From: muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Date: 10 Apr 92 05:26:29 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Apr10.034635.9400@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> mls@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (mike.siemon) writes:
>In article <1992Apr10.023852.28190@en.ecn.purdue.edu>, muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen) writes:
>
>> In article <92100.181336QAA@psuvm.psu.edu> QAA@psuvm.psu.edu (Tim Bieling) writes:
>
>> >God made me gay, it's that simple.  The sin for me would be to lie to
>
>> Tell me something...  Why would he do this to you?
>
>Do you grant that there is some good in our, each individually, approximating
>in some degree the condition of Christ?  If so, the answer is very simple;
>of all possible conditions of humanity at the present moment, that which
>is closest to being "despised and rejected of men" is the condition of being
>homosexual.  If we are to be Christlike, then at the moment one route, and
>maybe the "easiest" to this ?desirable state is to be gay.

Oh brother...  This is getting ridiculous.  I'll tell you what stands out to
me about being Christ-like:

Colossians 3:1ff

   If then you have been raised up with    \
   Christ, keep seeking the things above,   |
   where Christ is, seated at the right     |
   hand of God.                             |
      2 Set your mind on the things         |-Be like this...
   above, not on the things that are on     |
   earth.                                   |
      3 For you have died and your life is  |
   hidden with Christ in God.              /
      4 When Christ, who is our life, is   \
   revealed, then you also will be re-      |-...for THIS!!!
   vealed with Him in glory.               /  --------------
      5 Therefore consider the mem-        \
   bers of your earthly body as dead to     |
   immorality, impurity, passion, evil de-  |-Here is where I get "sex
   sire, and greed, which amounts to        | worship".
   idolatry.                               /

It seems to me that making someone gay without specifying proper gay behavior
would put someone in a bind here.

>> If I thought God had
>> made me gay in todays society I would probably be more than a little
>> angry with him.
>
>With allowance for differences of phrasing by those who agree but have
>rejected the whole basis of your statment (along with God), then you
>have indeed indentified a common (the most common?) reaction in our world
>to the discovery that we are what we are -- given the simplistic claims
>of people like you, the choice is between the REALITY of our being and
>the phantasy that you want so desperately, and ignorantly, to fob off on
>God.  Which leaves everyday "Christianity" looking pretty worthless and
>sick.

So "everyday" Christianity is the Christianity of the Bible and "true"
Christianity is whatever you want it to be for _you_?

>More than a few gay and lesbian people, seeing exactly what YOU see,
>are indeed "more than a little angry with" God -- or more precisely,
>with arrogant fools like you who think they can speak for God and do
>so with the apparent goal of demeaning, obliterating and mutilating us.

God speaks for God.  His word stands unmodified - His promises unbroken.
Without this basis why be a Christian?

>And that is an argument I, as a gay Christian, am not generally willing
>to enter into with my gay and anti-Christian brethren.  For they are
>right -- the God you tout is a superstitious non-entity compared to the
>reality that we have come to know.  A reality more truly God's than any
>I am able to recognize in YOUR formulaic and unrealistic nonsense.

You realize that by just letting go of the things in your life which you
_know_ God dissaproves of you will be able to have a better realtionship with
him...  God is far more real than just what you have made up in your mind.

>> God doesn't do anything without a purpose, so I am wondering
>> what this purpose is.  If it exists I realize that we can't know what God is
>> thinking, but I would like to hear any thoughts.
>
>Why should YOU be granted any understanding of God's purpose for me?
>Don't you have enough problem with your OWN relation to your Lord?
>Are you really so thoroughly saved that you can meddle in my salvation?

So you don't know.  Notice I don't want the whole plan for your life (which
you don't even know) - just why homosexuality is beneficial for you within
God's plan.

>> On that same note would God allow the Bible to become warped?
>
>And how, exactly, is God to "prevent" idiots from warping ANYTHING that
>is written by his inspired agents?  That's a serious question, actually.

Am I to understand that you are putting limits on what God can and cannot do?
If you were God would you allow your word to be changed significantly?

I am sure that the Bible I am holding in my hand right now is the complete
and unchanged Word of God because of 1) historical evidence, and 2) God's
promise to protect it.

>> Why must love incur sex?  Truly the "highest" love we can have one for
>> another is that which Christ has for us - "...even as I have loved you".
>> This was _never_ even remotely sexual in nature.
>
>You're sure of that, are you? why?  Why is Jesus' love for us NOT sexual
>in nature?  I can't think of anything which would contradict that claim.
>(Neither do I argue for it -- I just wonder why you are so eager to assert
>this putative "fact")  What is it that bothers you about sex?  Why do you
>think Jesus (or the Father) shares YOUR concern?  What the hell *is* this
>hangup YOU have about sex?  Why must love NOT incur sex?  That is as odd
>a proposition as I have ever seen.  How do you go about justifying it?


Romans 8:5ff - There are many more like this...

      5 For those who are according to          | I think this shows pretty
   the flesh set their minds on the things      | clearly that that type of
   of the flesh, but those who are accord-      | love is not what Christ
   ing to the Spirit, the things of the         | is about... (granted this
   Spirit.                                      | is not the best verse on
      6 For the mind set on the flesh is        | the topic)
   death, but the mind set on the Spirit is
   life and peace,
      7 because the mind set on the flesh
   is hostile toward God; for it does not
   subject itself to the law of God, for it is
   not even able to do so;
      8 and those who are in the flesh
   cannot please God.
      9 However, you are not in the flesh
   but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of
   God dwells in you.  But if anyone does
   not have the Spirit of Christ, he does
   not belong to Him.

I also vaguely remember posting a verse that said the body is not for
immorality but rather for God.  So the question is what is immoral?  I think
the Bible is pretty clear.  Once this is established it is clear that Christs
love (which we are supposed to exhibit) would not include such things.


>> 12 All things are lawful for me, but      \
>> not all things are profitable.  All things |-IMPORTANT!! Just because we are
>> are lawful for me, but I will not be       | not bound by law doesn't mean
>> mastered by anything.                     /  we do whatever we want.
>
>Fine.  Why do you assume that those arguing against you claim that "we
>can do whatever we want?"  Are you really unable to cope with our REAL
>claims, that you must manufacture nonsense against us?

Lets have the real claims.  As long as they include sex which is not in God's
plan then, well, they still deviate from God's plan - especially taking
"spirituality" into account.

>Instead of blathering on in your own ignorant idiocy, in the malicious
>intent to condemn us without knowing a DAMN thing about what you are
>pretending to talk about, why don't you just SHUT UP?

Name the time I condemned a person for their actions on this board.
How is my intent malicious?  It would seem that I have only _your_ best
interest in mind.

As a general rule the angrier people get the closer to home I've hit. :-)

If you are so comfortable with your views why not just leave it alone?

John M.