Ask an Evangelical Christian

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, even non-sexual romantic love for someone of your own gender is a sin, now?
 
So, actually being gay is not a sin, but expressing any sort of attachment is a sin?
 
"Being gay" isn't a sin because you can't control it. Feeling attraction for a member of the same-sex isn't a sin either, unless you intentionally retain that attraction, then it remains a sin.
 
"Being gay" isn't a sin because you can't control it. Feeling attraction for a member of the same-sex isn't a sin either, unless you intentionally retain that attraction, then it remains a sin.
Even if it is absolutely and unequivocally non-sexual?
 
Well, yes. We are ALL immoral, we are all sinners.

That said, if this is related to you recently "Coming out" as gay, that in itself isn't necessarily a sin. Becomming romantically or sexually involved with a person of the same-gender is.
What about being romantically or sexually involved with somebody of a different gender but the same sex?
 
So, the only way for a gay man not to be a sinner is to remain lonely and lovelorn? What sort of God would force that upon his children?
 
I consider romantic involvement to properly exist for the purpose of finding a marriage partner. That said, "Romance" implies sexual attraction at least in some sense, its is for the purpose of eros love (I'm assuming you know what the Greek word "Eros" means, I can't really describe it in English.)

I consider pursuing such love to be sinful.

On the other hand, a strong friendship is obviously not sinful, and it has nothing to do with sex, sexual orientation, exc.

What about being romantically or sexually involved with somebody of a different gender but the same sex?

I don't recognize "Transgender" as a valid gender. The only way you might argue (In a way that I would accept) that this could happen is if someone can PHYSICALLY be proven to have body parts from more than one gender. But a lot of times, its supposedly emotional. And if you change the gender God gave you based on feelings, this is unnatural.
 
And what kind of human was Adam supposed to be anyway? Homo sapiens? Homo erectus? Australopithecus afarensis? I never got the fundamentalist evangelical answer to that (despite asking).

He was more "awesome" than the Greek god's theoretically.

When God says to Abraham "I shall make your decendents as numerous as the stars in the sky", is he being metaphorical?

No, but unless Abraham had really good eyesight, his descendants have already passed the amount of stars that he saw. Now I believe that He had faith that there were more stars than he could see, and that one day every last star would be represented. The question is: is it possible to count all of his descendants?

Wat. :confused:

Evolution is not a process; it's a mechanic. You just admitted that evolution is real unless you have a completely different definition of "evolve" from me.

To evolve means to change and adapt to me. It is possible in biology and mind-sets. Staying the same is neither productive nor safe. Climate and the earth's crust is in constant change and everything on the surface changes also.

Can I get a response?

No, you are not immoral unless the definition of immoral is without morals and you no longer have any. You already felt that way, and have finally excepted the fact. One does not have to let guilt trap them into what they are not. From your post, you still have morals, and you seem to be steadfast in not "breaking" any of them. That is what is frustrating about change. Knowing the law and being free from the law are two separate issues. Not letting the law keep you in bondage is the first step in living a life that does not go against your conscience as to what is right and wrong. Freedom from the law is not a license to go against God' Will, but the freedom and peace to allow God to use you in His will.
 
Wikipedia defines erotic love thus: Éros (ἔρως érōs) is passionate love, with sensual desire and longing.

I can see why that might be a sin, but it seems that evangelicals are just as happy as Catholics to condemn everyone to eternal sin and damnation. I can't see why this would be.
 
I don't recognize "Transgender" as a valid gender. The only way you might argue (In a way that I would accept) that this could happen is if someone can PHYSICALLY be proven to have body parts from more than one gender. But a lot of times, its supposedly emotional. And if you change the gender God gave you based on feelings, this is unnatural.
Alright, well, that's absolutely vile, but it does provide a follow up question: Is it then acceptable to be romantically or sexually involved with somebody of your own gender, but of a different sex (which, in your mind, would be somebody of the opposite gender)?
 
Plato actually taught that eros was a part of every friendship, and that eros was an important first step in coming to wisdom.

Eros appears to be etymologically related to a Greek verb meaning "to ask questions." I'm thinking that the meaning of Eros may not be really limited to physical/sexual attraction, but rather include the curiosity that makes us interested in getting to know another person in general (not only to know another carnally). In that limited sense I would not say eros between two men is in any way sinful.
 
I don't recognize "Transgender" as a valid gender. The only way you might argue (In a way that I would accept) that this could happen is if someone can PHYSICALLY be proven to have body parts from more than one gender. But a lot of times, its supposedly emotional. And if you change the gender God gave you based on feelings, this is unnatural.

That is pretty transphobic and frankly utterly disgusting.

Congrats with the "Supposedly", I suppose you have total knowledge of how and what trans-people go through, right? I'm just going to guess that you don't, and that your knowledge in this area is SEVERELY lacking.

Being born into the wrong body, is severely difficult, and it is a recognised condition. It is NOT made up, and it can deeply affect someone, resulting in emotional and physical issues.

For you to even suggest that it is, is beyond the pale.
 
I don't recognize "Transgender" as a valid gender. The only way you might argue (In a way that I would accept) that this could happen is if someone can PHYSICALLY be proven to have body parts from more than one gender. But a lot of times, its supposedly emotional. And if you change the gender God gave you based on feelings, this is unnatural.
what's wrong with unnatural?
 
Moderator Action: From now on please refrain from asking any questions about or discussing anything related to homosexuality. Any such discussion will be deleted and possibly punished more harshly. Those issues can be discussed in another thread.

Also, this thread is on a very short leash. Stay civil, and more importantly, keep the content away from spam and pointless bickering.

Moderator Action: Final warning, stay away from discussing homosexuality and related topics.
 
Nothing. That is an impossibility. Why would God all of a sudden change His mind 500 years after the fact? A wrong does not correct another wrong to make it right.

Interesting. So then why did God change his mind about so much stuff when Jesus came? Do you keep kosher and think it a religious obligation to circumcise your children, or is it that you deny the Old Testament?
 
I don't think that is possiblee...

I am 100% certain of Christianity's truth.

First, you would have to plant some form of doubt in my mind of the truth of Christianity, THEN prove it wrong, THEN prove Islam true.

Won't happen.

Has there ever been a time when you were not 100% certain that Christianity was true?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom