Christianforums.com?

[ignescentphoenix]

Originally Posted by john.a

You don't have to get defensive. I wasn't trying to justify anything, I was explaining the situation a little more in case people didn't realise what the point of the forums were - all for the purpose of "to be fair." Like, it's a little better to create a support forum in response to a need within their own community (the Christian homosexual community desiring celibacy). It's not like they created a forum for the express purpose of hate.

Sorry for the snarkiness.

It seems that the sexuality support forum on christianforums only offers support for homosexuals who view thier homosexuality in a certain way. That is my main problem with it. I could understand if there were only conservative/reactionary christians on the site, but there are progressive christians there as well. Its as if a whole group of gay christians are exempt from getting the support they are looking for.

Originally Posted by john.a

So, having said that. I am Catholic and I myself did struggle with my sexuality for awhile - a struggle that I take very seriously and personally. For a while, I experimented with celibacy and now and then I got frustrated - as does anyone on a spiritual path. Now and then I wanted to find someone with whom to express my emotions and someone who had the same moral viewpoints I did. Since then, I have changed my mind but the point is that without support, I don't know how I would've ended up. And I wasn't suicidal or depressed or in danger. I was just a whiny friend who sometimes got frustrated with life and wanted another to let me rant and whine.

I'm glad you found the support you were looking for.

Originally Posted by john.a

So on Christian Forums, it was that need that sprung up from within the community and that society. Who are we to interfere with what that community does amongst themselves in so far as it crosses no legal boundaries?

The problem is that there are differing opinions in the christian community. Christian forums has quite a few christians that are supportive for gays. Its just that they don't have the ability to say that in the sexuality support section.

I'm not going to interfere, just making an observation.

Originally Posted by john.a

You don't have to be so stand-offish in expressing your curiosity about the quoted "homosexuals." I put it down because as a gay young adult, I myself have certain emotional issues with the word "homosexual." It's very clinical and cold. Many American televangelists use it with such hatred and vile that it hurts me to say it even if I mean it in every positive light possible. I put it in quotes because I wanted to use a more umbrella-, all-encompassing term but couldn't think of one and homosexual had to do.

When I talk to christians who put homosexual in quotes, they don't do it for the reasons that you do. Thats why it irked me a little. Now that you explained why you did it, I can understand it. Even though I myself prefer the term homosexual over gay. You could always use the acronym next time.

[john.a]

Originally Posted by ignescentphoenix

You could always use the acronym next time.

LOL. Do you know what the acronym is this time? It's apparently gotten some additions.

[ignescentphoenix]

Originally Posted by john.a

LOL. Do you know what the acronym is this time? It's apparently gotten some additions.

I know, everytime I turn around they add another letter to it. I just stick to the core four. I believe in the sanctity of my acronyms, or I'm just lazy and don't want to memorize the new letters.

[Blood Saga]

CF is all right. My username over there is Witchy Bee. Things have changed since NCR became CWR. But in a lot of ways it's brought the Non-Christian population together as well. I stay because of the nice and accepting people I've met there, but I prefer it here.

[MoonChild78]

Just checked out the site... looks like i could have some fun so I just signed up... WomynWarrior is I. I can already tell that I'm going to prefer being here but sometimes I just need to get into a good arguement and keep my skills sharp for law school next year lol!!

[Élistariel]

I don't really feel any desire to join, but I do wish I could have as search function as a nonmember. I wanna see what all icons for religions they have over there.
If I do join it'll be as Elistariel as I am extremely creative with usernames. :P

[Phoenix_Falls]

Originally Posted by john.a

LOL. Do you know what the acronym is this time? It's apparently gotten some additions.

I say "sexual minority" I can't keep up with all the alphabet soup we got going on these days.

[Blood Saga]

Originally Posted by Élistariel

I don't really feel any desire to join, but I do wish I could have as search function as a nonmember. I wanna see what all icons for religions they have over there.
If I do join it'll be as Elistariel as I am extremely creative with usernames. :P

You can view all the different faith icons they have from the FAQ. I don't think you need to be a member to see it.

[Lena C.]

See that is where I don't like the Christian faith...they twist things to fit something else. I grew up Catholic and when I read the bible straight through I never saw anything stating homosexuality was a sin. It was looked down upon because most homosexuality back then was abuse of children or adultery in its many forms. Since there was no marriage for homosexuals, it would be considered adultery outside of the marriage bed. Also a lot of times they saw homosexuality as something based on sex and not love, which differs from our current societal view. Current allowance of homosexual marriage would completely rule out the adultery argument. From my understanding of what I read, it was not the love of a person who is the same sex, but the reducing it to a base sexual urge that was considered wrong, the same as the view on heterosexual relationships. That was what it seemed to me anyway. I guess it all depends on interpretation.

Also what I find interesting is that the Catholic church used to encourage homosexual relationships among the clergy way back in the day, along with marriage among clergy and use of prostitutes to prevent men from raping the upperclass women. I would have to look it up, but it is part of the history of Christianity since most forms of current Christianity stemmed from the Catholic views. The Catholics kind of made it a point to wipe out the other versions of Christianity early on and to unite everyone under the one religion (which is another interesting point to do with Revelations but completely off topic). I believe some of those encouragements followed through into the beginnings of the Protestants too. I find that funny since that is then adultery which is a sin, but the church has been known for things like that over the centuries. I guess they looked at it as sex in the name of God, just like the Crusades and various other orders of the time were murder in the name of God. I can't quite remember the details of it all. It has been so long since I paid attention to what the bible says and the history of Christianity.

[Phoenix_Falls]

Originally Posted by Lena C.

See that is where I don't like the Christian faith...they twist things to fit something else. I grew up Catholic and when I read the bible straight through I never saw anything stating homosexuality was a sin. It was looked down upon because most homosexuality back then was abuse of children or adultery in its many forms. Since there was no marriage for homosexuals, it would be considered adultery outside of the marriage bed. Also a lot of times they saw homosexuality as something based on sex and not love, which differs from our current societal view. Current allowance of homosexual marriage would completely rule out the adultery argument. From my understanding of what I read, it was not the love of a person who is the same sex, but the reducing it to a base sexual urge that was considered wrong, the same as the view on heterosexual relationships. That was what it seemed to me anyway. I guess it all depends on interpretation.

Also what I find interesting is that the Catholic church used to encourage homosexual relationships among the clergy way back in the day, along with marriage among clergy and use of prostitutes to prevent men from raping the upperclass women. I would have to look it up, but it is part of the history of Christianity since most forms of current Christianity stemmed from the Catholic views. The Catholics kind of made it a point to wipe out the other versions of Christianity early on and to unite everyone under the one religion (which is another interesting point to do with Revelations but completely off topic). I believe some of those encouragements followed through into the beginnings of the Protestants too. I find that funny since that is then adultery which is a sin, but the church has been known for things like that over the centuries. I guess they looked at it as sex in the name of God, just like the Crusades and various other orders of the time were murder in the name of God. I can't quite remember the details of it all. It has been so long since I paid attention to what the bible says and the history of Christianity.

To be fair, Leviticus 18:22 states:
King James Version: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination"
Living Bible: "Homosexuality is absolutely forbidden, for it is an enormous sin"
New Living Translation: "Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin."

The verse is often taken in isolation, without regards to what the surrounding verses say. I personally believe that since other verses in Leviticus (18:21, 18:22, 20:2-5) are talking about the god Molech and what is forbidden in relation to how YHWH feels about Molech, that 18:22 is forbing specifically ritual anal sex (which was practiced by Molech's temple prostitutes), which is why female homosexuals and indeed, homosexuality in general isn't mentioned. The other versions widened the scope of the verse to homosexuality.

Although this is entirely debatable. The original word that is usually translated into English as "detestable, sin, abomination" is "תועבה" which I believe refers specifically to a moral sin. If I recall correctly, the original Hebraic version literally translates to something awkward like: "And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman"

Also, we have to remember that the Bible, specifically the Old Testament are laws that are applicable only to the the Israelites as dictated by YHWH, not for anyone else. It is my personal opinion that Jesus' sacrifice rendered the Old Testament null and void for modern day Christians.

Leviticus also forbids:
shaving the hair at the temples and beard hair(19:27)
gossip (19:16)
eating seafood (11:10)
eating pork products (11:7)
hybrid cattle (like beefalo) mixed agricultural fields and wearing linen/wool combos (all in 19:19)
associating with women on their menses (7:19-20)
eating the fruit of a newly planted tree before the fifth year (19:23-25)
rare meat (19:26)
tattoos (19:28)

There are a myriad of other things in Leviticus like that, but the "homo clause" is picked apart so often that modern day Christians completely forget about all these other "sins" they themselves are responsible of committing.

There's a really good article at this website that covers it more in depth (and with better sources). It's a bit long, but it's a really good read.