Gay christians: Why i can’t affirm or condemn them (prophets, eternity)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You have well explained your understanding of Ephesians, and I have no definitive alternative. At the same time proper exegesis, considering cultural context, would indicate women were never considered anywhere close to equal with the men they married. And my grasp of inspiration is that it has always been subject to human cultural considerations.
With regard to homosexual relations, the culture of that time frame didn't see men attracted to men, it saw sexual relations by men as "oversexed." In effect, not even a hundred women would be enough. Of course, we now know that is an improper view of same sex attraction. In addition, in the Roman world, same sex sexual relations were part of Roman idolatry---and idolatry was then and in the OT, always sinful in God's eyes.
Bottom line, is there are two ways of viewing same sex sexual relations in Scripture. There are biblical arguments for both. I made a conscious decision based on the words and actions of Jesus to accept a biblical understanding that does not disenfranchise anyone because of how they were born. And I do understand it as something that comes through birth---hence the numerous animals and even insects that have a percentage of their populations that prefer their own sex for relationships that include sexual relations.
To give you further thought, research the relationship between David and Jonathan. The words of Saul in the story are quite telling. He tells Jonathan:
“You son of a perverse, rebellious woman! Do I not know that you have chosen [David] the son of Jesse to your own shame and to the shame of your mother’s nakedness? For as long as the son of Jesse lives upon the earth, neither you nor your kingdom shall be established.” (1 Samuel 20:30)
Note the term "shame upon your mother's nakedness." That was a Hebrew euphemism for "incest." See Leviticus 18:6-18.
Imagine for moment that a man had given his best possessions to a woman--just handed them over as a sign of devotion. That's what Jonathan did for David. In any other circumstance it would be considered one the world's great love stories. When we read the story without projecting our personal beliefs about God into it. At the very least we see Jonathan as a homosexual. It is less clear about David. But we see no specific rejection of Jonathan' sexual orientation except by his father, Saul. It sounds remarkably like what many homosexuals today have experienced.
The upshot is that for me and my house we will not view sexual orientation as "evil" between same sex adherents. We will view them in light of their faithfulness to their avowed partners, something which Scripture is about as clear as most of our Denver mornings.
Been through a rough patch, but at least for a season, I *may* be back. Haven't had time or energy to complete promised in depth study, but will eventually get around to it. Also haven't read the 25 pages or so that have been accumulated on this thread since I was offline for a season, but did see the above post, same page and here is my reply....
As they say, you do err, not knowing the scriptures nor the power of His Spirit. Jonathan and David DID NOT have a homosexual relationship. First of all, the Hebrew word there is ahab, which is never used in the scriptures to denote homosexual activity, such as in the story of Sodom where the Hebrew word yada is used IN CONTEXT with what the men of Sodom asked pertaining to the men/angels they saw enter Lot's house.
Ahab is used in this section of text and is also used when G-d spoke to Abraham about the sacrifice of his son, whom he LOVED, it's used referring to G-d's LOVE for his children, for our LOVE towards G-d which is to include all our heart, soul, and might, and in, you shall LOVE your neighbor as yourself, to just list a few.
Yada is to know, as in a man knowing his wife and they were one, implying sexual intimacy. Yada, is nowhere used in the text describing the relationship between David and Jonathan. It IS used, as I said, in the story of Sodom.
As for Saul's comments to Jonathan, to uncover your father's nakedness is to have sexual relations with your mother. To uncover your mother's nakedness, is the same thing because the two are one, it's the same as having sex with your father. Denial of this simple fact (the two shall become one) is the root of so much darkness upon the earth, from the breaking of covenants to the taking on of another person's darkness (which has a legal right to enter into you with the joining of flesh).
David was anointed to be the next king of Israel, and is a type of Christ in the inner court realm; they both are shepherds, and they both ascended to their positions at age 30. This, if for no other reason, should be enough to convince even the diehard antichrist spirit that David did not have a homosexual relationship, since G-d would not glorify the breaking of His own law, not even for David, beloved of G-d, which He showed in His judgment pronounced over the Bathsheba incident.
Jonathan, who is in this section of text, a type of the true sons of G-d who seek only after their Father in heaven's approval, was shown fulfilling part of the law by loving David as himself, because he recognized in David, the same quality, ie. David was after the Father's heart. Jonathan was willing to go against his own natural father, and his family, deny his inheritance, and his right to the wealth of the things of this world.
Compare with Abraham who was willing to leave his father's house (type of carnal mind), his country (place where you are comfortable, comforts of soulish flesh), and his relatives (who are my brethren?) to look for a city (multiple habitations of Him) made without hands.
He was showing that his heart was pure in motive, which means it was in AGREEMENT with the Spirit that anointed David to be king, which in fact, meant that he, Jonathan WAS NOT to be king in the law of succession that would have been expected. How many men in his position would have done the same? Look around you. How many are willing to take on the mind of Christ,(which is the Word of G-d) today, and are instead slaves to their own carnal minds and the carnal minds of others, which is the natural succession to things in this realm, and there is your answer.
And as proof of his agreement with the Spirit of G-d's anointing of David to be the future king, he surrendered his princely garments (our righteousness is as filthy rags), and his armor, including his bow and sword (symbol of military might-NOT by power or by might but by my Spirit saith the Lord),and his belt (that which girds up the loins of truth). It was an exchange of identities, as a type and shadow of the exchange of identities His sons take on by receiving Christ as their head. As is the head, so is the body. Peace
Been through a rough patch, but at least for a season, I *may* be back. Haven't had time or energy to complete promised in depth study, but will eventually get around to it. Also haven't read the 25 pages or so that have been accumulated on this thread since I was offline for a season, but did see the above post, same page and here is my reply....
As they say, you do err, not knowing the scriptures nor the power of His Spirit. Jonathan and David DID NOT have a homosexual relationship. First of all, the Hebrew word there is ahab, which is never used in the scriptures to denote homosexual activity, such as in the story of Sodom where the Hebrew word yada is used IN CONTEXT with what the men of Sodom asked pertaining to the men/angels they saw enter Lot's house.
Ahab is used in this section of text and is also used when G-d spoke to Abraham about the sacrifice of his son, whom he LOVED, it's used referring to G-d's LOVE for his children, for our LOVE towards G-d which is to include all our heart, soul, and might, and in, you shall LOVE your neighbor as yourself, to just list a few.
Yada is to know, as in a man knowing his wife and they were one, implying sexual intimacy. Yada, is nowhere used in the text describing the relationship between David and Jonathan. It IS used, as I said, in the story of Sodom.
As for Saul's comments to Jonathan, to uncover your father's nakedness is to have sexual relations with your mother. To uncover your mother's nakedness, is the same thing because the two are one, it's the same as having sex with your father. Denial of this simple fact (the two shall become one) is the root of so much darkness upon the earth, from the breaking of covenants to the taking on of another person's darkness (which has a legal right to enter into you with the joining of flesh).
David was anointed to be the next king of Israel, and is a type of Christ in the inner court realm; they both are shepherds, and they both ascended to their positions at age 30. This, if for no other reason, should be enough to convince even the diehard antichrist spirit that David did not have a homosexual relationship, since G-d would not glorify the breaking of His own law, not even for David, beloved of G-d, which He showed in His judgment pronounced over the Bathsheba incident.
Jonathan, who is in this section of text, a type of the true sons of G-d who seek only after their Father in heaven's approval, was shown fulfilling part of the law by loving David as himself, because he recognized in David, the same quality, ie. David was after the Father's heart. Jonathan was willing to go against his own natural father, and his family, deny his inheritance, and his right to the wealth of the things of this world.
Compare with Abraham who was willing to leave his father's house (type of carnal mind), his country (place where you are comfortable, comforts of soulish flesh), and his relatives (who are my brethren?) to look for a city (multiple habitations of Him) made without hands.
He was showing that his heart was pure in motive, which means it was in AGREEMENT with the Spirit that anointed David to be king, which in fact, meant that he, Jonathan WAS NOT to be king in the law of succession that would have been expected. How many men in his position would have done the same? Look around you. How many are willing to take on the mind of Christ,(which is the Word of G-d) today, and are instead slaves to their own carnal minds and the carnal minds of others, which is the natural succession to things in this realm, and there is your answer.
And as proof of his agreement with the Spirit of G-d's anointing of David to be the future king, he surrendered his princely garments (our righteousness is as filthy rags), and his armor, including his bow and sword (symbol of military might-NOT by power or by might but by my Spirit saith the Lord),and his belt (that which girds up the loins of truth). It was an exchange of identities, as a type and shadow of the exchange of identities His sons take on by receiving Christ as their head. As is the head, so is the body. Peace
I don't disagree about your "spiritual" views regarding the "why" of Jonathan. I just think he was a homosexual--and an understanding of Hebrew idioms leads one to believe Saul thought he was, too.
So what? I think God uses homosexuals for spiritual truths as much as anyone else. What you've proven is that a homosexual was humble---unlike many modern day "christians."
Last edited by Wardendresden; 03-27-2016 at 11:46 AM..
I don't disagree about your "spiritual" views regarding the "why" of Jonathan. I just think he was a homosexual--and an understanding of Hebrew idioms leads one to believe Saul thought he was, too.
So what. I think God uses homosexuals for spiritual truths as much as anyone else. What you've proven is that a homosexual was humble---unlike many modern day "christians."
Yes, well He certainly used them to reveal spiritual truths when He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, didn't He? Peace
You know what? And this is quite a shocker for the rebellious at heart, so get ready....G-d DISCRIMINATES!
Yes, that's what I said. He discriminates against sin and He doesn't care WHO the vessel or vessels are, that are walking in that sin. Neither the clergy who harbor the root of it in their hearts, nor the lay people who walk out the sins of the clergy for all to see: it's one and the same sin. That's what 95% don't see.
But He's about cleansing the INSIDE of the cup, as well as the OUTSIDE. What you are discussing here is only the OUTSIDE of the cup ONLY, but I'M NOT, so don't lump me in with the 95%. Peace
And one of the worst sins is destroying lives an community by misrepresenting what IS sin because of a failure to examine in the Spirit of that concern for others that is the love Jesus taught.
And one of the worst sins is destroying lives an community by misrepresenting what IS sin because of a failure to examine in the Spirit of that concern for others that is the love Jesus taught.
You got that right. If you were TRULY concerned for others in the same vein as the Spirit that He was, you wouldn't be JUST looking at their physical comforts (and that includes their social standing, ect.) and making accommodations for the flesh in THIS LIFE, which Yeshua didn't do. He cared about their ETERNAL STATE, deeming it more important than this temporal life, which is but a vapor. Peace
You got that right. If you were TRULY concerned for others in the same vein as the Spirit that He was, you wouldn't be JUST looking at their physical comforts (and that includes their social standing, ect.) and making accommodations for the flesh in THIS LIFE, which Yeshua didn't do. He cared about their ETERNAL STATE, deeming it more important than this temporal life, which is but a vapor. Peace
In Christ, eternal life begins NOW.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
