legalism or not?

[Lonely Summer]

Hello friends, I haven't posted here much lately, and admit my mind is not always focused on things spiritual....but lately, I keep mulling over certain ideas that bother me. For starters, there is the ongoing debate about gay people in the church. I've heard arguments from both (or all) sides, but neither really satisfies me. My best friend at work is gay, grew up in the Free Methodist church, but now is atheist. I would imagine growing up in a very strict church like that (his parents would not allow him to even say "heck" or "darn"...."you know that's just a substitute for a bad word!") and then realising later in life that you attraction is to your own gender has got to cause great problems internally. Another friend who was raised Mormon more recently told me she is lesbian. I'm familiar with the often cited Bible passages on this subject, but am still confused why some of us hold those up, yet we no longer make an issue of eating shellfish, expect women to shut up in church, or stone disobedient children. BTW, my friend at work is not active in the gay lifestyle. To my knowledge, he has never dated, never had a boyfriend (never had a girlfriend either), I don't think he ever will. He is painfully shy around strangers (around people he knows well like me he's a chatterbox!), and I think he is afraid of the idea of a relationship. I don't know why it matters to me, nothing anyone says will change my opinion of my friend, a truly caring, loving person. And no, he's never made a pass at me, never tried to make me "turn gay".....doesn't push it on anyone, in fact only his closest friends know, and I don't talk about it with coworkers. But I do have conflicted feelings because of my past in the ET church.

[ded2daworld]

I had a similar friend. We hung out together for several years and I dated his sister for awhile. He has since died from aids - almost 20 years now and like your friend, never "came on to me" or tried to "turn me". He was one of the kindest, fun, intelligent person I've ever known and I miss the camaraderie that we had. My only solace is knowing that ultimately, he will be reconciled to God, as will your friend. Meanwhile, Jesus said "what you do to/for men, you also do to/for me" so treat him as you would Jesus - with care and lovingkindness. :Peace2:

[Molly]

gay people in the church

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

--2 Cor 6:14


1 Corinthians 5:9 I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people--


1 John 1:6 If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth.

[ded2daworld]

C'mon Molly, If we didn't associate with sexually immoral people most of us couldn't have jobs. and as for lonely summers friend he so far has been less sexually immoral than a TV preacher.
By not associating with them, Paul here is saying not to take on the attitude of condoning the sin, or pretending it's all right. Not being mistakenly identified as "one of them". My friend didn't even tell me and I had no idea he was gay until about 12 years after we became friends. One day he asked me, "What is the last thing you would suspect of me?" I laughed and said, "Probably that you're gay(he was very masculine) and he looked me strait in the eye and said, "That's it."
If a sexually immoral person is one that lusts after a woman in his heart, You might as well say don't hang around anyone that is not a believer and don't hang around 80% of those that claim to be believers and by the way, don't hang around yourself.
If nobody talks to these people and they are treated anathema, they sure won't see the love of Christ in us.
"Love the sinner and hate the sin" - you can't love the sinner if you don't go near them.
Thank God  Jesus "associated with sinners"

[Molly]

well, you have two choices.  Listen to the Bible, or don't.

Not that it matters much in the churches these days, because the predicted great falling away is happening right on schedule as far as I can see.

But, i still do appreciate the shepherds who hold the line for their sheep.

PS I reject the idea that this topic has anything to do with 'legalism.'

[sheila]

...to me..it always boils down to...loving the sinner...hating the sin.   I have no conflict with loving them...

  I find them very lovable..and know God loves them.  But it is the wresting the scriptures to condone

  homsexuality  that causes the problem. For the gentiles...sexual immorality,blood,things strangled

  and idolatry are still to be avoided.   Father will save the sinner with Jesus' blood..but not justify the sin..imo.


   Neither do I  think I am any better than any other sinsick person...and not need the total healing that He
will perform with all men.  I look forward to this for all mankind.  I am joyful in the Lord that homosexuals shall
be saved. I am elated that He shall deliver all from corruption of all kinds..

[victoriousgospel]

Molly, "Listen to the Bible, or don't" is exactly the kind of insight from conventional Christianity that keeps people mired in fear of ET beliefs. I think if you're going to make a strong, sure statement against homosexuality, we would expect better in a forum focused on discussion. I appreciate your reasoning you include, but maybe the tone is a bit off considering the tenor of discussion encouraged here? I say this with love, and not aggression. :HeartThrob:

I'm basically with Ded on this one. I wouldn't treat a gay person any different than any other kind of sinner - would you treat a habitual liar, or a person who cheats on their wife like lepers the same way gays/lesbians are treated? If we disassociated from someone because of perceived sin consistently, we'd have no one left to talk to. That's escapism, and God put us in this world to engage it and embody Christ's love when interacting with others.

I remain agnostic on the issue of whether or not monogamous homosexual relationships are inherently sinful. I feel blessed that I do not have to struggle with homosexual feelings personally - though we all struggle with 'sexual immorality'. Lust, self-control, etc.  I've heard arguments from both sides.

I'm not going to take a strong stand in this thread, because I've seen these discussions go nowhere a million times. Everyone has an opinion, and nobody ever seems open to persuasion one way or the other. Such is humanity.  :2c:

I will say this, though: If Jesus seemed to want to get anything across, it's that the internal attitude of an individual is at least as important as the action itself. Thus, the logic of 'Looking at someone with lust' == 'Adultery'. And like Ded said, gay or not, we'll all be reconciled in the end. So, gay or not, you should treat your friend with respect, embody the love of Christ, and pray that they will be moved in whatever direction God would like them to move.

[victoriousgospel]

I'm not playing games or trying to fight you. Just saying that "The Bible is clear on this topic" is the same thing people who believe in eternal Hell say, and is not a persuasive argument for someone who started a thread looking for some real discussion.

This is not "playing a game". Again, all I'm saying is if we have to throw one sinner out of our lives, we've got to throw them all out. It's not that sin is "ok", it's that we all have a plank in our eye, we're all guilty of sin (many of them also listed as abomination), and it's hypocritical to treat homosexuals as if they're in some super-sinner class all their own. Adultery, hardness of heart, injustice - I have been guilty of all these things, and it is a life long walk to be cleansed of these things. I don't diminish these sins, but I also don't presume to think that these sins are in a lesser class than anyone else's.

I didn't say whether or not I thought it was "legalism" to be down on homosexuality.  I certainly leave the possibility open that God might not approve.  I have days where I do lean toward that opinion. I am just not as sure as you are that the mainstream interpretation on this is what is intended to be read. I read the same Bible you did. And like most things, there are a variety of interpretations. We wouldn't be on this forum if we didn't break from the mainstream at some point. Rather than sow discord among brothers (oh, there's an abomination as well), I simply discard my pride and acknowledge my uncertainty on the matter.

The 'sexualization of children' is a total non-sequitur here. Nobody on this forum is intending to play a "legalism game" by just being honest about their viewpoint.

[ded2daworld]

I can see the pharisees rejecting any kind of association with any kind of "sinner"
but even if we see gays as "enemies" are we not to love them.
There is a big difference between hating the sin and being homophobic
which has to do with the person.
If anyone can ask themselves "what would Jesus do?" and can envision or see Jesus
refusing all contact or associating with gay people because the sin they commit is disgusting
Then we see our Lord differently. Thank God you are no longer one of the "lost sheep"
that Christ will not associate with. :2c:

[Molly]

Just saying that "The Bible is clear on this topic" is the same thing people who believe in eternal Hell say,

well, they're right.  They're just reading a bad translation.

The 'sexualization of children' is a total non-sequitur here.

It's not a non-sequitur.   What do you happens in states that have legalized gay marriage?  Well, we have to teach children as young as 5 years old about homosexuality because their little friends might have gay parents.  Guess what?  A five year old could care less.  And, if he cares, let him ask his parents.  But, no, that's not an option.  They need to learn in school about sex at five years old now, and not only sex, but gay sex.

Again, all I'm saying is if we have to throw one sinner out of our lives, we've got to throw them all out.

Everybody has to make their own decision about this.  I know what it means to be unequally yoked, and it can become a heavy, heavy burden and years of heartache.   The Bible is telling us things to protect us, not to harm us.  But, far be it from me to think that anyone would take some good advice instead of years of heartache to learn the same thing.  I didn't do it myself.   Here's Paul's advice, take it or leave it:


9 When I wrote to you before, I told you not to associate with people who indulge in sexual sin. 10 But I wasn't talking about unbelievers who indulge in sexual sin, or are greedy, or cheat people, or worship idols. You would have to leave this world to avoid people like that. 11 I meant that you are not to associate with anyone who claims to be a believer yet indulges in sexual sin, or is greedy, or worships idols, or is abusive, or is a drunkard, or cheats people. Don't even eat with such people.

12 It isn't my responsibility to judge outsiders, but it certainly is your responsibility to judge those inside the church who are sinning. 13 God will judge those on the outside; but as the Scriptures say, "You must remove the evil person from among you."

--1 Cor 5



14 Don't team up with those who are unbelievers. How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? 15 What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever? 16 And what union can there be between God's temple and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God said:

"I will live in them
and walk among them.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.

17 Therefore, come out from among unbelievers,
and separate yourselves from them, says the Lord.


Don't touch their filthy things,
and I will welcome you.
18 And I will be your Father,
and you will be my sons and daughters,
says the Lord Almighty."

--2 Cor 6










.

[Molly]

There is a big difference between hating the sin and being homophobic
which has to do with the person.

'homophobic' is a made up word circa late 20th century.  homo plus phobic.   Fear of men?  That's what it translates to.  So if we didn't have fear of men we would have sex with them?

It's the type of word that messes with your brain.  It accuses the person who disapproves of gay sex of having something wrong with THEM.

If anyone can ask themselves "what would Jesus do?" and can envision or see Jesus
refusing all contact or associating with gay people because the sin they commit is disgusting.

If you believe what I do, Jesus is the one who used the word 'disgusting' in the first place.

What message does Jesus give?  Repent, Go and sin no more.

And if they don't?  Shake the dust off your feet and move on.

[ded2daworld]

See, I must have missed the part that said we were talking about the sexually immoral
that claim to be christian. I agree with molly on that. I was talking about your average sexually immoral
non-believer which Paul says we will always have in the world.
No way should an obviously sexually immoral person that claims they know Christ be treated as if "everythings OK"
These people are deluded either by themselves or "the adversary"
...and unequally yoked? My wife and I have problems over she is ET and I am UR.
I can't even imagine someone feeling that God is commanding them to marry a non-believer.
The only exception I can think of was Hosea being commanded to marry Gomer the prostitute to show Israel
that Hosea represented him and Gomer repreented Israel and the whoring was israel running after other gods and leaving their first love, the one true and living God

and "fear of men" may be the literal interpretation, but todays american usage is a fear of homosexual men. It's just shorter than saying someone is homosexualphobic

[victoriousgospel]

It's not a non-sequitur.   What do you happens in states that have legalized gay marriage?  Well, we have to teach children as young as 5 years old about homosexuality because their little friends might have gay parents.  Guess what?  A five year old could care less.  And, if he cares, let him ask his parents.  But, no, that's not an option.  They need to learn in school about sex at five years old now, and not only sex, but gay sex.

I'm not sure what state you live in, but I live in a state where gay marriage is not an option - and surprisingly, gay people still exist here. Some of them have kids.

There's also a difference between having to inform a child of the reality that "gay people exist," and giving them a low-down on the mechanics of homosexual intercourse. If your kids are being "sexualized" by coming into contact with the very idea that gay people exist, then by that rubric, telling kids that hetero people like you and I exist is "sexualizing" as well. It would be hard to exist in this world without your kids coming into some "sexualizing" influence by that measure. I agree with you on one thing - kids don't care. They are pre-sexual. Gay, straight - they could really care less. If your local schools are giving 5-year-olds the dirty details on how gay intercourse works, then yeah, I agree there's a big problem.

We don't live in a perfect world, and regardless of what you believe God's rubric for perfect is, by your estimation of what it means to be "yoked with unbelievers", I'm not sure how you can bear to go outside your house.

[ded2daworld]

Right. There's no question that the public school system is no place to raise
Godly kids - and they shouldn't have the reponsibility of raising others kids anyway
since many piblic school teachers are non-believers in christianity, or atheist, or a few satan worshipers or witches and/or a few gay and lesbian. Not good.
I would fear and loathe the responsibility of raising a child in this day and age.

[Molly]

They are pre-sexual. Gay, straight - they could really care less. If your local schools are giving 5-year-olds the dirty details on how gay intercourse works, then yeah, I agree there's a big problem.

They are started off by being given books of men loving men instead of women.  And, men kissing men on the lips. 

Mind you, I would not approve of giving a five year old a book showing men kissing women on the lips, either.   

But, they want to make it clear--this involves sex.

What is going on--it is normalizing homosexuality, the way heterosexuality is normal.

It's the new normal for children.   Like it or not, this used to be a Christian country.  That is no longer an option.

We don't live in a perfect world, and regardless of what you believe God's rubric for perfect is, by your estimation of what it means to be "yoked with unbelievers", I'm not sure how you can bear to go outside your house

Being yoked means being in close relationship with--yoked together.   What they do affects you directly.  We are yoked with Christ.  People usually think about it as being married but it could be a close relationship or a business partnership, etc.

Don't worry about me.  I've been around the block a few times.

[Molly]

See, I must have missed the part that said we were talking about the sexually immoral
that claim to be christian. I agree with molly on that. I was talking about your average sexually immoral
non-believer which Paul says we will always have in the world.
No way should an obviously sexually immoral person that claims they know Christ be treated as if "everythings OK"
These people are deluded either by themselves or "the adversary"
...and unequally yoked? My wife and I have problems over she is ET and I am UR.
I can't even imagine someone feeling that God is commanding them to marry a non-believer.
The only exception I can think of was Hosea being commanded to marry Gomer the prostitute to show Israel
that Hosea represented him and Gomer repreented Israel and the whoring was israel running after other gods and leaving their first love, the one true and living God

and "fear of men" may be the literal interpretation, but todays american usage is a fear of homosexual men. It's just shorter than saying someone is homosexualphobic

yes gays in the church is what I have been responding to here.  That was in the original question.   That, and the warning about becoming unequally yoked.

the ongoing debate about gay people in the church

As far as her friend is concerned, I have no idea about that because I don't know enough about it to respond.  That's between her and God.  All I can do it show what the scripture says.





Fear of homosexual men?  Is that what you think is going on here?

So you call someone homophobic because you think they have fear of homosexual men?

And, if only they could get over their irrational fear, all would be well?

You do understand, among some cultures, it is a pejorative term.

[ded2daworld]

How could i? I don't know what pejorative means and am 2 la-z to look it up.
Fear of homosexual men are the guys that don't mind wrestling or sports or
defending our country with other "straight" guys, but cringe at the thought of
gay guys being next to them or touching them in even a non-sexual manner,
or having to depend on them to maybe save their life.

[micah7:9]

Mat 7:1  `Judge not, that ye may not be judged,
Luk 6:37  `And judge not, and ye may not be judged; condemn not, and ye may not be condemned; release, and ye shall be released.
Luk 12:14  And he said to him, `Man, who set me a judge or a divider over you?'
Joh 3:17  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

[Molly]

pe·jo·ra·tive 

Adjective

Expressing contempt or disapproval.

Noun

A word expressing contempt or disapproval.



As in,
"Homophobic.. is a pejorative term."


It is treating the person who disapproves of homosexuality [which is their right, especially in a so-called Christian country] with contempt.

Or, to make it simpler, it's namecalling [or adhominem if you want to stick with Latin].

It is saying to the person, there is something wrong with you if you do not approve of homosexuality.  And, make no mistake, children understand it this way.

[Molly]

Mat 7:1  `Judge not, that ye may not be judged,
Luk 6:37  `And judge not, and ye may not be judged; condemn not, and ye may not be condemned; release, and ye shall be released.
Luk 12:14  And he said to him, `Man, who set me a judge or a divider over you?'
Joh 3:17  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!

--1 Cor 6:3

[jabcat]

Legalism?  The  [personally detested] "homophobia" label?  Unless done in a condemning, "mean" way, I don't believe so at all, or that it has anything to do with ET.  The scriptures are still a guideline to be adhered to - as best we can understand, and given guidance by the Holy Spirit.

I PERSONALLY likely wouldn't feel comfortable spending most of my interacting/"fellowshipping" time with an actively practicing, "open" homosexual (or thief, or murderer, or adulterer) because we just wouldn't have that much in common to share, or enjoy together.  Nor do I believe they should be given an "equal" participating position in the ekklesia - rather should be lovingly sought to be restored.  That said, I believe in loving and being kind to the sinner - treating them with respect [don't we all have sins and need merciful correction?].  But "forgetting" the OT for just a moment - I believe Paul was VERY clear on homosexual behavior - as with many other sins.  I believe to be a follower of Christ, we're to crucify the deeds of the flesh [abhor them, give them over to God for help and deliverance].  There are consequences to our sins, and correction isn't and won't be fun.  Love is required, but IMO, excusing sinful behavior does no one any favors.

God does and will forgive.

[sheila]

 Is it really NOT enough..to say.to any brother..GOD WILL SAVE US FROM ALL SIN. .MUST we be put

under compulsion to also say 'your homosexuality is not a sin you need to be delivered from..but an

acceptable alternative to God"?

[jabcat]

Is it really NOT enough..to say.to any brother..GOD WILL SAVE US FROM ALL SIN.

I understand your point and generally agree with it.  However, Apostle Paul was awfully specific.  Went right down the list.  I BELIEVE you and I also see correction somewhat differently, which probably enters into our views here.  If I'm wrong, "correct" me.   :laughhand:  But I THINK you believe as soon as the body dies, sin is gone.  Whereas I believe there is a period of correction afterlife (based on my understanding of both Jesus' and Paul's teachings) - "kolasis aonion".  So for me, although I DON"T go around pointing out peoples' sins  :punish: - just as I wouldn't want someone picking at mine :laugh:, if the occasion arose (and I'm not sure exactly what that might be - if they asked me maybe?) - I'd feel a responsibility to be honest.  Not doing so, IMO, is doing them a disservice.  Which brings to this part;

say 'your homosexuality is not a sin you need to be delivered from..but an

acceptable alternative to God"?

which is  :2thumbs:   

[jabcat]

p.s.  I believe we're probably in large part talking theory at this point, since none of us probably go around beating on people about their/our sin, none of us are running an ecclesia, etc.   Still, useful conversation.   :thumbsup:

[ded2daworld]

Now I'm confused(or maybe that would be "Still, I'm confused."
Who is saying "homosexuality is not a sin and an acceptable alternative to God?"
IMO, scripture is clear that homosexuality is still a sin and
NOT an acceptable alternative to God. In fact, let me go out on a limb here and say
the only acceptable alternative to sin is NOT to sin.
Since people refuse to continue in their sin, they try to redefine what is sin.
(or like a famous presidential sinner said, "We need to define what "is" is)
He just redefined what "sex" was so that everything was OK - in his mind.
Front page of my local newspaper they arrested a 57 yr old disabled man for
molesting an 8 year old girl. He said that everything he did to her was allright
(and he did a LOT of stuff I won't mention) because the spinal injury that made
him disabled prevented him from an erection.
"The sinner apart from Christ will always attempt to justify themselves" - Jeffrey Smith