I don't think we can regard it as a grave sin either. It isn't mentioned in the 10 commandments so it's obviously far less of a sin than taking the lords name in vain.

Does Jesus condem gays? I've read nothing in the new testament to suggest he does.

too bad, God's morals don't change and homosexuality is described as sin in both testaments

It's also patently not as serious as going to B&Q on The Sabbath.

Here's a bet for you scarlets. I bet that you cannot refrain from insulting other people with ad hominem attacks and instead just debate.

You complain so much about ad hominem attacks against yourself, yet you indulge in this more than anyone else. Maybe we should count up how many insults there are and compare them?

Do you actually think that rubbishing someone's argument is going to convince them? It won't. It will just make them defend their position even more. And calling someone gullible is only going to rile them.

I hate to have to ask this, but do you actually have any friends?

Indeed. Must rank below telling porkie pies as well.

It's bizarre how many xians seem fixated on this one issue.

scarlets, a difference of opinion is not lying. Please refrain from calling other posters liars or you may find your posts subject to a spot of forced "humbling".

Well it say that man shall not lie with man but me not being a religious type of person i just think that many of the so called puffs are simply out to put it anywhere they can and are not suffering from a genetic disorder at all.

queers should be left alone to do what ever they do behind closed doors but the problom is the PC bridgade has jumped on the band wagon and now all our kids are being told at scholl that it's normal, well it's not and should not be encoraged for any other reason than to reduce the earths population but i'm sure science will soon over come that little problom too.

maybe the PC lot here should sugest someone other than Jesus thinks it's OK to be bent and then let em fight it out between themselves because you can not have it all ways can you now.

What a wonderfully ignorant and bigoted little tirade that was. You must feel so much better to get that off your chest.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". I pretty much thought one sin was regarded as bad as another by the sandled one. So why christians have this total fixation on people who have they're toast buttered on the wrong side is bizarre. That and their total inability with being able to cope without human history before 7000bc baffles me.

If they actually followed Jesus's teachings, they would realise everyone is as bad anyone else whatever side their toast is buttered.

I hate these types of discussions, and I hate being stereotyped.

I am gay.

I am not "simply out to put it anywhere they can". I have only had one sexual relationship - my current one, which is completely monogamous and is now well into its fifth year.

Jesus also said "remove the plank from your own eye before removing the speck from your brother's". If people want to tell me to live by exactly what it says in the Bible then they should follow ALL the Bible's laws themselves. That includes not shaving, not having tattoos, and taking your shower curtain to the priest if you find mould on it.

I think to actually follow Jesus' teachings is quite difficult, and the vast majority of people (Christians included) never really get close.


Sound advice for scarlets which, I suspect, will fall on totally deaf ears.

Loving a person does not mean you also have to love their behaviour.

yes but its the way that homosexuality is branded as worse than sleeping with someone outside marriage, or telling a lie

let he who is without sin cast the first sin, so why should Christians get all judgemental about homosexuality when they sin themselves?

what you are trying to say here is love the sinner hate the sin, Jesus doesn't need you to stop being homosexual before coming to him
and its much easier and better to have grace and compassion for someone than it is to just hate their sin

Yes i do feel better thank you and will do all in my power to protect kids from people who promote liberal values because i, unlike you can see where it will all end.

i am simply sick of our kids being told by left-wing motivated teachers that it's all so normal in an effort to make themselves feel better about themselves.

feel free to argue with nature and what most of the world thinks but don't exspect everyone to agree with you when queers/gays/puffs go around promoting their beleives as if it's soemthing to be proud of.

Really?

I am not a liberal leftie but I am gay. I discovered this in my teens. I didn't want to be. I wanted more than you can imagine to be "normal". As a "natural" bloke you can't possibly understand the torment I went though coming to terms with being different in this way - the certainty that I would never marry; have children; the fear of being treated like a freak. It was made worse by the bigotry of those around me, including the father of a lad of 16 I knew who kicked his son out of home when he found out about him being gay. Perhaps if there had been a "liberal leftie" teacher to tell me that actually it was OK, that I was just different and should do my best to accept it, then I wouldn't have had to go though years of misery and denial.

Us "queers/gays/puffs" cannot change our sexuality. It is not a belief. It is not a choice. It is part of our nature, built into us from birth.


That is why I've pulled you up on this. You have no idea what it is you condemn.

Edit: highlight

Your right.. Christians shouldn't be judgemental about homosexuals or any other kind of person. But most are and that makes them sinners just the same.

All sin is equal in the eyes of God, only one sin is unforgiveable according to God and that isn't homosexuality.

Not all Christians are actually born again, some don't actually understand what God is saying about sin.



Of course not, it is the work of Jesus and the Holy Spirit alone that changes us within..we don't change by our own works. lest any man should boast.




Those also are gifts from the Holy Spirit without them how can someone be called a Christian.



We are all sinners, only Jesus is without sin.

God doesn't measure which sin is worse. Sin is sin and every kind of sin separates us from God, only the blood of Jesus and faith in him alone can cleanse us from our sins.

human nature gave us greed, fear and also made us judgmental it part of survival and stood us in good stead you 1000's of years and if we pretend that nothing is bad and people can not help themselves then where were does that get us.

are you saying that if a kill someone that has killed lots of people for pleasure than that make me as bad as him and not just doing what any decent person should do.

reverse logic where good is bad does not work in this universe but might in others.




i take your point but too many gays are looking for converts and not only promote it as normal but a prefured way of life.

Today i was doing a search for property for sale in Bulgeria and would you beleive i came across a site dedicated to gays and property in Bulgeria ! what's next the Gay ford escort owners club and then they are the first to scream they want to be a part of normal socity.

i smoke dope now and then but thats not to say i want to taught in schools that it's good for you is it now.

stop forcing belives on our kids and i'll stop kicking back.

strange i've had this debate before and it's often the ones that are open that i can have common ground with.

i don't have a problom with real gays so much but i can not stand the ones who bat on both sides and it these ones that try so hard to make it look like everyone is up to the same thing in a vain attempt to make themselves feel normal.

I've personally spoken to plenty of gay men (and women) who are completely monogamous through choice. Cultural considerations aside, a gay relationship is no different to a heterosexual one. I've certainly found no difference myself.

This does not mean to say that some gay people can not play the field as much as their heterosexual counterparts can, just that if you exclude the stage in your average gay person's life where they have just come out and have a lot of catching up to do, the only difference seems to be the gender they are attracted to.

I had some rampant political lesbian friends when I was a student living in Brighton. They got into trouble once when they scrawed in chalk on the university campus "We don't convert, we recruit!" in chalk during one of their actions.

I've never ever heard any gay person ever discuss or raise the idea of converting heterosexuals. It's only ever been to make coming out easier for the next generation of people who realise that they were born gay.

Have you got any evidence whatsoever that gays want to convert others?




I've noticed the same thing myself. I've also noticed that the only other group to do the same thing are Christians. But it's understandable for both Christians and gays. In fact especially gays. The trouble is that you don't immediately know if someone is gay (or a Christian). And it's not something you generally ask someone out of the blue. People like to hang around others of a similar mindset, especially something as fundamental to their being as their sexuality or religion.

Maybe around your way they are. I don't see much of that myself. Some examples would be useful to take the debate forward.



What is your problem with gay people doing this? Any group of people sharing common characteristics or interests will organise vested interest groups of this kind. You don't have to join and there is plenty of room for "straights in Bulgaria" sites. In fact, don't they make up the vast majority ?



Rubbish comparison, as I'm sure you are fully aware. I can go into reasons why (there are myriad) if you really want....



The only "beliefs" being "forced" on kids is that it's not OK to kick the shit out of boys just because they don't fancy girls, and that gay people should not have to make excuses for the way they are made.



It remains to be seen just how much common ground we have, but I'm happy to continue the discussion for now.



Are you referring to bisexuals? I'm not sure I follow exactly what you're getting at here.

You are using mans own standards of who is a better person...I am writing about Gods standards, Gods law, what He tells us in his word.


Image a graph of good and bad people...though you maybe a million times better person than the likes of Hitler, Saddam. You maybe at the top end of the graph and they left at the bottom..and say Mother Theresa even higher than you..(who knows) that is what mans standard is like.
Now a graph between Jesus and the rest of us sinners including Christians eg.. Mother Theresa.....No human even comes 1/2% close to Jesus..though we may think ourselves better than hitler ..we are so below what Gods standard is..it's impossible for any human to acheive Gods standard.



So we have faith and Jesus' blood to cleanse us clean from our sins..without that God sees us as a sinners, no matter if we think it was only a small sin and it doesn't matter....... When cleansed from our sins though...God sees us sinless as Jesus is sinless.

Man as got his own standards of what good and bad, the laws of the land are run by those standards.

Gods standard is anyone below what Jesus is (sinless)..is a sinner no matter what type of sin they've committed.

Nicolaj

we need bad people after all how can you have good without bad ? your too deep for me and i will not draw on religion to score cheap point here when i don't swallow any of it.

narrowescape

i would take you up on some of your points but on this occasion i would find it very hard to do without offending you so maybe we should let it drop and agree to disagree.

what i will say without possibly coming to blows with you is that nature has tried ever experiment in the book when it comes to evolution and making changes and little we see today has not been tried before at sometime but now man thinks he's in control and not nature.

maybe cancer gave a monkey a huge brain and as luck would have or not, humans came out of it.

I have quite a thick skin and would be genuinely interested to know the background to your point of view, but if you want to avoid the risk of offending me that's fine, and we can just avoid locking horns on this topic in future

What I would say in answer to your point about nature/choice is that biology doesn't always work in an obvious way and what may appear to some as a lifestyle choice is most likely a biological phenomenon caused by a "fit" gene operating in a counterintuitive way. What I mean by this is that there are examples of genes that create sufficient reproductive advantage for some that they continue to be propagated despite curtailing the reproductive abilities of others. The gene for sickle cell anaemia is a very well-documented example of this. Two copies of the gene cause (as the name suggests) sickle cell anaemia, but one copy confers some protection against malaria so in areas where malaria is rife, this gene is actively selected despite the fact that it makes some people very sick. Going back to the matter at hand, there has been a scientific study (I think it was in the New Scientist) suggesting that one of the candidate genes for (male) homosexuality may increase the overall fertility of women who carry it. Obviously a gene that increases fertility is going to be useful, even if some of the offspring may not themselves reproduce. Perhaps this goes some way to explaining why an "obvious" evolutionary dead-end gene is still propagated and why people like me continue to be born.

Edit: Removed part of quote not relevant to this reply

Maybe not mould and shower curtains, but certainly mildew... Not one of the most strictly observed bits of the Bible:

Leviticus 13:

47 "If any clothing is contaminated with mildew—any woolen or linen clothing, 48 any woven or knitted material of linen or wool, any leather or anything made of leather- 49 and if the contamination in the clothing, or leather, or woven or knitted material, or any leather article, is greenish or reddish, it is a spreading mildew and must be shown to the priest. 50 The priest is to examine the mildew and isolate the affected article for seven days. 51 On the seventh day he is to examine it, and if the mildew has spread in the clothing, or the woven or knitted material, or the leather, whatever its use, it is a destructive mildew; the article is unclean. 52 He must burn up the clothing, or the woven or knitted material of wool or linen, or any leather article that has the contamination in it, because the mildew is destructive; the article must be burned up.

53 "But if, when the priest examines it, the mildew has not spread in the clothing, or the woven or knitted material, or the leather article, 54 he shall order that the contaminated article be washed. Then he is to isolate it for another seven days. 55 After the affected article has been washed, the priest is to examine it, and if the mildew has not changed its appearance, even though it has not spread, it is unclean. Burn it with fire, whether the mildew has affected one side or the other. 56 If, when the priest examines it, the mildew has faded after the article has been washed, he is to tear the contaminated part out of the clothing, or the leather, or the woven or knitted material. 57 But if it reappears in the clothing, or in the woven or knitted material, or in the leather article, it is spreading, and whatever has the mildew must be burned with fire. 58 The clothing, or the woven or knitted material, or any leather article that has been washed and is rid of the mildew, must be washed again, and it will be clean."

59 These are the regulations concerning contamination by mildew in woolen or linen clothing, woven or knitted material, or any leather article, for pronouncing them clean or unclean.

What if the person who kills loads of people for pleasure does so because he has temporal lobal damage to the brain? -therefore having no concept of right and wrong
If you kill him aren't you worse because you know it is wrong to kill someone? whereas he doesn't

Paulo's the same question to you - in a different way - if a man who has temporal lobal damage to the brain - kills people because he doesn't know right from wrong - should he go unpunished because its "natural" to him?
Just because something seems natural doesn't make it right

If you are a true Christian then you should embrace all faiths and all types of people.This does not mean that Christianity accepts homosexuality as the normal and correct practice just the same as we do not accept that Islam is right either or adultery is ok. You can be a gay Christian and there is nothing wrong with that but like everyone we all brake the rules in some way and have to ask for forgiveness.

Yes but Scarletsbotv7.9 seems to have a pathological hatred of up hill gardeners above and beyond all other "sins".

Aren't you basically contradicting yourself here?