The Ron Brown Religion & Persecution Thread

[Haspula]

Sometimes its best if you keep your opinions to yourself, especially religious ones

[TonyStalloni]

A phrase that has been popular for 10 or so years is WWJD (what would Jesus do). It would have been interesting if Jesus had been at the meeting in Omaha that started this discussion. Some think RB and Jesus would be debating on opposite sides of the issue. Some think not. Jesus himself said he didn't come to replace the law but to fulfil it. He wasn't concerned with rights as much as understanding and living by the first two commandments. Loving the Lord God and loving and respecting our neighbors. My best guess is Jesus would have offered life. The one he called "abundant." And I think we all have a lot to learn about that. Probably the question is do we want to seek it or continue to argue about the law? He told the woman at the well that "he didn't condemn her" but he also told her, "go and sin no more." Not because he condemned her, but because he wanted the best for her.

 

This is how I see Ron Brown. He isn't condemning people individually but calling out a lifestyle that he understands the Bible condemns.

 

 

As a follower of Christ I love Coach Brown and the missional work he has done in this world, but I disagree with the last statement. I don't think that what Ron Brown is doing looks at all like how Jesus lived. You know what words I didn't hear come out of Brown's mouth during this entire thing? Salvation. Grace. Forgiveness. Gospel. To name a few.

 

What he is preaching isn't what Jesus preached. Ron Brown's method is "what you are doing is wrong, you need to stop that and change" when Jesus' method was "I love you and have a plan for you" and then that love was what changed people's lives. Jesus accepts us as we are and changes us from the inside, we can't earn or will ourselves to be pleasing to God - we just have to place faith and let Him do the work.

 

I don't know if you've ever attended one of Ron Browns events where he preaches from his heart. He speaks often and passionately about salvation, grace, forgiveness and the Bible. The event recently in Omaha wasn't a venue where he came to preach. Just to give his opinion about changing a law for the city of Omaha. I don't know if he has worked in the political arena before or not. I'm guessing not often or we would have heard about it.

 

Jesus wasn't particularly averse to calling a spade a spade whether it was with individuals (the woman at the well) or organizations (like the Pharisees). He didn't tell the woman to try and live a good live and just do your best. He told her to "Go and sin no more" or in your words "Stop that and change". It was unusual that He was even talking to her as she was a Samaritan, she was a woman and by using her cup he would have been declared ceremonially unclean. Jesus did have a way of showing love and compassion to people which was magnetic. He could call out their sins without condemning them.

[Landlord]

A phrase that has been popular for 10 or so years is WWJD (what would Jesus do). It would have been interesting if Jesus had been at the meeting in Omaha that started this discussion. Some think RB and Jesus would be debating on opposite sides of the issue. Some think not. Jesus himself said he didn't come to replace the law but to fulfil it. He wasn't concerned with rights as much as understanding and living by the first two commandments. Loving the Lord God and loving and respecting our neighbors. My best guess is Jesus would have offered life. The one he called "abundant." And I think we all have a lot to learn about that. Probably the question is do we want to seek it or continue to argue about the law? He told the woman at the well that "he didn't condemn her" but he also told her, "go and sin no more." Not because he condemned her, but because he wanted the best for her.

 

This is how I see Ron Brown. He isn't condemning people individually but calling out a lifestyle that he understands the Bible condemns.

 

 

As a follower of Christ I love Coach Brown and the missional work he has done in this world, but I disagree with the last statement. I don't think that what Ron Brown is doing looks at all like how Jesus lived. You know what words I didn't hear come out of Brown's mouth during this entire thing? Salvation. Grace. Forgiveness. Gospel. To name a few.

 

What he is preaching isn't what Jesus preached. Ron Brown's method is "what you are doing is wrong, you need to stop that and change" when Jesus' method was "I love you and have a plan for you" and then that love was what changed people's lives. Jesus accepts us as we are and changes us from the inside, we can't earn or will ourselves to be pleasing to God - we just have to place faith and let Him do the work.

 

I don't know if you've ever attended one of Ron Browns events where he preaches from his heart. He speaks often and passionately about salvation, grace, forgiveness and the Bible. The event recently in Omaha wasn't a venue where he came to preach. Just to give his opinion about changing a law for the city of Omaha. I don't know if he has worked in the political arena before or not. I'm guessing not often or we would have heard about it.

 

Jesus wasn't particularly averse to calling a spade a spade whether it was with individuals (the woman at the well) or organizations (like the Pharisees). He didn't tell the woman to try and live a good live and just do your best. He told her to "Go and sin no more" or in your words "Stop that and change". It was unusual that He was even talking to her as she was a Samaritan, she was a woman and by using her cup he would have been declared ceremonially unclean. Jesus did have a way of showing love and compassion to people which was magnetic. He could call out their sins without condemning them.

 

 

 

I have listened to Coach Brown speak several times, I know his passion and heart for people and am not questioning that it's there. However, Ron Brown's active and public crusade against homosexual rights does not compare in any way, in my opinion, to ways in which Jesus interacted with people. First, Jesus never spoke about sinners and not to them. Second, he didn't spend all of his time cherrypicking certain sins and not others. Third, he took steps to protect those with lesser liberties or status or reputation. Fourth, he was a friend to sinners; in person, genuinely and lovingly - Ron Brown is just speaking out against people that he isn't (seemingly, I don't know his personal life) actively pursuing relationships with to show love. Fifth, Jesus didn't always tell people "go and sin no more", as is evidenced by him telling his disciples (who were basically professional sinners) to simply follow, and on the journey they believed and they changed. Even with the woman at the well, He only gave her that command after He demonstrated remarkable love and grace towards her, not before. I could go on, but you get the point. If Ron's intentions are Christlike and genuine, he is doing an absolutely awful job at showing that to the people he is speaking out against.

[SoCalhusker88]

Hey guys long time no talk, I have been following this story for a while and have a few opinions I hope can bring some active, appropriate, and good-natured discussion to this board and does not simply spur a fingerpointing internet session.

 

In the business of full-disclosure I am currently studying at an undergraduate level Theological studies as a major from a local Concordia University. I also am a strong LCMS Lutheran (something that is extremely secondary to my being a christian) which may give you some more understanding of my opinions and beliefs. Eventually i want to become a pastor and eventually at some point teach theology on the University or High School Level.

 

Now to my opinions. Simply put I do view the practice of homosexuality of a sin. However, by no means do we as christians have some sort of mighty pulpit to attack the integrity or nature of human rights based on a single act. To put it in perspective as a hetro-sexual male I would say 100% of hetro-males commit the same "level" of sin (despite there being no real levels of sin and all are equally damming) everytime we have seen a picture of Kate Upton, Brooklyn Decker and the like. I doubt any of you have seen a picture of these aforementioned women and internally or externally in no way had some sort of lust for them. It is not my place as a sinner to damm anyone to hell for their actions on Earth. At the same time we are supposed to point out (lovingly) and rebuke and correct in righteousness. Much like if you found out your buddy was cheating on his wife or had slipped into some drug related addictions you would hopefully out of love discuss the transgressions with him and try to correct the behavior. Additionally God does not hate gays anymore then he hates the sins we commit on a daily level. This is not Dante's Inferno with levels of hell. We are all sinners a dammed to hell, except for the saving grace of Jesus Christ for all people who have faith (sounds like a tebow press conference I know just bare with me).

 

For Coach Brown to use a public university as a pulpit for anti-gay speech is not the smartest decision he has made and he admits that. However, to fire him for a personal belief system does not make much sense either. From everything I have read(including comments by Muslim Admir Abdullah) Coach Brown is very respectful to the players and exemplifies his vocations as a football coach and a Christian well. Now does Coach Brown sometimes become to expressive with his faith in the public sector when representing the university....perhaps. that is a subjective opinion that will be different among all of us and may not contain a necessary right or wrong answer.

 

The point is, Coach Brown and his faith does not hate gay people anymore then it hates the sins every human commits on a daily, hourly, or momentarily often basis. However, because of the free speech and lack of government sponsored religion (things I both advocate and respect) he is walking a fine line of not respecting the latter by his expression of the former. That fine line is subjective in nature and contains a large amount of gray area. What I hope all of us can remember is that the loving respect of both gays and their beliefs, what UNL stands for, and what Coach Brown stands for is able to co-exist as long as each of the respective parties respects the other as outlined by our great constitution. For it is by loving respect that the message of both Coach Brown and what the university stands for is most adequately represented.

 

I hope this cleared somethings up and allowed my opinion to be shown in a non-wavering, yet non-pejorative manner

[SoCalhusker88]

also i usually hate the long post so i tried to keep it short but as you can see that didnt work out so i apologize

[Husker_x]

Hey guys long time no talk, I have been following this story for a while and have a few opinions I hope can bring some active, appropriate, and good-natured discussion to this board and does not simply spur a fingerpointing internet session.

 

In the business of full-disclosure I am currently studying at an undergraduate level Theological studies as a major from a local Concordia University. I also am a strong LCMS Lutheran (something that is extremely secondary to my being a christian) which may give you some more understanding of my opinions and beliefs. Eventually i want to become a pastor and eventually at some point teach theology on the University or High School Level.

 

Now to my opinions. Simply put I do view the practice of homosexuality of a sin. However, by no means do we as christians have some sort of mighty pulpit to attack the integrity or nature of human rights based on a single act. To put it in perspective as a hetro-sexual male I would say 100% of hetro-males commit the same "level" of sin (despite there being no real levels of sin and all are equally damming) everytime we have seen a picture of Kate Upton, Brooklyn Decker and the like. I doubt any of you have seen a picture of these aforementioned women and internally or externally in no way had some sort of lust for them. It is not my place as a sinner to damm anyone to hell for their actions on Earth. At the same time we are supposed to point out (lovingly) and rebuke and correct in righteousness. Much like if you found out your buddy was cheating on his wife or had slipped into some drug related addictions you would hopefully out of love discuss the transgressions with him and try to correct the behavior. Additionally God does not hate gays anymore then he hates the sins we commit on a daily level. This is not Dante's Inferno with levels of hell. We are all sinners a dammed to hell, except for the saving grace of Jesus Christ for all people who have faith (sounds like a tebow press conference I know just bare with me).

 

For Coach Brown to use a public university as a pulpit for anti-gay speech is not the smartest decision he has made and he admits that. However, to fire him for a personal belief system does not make much sense either. From everything I have read(including comments by Muslim Admir Abdullah) Coach Brown is very respectful to the players and exemplifies his vocations as a football coach and a Christian well. Now does Coach Brown sometimes become to expressive with his faith in the public sector when representing the university....perhaps. that is a subjective opinion that will be different among all of us and may not contain a necessary right or wrong answer.

 

The point is, Coach Brown and his faith does not hate gay people anymore then it hates the sins every human commits on a daily, hourly, or momentarily often basis. However, because of the free speech and lack of government sponsored religion (things I both advocate and respect) he is walking a fine line of not respecting the latter by his expression of the former. That fine line is subjective in nature and contains a large amount of gray area. What I hope all of us can remember is that the loving respect of both gays and their beliefs, what UNL stands for, and what Coach Brown stands for is able to co-exist as long as each of the respective parties respects the other as outlined by our great constitution. For it is by loving respect that the message of both Coach Brown and what the university stands for is most adequately represented.

 

I hope this cleared somethings up and allowed my opinion to be shown in a non-wavering, yet non-pejorative manner

 

I respect a lot of what you've written here and can agree with much of it. I don't think Coach Brown hates gay people either. I find him to be a very charitable, loving individual and I respect him on that basis.

 

However.

 

The most insidious aspect of the Christian faith (at least as it pertains to this topic) is that it views homosexuality as a sin. Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexuals are not sinners. Neither are heterosexuals who find the opposite sex attractive. Human kind has evolved the sensation of lust for a very good biological reason: reproduction. It's also completely natural for a certain segment of the population to be attracted to the same sex. This is found in our species, our closest cousins, and other animals as well. The idea that a gay person should look at him or herself as sinful or shameful is a hideous idea.

 

Homosexuals should be proud of who they are. I don't care that Ron Brown believes in a storybook that tells him different. He's free to believe that nonsense in Leviticus if he wants to, but what I will not stand for is a society in which people are taught that they are born guilty and should fight and/or be ashamed of themselves simply because they happen to like other men (or women). Its doubly worse if Brown wants to use his position as coach to fight against civil liberties. This is a line he should not flirt with. You're either a coach or a preacher. Decide which you want to be, and do that. But don't damage the image of the University of Nebraska.

[bhamHusker]

Every time I hear a variant of the "he's just hating the sin while loving the sinners" defense of religious anti-gay bigotry, part of me is actually sympathetic to that argument. After all, it's precisely the way I feel about people trapped in religion - especially those who are living openly religious lifestyles. I disapprove of their behavior, and will do everything I can to discourage the practice of that detestable way of life. You must know that I do it out of good will and love for the poor victims of this miserable condition in the hope that I can help to free them from the crippling constraints of religious belief. When I criticize, castigate, mock or berate the religious lifestyle, I'm attacking only the behavior, and certainly not the individual snared in this pitiable way of life.

 

(I don't really need the emoticon, do I?)

[bhamHusker]

Every time I hear a variant of the "he's just hating the sin while loving the sinners" defense of religious anti-gay bigotry, part of me is actually sympathetic to that argument. After all, it's precisely the way I feel about people trapped in religion - especially those who are living openly religious lifestyles. I disapprove of their behavior, and will do everything I can to discourage the practice of that detestable way of life. You must know that I do it out of good will and love for the poor victims of this miserable condition in the hope that I can help to free them from the crippling constraints of religious belief. When I criticize, castigate, mock or berate the religious lifestyle, I'm attacking only the behavior, and certainly not the individual snared in this pitiable way of life.

 

(I don't really need the emoticon, do I?)

 

We religious people feel the same way about Atheists/Agnostics...but we usually try to pull back on talking down to people. It seems to piss people off.

 

And here's the kicker on your comment...what is so wrong about someone living according to the Bible? Honestly, I don't go out and try to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals and I don't pass judgement on them (Matthew 7 says I shouldn't) so if I believe something, what does it hurt? How is living a life as a peacable Christian a bad thing that you should feel sorry for?

Apparently, I did...

[bennychico11]

This is straight up BULL. Brown is talking about what he believes as WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE.

 

Here's the deal on sin.

 

 

Can a sick person prove that they have no fever just by breaking the thermometer that measures his/her fever? You know they can't. So why is it here that people are rejecting Gods view of a sin and pretending that said sin doesn't exist (or claiming it isn't a sin)? it says in multiple places in both the OT and NT that homosexuality is a sin...and sin originates (according to God) with the Devil (1 John 3:8). I for one, don't want to be associated in that aspect.

 

To someone like me you first need to prove to me that something like a thermometer exists and has the ability to actually measure a temperature. Fortunately, in that case, that's easy for us to asses. Your god, on the other hand, isn't.

The "sin" of homosexuality is widely disputed. And because it is, that's why everyone can't just agree with what's written in a couple verses in your book. Especially since the actual translation of the Hebrew word varies (there was no word for homosexuality then...so when you see that word in the Bible, you should question the bias of the translator right off the bat). I've read one criticism that the actual translation of Leviticus 18:22 is "And with a male thou shalt not lie down in a woman's bed; it is an abomination." Which also leads us to the original context of the verse. Many scholars say you have to think culturally...and this verse in particular is forbidding any man who is not a woman's husband to lie in her bed. This is because there are specific rules for a woman's bed. Which Leviticus 15 dives further into.

This also brings us to the word "abomination"...the original Hebrew was "to’evah." I've also heard several scholars suggest that this translation is more suited to "undesirable thing" or "not customary". If you look at the verses where it talks about certain animal sacrifices or eating un-kosher animals...this makes more sense. In Genesis 43:32, the Egyptians don't eat with the Hebrews because it was to'evah to the Egyptians.

And then we can dive further into "homosexuality" and how it actually was regarded historically and maybe why it was considered not-customary...but that's another topic.

 

All that being said, I find Brown and the whole Bible's concept of sin ridiculous. I don't agree with it and think if a god actually judges people based off of some of these insane rules that are only subject to assumption by interpretation because we have to rely on copies of copies of translations of copies of terribly contradictory pages (compiled by humans)...then he's more fallible and unloving than many think.

Let people love who they want to love and allow them to have the inalienable human rights we all deserve. It's really not that hard.

[Landlord]

This is straight up BULL. Brown is talking about what he believes as WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE.

 

Here's the deal on sin.

 

 

Can a sick person prove that they have no fever just by breaking the thermometer that measures his/her fever? You know they can't. So why is it here that people are rejecting Gods view of a sin and pretending that said sin doesn't exist (or claiming it isn't a sin)? it says in multiple places in both the OT and NT that homosexuality is a sin...and sin originates (according to God) with the Devil (1 John 3:8). I for one, don't want to be associated in that aspect.

 

What Ron Brown is doing is stating what is in the Bible as his beliefs. He's not judging an individual. He's not persecuting a group of people. He's stating his beliefs.

 

People need to quit trying to pidgeon hole him into the role of bigot. There's plenty of those people out there already. Go find them and shout for them to be fired...they deserve it. A person who states their beliefs, sticks to their guns, and makes sure to let people know it's HIS belief and not that of his job shouldn't have this much crap flicked at him. Ridiculous.

 

Your response has nothing to do at all with what I said.

 

 

I respect a lot of what you've written here and can agree with much of it. I don't think Coach Brown hates gay people either. I find him to be a very charitable, loving individual and I respect him on that basis.

 

However.

 

The most insidious aspect of the Christian faith (at least as it pertains to this topic) is that it views homosexuality as a sin. Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexuals are not sinners. Neither are heterosexuals who find the opposite sex attractive. Human kind has evolved the sensation of lust for a very good biological reason: reproduction. It's also completely natural for a certain segment of the population to be attracted to the same sex. This is found in our species, our closest cousins, and other animals as well. The idea that a gay person should look at him or herself as sinful or shameful is a hideous idea.

 

Homosexuals should be proud of who they are. I don't care that Ron Brown believes in a storybook that tells him different. He's free to believe that nonsense in Leviticus if he wants to, but what I will not stand for is a society in which people are taught that they are born guilty and should fight and/or be ashamed of themselves simply because they happen to like other men (or women). Its doubly worse if Brown wants to use his position as coach to fight against civil liberties. This is a line he should not flirt with. You're either a coach or a preacher. Decide which you want to be, and do that. But don't damage the image of the University of Nebraska.

 

 

Husker_x, you're a smart guy; a hell of a lot better than I. I have no qualms about your personal beliefs on homosexuality, but it seems like you are saying something along the lines of "Christians should think differently." I don't know if you're making that point or not, and if you aren't then I apologize and you can disregard this, but if you are arguing that the Christian perspective on homosexuality should be different you aren't giving much reason for it. Human kind has evolved all kinds of lusts (sexual and not) that aren't okay. The Bible doesn't teach that we are only sinful by conscious rebellion, but by a sinful nature as well. By that same coin, one could argue that murder, rape, theft, cannibalism or anything else that has some kind of genetic basis in humankind or animal kind aren't sinful or wrong either. We live in a fallen world, just because something is 'natural' in an environment permeated by sin doesn't mean it is in unity with righteousness or holiness. The problem is that church wants to pick on homosexuality when there are numerous other environmental or natural sinful behaviors that we ignore or lessen.

[SoCalhusker88]

Hey guys long time no talk, I have been following this story for a while and have a few opinions I hope can bring some active, appropriate, and good-natured discussion to this board and does not simply spur a fingerpointing internet session.

 

In the business of full-disclosure I am currently studying at an undergraduate level Theological studies as a major from a local Concordia University. I also am a strong LCMS Lutheran (something that is extremely secondary to my being a christian) which may give you some more understanding of my opinions and beliefs. Eventually i want to become a pastor and eventually at some point teach theology on the University or High School Level.

 

Now to my opinions. Simply put I do view the practice of homosexuality of a sin. However, by no means do we as christians have some sort of mighty pulpit to attack the integrity or nature of human rights based on a single act. To put it in perspective as a hetro-sexual male I would say 100% of hetro-males commit the same "level" of sin (despite there being no real levels of sin and all are equally damming) everytime we have seen a picture of Kate Upton, Brooklyn Decker and the like. I doubt any of you have seen a picture of these aforementioned women and internally or externally in no way had some sort of lust for them. It is not my place as a sinner to damm anyone to hell for their actions on Earth. At the same time we are supposed to point out (lovingly) and rebuke and correct in righteousness. Much like if you found out your buddy was cheating on his wife or had slipped into some drug related addictions you would hopefully out of love discuss the transgressions with him and try to correct the behavior. Additionally God does not hate gays anymore then he hates the sins we commit on a daily level. This is not Dante's Inferno with levels of hell. We are all sinners a dammed to hell, except for the saving grace of Jesus Christ for all people who have faith (sounds like a tebow press conference I know just bare with me).

 

For Coach Brown to use a public university as a pulpit for anti-gay speech is not the smartest decision he has made and he admits that. However, to fire him for a personal belief system does not make much sense either. From everything I have read(including comments by Muslim Admir Abdullah) Coach Brown is very respectful to the players and exemplifies his vocations as a football coach and a Christian well. Now does Coach Brown sometimes become to expressive with his faith in the public sector when representing the university....perhaps. that is a subjective opinion that will be different among all of us and may not contain a necessary right or wrong answer.

 

The point is, Coach Brown and his faith does not hate gay people anymore then it hates the sins every human commits on a daily, hourly, or momentarily often basis. However, because of the free speech and lack of government sponsored religion (things I both advocate and respect) he is walking a fine line of not respecting the latter by his expression of the former. That fine line is subjective in nature and contains a large amount of gray area. What I hope all of us can remember is that the loving respect of both gays and their beliefs, what UNL stands for, and what Coach Brown stands for is able to co-exist as long as each of the respective parties respects the other as outlined by our great constitution. For it is by loving respect that the message of both Coach Brown and what the university stands for is most adequately represented.

 

I hope this cleared somethings up and allowed my opinion to be shown in a non-wavering, yet non-pejorative manner

 

I respect a lot of what you've written here and can agree with much of it. I don't think Coach Brown hates gay people either. I find him to be a very charitable, loving individual and I respect him on that basis.

 

However.

 

The most insidious aspect of the Christian faith (at least as it pertains to this topic) is that it views homosexuality as a sin. Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexuals are not sinners. Neither are heterosexuals who find the opposite sex attractive. Human kind has evolved the sensation of lust for a very good biological reason: reproduction. It's also completely natural for a certain segment of the population to be attracted to the same sex. This is found in our species, our closest cousins, and other animals as well. The idea that a gay person should look at him or herself as sinful or shameful is a hideous idea.

 

Homosexuals should be proud of who they are. I don't care that Ron Brown believes in a storybook that tells him different. He's free to believe that nonsense in Leviticus if he wants to, but what I will not stand for is a society in which people are taught that they are born guilty and should fight and/or be ashamed of themselves simply because they happen to like other men (or women). Its doubly worse if Brown wants to use his position as coach to fight against civil liberties. This is a line he should not flirt with. You're either a coach or a preacher. Decide which you want to be, and do that. But don't damage the image of the University of Nebraska.

 

This would be then the fundamentally difference in our collective paradigm where the conflict comes from. I would say that it is a sin and I am unwavering from that. However, I respect your opinion and hope we can ultimately agree to disagree.....good thought out response btw i rec'd you for that.

[Lil' Red]

All that being said, I find Brown and the whole Bible's concept of sin ridiculous. I don't agree with it and think if a god actually judges people based off of some of these insane rules that are only subject to assumption by interpretation because we have to rely on copies of copies of translations of copies of terribly contradictory pages (compiled by humans)...then he's more fallible and unloving than many think.

Let people love who they want to love and allow them to have the inalienable human rights we all deserve. It's really not that hard.

 

I agree. I find it absurd to rely on a convoluted interpretation of the bible to distinguish whether or not something is moral. A similar type of logic was used to justify discrimination against African Americans. I implore anyone who believes that homosexuality is a distasteful sin to speak to some homosexuals and reason it out yourself whether or not it is a sin. Based on my experience, the only way to assert that homosexuality is a sin is to argue that heterosexuality is a sin as well.

[Landlord]

All that being said, I find Brown and the whole Bible's concept of sin ridiculous. I don't agree with it and think if a god actually judges people based off of some of these insane rules that are only subject to assumption by interpretation because we have to rely on copies of copies of translations of copies of terribly contradictory pages (compiled by humans)...then he's more fallible and unloving than many think.

Let people love who they want to love and allow them to have the inalienable human rights we all deserve. It's really not that hard.

 

I agree. I find it absurd to rely on a convoluted interpretation of the bible to distinguish whether or not something is moral. A similar type of logic was used to justify discrimination against African Americans. I implore anyone who believes that homosexuality is a distasteful sin to speak to some homosexuals and reason it out yourself whether or not it is a sin. Based on my experience, the only way to assert that homosexuality is a sin is to argue that heterosexuality is a sin as well.

 

 

So if I speak to a rich man who wants to acquire all the wealth he can possibly get his hands on but doesn't think it's wrong or bad, is it not sinful? Or if I speak to a schizophrenia murderer who doesn't know that killing is bad, is that not sinful? If I talk to a child who terrorizes their younger sibling because it's good fun are they not in the wrong?

 

Maybe I'm missing your point here, but it seems that you're implying that something isn't sinful unless it is conscious, deliberate open rebellion, which is not accurate.

[Lil' Red]

So if I speak to a rich man who wants to acquire all the wealth he can possibly get his hands on but doesn't think it's wrong or bad, is it not sinful? Or if I speak to a schizophrenia murderer who doesn't know that killing is bad, is that not sinful? If I talk to a child who terrorizes their younger sibling because it's good fun are they not in the wrong?

 

Maybe I'm missing your point here, but it seems that you're implying that something isn't sinful unless it is conscious, deliberate open rebellion, which is not accurate.

 

My point is that an interpretation of the bible shouldn't be used to discern whether or not something is sinful if it can't be supported with concrete reasoning. Simple logic will tell you that the rich man's hoarding of wealth will leave less for the unfortunate, killing ends a life, and bullying of a younger sibling is hurtful and demeaning for the sibling. What harm is brought on by homosexuality?

[Husker_x]

Husker_x, you're a smart guy; a hell of a lot better than I. I have no qualms about your personal beliefs on homosexuality, but it seems like you are saying something along the lines of "Christians should think differently." I don't know if you're making that point or not, and if you aren't then I apologize and you can disregard this, but if you are arguing that the Christian perspective on homosexuality should be different you aren't giving much reason for it. Human kind has evolved all kinds of lusts (sexual and not) that aren't okay. The Bible doesn't teach that we are only sinful by conscious rebellion, but by a sinful nature as well. By that same coin, one could argue that murder, rape, theft, cannibalism or anything else that has some kind of genetic basis in humankind or animal kind aren't sinful or wrong either. We live in a fallen world, just because something is 'natural' in an environment permeated by sin doesn't mean it is in unity with righteousness or holiness. The problem is that church wants to pick on homosexuality when there are numerous other environmental or natural sinful behaviors that we ignore or lessen.

 

I wouldn't say Christians should think differently. I'm saying they are thinking differently, and I think within a generation or two almost the entire church will have come up with some rationalization as to why. Society is changing and, as always, religion has to catch up. This conversation was not even happening thirty years ago. Nowadays people like Brown simply cannot promote bigotry in public without facing scorn from Christians and non-Christians alike. That's progress.

 

We don't live in a fallen world. That's another lie that religion has ruined lives with. You are not fallen and neither am I. Homosexuals are not fallen creatures, either, and none of us should feel ashamed of our nature. I am a much more moral person than the God of the bible, and it's not even close. So are you, for that matter, and I can comfortably say that without even knowing you; such is the reputation of Yahweh. This is the root of the most insidious aspect of Christianity--original sin. The concept is both repulsive and without merit. It has no place in modern society and certainly no place in a political discourse on human rights.

 

I actually agree with your point on natural not necessarily meaning good. That's absolutely right. In every case you have to apply reason to assess harm. In the case of murder, theft, and rape, ask yourself what kind of civilization we could build where these were the norm. The result would be a (short lived) disaster. Homosexuality is not theft, rape, or murder. It is a natural instinct of a certain small percentage of our population that results in the wonderful bonding and loving relationships that everyone else enjoys. What is Christianity with its outdated, outmoded scripture to tell these people they should be ashamed of themselves or each other?