To Kevin,

In fact I don’t really agree with any of what you have written.

I fail to see how a side which has no texts countenancing what thye are proposing has any proof texts at all. The big objection to proof-texts is a legalistic deception as proof texts are key statements on the holistic Biblical views as a whole. Hence with the sex issues, all the texts either pronounce male/female as God’s purpose or same sex as error. The claim that some ‘interpret’ the scriptures differently is nonsense in the respect that if the speed limit sign says 30mph that’s what it means, I cant make it mean 40mph. So the claim a holistic view is taken by both sides is another baseless claim.

To suggest we are all sinners in response to this issue is another deception as we are disagreeing on what a particular sin is; if we cant agree it is God who defines what sin is, One could simply exlcude oneself from any sin one didnt want to be counted. But Jesus died for forgiveness of sins, one cant receive that forgiveness if one doesnt recognise what one has been forgiven for. In this way this is a core issue of faith.  

Furthermore most Christians worldwide who believe the word of God and know same sex relations are error, are not evangelicals but Roman Catholics, of whom many might be labelled evangelical.

Now Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would lead the disciples and apostles in truth and remind them of all He had said, which of they wrote along with the rest of the NT once filled with the Holy Spirit. So to suggest the Holy Spirit can lead people to disagree with what the Holy Spirit inpired in the Bible is really nothing short of denying the work of the Holy Spirit.  

When the question WWJD is asked, if there is already acts or teaching on the issue recorded in the Bible we already know WWJD.

As God created male and female there is no Godly concept of gay and straight communities. I am sure if Christ had come today he would have spent time with the Jews as He did then as He was born a Jew, God’s plan was salvation from the Jews. I see Jesus welcomed all who came to Him and had harsh words for all who disputed with what He said.

An extraordinary statement was made ‘making those of us who think we have the truth very uncomfortable indeed.’ How could we not think we had the truth if we believe Jesus Christ and His teaching is the truth and affirm it? On this issue I am very comfortable indeed, I know Jesus Christ is the truth and the Biblical testimony only excludes and condemns same sex relations.

To Hugh of Lincoln,

You wrote “Such is the ambiguity of the Bible, it has to be accepted that neither side has made a convincing case based on Scripture alone”

Sorry but this simply isn’t the case, and such a statement simply leads to a total breakdown in communication. The scripture is totally convincing that same sex relations are error. Let me just reaffirm. Passages such as in Genesis 2, Matthew 19, Mark 10 and Ephesians 5 etc. describe how in the beginning God made male and female and it was for this reason a man shall be united with his wife and the two become one flesh. Throughout the Bible man and woman are countenanced. Throughout the Bible same sex relations are condemned as wicked, detestable and error, Genesis 19, Leviticus 18, 20, 1 Corinthians 6-7, 1 Timothy 1, Romans 1, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1. There is no countenance for same sex relations.

One side of the argument quotes the word of God and the other has nothing to quote but merely states its systematic disbelief of what the relevant scriptures say and then claims both sides have an equal case. The church is splitting because it probably doesn’t have such a level of disbelief and denial as on this issue.

One has anarchy. The case of Charles Raven is an example. Obedient to the Anglican Communion as a whole and to scripture which is what really counts, he was disobedient to his disobedient bishop and he in the end was the one to go. Good for him.   

To Hugh of Lincoln,

Not all all, I would say promoting and defending something which scripture condemns as disbelief and denial.

To Roger Hurding,

Sorry but I see your argument merely as massive disbelief and denial.

Again you propose I have an interpretation of the scriptures, but I haven’t given an interpretation, all I have done is cite and quote them.

I see the condemnations as not cultural, they are spoken to the people of God so as not to do these things, at Sodom, at the time of the exodus, and during the cultures where else it existed, Greek and Roman at the time of Jesus; it is obvious this is not cultural but what the people of God do not do.   

I could interpret the passages like others so that it doesn’t mean what it says, but I believe the word of God.

I would like to address again what you offered.

As to gang rape, the text doesn’t say this and says the men wanted to know (‘yada’) the men carnally. Lot pronounces this wicked and offers his virgin daughters instead. Your interpretation would imply gang rape of men is wicked but gang rape of women isn’t, but your view is based on faulty translation as well. You refer to 1 Cor 7 as Paul’s teaching, Galatians 1 tells us this isnt so much Paul’s teaching as he did not receive his revelation from man but from the risen Lord, don’t you believe that either? 1 Cor 7 mirrors the rest of the NT such as Matthew 19 where it is faithful marriage or celibacy. So what is your point exactly?

You said I cited Genesis 2 in defence of my view on marriage, no I did not, I cited it as God’s view on marriage because I believe it is the inspired word of God directly from God. The only way you could claim what you have said logically would be to assume when Jesus NT teaching repeats it in Matthew 19, Mark 10, Eph 5 etc that Jesus was lying when He claimed he spoke what He heard the Father say. John 14:10.

I am afraid even some of my gay and lesbian friends who do not agree with or believe the Bible at least recognise what it says.

I would like to thank wggrace for his last post which I think is excellent and I fully agree with.  I believe it explains that there is such a difference of opinion and how wide and deep it is. What I would point out is most Christians see the promotion and defence of same sex relationships as a major departure from the faith once delivered, not just because of the disbelief of the passages about God's purposes and the condemnations, but the reasoning exposes further disbelief of other passages. And in addition, we have many who hold those views professing other established heresies such as pluralism when all the Biblical testimony claims there is no other God and no other salvation. 

For me and for many, two different faiths.

To David H

The first testimony in the Roy Clements link you made is very interesting indeed.

The person knew he had same sex desires but stuck with God’s word and launched himself into mission. During mission when he was focussed on serving he didn’t focus on the sexual desires. Sure he did feel some desires but put the friendship and mission first. He said it was a struggle and a blessing. Note that he says he had desires for men, as if the other men and women didn’t have desires for each other. Did any of the other men and woman have sexual relations, which also would have been falling short?

When he met another person who also had same sex desires which they discussed, they had sexual relations. As soon as the focus was on the same sex desires the temptation was not resisted.  Note that when he had fallen short he wasn’t condemned by the leadership on the mission.

Note that whilst on mission he testified to having a ‘loving family with brothers and sisters’ but afterwards ‘just as I am’ he then refers to finding love which would involve sex with another man.

But I think the key to this testimony is that he admits other Christians ‘have similar struggles with their desires’ and then merely contradicts that by saying he isn’t like heterosexual Christians. Here is the problem he is already thinking himself as different when he isn’t. In the NT the Pharisees reaction to Jesus teaching was that it was better not to marry at all if it meant having to be faithful, and Jesus offers celibacy as the alternative. Matt 19. In the case of the rich young man who wanted to justify himself, Jesus told him to give up all his possessions to which he went away sad. So homosexuals, those with same sex desires are not any different to any other Christian, at the point they decide they are they succumb to the lie. This is why the false teaching promoted in the church is so damaging. He acknowledges he might have gone out and had a sexual encounter, this is called falling short, he did have one on the mission and was forgiven by the fellowship and helped to restore, (as in Galatians 6) however once associated with the gay groups he then falls for the lie that sinful same sex relationships can be sanctified.

So my conclusion of the problem is simply gay affirming ‘Christian’ groups which seduce people with the lie. Firstly Jesus Christ has bought us all at a price, whatever our sexual attractions and whatever our desires in any respect, our hearts and minds are being renewed to conform to Christ. 1 Cor 6:20, 1 Cor 7:23, 2 Corinthians 10:5. ‘gay christians’ is misleading people into a lie, falling short and committing a same sex act is no worse than falling short and stealing something, lying, or committing adultery. It is knowing the truth that sets us free and part of that truth is that same sex relations are error. The ‘gay christian’ line then claims the sin is not compromising the faith in Christ and proceeds like the rich young man in Matt 19 and Mark 10 to try and justify itself by everything else it does which is in line with the truth.

The first of the Roy Clement articles which David H linked to show well the challenges all Christians face apart from it seems homosexuals. We are all challenged and tempted. In the first testimony when the person was focussed on mission he found a loving fellowship, when he fell short he was loved and forgiven and helped. When he focussed on his same sex desires and was mislead he decided they were alright and sanctified when the word of God says they are not. 

All Christians face challenges to resist temptation.   

I think Carl makes the crucial point, there is no controversy about homosexuality, same sex sex is condmened and excluded throughout scripture. That it is being contested is baseless and thus should not be allowed to be contested unless several scriptures which countenances it can be offered to te debate.

To L Roberts,

Your post of to me of Thursday 10 December 2009 - 08:56pm

makes no reference to the argument and discussion. Indeed you have acknowledged the focus on sin I refered to, but not the focus on Christ I referred to.

As you can see from what I wrote, based on the testimony, thiis an example and a lesson for all of us. When we focus on Christ, and seek Him to do what He teaches, we see fellowship, avoidance of sin, (1 Cor 6:18,) forgiveness and support when falling short (Gal 6) and joy.  When we focus on the sin or decide to compromise and accept it we indulge in the sinful nature. This applies to any sin.  

So in response to your question no the opposite, I love it when we focus on Christ and His purposes rather than sin and our selfish desires. This is the gospel, the truth sets us free to live a life to the full purposes God has created us for. Halleluiah 

An interesting link.

The key is in these two sentances as I see it is....

However, the Alliance sticks to its view that “God’s purpose for his gift of sex is that it would be the ultimate physical expression of love between a man and a woman in the context of the covenant of marriage”.

But they point out that “Jesus requires of his followers that they love and do good to those who oppose them or hold to different ethical standards than they do”.

Whilst this is true as a message for non-believers, believers need to remember that same sex relationships are error, detestable to God, and a barrier to the Kingdom; once believers were in the darkness as well.  My wife and I will be attending more civil partnerships of our gay and lesbian friends, but of course they aren’t believers and until they are we can’t judge them. (1 Cor 5) But as Christians we shouldn’t be supporting their error, that would be loving them in a human way and not the way God loves. In a democracy we have the citizens right to vote against same sex relationships being recognised as valid for society as a whole.

To Jeremy Pemberton,

In response to your post to Carl, I am puzzled by one point you make.

But you don't call for the implementation of the natural readings of all kinds of other verses in the same book of the Bible

Well we know Jesus fulfilled the law and prophets we know there is no need to sacrifice anymore and we know we may eat all foods (Mark 7, Romans 12) So I don’t see the logic in your remarks unless you are suggesting all the Levitical laws be obeying for those in Christ or none.

Same sex acts along with incest and bestiality are condemned in OT law in Leviticus and in Jesus Christ’s NT teaching. Leviticus 19:18 " 'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.” is also countenanced in Jesus Christ’ NT teaching under the new covenant in Him.

Now Carl, in his post, reasoned with the scriptures that condemn same sex relations, I see no scriptural reasoning in your response except the implication you simply don’t believe the scriptures and consider them prejudice against your view.