Common Myths about Gay Christians

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by Aquila

An active homosexual can't truly call themselves Christian.

Aquila,
I wasn't disagreeing with you at all. Just saying there IS HOPE for the active homosexual IF they really desire to be helped. It IS a choice, as it is for any sin.

When someone is ill and they go to the doctor for help, they can either do as the physican says, or reject his help.
It is a choice! Sometimes it is said about a disease, there is no known cure for this condition. But there IS a cure for the SIN problem. GOD provided an ANADOTE, but many reject it.

Naaman would never have been cleansed, if he had not reconsidered what the prophet told him to do. His servant reminded him that if it had been some hard thing, would he not have done it. So simple to dip seven times in the river the prophet told him to. The answer came when Naaman reconsidered. Some will say they don't need to baptized in a certain name. They don't need to do this or do that. If the doctor gives a certain perscription to take, he means to do just that. Why can't we just do what the Great Physican perscribes. So simple.

Blessings,

Falla39

[bbyrd009]

yup.

[Aquila]

So... we all agree that the term "gay Christian" isn't absolutely necessary and an argument can be made that any hyphenated Christian term isn't biblical. Theologically speaking, we're all just "Christians". We agree on the principle. However... that's only half of the issue. The second half is... what do we do about it? So we have a theoretical precept that we agree upon and believe is biblical. Now... how is that precept applied???

Do we disassociate with those faithful and celibate believers who insist on calling themselves "gay Christians"??? My point is, I don't think we should, especially seeing that they are being faithful to Christ and not engaging in sin. I can't help what they choose to call themselves. I can not like it, or even prefer that they use a different term like just "Christian". But the REALITY is that they use this term. While you guys are posing strong reasons why it should be rejected... you're not demonstrating how to apply it... especially with those who are obedient born again Christians who will look you in the eyes and say, "No, I'm a gay Christian." How do you apply your position???

That's why I say just let people call themselves what they wish. Sure, it may not always be biblical. We call ourselves "Apostolic" but historically we do very little, with the exception of baptism, the way the Apostles did. And we call ourselves, "Apostolic Christians". Sometimes, "Apostolic Pentecostal Christians". Sometimes, "Oneness Christians". Sometimes "Liberal Apostolic". Sometimes "Moderate Apostolic". Sometimes "Conservative Apostolic"... and the list can go on and on. Do we go on a crusade to correct everyone's self ascribed labels? Or should we simply acknowledge them as individuals who have chosen a label and seek to understand them and draw them closer to Christ?

A good example is Socialism and Communism. They sound beautiful to many theoretically on paper. However, their application in the REAL world would be an absolute disaster.

While the more conservative theoretical notion that the term "gay Christian" shouldn't be used is biblical and logical... Would it's application in the real world bring more division, arguments, and strife to the body of Christ in a battle over "wording"? Or would it really be something that would bring those born again obedient believers together in unity?

I'm afraid that while the idea that the term "gay Christian" shouldn't be used is logical... in the real world trying to eradicate it's usage will only bring more harm than good to the body. So we should accept the term (perhaps with some reservation) and then seek to understand the individual PEOPLE behind the label.

But some will stay say, "Waaaa... I don't like that term." So what? I don't either, but some BROTHERS and SISTERS use it and will continue to. Get over it. Welcome to planet earth! lol

Can ANYONE see what I'm trying to say???

Jeesh... I feel like no one is really getting it.

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

Ortho, good points. It seems to me that the "gay" struggle becomes defined as getting society to accept them, and not them to accept their sin. I've read pages of "attracted to the same sex" but I've yet to see a post that's "scared of the opposite sex," or call it what you like, but as this thread is about "myths," and I wonder if, since we've prolly gone about as far down this "gay struggle" road as we can, which I also have to note in passing always seems to turn into "the Christian struggle to accept homosexuals," we might explore what strikes me as the real homosexual struggle, that of getting a homosexual person to examine why they are not attracted to the opposite sex, or, if you will, move the conversation from society accepting abomination (death)(no judgement meant here), to homosexuals facing themselves, like we all have to do, and owning up to myths of their own (life). I understand that homosexuals dislike the following analogy, but I am attracted to my hand, and can only see parallels?

No "preview" here, so please understand that I mean this in love; we are under Grace, and I am determined that I will not judge here.

but I don't really expect anyone to come near this, being as how it is the real "struggle."

[houston]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

but I don't really expect anyone to come near this, being as how it is the real "struggle."

Not gonna happen. Everyone's a "victim."

[bbyrd009]

MmmHmm

[Aquila]

We have to acknowledge that part of the struggle is the sinful community seeking acceptance without repenting of their sin. However, there is another part of our struggle. We have obedient, Christ centered, celibate believers who are “gay” in orientation. These individuals are facing fire from BOTH sides. First, the gay community thinks they are caving into the “haters” by choosing to live celibate and dedicated to Christ. To the gay community these individuals are thought of as being brainwashed drones who are bowing to what they say is Conservative Christian bigotry. However, faithful “gay Christians” reach out to them and seek to see them saved. The faithful Christians with gay orientation also catch fire from the church. Many would tell a gay Christian who is living a celibate life that they are still an abomination until they are “changed” and don’t feel same gender orientation at all. They also face the fear of telling their story and being ostracized by churches they dearly love attending. They fear loosing ministry opportunities if their orientation was known. Some working for Christian businesses fear loosing their livelihoods. They fear being viewed with suspicion and perhaps being outright rejected for being different… though they are being disciplined and faithful.

So, some of them want to take the stigma off of the term “gay”. They use the term “gay Christian” to tell the gay community AND the church community they indeed are gay and are still followers of Christ. In our highly socially viral society that is full of labels and identity classifications… they feel being silent and afraid of both the gay and church communities isn’t something they can do any longer. So they want more people to understand that those of same gender orientation can indeed follow Christ and be a victorious Christian.

You might not agree with the tactic many of them have chosen in this area. However, it’s reality. We can seek to understand them and encourage them to continue their faithfulness and walk with Christ… or we can declare a war against labels.

Again, I can see both sides. But I only see acceptance of the term and getting to know the individuals behind it being the only logical, peaceful, and loving response.

[Truthseeker]

Wow is it really this complicated?

[Falla39]

My husband's cousin still declares himself an alcohoic even though he hasn't touched a drop in 12 yrs. I would think it would be better to say "a former alcoholic" or, "such WAS I". But then I wasn't an alcoholic, etc. Husband's cousin doesn't claim to be a Christian, or say he's an "alcoholic Christian" either.

Falla39

[Aquila]

What's wrong with letting people define and then explain themselves without prejudging them?