Christian Homosexuality

[HisDaughter]

I'm not talking about homosexual behavior. I'm talking about same-sex attraction, which is something that homosexuals suffer from. You can be a homosexual and not engage in the behavior.

I've got that. I understand, we all have sinful desires. Sexual attraction to the same sex is a sinful desire.

I think you are doing yourself a disservice by not acknowledging the reality that homosexuals feel that their desires are natural, and the desires they are supposed to have feel wrong. This is simple fact.

Yes, I believe they feel it is natural. Just because you feel something doesn't mean it is right or true.

This implies something deeper than 'it's just a label'. I still don't know about them being "born this way", but I cannot ignore the reality that it feels as right to them to be attracted to the same gender as it does for me to be attracted to my wife. Once you get past that detail, you can begin to see the situation in a whole new light.

Again what constitutes a "homosexual? Is it attraction to the same sex?

By revising my question, you answer the original question with an affirmative, even though you don't like it. Yes, a Christian can have homosexual desires = a homosexual can be a Christian. The problem is that you don't see homosexuality as something that a person is (similar to an alcoholic).

This is what Paul said: 1Co 6:10-11 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (11) And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

This is the distinction, "such were some of you". We are no longer these but, that doesn't mean we will not do these sins. So I don't agree with your summation"Christian can have homosexual desires = a homosexual can be a Christian" based on scripture.

[Benjie]

HisDaughter, you haven't hurt me. It just felt like this discussion was slipping into the realm of unfruitful arguing, and that isn't what I wanted. This is a touchy subject, and emotions can flare on each side of it. I am wanting to know the true, Biblical response to homosexuality, not what we have always been taught. What it appears to me, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that you are responding out of the traditional biases of the church, not out of the reality of the situation. The church has always said "it's a sin!" and never really looked at it. To me, it's similar to the church line on dancing. For the longest time, dancing was looked at as a sin, but the simple act of dancing can hardly be thought of as sinful. It's what people do with that simple act that makes the difference. I'm not saying that this subject is as simplistic as dancing, but please help me to see that your position isn't rooted in the 'old-school' church tradition.
I'm trying to shed a different light on the subject that might help us understand it from a different angle. If, from that different angle, it still looks like a duck, then we can continue treating it as such - but if, from the new angle, it looks more like a Mercedes, then we can adjust and figure out what to do with it from there.


As it appears that we are re-covering the same ground, I'm going to pick up the conversation from here:

Again what constitutes a "homosexual? Is it attraction to the same sex?

I think this may be the actual crux of the question. Homosexuality, in my definition, constitutes more than just the act. Just as an alcoholic is an alcoholic even if they never drink again, and it has been proven that some people are predisposed to alcoholism (which is why I don't drink), I believe that a homosexual is someone who is simply attracted to the same sex. Even as I type this, my thoughts are shifting around it. Please, indulge me as I type and think at the same time. . .
Alcoholics are named as such because they have consumed alcohol and become addicted. Can someone be an alcoholic without ever consuming alcohol? If that is the case, then could I be considered an alcoholic because it runs in my family, yet I have never tasted the stuff? I would say, and I have said, that I have an addictive personality, therefore I refuse to sample beer due to the pull that I know it may have on me. But, does that possibility make me an alcoholic? No. However, there is a difference between someone who might be an alcoholic and someone who definitively has desires for the same gender, but has never acted on it. I have no real desire for alcohol, with the exception of a desire to taste certain types of wine and champagne, but people with same-sex attraction (homosexuals, in my book), have a visceral desire for the same gender and an equal void of desire for the opposite gender. It appears to be comparing apples to radios.
I would say that one does not have to engage in homosexual activity to be considered homosexual, unlike alcoholism. If someone desires both sexes, but never acts on the desire for the same gender, we call that 'bi-curious', but we never call it 'homosexual-curious'. Hmm . . .

Still thinking it through. . .

This is what Paul said: 1Co 6:10-11 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (11) And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

This is the distinction, "such were some of you". We are no longer these but, that doesn't mean we will not do these sins. So I don't agree with your summation "Christian can have homosexual desires = a homosexual can be a Christian" based on scripture.

But an alcoholic is always an alcoholic. Just because they are no longer drinking, they will always be that way. A homosexual will always have those desires. Studies have shown that very few are ever 'changed' or 'cured', and of those that are, it's rarely a 100% change. They will always battle those desires.
My summation is based on SSA (Same-Sex Attraction) being the same as homosexuality. If you disagree that SSA = homosexual, then what is SSA?

[HisDaughter]

HisDaughter, you haven't hurt me. It just felt like this discussion was slipping into the realm of unfruitful arguing, and that isn't what I wanted. This is a touchy subject, and emotions can flare on each side of it. I am wanting to know the true, Biblical response to homosexuality, not what we have always been taught. What it appears to me, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that you are responding out of the traditional biases of the church, not out of the reality of the situation. The church has always said "it's a sin!" and never really looked at it. To me, it's similar to the church line on dancing. For the longest time, dancing was looked at as a sin, but the simple act of dancing can hardly be thought of as sinful. It's what people do with that simple act that makes the difference. I'm not saying that this subject is as simplistic as dancing, but please help me to see that your position isn't rooted in the 'old-school' church tradition.
I'm trying to shed a different light on the subject that might help us understand it from a different angle. If, from that different angle, it still looks like a duck, then we can continue treating it as such - but if, from the new angle, it looks more like a Mercedes, then we can adjust and figure out what to do with it from there.

I am not trying to provoke anger or bad emotions. Traditions are not what I cling to. Looking at a object from any angle it is still the same object. Sin is sin no matter what angle you look at it from. Just to clear something up, I want you to know that by see homosexuality as a sin doesn't mean I condemn a person who has those attractions. We all have sin, none are without. Tradition would like to separate the sin of homosexual desires from adulterous desires or covetous desires, to which IMO there all sin one not worse than the other.

As it appears that we are re-covering the same ground, I'm going to pick up the conversation from here:
I think this may be the actual crux of the question. Homosexuality, in my definition, constitutes more than just the act. Just as an alcoholic is an alcoholic even if they never drink again, and it has been proven that some people are predisposed to alcoholism (which is why I don't drink), I believe that a homosexual is someone who is simply attracted to the same sex. Even as I type this, my thoughts are shifting around it. Please, indulge me as I type and think at the same time. . .
Alcoholics are named as such because they have consumed alcohol and become addicted. Can someone be an alcoholic without ever consuming alcohol? If that is the case, then could I be considered an alcoholic because it runs in my family, yet I have never tasted the stuff? I would say, and I have said, that I have an addictive personality, therefore I refuse to sample beer due to the pull that I know it may have on me. But, does that possibility make me an alcoholic? No. However, there is a difference between someone who might be an alcoholic and someone who definitively has desires for the same gender, but has never acted on it. I have no real desire for alcohol, with the exception of a desire to taste certain types of wine and champagne, but people with same-sex attraction (homosexuals, in my book), have a visceral desire for the same gender and an equal void of desire for the opposite gender. It appears to be comparing apples to radios.
I would say that one does not have to engage in homosexual activity to be considered homosexual, unlike alcoholism. If someone desires both sexes, but never acts on the desire for the same gender, we call that 'bi-curious', but we never call it 'homosexual-curious'. Hmm . . .

This is an area were we part in understanding. Do you believe drinking alcohol is a sin? I don't, therefore desiring alcohol is not sinful. The desire to be drunk is sin, because begin a drunkard is sinful. This comparison is like apple and oranges.

Still thinking it through. . .

But an alcoholic is always an alcoholic. Just because they are no longer drinking, they will always be that way. A homosexual will always have those desires. Studies have shown that very few are ever 'changed' or 'cured', and of those that are, it's rarely a 100% change. They will always battle those desires.
My summation is based on SSA (Same-Sex Attraction) being the same as homosexuality. If you disagree that SSA = homosexual, then what is SSA?

This is another area we part in understanding. Paul said in scripture "we once were" even in regard to drunkards (alcoholics). Was he wrong? Just because the world says "once an alcoholic always an alcoholic" doesn't mean it is true.

What I am trying to do is look at scripture for the answer. The world wants to say alcoholic's have a disease, or homosexual's are born that way, IMO it is a sinful behavior, nothing more nothing less. While it is sin it is not sin unto condemnation. There is only one sin that is unto condemnation.

The world wants to say men evolved, while this is off topic I said this to say, I choose to believe what the bible says rather than the world.

[HighBeams]

But an alcoholic is always an alcoholic. Just because they are no longer drinking, they will always be that way. A homosexual will always have those desires. Studies have shown that very few are ever 'changed' or 'cured', and of those that are, it's rarely a 100% change. They will always battle those desires.

Benjie, a besetting sin is always besetting. Just because we are born again and sin does not rule over us, it does not mean that the temptation of the besetting sin (or any other sin) ceases to plague us. In this life we will always have two natures warring within us--the natural man and the redeemed man. Sin does not cease just because we become saved, believing in Jesus Christ. What changes is our attitude about our sins. As we submit ourselves to God more and more, the Holy Spirit will convict us more and more of anything we're doing that God has called "sin". We have a choice to accept the Holy Spirit's leading in this or to fight against His leading. Continuing in sinful behavior does not nullify our salvation, but it does rob us of blessings and opens us up to corrections from God. It also keeps us open to the consequences of that sin (such as illness from risky behavior). So, to answer your original question bluntly, I'd say that yes, a practicing homosexual may well be in a saved condition (Christian in deed and not only in name). But such a person is in for some really hard knocks as God deals with the continuation of sin.

Let me give you an example from my own acquaintances.

I know a man who has, I believe, truly accepted Christ as Savior. He is born again. But he is not teachable. He holds his own opinions about spiritual things and refuses to change those opinions. He does revere God, but his own pride keeps him from truly listening to God's directions. This man was diagnosed with insulin-dependent diabetes when he was 30 years old. He rejected the diagnosis, saying that he was a Godly man and that God would not do this to him. So for the first 5 to 7 years, he did very little of the treatment that he needed to do to keep himself healthy. He finally came around to understanding that this was not a judgment on him from God, and that he was wrong not to follow the treatment. He started to do what he was supposed to do, but the physical damage was already done. He will be 42 years old in July. He is legally blind (I believe he can tell light and dark and can see movement); has neuropathy of his stomach, feet, and halfway up his calves; needs a walker to walk; is on kidney dialysis; and his heart is only working at 30 to 40 percent. He is on disability, and his wife is employed. His daughter is in 8th grade. Because of his stubborn attitude, his wife must take on nearly all of his care, as well as getting him to and from doctor/dialysis appts. and juggling in her job. Their daughter also must take on much of the work around the house. His wife knows that he will soon need more care than she can give him, that he will need a nursing home soon. But she also knows that he is not willing. He acknowledges that he brought this all onto himself and is very regretful. But I'm not sure that full repentance of his past actions is there. His sin nature is to be prideful; and while he has made some strides in recognizing and dealing with it, he has not truly brought it under enough control. He,and his family, have paid a heavy price for his unwillingness to bring his sin under God's rule.

This is how I see the practicing homosexual. Perhaps truly saved, but not reconciled to God's lordship over him/her.

[historyb]

Controversial topic, I know. . .

Can a Christian be a homosexual?

Yes, I thought for the longest time that they were condemned. Yet the Bible say the act itself is sinful. So a person can have SSA and be a Christian, but not be a homosexual (which is being active)

[dave]

...I am wanting to know the true, Biblical response to homosexuality, not what we have always been taught. What it appears to me, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that you are responding out of the traditional biases of the church, not out of the reality of the situation. The church has always said "it's a sin!" and never really looked at it. To me, it's similar to the church line on dancing. For the longest time, dancing was looked at as a sin, but the simple act of dancing can hardly be thought of as sinful. It's what people do with that simple act that makes the difference. I'm not saying that this subject is as simplistic as dancing, but please help me to see that your position isn't rooted in the 'old-school' church tradition.
I'm trying to shed a different light on the subject that might help us understand it from a different angle. If, from that different angle, it still looks like a duck, then we can continue treating it as such - but if, from the new angle, it looks more like a Mercedes, then we can adjust and figure out what to do with it from there.


As it appears that we are re-covering the same ground, I'm going to pick up the conversation from here:
I think this may be the actual crux of the question. Homosexuality, in my definition, constitutes more than just the act. Just as an alcoholic is an alcoholic even if they never drink again, and it has been proven that some people are predisposed to alcoholism (which is why I don't drink), I believe that a homosexual is someone who is simply attracted to the same sex. Even as I type this, my thoughts are shifting around it. Please, indulge me as I type and think at the same time. . .
Alcoholics are named as such because they have consumed alcohol and become addicted. Can someone be an alcoholic without ever consuming alcohol? If that is the case, then could I be considered an alcoholic because it runs in my family, yet I have never tasted the stuff? I would say, and I have said, that I have an addictive personality, therefore I refuse to sample beer due to the pull that I know it may have on me. But, does that possibility make me an alcoholic? No. However, there is a difference between someone who might be an alcoholic and someone who definitively has desires for the same gender, but has never acted on it. I have no real desire for alcohol, with the exception of a desire to taste certain types of wine and champagne, but people with same-sex attraction (homosexuals, in my book), have a visceral desire for the same gender and an equal void of desire for the opposite gender. It appears to be comparing apples to radios.
I would say that one does not have to engage in homosexual activity to be considered homosexual, unlike alcoholism. If someone desires both sexes, but never acts on the desire for the same gender, we call that 'bi-curious', but we never call it 'homosexual-curious'. Hmm . . .

Still thinking it through. . .

But an alcoholic is always an alcoholic. Just because they are no longer drinking, they will always be that way. A homosexual will always have those desires. Studies have shown that very few are ever 'changed' or 'cured', and of those that are, it's rarely a 100% change. They will always battle those desires.
My summation is based on SSA (Same-Sex Attraction) being the same as homosexuality. If you disagree that SSA = homosexual, then what is SSA?

This makes alot of sense to me...comparing the alcoholic to the homosexual (who is engaging or has become "addicted", per se, to the homosexual act). I do agree with another poster that I don't believe consuming alcohol is a sin...but there can be a clear distinction between consuming alcohol and getting "drunk" (and consequently...risking addiction) which CAN be a sin.

And yeah, I think it's safe to say that a person with a same-sex-attraction will battle that for life, with some exceptions. That person might have to work at living chastely, but so does everyone else. We all have to find our fulfillment in Christ and live in the way that pleases Him...and we each have different journeys and different burdens to carry along the way.

[Unclaimed Treasure]

Hmm...time for the old maid to say something. I'm heterosexual...I like men. But! I'm also unmarried and will likely remain so all my life. So, I'm attracted to men, however, outside of marriage, I cannot act upon those attractions. Chastity is required. Also required is a control over my thought life. I cannot allow fantasies about men to run rampant in my imagination.

My attraction to men is not sinful. Unfettered fantasies about men are, as would an actual illicit relationship.

[Titus]

Hmm...time for the old maid to say something. I'm heterosexual...I like men. But! I'm also unmarried and will likely remain so all my life. So, I'm attracted to men, however, outside of marriage, I cannot act upon those attractions. Chastity is required. Also required is a control over my thought life. I cannot allow fantasies about men to run rampant in my imagination.

My attraction to men is not sinful. Unfettered fantasies about men are, as would an actual illicit relationship.

Very well said.
Believers may still, however, fall into sin; very serious sin. How long will God allow His children to remain under the influence of a particular sin until He brings chastisement? We look upon appearances. To us, a person who has been in this situation for a long time couldn't possibly be a believer. To God, 20 years is barely the blink of an eye. So how long will He allow it? Who can know the mind of God? I think He probably takes a case by case approach, and deals with people according to His plan for their lives. If we say that person cannot be a believer we are trying to take God's place as judge. We know what's right and what's wrong, we know what the Bible says, but that's not really the whole story. The rest of the story is that God extends grace to whom He will and we in our finite wisdom cannot know to what extent God has dealt, is dealing, or will deal with a wayward child.
All we can do is love them, show them Jesus, and when the opportunity arise, and it must be God's timing, show them what God's word says.
A pastor once told me of a situation of which he knew where a chrictian woman was married to an abusive alcoholic. She remaine with him and married to him for many years(not that I am recommending that). She continued in paryer for him and endured his abuse, until finally God changed his life. Now, this is not a story of a christian who falls into sin until God restores him. It's a sinner that God took many years to save and allowed one of His children to endure abuse by his hand. The similarity for me is that God has His own time line in dealing with each of, and none of us knows what that is for someone else.

[Benjie]

I haven't had much time to post to this, but I have a few minutes right now. I'll have to get back to this later on tis weekend (hopefully).

I am not trying to provoke anger or bad emotions.

Please know that I am not trying to stir anything up with this thread either. I want to be clear about this, as I have been accused of that and much worse in times past.

Traditions are not what I cling to.

I have found that we all cling to a tradition of some sort. i am not calling you wrong, or saying that you are lying to me when you say that. i just think that a lot of traditions are more ingrained in us than we realize. I found that truth hen my friend came out to me. I had an inward struggle with my thoughts on homosexuality and my knowledge of my friend. There was a dissonance there that demanded attention.

Looking at a object from any angle it is still the same object.

Then there is no reason for message boards. Part of why we reason together is because of our differing perspectives on life.

Sin is sin no matter what angle you look at it from. Just to clear something up, I want you to know that by see homosexuality as a sin doesn't mean I condemn a person who has those attractions. We all have sin, none are without. Tradition would like to separate the sin of homosexual desires from adulterous desires or covetous desires, to which IMO there all sin one not worse than the other.

And I appreciate the clarification. Now I know that you aren't just being the angry, "justified" Bible-thumper who doesn't like something, so you hate it.

This is an area were we part in understanding. Do you believe drinking alcohol is a sin? I don't, therefore desiring alcohol is not sinful. The desire to be drunk is sin, because being a drunkard is sinful. This comparison is like apple and oranges.

That's part of the reason I was thinking it through. Some people do believe that drinking alcohol is a sin. That doesn't validate that belief, I'm just tossing that out there. I'm with you in that consuming a fermented beverage does not a sinner make.

This is another area we part in understanding. Paul said in scripture "we once were" even in regard to drunkards (alcoholics). Was he wrong? Just because the world says "once an alcoholic always an alcoholic" doesn't mean it is true.

Actually, in this case, it is true. Once you are an alcoholic, 'just one drink' will set them off all over again. Some alcoholics who have abstained for years have died from that one beer that they gave in on.

What I am trying to do is look at scripture for the answer. The world wants to say alcoholic's have a disease, or homosexual's are born that way, IMO it is a sinful behavior, nothing more nothing less. While it is sin it is not sin unto condemnation. There is only one sin that is unto condemnation.

The world wants to say men evolved, while this is off topic I said this to say, I choose to believe what the bible says rather than the world.

Which is why I am searching to find the equilibrium point of my beliefs and scripture.

[The Unaltered Gospel]

Benjie, a besetting sin is always besetting. Just because we are born again and sin does not rule over us, it does not mean that the temptation of the besetting sin (or any other sin) ceases to plague us. In this life we will always have two natures warring within us--the natural man and the redeemed man. Sin does not cease just because we become saved, believing in Jesus Christ. What changes is our attitude about our sins. As we submit ourselves to God more and more, the Holy Spirit will convict us more and more of anything we're doing that God has called "sin". We have a choice to accept the Holy Spirit's leading in this or to fight against His leading. Continuing in sinful behavior does not nullify our salvation, but it does rob us of blessings and opens us up to corrections from God. It also keeps us open to the consequences of that sin (such as illness from risky behavior). So, to answer your original question bluntly, I'd say that yes, a practicing homosexual may well be in a saved condition (Christian in deed and not only in name). But such a person is in for some really hard knocks as God deals with the continuation of sin.

Let me give you an example from my own acquaintances.

I know a man who has, I believe, truly accepted Christ as Savior. He is born again. But he is not teachable. He holds his own opinions about spiritual things and refuses to change those opinions. He does revere God, but his own pride keeps him from truly listening to God's directions. This man was diagnosed with insulin-dependent diabetes when he was 30 years old. He rejected the diagnosis, saying that he was a Godly man and that God would not do this to him. So for the first 5 to 7 years, he did very little of the treatment that he needed to do to keep himself healthy. He finally came around to understanding that this was not a judgment on him from God, and that he was wrong not to follow the treatment. He started to do what he was supposed to do, but the physical damage was already done. He will be 42 years old in July. He is legally blind (I believe he can tell light and dark and can see movement); has neuropathy of his stomach, feet, and halfway up his calves; needs a walker to walk; is on kidney dialysis; and his heart is only working at 30 to 40 percent. He is on disability, and his wife is employed. His daughter is in 8th grade. Because of his stubborn attitude, his wife must take on nearly all of his care, as well as getting him to and from doctor/dialysis appts. and juggling in her job. Their daughter also must take on much of the work around the house. His wife knows that he will soon need more care than she can give him, that he will need a nursing home soon. But she also knows that he is not willing. He acknowledges that he brought this all onto himself and is very regretful. But I'm not sure that full repentance of his past actions is there. His sin nature is to be prideful; and while he has made some strides in recognizing and dealing with it, he has not truly brought it under enough control. He,and his family, have paid a heavy price for his unwillingness to bring his sin under God's rule.

This is how I see the practicing homosexual. Perhaps truly saved, but not reconciled to God's lordship over him/her.

You can't live a homosexual lifestyle and be truly saved. Homosexuality is an abomination to God, period. A Christian can't live a sinful lifestyle of any kind and expect to inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Cor 6:9: Gal 5:19-21.