Gay christian groups

I thought that the whole idea behind Christianity was to follow the teachings of Christ. If one looks at it that way, it's very hard to condemn homosexuality as I'm not aware that Jesus ever did. If a church built itself around the teachings of Jesus then it would be quite an inclusive church indeed.

These are both very complicated issues, with each requiring a seperate discussion of it's own.

As to female priests or ministers, well, some denominations have allowed them and others have not. I guess it's a matter for each church to decide.

Same thing with gay marriage. For religions that don't believe homosexual acts are sins, I guess they won't condemen same-sex marriage. For those who do, they're not going to approve of such unions. I guess this is one of ways in which people tend towards one denomination or the other.

Paedophiles prey on innocent children who are not yet mature enough to choose. Homosexuals choose other homosexuals as partners (in general).

The difference is, homosexuals don't hurt anyone. Paedophiles do.

Ok. Thanks!

I am Christian and have attended such churches. As a matter of fact, the church where I was married over seven years ago, did allow gay and lesbian ministers. During the summer this church typically has other ministers filling and wow they even had a lesbian minister once – this was seven or eight years ago.

Shewolfn – Have you read the Bible in its true form? Do you fully understand the language and can you say without 100% doubt that you interpreted what was said 100%? I assume you read one of the several English translations. No matter how many times you read that translation, do you know for sure that the translation is correct? And even in this interpretation being gay is not wrong, the act of having sex with some one of the same sex is the sin.

I disagree that the Bible clearly states that being gay is wrong. It is particular interpretations of the Bible that state this. There is a wonderful website that I used I could remember that has many interpretations that explain the opposite that homosexuality is acceptable and also counters any of the passages that others have interpreted to mean the opposite. As the entire Bible was written in a different language where there is not an exact interpretation (many words have different meanings when being translated), there are always differences in interpretations.

Also, a Christian understands that they sin and are infallible and thus will never be able to follow the Bible 100%. The thing is – you try to follow Jesus and do as he does, it does not mean that you will succeed 100%, otherwise all Christians would be just like Jesus and not sin. God forgives us when we try to follow his example and word and ask for forgiveness.

You are absolutely right freeduck, Jesus never condemned homosexuality. And a Christian is some one who believes and follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.

If the church turned away everyone who supposedly sins, there would be no one there.

Look what a quick Google search finds:

http://www.christiangays.com/

http://groups.msn.com/GayChristianOutreach/

http://www.gaychristian.net/aboutgcn.html

http://www.whosoever.org/index.shtml

http://www.rcym.org/aboutus.php

Here is the website I was looking for - it is called Religious Tolerance. There is a load of information here including different interpretations from the Bible. http://www.religioustolerance.org/

And here is a link that directly deals with the concept – can a homosexual be a Christian. http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chri.htm

And here is another link helps describe how different groups interpret the Bible differently. One interesting note to me is that more conservative Christians tend to rely on the English translations whereas more liberal tend to look at the original translations – Hebrew/Greek.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bmar.htm

And one more link that describes how Christians interpret Biblical passages on homosexuality. http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibx.htm

Okay surely - and forgive me for, quite possibly, creating a furor here, - the bible, true in principle but isnt it just the teensiest tiniest bit possible that, since it was primarily jotted down after the fact, by ppl who werent personally there that maybe, just maybe, someone might have thought 'hey, i could add just a tiny bit in here and that'd totally help my lifestyle/political ambition/moneymaking scheme/make my opinions right'? Case in point - the Peter dude (i forget how2spell his sirname), head of one of the african sections of the anglican church - Gay bishops? NOOOO!!!!!! Child sacrifice in my own country? Turn the other cheek.

Lol, yelloworld, I hope you cause that furor you're afraid of, because what you've said is not only controversial but absolutely right. The church is hypocritical, even if the religion itself is not, and there are a number of double standards like that. Sodomy is a sin and you will burn in hell for it, but if a few thousand people have to die during a crusade, so be it! I support the gay cause because I am pro-choice, but it's important to remember that sometimes with this issue choice does not enter into it. It's often times a chemical imbalance that is present from birth or a chromosomal impulse to be attracted to members of the same sex. It's not necessecarily their choice to be homosexual, it just happened that way - and I am close friends with a lesbian who often wishes she wasn't. But it's impossible to just flip a switch and be gay or not gay. If the church could come out of the middle ages, we'd have no problem with this.

First of all, not all experts in ancient linguistics agree that what is identified by translators of the original Hebrew Old Testament as being homosexuality was, indeed, homosexuality but, rather, male temple prostitution as practiced by pagans civilizations surrounding ancient Israel.

The Bible has been mistranslated and, consequently, misinterpreted. This mistranslation and misinterpretation is, especially, true of the alleged sinfulness of a mutually loving, respectful, romantic homosexual relationship and its prohibition by Divine Will.

Case in point: The King James Version of Deuteronomy 23:17-18 reads:

"...There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel..."

HOWEVER, the original Hebrew reads: "...i, lo'-thihyeh qedhêshâh mibbenoth yisrâ'êl velo'-yihyeh qâdhêshm ibbenêy yisrâ'êl..."

Take notice of the words "qedhêshâh" & "qâdhêshm" in the above Hebrew passage. "Qedhêshâh" is the femenine noun in Hebrew for temple prostitute & "qâdhêshm" is the masculine noun in Hebrew for temple prostitute.

Strong's Hebrew Dictionary (http://www.jcsm.org/StudyCenter/kjvstrongs/STRHEB69.htm)
defines "qadesh" as "...qadesh kaw-dashe' - from 'qadash' (6942); a (quasi) sacred person, i.e. (technically) a (male) devotee (by prostitution) to licentious idolatry:-- sodomite, unclean...

Therefore, why did the translators of the original Hebrew mistranslate the male noun "qâdhêshm" as Sodomite instead of male whore when they translated the female noun "qedhêshâh" as whore?

Homophobic discrimination is the answer.

Take note that the Hebrew word for Sodom is S'dom according to
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/2004-February/017145.html: "...Sodom (Hebrew: > S'dom)..."

There are no combinations of letters spelling S'dom or variaition thereof such as Sodomite in the original Hebrew version of Deuteronomy 23: 17-18, therefore, Sodomite is a purposeful mistranslation. Got it? Get it.

Therefore, the correct translation should read:

"There shall be no female temple prostitute of the daughters of Israel nor a male temple prostitute of the sons of Israel..."

The point of all this being, as one who all his life has been speaking, reading & writing in ancient Hebrew, original language of the Bible, 2 Samuel 1: Rabbi Gershon Caudill (married heterosexual) states
(http://hometown.aol.com/ecorebbe/myhomepage/rant.html):

"...Over the past decade, I have been involved in a study of the so-called anti-homosexual texts of Leviticus in the original Hebrew versions extant, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and with the help of a Catholic Priest and a Protestant Biblical Languages student at Emory University, I have studied translations of the Greek and Latin texts.

This study has involved reviewing Talmudic texts and other materials of a collateral nature to the subject matter being studied; history, anthropology, archaeology, philology, and etymology, to name but a few.

As a result of my research, I am convinced of two things.

1. THE ORIGINAL HEBREW TEXTS HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH HOMOSEXUALITY!"

Furthermore, in king David, in his own words recorded for eternity in the inerrant Bible, publicly confesses his homosexual relationship with Jonathan by stating that his love for Jonathan surpassed the love of women.

(1) 1 Samual, Chapter 17,(love at first sight), "1 And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul..."

(2) 1 Samuel 20: 30, (father calls son faggot & blames the mother) "...Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?"

The above scene has been played over a million times over the millennia when a father finds out his son is having a homosexual affair and blames the mother. Nothing new under the sun.

(3) 2 Samuel 1: 26 "...I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women..."

I repeat, "PASSING the love of WOMEN."

Later. :wink:

Hi, I'm new to this forum and as soon as I figure out how to fill out my personal information, you'll be able to know a bit more about me.

However, when I discovered this forum doing a Google search, I joined and anxious to post as soon as possible.

Later.

welcome aboard Recaredo!

your aol link does not work

Hi Husker et al:

Hmm, you're right, the original website's been zapped.

Here's Rabbi Gershon Caudill's own website with the full length version of the quote in my post re homosexuality. Hope it works.

http://home.earthlink.net/~ecorebbe/id18.html

If not just do a Google search with the keywords "Rabbi Caudill Homosexuality" and you'll plenty of results taking you there.

Just made a quick pit stop here to check the "mail" from searching info in cyberspace on a casting resin that can withstand high temperature. Never mind, you don't want to know. :wink:

Warp trillion, Chekov, I'm outtta here.

Later, guys.

link works now

What the ..?..

I wrote w e b s i t e ' s in my post above and it turned into a link.


Take it through the worm hole on the other side of Alpha Centauri, Spock.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *poof*

Beam me dowon, Scotty.

Now proceeding to the topic of homosexuality in nature or as religious homophobes like to repeat like budhist parrots reciting their mantras that homosexuality is "contra natura" against nature, let me point out the followng:

This pet phrase, "contra natura" translates "against nature" as if homosexuality is against the laws of nature. Abundant empirical evidence betrays this premise that homosexuality is "contra natura" is FALSE.

In Bruce Bagemihl's 572-page book, "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality & Natural Diversity, nominated in 1999 for a Pulitzer Prize, contains 200 years of scientific observations animal behavior in hundreds of species both in the wild & in captivity of homosexuality in animals from insects to reptiles, to birds to mammals, including the most intelligent species such as primates & dolphins.

There are many documented scientific observations in Bagemihl's book of animals engaging in homosexual acts in the wild even in the presence of abundant sexual partners of the opposite sex, therefore, homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation in the animal kingdom which is not the result of cultural conditions such as sexual identification due to parental role models or lack thereof.

The Bighorn Sheep is the U.S. live in sexually segregated herds for all of the year except for the rutting season when males seek the females. However, the rest of the year, male-to-male sexual copulation is the norm among male Bighorn Sheep. Not always is a dominant or older male the mounter but will allow themselves to be mounted by younger males.

From online magazine, Science Daily, Date: 2004-03-09 at


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/03/040309073256.htm

"...Biology Behind Homosexuality In Sheep, Study Confirms...

...A study published in the February issue of the journal Endocrinology demonstrates that not only are certain groups of cells different between genders in a part of the sheep brain controlling sexual behavior, but brain anatomy and hormone production may determine whether adult rams
prefer other rams over ewes...

"Same-sex attraction is widespread across many different species." said Roselli, whose laboratory collaborated with the Department of Animal Sciences at Oregon State University and the USDA Agricultural Research Service's U.S. Sheep Experiment Station in Dubois, Idaho.

Kay Larkin, Ph.D., an OHSU electron microscopist who performed laboratory analysis for the study, said scientists now have a marker that points to whether a ram may prefer other rams over ewes.

"There's a difference in the brain that is correlated with partner preference rather than gender of the animal you're looking at," she said.
About 8 percent of domestic rams display preferences for other males as sexual partners.

Scientists don't believe it's related to dominance or flock hierarchy; rather, their typical motor pattern for intercourse is merely directed at rams instead of ewes..."

Furthermore, God in his infinite wisdom also created lesbian lizards