An honest theological question

[dsc]

If you are one of those who believe that a gay orientation isn't a sin but acting upon it is, what is your definition of acting upon it? Jesus is pretty clear that even thinking about a sinful activity is the same as the sinful activity itself, so thinking about having sex with a man is the same as having sex with the man. In short, I can't see a way that people can claim that a gay orientation isn't a sin, but that acting upon such an orientation is. Gay people tend to fantasize about sex with the same gender, that is sort of how it works.

[Ian David]

1. If you fantasize about straight sex during gay sex, doesn't it cancel out?

Or what if during gay sex you think about giving money to the poor, or about how much you love Jesus, or if you always play gospel music in the background?

Doesn't yelling "Oh, god!" during sex wipe all that sinfulness away?

[ZombieHorde]

12. Yes, everything you wrote is true.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

2. In my own reckoning, I treat it the same as heterosexual sex

in that it ideally should be kept to marriage (which is a whole other can of worms).

So anyone having sex (heterosexual or homosexual) outside of marriage is a sin. Same with sexual fantasies. And sexual contact. Hell, some people even take issue with kissing. Gay and straight people are supposed to keep all those to a minimum as well.

Is it a somewhat unrealistic ideal? Of course it is. That's why I also believe in a very forgiving God.

[dsc]

3. Since religions to marry gays that part can be gotten around

presumedly, but for those of us unattached, well not so much.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

6. Exactly.

And I'm guessing we're both in that situation, huh?

[Ian David]

14. You should have sex through a hole in a sheet when the woman is ovulating. n/t

[metapunditedgy]

4. I think those religious folks might say that...

thinking and acting are two very different things, even though both could be sinful. A clearer example is thinking about murder vs. actually committing it. Pretty much everyone would say that the latter is a greater moral evil.

There is a tendency to develop an "economy of sins" in religion. Especially because the Church(es) can take advantage of that economy to gain money/power. The "indulgence" fee for thinking about X is $25, while it will take at least $1000 to absolve you of actually doing X, etc.

Martin Luther (and many others) were big on pointing out the hypocritical aspects of "little sin" vs. "big sin." If churches want to say sin is a big deal, then they shouldn't (in the next breath) act like some sins are not a big deal; it's inconsistent. (And often driven by convenience.)

[sam sarrha]

5. All the Prophets, Abraham.. his relative Mohamed.,both exhibited symptoms of Schitzophrenia..,most

people who talk to god and hear god tell them to kill their children are candidates today of a diagnosis of schizophrenia. even Jesus might have had a mild case or at least early onset.. it runs in families.

so... the way i see it all the major god based religions are the product of mental illness..

so i just ignore anything related to it. and the people who subscribe to such insanity

i was raised in a extremist fundamentalist free Holiness Pentecostal church. even at age 6 i thought the sons of bitches were F'n nuts. i still suffer from PTSD due to my childhood torment and torture at the hands of those self rightious child abusers and torturers

[struggle4progress]

7. I am going to attempt an honest theological answer, though you may think it an equivocation

The gospel does not preach "morality" or "ethics" but rather calls us to "agape" -- real universal love for our fellow humans

The gospel does ask us, to attempt to perfect ourselves in our ability to love and to set aside whatever obstructs that effort, but it simultaneously recognizes that such perfection is entirely beyond our ability

Our hope is not that we be judged according to our "righteousness" or our failure to be "righteous" -- but rather according to the sincere intent of charity in our hearts

The teaching that we ourselves are imperfect brings with it a demand that we should be graceful in viewing the imperfections of our brothers and sisters, however much more clearly we see their imperfections than our own

Perhaps the point of Luther's dictum Sin boldly, but believe even more boldly is that we should not distort our personalities and become side-tracked from the essential gospel, by seeking a mere "righteousness" that could only make us even more egotistical and judgmental

So, in short, I think that in some sense you are asking the wrong question

[H2O Man]

8. There are a series

of lessons in the four gospels that are known collectively as "the harsh teachings" of Jesus. The one you mention fits squarely in that group. What it is focused on isn't really sexual activity or even thinking about sex. It's self-righteousness. And that is the central focus of every one of those harsh teachings.

[dsc]

11. that is an interesting take

I never thought of those teachings that way.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. I don't believe it's a sin

It's just a naturally occurring variant of humanity, like being left-handed or having blue eyes.

I predict that 50 years from now, trying to turn a gay person straight will seem as quaint as forcing left-handed children to write with their right hands.

[knitter4democracy]

10. I've often wondered about this.

That's why I don't think it's sin. The thinking falls apart when you look at how Jesus defined sin.

[TechBear_Seattle]

13. Jesus is clear that fantasizing is morally identical (and just as sinful) as the act itself

You have heard that it was said, "You shall not commit adultery." But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." -- Matt. 5:27-28.

Extrapolating from this, the act of fantasizing, of even just looking at someone with lust, is tantamount to physically engaging in the act itself. Gay or straight, YOU MUST NOT LOOK AT SOMEONE LUSTFULLY!

The distinction is that lustful thoughts are between you and God. If you seek repentance and work not to have lustful thoughts, your sin can be forgiven. Carrying those thoughts out to physical acts, however, is a different matter. In this regard, people who have sex with anyone other than their married-in-the-eyes-of-God spouse is a sinner. It is not the genders involved that matter, but whether or not the people involved are married to one another.

(Please note: I am an atheist, but I do remember stuff from adult Sunday School :hi: )

[mikelewis]

15. Gay sex is only a sin if there is no love...

Senator Larry Craig and Pastor Ted Haggard are great examples of this because what they were doing was sinful... they were engaging in a homosexual relationship for self-debasing sexual reasons. They both were married men, they both hated the "Gay Lifestyle" and they both were strong advocates against Gay rights... and yet they both were consumed by their own desires and ruined by their own hypocrisy. If they had been true to themselves and honest, they both could have avoided much embarrassment and pain which are the rewards of sin. A committed loving gay couple, on the other hand, are not committing sinful acts... if there is love between them then it could have only been put there by God who as 1 John states, "God is Love". There is nothing wrong with sex in general, mind you, but it should be reserved as expressions of love and trust between two committed people and it should not be a cheap and tawdry act between one man or woman and a destructively shameful fantasy.