No gay gene.....no gay anti-discrimination law?

[XtremeJibber2001]

I question the objective of this thread at this juncture.

Are we to walk away from our faith and conform to the customs of this world because a small group of people say so ... because something we believe is inconvenient for them or they don’t understand it? Even though our faith in Romans calls us not to copy the behavior and customs of this world?

Homosexuals should be loved and respected by Christians and welcomed to the church just like all other imperfect humans. Many Christians have failed in this regard. However, the gospel is clear you cannot be both Christian while actively engaging in Homosexuality.

not even sure why religion is part of this thread....

Pretty sure that was my doing so perhaps I have to lay in the bed I’ve made :)

[Mister Moose]

People believed the Earth was flat and if you sailed off to the west into the Atlantic you’d fall off the edge of the planet. Proof was that people sailed off and never returned. People believed the sun and stars revolve around the Earth. Proof was seen every night in the sky. What people believe and what is real are not necessarily the same thing.

And yet the earth appears and behaves flat to someone on the ocean. The stars do move overhead about us. These are easily observable occurrences. There is truth to them. It is possible for different observers to see different but related truths without seeing the complete relationship. That does not make one of them completely false.

No it's 100% false that the earth is flat and anything other then the moon (a perhaps a little space dust) orbits earth. Those who believe otherwise are completely wrong.

It seems to me you are trying to make the case for alternative facts or supporting ignorance. Those are bad arguments Moose

Read. I said the earth appears and behaves flat to an observer on the surface. I said the stars move overhead. The sun does rise, does it not? It is ignorant to say the sun moves across the sky? You might want to rethink that, o all seeing one.

You do not understand how you can place the origin of your coordinate system anywhere, and how each coordinate system is still valid. Your idea of 'facts' that you hold steadfast to are .... partial observations. When you do that, you are like a flat earther, making a partial observation and believing it to be complete.

[madhatter]

People believed the Earth was flat and if you sailed off to the west into the Atlantic you’d fall off the edge of the planet. Proof was that people sailed off and never returned. People believed the sun and stars revolve around the Earth. Proof was seen every night in the sky. What people believe and what is real are not necessarily the same thing.

And yet the earth appears and behaves flat to someone on the ocean. The stars do move overhead about us. These are easily observable occurrences. There is truth to them. It is possible for different observers to see different but related truths without seeing the complete relationship. That does not make one of them completely false.

No it's 100% false that the earth is flat and anything other then the moon (a perhaps a little space dust) orbits earth. Those who believe otherwise are completely wrong.

It seems to me you are trying to make the case for alternative facts or supporting ignorance. Those are bad arguments Moose

Read. I said the earth appears and behaves flat to an observer on the surface. I said the stars move overhead. The sun does rise, does it not? It is ignorant to say the sun moves across the sky? You might want to rethink that, o all seeing one.

You do not understand how you can place the origin of your coordinate system anywhere, and how each coordinate system is still valid. Your idea of 'facts' that you hold steadfast to are .... partial observations. When you do that, you are like a flat earther, making a partial observation and believing it to be complete.

singular thought process....truth over facts....sleepy joe approves...

[Bubba]

People believed the Earth was flat and if you sailed off to the west into the Atlantic you’d fall off the edge of the planet. Proof was that people sailed off and never returned. People believed the sun and stars revolve around the Earth. Proof was seen every night in the sky. What people believe and what is real are not necessarily the same thing.

And yet the earth appears and behaves flat to someone on the ocean. The stars do move overhead about us. These are easily observable occurrences. There is truth to them. It is possible for different observers to see different but related truths without seeing the complete relationship. That does not make one of them completely false.

Thanks for reiterating my point. FAST said “Billions of Christians believe and profess the existence of the Holy Spirit through real and personal experiences, that is proof.” I simply said belief and personal experience are not necessarily proof of anything.

Again, in matters of faith, there is no argument. Belief in God, the Trinity, or any other religion is, almost by definition, a matter of faith.

[XtremeJibber2001]

Okay .... some of you must have read Bill Bryson’s Short History of Nearly Everything, right?

[madhatter]

People believed the Earth was flat and if you sailed off to the west into the Atlantic you’d fall off the edge of the planet. Proof was that people sailed off and never returned. People believed the sun and stars revolve around the Earth. Proof was seen every night in the sky. What people believe and what is real are not necessarily the same thing.

And yet the earth appears and behaves flat to someone on the ocean. The stars do move overhead about us. These are easily observable occurrences. There is truth to them. It is possible for different observers to see different but related truths without seeing the complete relationship. That does not make one of them completely false.

Thanks for reiterating my point. FAST said “Billions of Christians believe and profess the existence of the Holy Spirit through real and personal experiences, that is proof.” I simply said belief and personal experience are not necessarily proof of anything.

Again, in matters of faith, there is no argument. Belief in God, the Trinity, or any other religion is, almost by definition, a matter of faith.

[Mister Moose]

Okay .... some of you must have read Bill Bryson’s Short History of Nearly Everything, right?

I haven't. What does he have to say that you think is relevant?

[Kpdemello]

Are we to walk away from our faith and conform to the customs of this world because a small group of people say so ... because something we believe is inconvenient for them or they don’t understand it? Even though our faith in Romans calls us not to copy the behavior and customs of this world?

Homosexuals should be loved and respected by Christians and welcomed to the church just like all other imperfect humans. Many Christians have failed in this regard. However, the gospel is clear you cannot be both Christian while actively engaging in Homosexuality.

One of the more enlightening moments in my spiritual journey occurred when I started asking questions about how the various books of the Bible came to be considered holy scripture. When you examine that question, you quickly realize that these holy books were cannonized by men, who selected some as holy scripture and rejected others as not so. In my mind, that signals that I should treat these scriptures with some level of skepticism - they were written by men, selected by men, and proclaimed by men to be unerring. I'm not sure I buy all that for a number of reasons.

The gospels, however, I put in a different category. Here you have five books detailing the life of Jesus. They are different accounts written by different people mostly without reference to one another, yet they largely tell the same story with little discrepancy. That tells me the information they report is reliable. And the story they tell is about a man who is incredibly admirable, whose teachings are wise and perhaps the best authority on how to live a moral life. That is highly significant, and fundamentally different from all the other books in the Bible. So I find the gospels worthy of my attention and belief. However, when I examine the five gospels, I find no mention of homosexuality being a sin.

Given my thoughts above, which is just one perspective among many, I think reasonable people reading the same Bible can come to different conclusions about whether homosexuality is a sin. That kind of religious belief has no place being imposed on people through force of law. If your concern is your family being influenced by the acceptance of homosexuality by society, then I would say it's incumbent on you to teach your family what you think is right, rather than forcing your beliefs on society at large. All of us have to come to terms with living in a society where people do things we don't necessarily agree with, but that we have to tolerate and respect if we wish to be tolerated and respected in turn.

[XtremeJibber2001]

Okay .... some of you must have read Bill Bryson’s Short History of Nearly Everything, right?

I haven't. What does he have to say that you think is relevant?

Somewhat tangential, but Bubba's comment about belief vs personal experience made me think of this book. While it's not a faith-based book, he discusses many scientific theories we accept as fact (today or in the past) and how they came to be what we believe today. It's a fun book - highly recommend it.

The gospels, however, I put in a different category. Here you have five books detailing the life of Jesus. They are different accounts written by different people mostly without reference to one another, yet they largely tell the same story with little discrepancy. That tells me the information they report is reliable. And the story they tell is about a man who is incredibly admirable, whose teachings are wise and perhaps the best authority on how to live a moral life. That is highly significant, and fundamentally different from all the other books in the Bible. So I find the gospels worthy of my attention and belief. However, when I examine the five gospels, I find no mention of homosexuality being a sin.

Agreed that the gospels don't mention it. Other parts of the New Testament do ... Corinthians at a minimum.

Given my thoughts above, which is just one perspective among many, I think reasonable people reading the same Bible can come to different conclusions about whether homosexuality is a sin. That kind of religious belief has no place being imposed on people through force of law. If your concern is your family being influenced by the acceptance of homosexuality by society, then I would say it's incumbent on you to teach your family what you think is right, rather than forcing your beliefs on society at large. All of us have to come to terms with living in a society where people do things we don't necessarily agree with, but that we have to tolerate and respect if we wish to be tolerated and respected in turn.

I don't think Christians should be in the business of 'forcing' their religious beliefs on others, but should hold others that say they're Christian accountable.

As a Christian and US Citizen, I think we have rights just like Homosexuals. Their rights shouldn't trump mine (no pun intended ) just because they're a minority, louder than me, march more, etc.

I disagree with having to condone things we don't agree with to be respected. I'm respected today (maybe not by some here ) without having to condone many things. It's like saying you must condone my right to open carry my firearm if you want my respect ,.. we know by watching the media/marches that this right is not condoned by many today.

[Kpdemello]

Many parts of the NT do condemn homosexuality, that is true. But that goes to my point about cannon - I wouldn't consider the epistles to be an authority on right and wrong. To me, they are expressions of the viewpoints of various founders and early leaders of the faith. I think the stuff about homosexuality in the epistles is largely a reflection of societal norms, not Jesus teaching. Jesus teaching is clear - do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I don't see how homosexuality offends that golden rule. It does seem to me that since I want my choice of who I partner with to be respected, I should in turn respect the partner choice of others.

I'm not suggesting you condone something you don't agree with. All I'm suggesting is that we must respect each other's right to choose how to believe and live life, so long as that choice does not do harm to others.

[XtremeJibber2001]

All I'm suggesting is that we must respect each other's right to choose how to believe and live life, so long as that choice does not do harm to others.

Can't I respect it while not condoning it?

[madhatter]

All I'm suggesting is that we must respect each other's right to choose how to believe and live life, so long as that choice does not do harm to others.

Can't I respect it while not condoning it?

one can respect the right to choose without respecting the choice made....

[Kpdemello]

All I'm suggesting is that we must respect each other's right to choose how to believe and live life, so long as that choice does not do harm to others.

Can't I respect it while not condoning it?

Sure

[Bubba]

Meanwhile...

Founder of “conversion therapy” center comes out as gay

https://apple.news/AHoexhs54RCC4ufBdst5tkg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[XtremeJibber2001]

Meanwhile...

Founder of “conversion therapy” center comes out as gay

https://apple.news/AHoexhs54RCC4ufBdst5tkg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;