Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

A Snarky Response To Evangelical Homophobes


Guest sylensikeelyoo

Recommended Posts

Guest sylensikeelyoo

I came across this article on my news feed from a conservative Christian media outlet. Within it, there were these 40 questions that Christians were supposed to ask themselves if they support gay marriage and all that. I got the feeling after reading it that the author of this article or whomever came up with these questions was insinuating that you can’t be a real Christian if you support gay marriage. I’m not going to get into that and I’ll give these guys the benefit of the doubt and assume that Christians actually want to open up a dialogue about this issue and possibly stop using the bible as a tool to discriminate against homosexuals. So, I took the liberty of answering these questions, although I am no longer a Christian. When I was a Christian, I supported gay marriage and had absolutely no problem with homosexuals. HOWEVER, I did feel pressured by my religion to go against my personal feelings and not outwardly support gay marriage and to publicly condemn homosexuality. This caused a lot of inner conflict, as you may have guessed. As I studied the bible more and more, I noticed the human hand prints and my faith began to crumble from there. I noticed that you can take pretty much any worldview or political ideology you want and defend it with scripture, so long as you cherry-pick.  Therefore, I went through and answered these questions and defended my answers with scripture. Here is a link to the article:

http://conservativetribune.com/40-questions-christians/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=RightWingNews&utm_content=2015-07-05

 






Below is my response. Enjoy!




 


1. How long have you believed that gay marriage is something to be celebrated?

 


I have always believed that MARRIAGE is something to be celebrated. It was even worth dying for, according to St Valentine. In the third century in Rome,during the reign of Claudius Gothicus, Christians were banned from marriage. They weren’t thought of as “normal”  human beings worthy of the same basic rights as everyone else, so the government forbid them from getting married. Sound familiar? Anyways, St.Valentine married them in secret. He got caught and sent to prison. Even in prison, Christian couples sneaked to him and he would still perform their weddings, even while he was locked up. He eventually got his head chopped off. St Valentine was martyred because he believed marriage is an institution worth fighting for. Also, it is for EVERYONE. Not just straight people, not just Christians…everyone.





2. What Bible Verses led you to change your mind?

I have always felt this way about love: That you can’t choose whom you fall in love with. The bible has lots to say about love. One of my favorite scriptures about love and that feeling you get when you find the “one” is Song of Solomon 8:6-7:

 

“Place me like a seal over your heart, like a seal on your arm; for love is as strong as death, its jealousy unyielding as the grave. It burns like blazing fire, like a mighty flame. 

Many waters cannot quench love; rivers cannot wash it away. If one were to give all the wealth of his house for love, it would be utterly scorned.” (NIV)

 





3. How would you make a positive case from Scripture that sexual activity between two persons of the same sex is a blessing to be celebrated?

 

Well, if you figure that much of the scripture is written by primitive, Bronze Age goat herders with a thirst for the blood of their Palestinian neighbors, homosexual activity is not thought of in a very positive light, as it does nothing to ensure the propagation of their race. If the ancient Hebrews did not constantly get their women, slaves, and foreign captives pregnant, they would not have flourished as much as they did. Besides, not much was known about the female role in procreation, other than the fact that man’s seed goes thereto grow, and then give birth. They didn’t know that women have eggs and that the sperm must meet with the egg and then the DNA from both mother and father divide up into the new human. It was thought that life was only in the male “seed” and that masturbation,“pulling out” during sex, and any other type of sex other than penetration into the vagina was an “abomination.” All of these things were considered an abomination because in the ancient Hebrew mind, placing sperm anywhere other than inside the female vagina was the same thing as an abortion. To them, sperm IS human life, after all. Therefore, in the Bible, you will not see any examples of how homosexual activity is a “blessing to be celebrated” because of cultural influence….just like how you will not see any scripture condemning polygamy, incest, rape, or slavery. In the culture of that day, these things were NOT necessarily “wrong.” But I will touch on this more in another question.You bring up culture again in question 12. I am very happy to give you more of my thoughts on culture and scripture.




4. What verses would you use to show that a marriage between two persons of the same sex can adequately depict Christ and the church?


Christ is gender-less and so is the Church. While Paul and John did draw the connection using a bride and bridegroom as a metaphor in Ephesians, Corinthians, and Revelation, it was to convey their point about Christ’s love for his church. They were not making political statements about how marriage is supposed to be for just straight people, but were using a commonly known image for people to understand their point. Jesus has a deep love for his people and he wants them to prepare themselves for him in the same manner as a bride would prepare herself on her wedding day for her husband back then. She cleans herself, she adorns herself with her finest clothes and jewelry, and she presents herself as something pleasing and desirable to her husband. Jesus wants his people to do the same thing only spiritually, in preparation for the day he returns. This message is clearly a spiritual one, and has absolutely nothing to do with ACTUAL MARRIAGE. You need to look at biblical scripture in context and stop cherry picking scripture to suit your worldview, and stop asking others to do the same when defending their worldview.







5. Do you think Jesus would have been okay with homosexual behavior between consenting adults in a committed relationship?

 

Well, Jesus didn't mention homosexuality being bad at all. In fact, he implies that homosexual behavior increases your chances to be raptured. Don't believe me? Turn with me in your bibles to Luke 17:34-35:

"I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken,and the other left."

But seriously though. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. Therefore, it must not have been a big deal to him, otherwise, he would have said something.





6. If so, why did he reassert the Genesis definition of marriage as being one man and one woman?


He reasserted the importance of commitment to your partner using Genesis because he was pointing out that DIVORCE was wrong. And, his point wasn’t even about marriage either, it was just an example. His whole teaching was about how he came to not only fulfill the Law of Moses, but to bring a higher standard to it. He went on to talk about how hating someone is just as bad as murdering him and how you need to turn the other cheek and eye for an eyeis bad and divorce is bad and all that. He just quoted Genesis to aid in making his point. Again,it’s not a political statement about marriage being just for straight people. Context,people. Context.




7. When Jesus spoke against porneia, what sins do you think he was forbidding?

Nice try. The only time Jesus used the word, “porneia” was in Matthew 19:9 which says, “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery." The word, “porneia” in this verse translates to “sexual immorality.” In this context, sexual immorality most likely doesn’t mean gay sex because, quite frankly, I don’t see too many men getting all upset and divorcing their wives because of lesbian sex. In fact, quite the opposite. Sexual immorality in this context probably refers to cheating. I think most scholars and theologians would agree with me, and if you were honest with yourself, so would you.



8. If some homosexual behavior is acceptable, how do you understand the sinful “exchange” Paul highlights in Romans 1?

 

I understand that Paul was a very bitter, sexually repressed, first century Christian. He also was not a particularly handsome fellow, according to the studies I’ve done on the life of Apostle Paul. This could have been on a reason why he had a very negative attitude about women, sex, and sexuality. This negative attitude is very apparent in verses such as 1 Cor 14:34-35, 1 Tim 2:11-14, and 1 Cor 7:1-2.



9. Do you believe that passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Revelation 21:8 teach that sexual immorality can keep you out of heaven?

 

The bible teaches that everything keeps you out of heaven. The only thing that gets you into heaven is the grace of God, through faith in Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans10:9-10, 13)






10. What sexual sins do you think they were referring to?


The sexual sins Paul and John were referring to was pretty much everything you can think of. ALL SEX, according to first century Christians, is evil unless you are trying to procreate. Many sects of Christians still believe this today. They use passages of scripture such as 1 Cor 6:9 and Rev 21:8 to tell their congregations that sex is not for enjoyment or to express physical love, but only to have babies. Many mainstream Christians reject this idea, citing Song of Solomon in defense of sex for pleasure and enjoyment and expression of love and plain ol' recreation. Many Christians now teach that God created sex as a gift to humans and as long as it is done within the confines of marriage,anything goes. My whole thing is, why exclude homosexuals from this amazing gift from God?There’s no reason for it, other than ignorance and prejudice.







11. As you think about the long history of the church and the near universal disapproval of same-sex sexual activity, what do you think you understand about the Bible that Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin and Luther failed to grasp?

 

If you are trying to say that as time goes on, people don’t change their minds about issues regardless of the bible, I will direct you to my answer in question 12.  Now, to be pretty blunt with you, there are tens of thousands of schisms and sects of Christianity that have spurred off because of teachings of Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, and Luther. Many Christians throughout the ages have either rejected or embraced these different teachings in some way. My answer to you will be in the form of a question. What do you think all these billions of Christians throughout the ages understand that all these guys you mentioned failed to grasp? See?Your question is pretty ignorant. I’m not the only person in the whole Christian world to ever disagree with doctrine presented to me by an authority of the Church. These people you mentioned even fundamentally disagree with one another on different doctrinal issues.That’s why there's like twenty thousand sects and denominations of Christianity today.They disagree on biblical teaching and they break off and teach what they want, or at least, what they feel the bible says to them.





12. What arguments would you use to explain to Christians in Africa, Asia and South America that their understanding of homosexuality is biblically incorrect and your new understanding of homosexuality is not culturally conditioned?

 

Well,  I could ask you the exact same thing about rape and slavery, as described in the Bible. The Bible clearly does not condemn these in the same way that it does homosexuality. The bible says that homosexuals are to be executed (Leviticus 20:13). A few chapters away, it says that rapists are to pay his victim's father a fine and then marry his victim. There is also a whole entire manifesto in The Law of Moses that talks about how to handle your slaves and whom you are allowed to buy and from where and that you can allow your children to inherit your slaves(Exodus chapter 21 and Leviticus 25:44-46).  Apostle Paul himself tells slaves to obey their masters (Ephesians 6:5, 1 Timothy 6:1-2). Jesus told a parable that suggested that he thought it was okay to beat your slaves( Luke 12:47-48). He doesn't tell slave owners to set their slaves free, for owning people is wrong.I would imagine that if God himself were truly against slavery and incarnated himself  to impart heavenly wisdom to us, he probably would have mentioned it. Right? Well apparently Christian apologists don't think so. They seem to think that some of these Scriptures were"culturally conditioned"...just like the stuff about not eating shellfish, or mutilating your penis, or getting haircuts. These things are all in the same text that every Christian LOVES to quote about the bible forbidding homosexuality. Therefore, your ad-populum fallacy disguised as a question is irrelevant. 





13. Do you think Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were motivated by personal animus and bigotry when they, for almost all of their lives, defined marriage as a covenant relationship between one man and one woman?

 

I honestly do not give a rat's ass about the opinions of crooked politicians. I pretty much expect them to stick their finger into the wind and point their politics in the direction that it's blowing. Clinton, Obama, and Bush mean squat to me.






14. Do you think children do best with a mother and a father?

 

It really depends on what you mean by “do best.” Some children are abused and neglected in homes with a“traditional” structure, and some children are well taken care of and well loved. There has been some research to suggest that children who grow up in “single parent” families have a higher risk of abuse and neglect and turn to crime than that of homes with two parents. Also, single parent families are typically at a lower income level than two parent families. Psychologists and Economists have researched and published papers suggesting that poverty could be the biggest reason for crime, and not necessarily poor parenting. I mean, yes, poor parenting has a lot to do with it too, but the reasons behind the abuse and neglect and poor choices by the parents can all be traced back to its root: poverty.  It has little to do with the gender pairing of the two parents.






15. If not, what research would you point to in support of that conclusion?

I started to do this, but I’ve decided to not link any studies here. There’s plenty of information out there on the internet and your local library. I am not going to do the research for you. If you really want to know, look it up for yourself. Besides,I am lazy and I have already devoted enough time and energy answering all these ridiculous questions.







16. If yes, does the church or the state have any role to play in promoting or privileging the arrangement that puts children with a mom and a dad?

I honestly don’t understand what you mean by this. I do know that if the state has grounds to remove a child from a home, there has to be an investigation and a court order first. Children are removed and replaced into homes on a case by case basis. It doesn’t matter if it’s a single parent home, traditional parent home, or same sex parent home. The circumstances surrounding the decision to remove a child varies but has very little to do with family structure and more to do with the way a child is cared for by the family in question.






17. Does the end and purpose of marriage point to something more than an adult’s emotional and sexual fulfillment?

Yes. Marriage is about finding that special person that you want to share your life with. It’s about growing together as a couple and as individuals. You raise a family together, you share in one another’s achievements, happiness, pleasure, sadness, pain, and loss. You are building a life together full of adventure and wonder. Sure, you can be emotionally and sexually fulfilled and that’s part of it, but it is so much deeper. The love and commitment that two people share together is beautiful. It is an amazing institution that ALL couples have the right to participate in.







18. How would you define marriage?

Dictionary.com defines it pretty well, in my opinion:



 

Any of the diverse forms of interpersonal union established in various parts of the world to form a familial bond that is recognized legally, religiously, or socially, granting the participating partners mutual conjugal rights and responsibilities and including, for example,opposite-sex marriage, same-sex marriage, plural marriage, and arranged marriage.

 


I define it simply as a legal union between two consenting adults.






19. Do you think close family members should be allowed to get married?

While I believe this question is irrelevant to the discussion, I'll let you have your "slippery-slope fallacy" and bite. I personally think it's gross to marry your brother or sister, but the Bible seems to condone this sort of thing. Abraham married his sister, Sarah. Jacob married his two cousins, Leah and Rachael. They were blessed by God so obviously He didn't have a problem with this sort of union. Incestuous or poly-amorous unions (Jacob's marriage was BOTH btw) fit the biblical definition of marriage. So why should I be against it?







20. Should marriage be limited to only two people?

Well, like I just said, poly-amorous unions are condoned in the Bible. King Solomon was one of the wisest, richest, and most blessed kings in the history of Israel. He had hundreds of wives and concubines. God really doesn't seem to have a problem with it, so why do we?







21. On what basis, if any, would you prevent consenting adults of any relation and of any number from getting married?


I wouldn't. Consenting adults should be allowed to do what they want to do regardless of race,religion, sexual orientation, or worldview, so long as it doesn’t harm anyone around them. It doesn't affect me in any way if rednecks want to marry their siblings. It doesn't harm me in anyway if religious fundamentalists want to have multiple wives. As long as they are adults capable of consent and everyone in question agrees to the union, what business is it of mine what they do?Personally, If I were still a Christian, I would do what Jesus commanded me to do and get the logout of my own eye and not worry about the speck in my neighbor's eye.







22. Should there be an age requirement in this country for obtaining a marriage license?


Yes. The requirements should be the legal age of consent as agreed upon by the society in which i live. Most places, it's 18. Some is 21. Whatever the legal adult age is in your country is what the age requirement should be for obtaining a marriage license.







23. Does equality entail that anyone wanting to be married should be able to have any meaningful relationship defined as marriage?


Well,whatever relationship is protected under the law in your society would qualify as a marriage under the legal definition so yes...As long as there is MUTUAL CONSENT. I can't stress the mutual consent thing enough around you Christians with your slippery slope fallacy. When you guys go there, you start bringing up children and animals and the rest of us pull out our hair and scream: IT'S NOT THE SAME!







24. If not, why not?


Not applicable to me, but I am curious as to what you would say. Because I have a feeling your answer would be NO.







25. Should your brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree with homosexual practice be allowed to exercise their religious beliefs without fear of punishment, retribution or coercion?

It depends on your definition of "practicing" your religious beliefs. If you mean that they have the right to disagree with someone's political views because of their personal religious convictions, sure. If they don't wish to participate in a homosexual activity they still don't have to. No one is forcing that on them. If you don’t like gay weddings,don’t go to one or participate in it. However, if your definition of exercising one's religious freedom is to bully, harass, and torment a homosexual couple, or to push for legislation to ban homosexuals from having the same rights as everyone else, then no. I don't think that's okay.








26. Will you speak up for your fellow Christians when their jobs, their accreditation, their reputation and their freedoms are threatened because of this issue?

I will always fight to defend religious freedom, period. I may no longer be a Christian, but the day people actually start treating Christians the in the same manner that which Christians have been treating homosexuals for the last 1500 years, then yes, I will still fight for you (although that would be terribly poetic). Because guess what? Discriminating against people for any reason,and denying them their basic human rights is immoral and an injustice.







27. Will you speak out against shaming and bullying of all kinds, whether against gays and lesbians or against evangelicals and Catholics?

Yes. Until I take my dying breath, I will ALWAYS take a stand against bullying and shaming.



The last 13 questions are all evangelical doctrinal issues and I don't wanna get into that nonsense anymore. But the link is in the article if you want to read through them yourself. I hope you enjoyed this article and my answers to these questions. The only way we are going to move forward in civilized society is if we open up a dialogue about the things that are holding us back.


 

 
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an enormous amount of work.  Bravo!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sylensikeelyoo

That's an enormous amount of work.  Bravo!

Thanks LOL. I did it a month ago and submitted it to the main blog. I think the reason it never got posted is because it got messed up when I copied and pasted it from my word processor to the website. I figured the webmaster didn't want to fuck with it because of the formatting issues. I thought about correcting it and re-submitting it but I was reading that it's against the rules. So I decided to just post it to the forum. I know its long, but hopefully worth the read. I enjoyed working on it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, great answers! Good job.

 

I think the sheer number of questions indicates that the people who came up with them do not simply want to find out what the Bible says. They want the Bible to stop other people from marrying. Not to stop them and their chums, but to stop other people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sylensikeelyoo

Wow, great answers! Good job.I think the sheer number of questions indicates that the people who came up with them do not simply want to find out what the Bible says. They want the Bible to stop other people from marrying. Not to stop them and their chums, but to stop other people.

Yeah I think so too. It's almost like they designed these questions to be rhetorical. Well fuck them. LOL

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over on Patheos I see things from evangelicals that show there are some who do affirm same-sex relationships. That, at least, is encouraging.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sy,  let's don't ever argue, OK?   smile.png

 

 

That was brilliant. I think you just wrestled down thousands of years of church hatred, not to mention the Bible itself, on this issue. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sylensikeelyoo

Sy,  let's don't ever argue, OK?   :)

 

 

That was brilliant. I think you just wrestled down thousands of years of church hatred, not to mention the Bible itself, on this issue.

 

 

Hehehehe. It's what I do baby ;)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Absofuckinlutley brillliant!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

sylen, Thank you so much for adding this masterpiece  for the readers on Ex-c!

 

What do you think gang....we should pin this one..woohoo.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sylen, Thank you so much for adding this masterpiece  for the readers on Ex-c!

 

What do you think gang....we should pin this one..woohoo.gif

 

I think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darth Sylens, a formidable ally in the war against superstition and ancient myth. (I can't help hearing James Earl Jones' voice when I read that...)

 

I think pinning the thread would be appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Nice work!  Pin it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sylensikeelyoo

Darth Sylens, a formidable ally in the war against superstition and ancient myth.

Indeed. I find their lack of reason disturbing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, Silence I Kill You (I think I just figured out your screen name),

 

a further thought about Rev. 21:8: it doesn't specifically mention gays or lesbians. It does use the word ἐβδελυγμένοις, "those who are defiled by abomination/s." In the Septuagint, the Greek word bdelugma is regularly used to translate the Hebrew "to'evah." Something is to'evah if it involves crossing category boundaries. That's why rabbit is to'evah, because it doesn't have hooves but chews the cud (acc. to the OT). Or mixed fabrics. A male "lying the lying of a woman" with a male is to'evah in Leviticus.

 

So Christians who quote Rev. 21:8 don't realize that that verse is CONTINUING the Torah concept of to'evah, which Jesus is supposed to have wiped out for Christians.

 

Try telling the fundies that Revelation(s) [they usually mess up the title of that book] says they're going to the Lake of Fire if they wear mixed fabrics or eat rabbit or shrimp.

 

But Paul said ...

 

Another Bible contradiction.

 

Or... let them try to puzzle out which of the 109 or whatever "to'evah" things in the OT are still "to'evah."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sylensikeelyoo

Hey, Silence I Kill You (I think I just figured out your screen name),a further thought about Rev. 21:8: it doesn't specifically mention gays or lesbians. It does use the word ἐβδελυγμένοις, "those who are defiled by abomination/s." In the Septuagint, the Greek word bdelugma is regularly used to translate the Hebrew "to'evah." Something is to'evah if it involves crossing category boundaries. That's why rabbit is to'evah, because it doesn't have hooves but chews the cud (acc. to the OT). Or mixed fabrics. A male "lying the lying of a woman" with a male is to'evah in Leviticus.So Christians who quote Rev. 21:8 don't realize that that verse is CONTINUING the Torah concept of to'evah, which Jesus is supposed to have wiped out for Christians.Try telling the fundies that Revelation(s) [they usually mess up the title of that book] says they're going to the Lake of Fire if they wear mixed fabrics or eat rabbit or shrimp.But Paul said ...Another Bible contradiction.Or... let them try to puzzle out which of the 109 or whatever "to'evah" things in the OT are still "to'evah."

Yeah. Well, THERE YA GO! One more nail in the coffin. BOOM!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, they might be able to weasel out of it by pointing out that Proverbs calls certain moral failings "to'evah."

 

Actually I think a lot of the problem with discussions of same-sex issues in Christianity is that Christianity pretends to be beyond law, but then it tries to set up a new law code - just one that allows lobster roll and such. The mentality with which they discuss moral norms is a mess, since their theology denies that they have legal principles, from which they can reason to particular cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sylen, Thank you so much for adding this masterpiece  for the readers on Ex-c!

 

What do you think gang....we should pin this one..woohoo.gif

 

I vote yes, this thread is too awesome not to be pinned.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

With this being in the Lion's Den, I can't imagine why we haven't heard from our resident Cheerleaders for Christ. yelrotflmao.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sylensikeelyoo

With this being in the Lion's Den, I can't imagine why we haven't heard from our resident Cheerleaders for Christ. :yelrotflmao:

Probably cuz they're homos themselves. lolz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

With this being in the Lion's Den, I can't imagine why we haven't heard from our resident Cheerleaders for Christ. yelrotflmao.gif

Probably cuz they're homos themselves. lolz

 

 

As always, I will stick up for our Christian members.  

 

Not really, but was that at least a little bit funny?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

God created male and female.

 

Sex is for procreation and fun within marriage.

The ideal environment for raising children and living a full life.

 

That is the mark. That is the perfection.

 

Anything else is missing the mark. It is sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God created male and female.

...

 

Just not in any way you can demonstrate.

 

 

...

Sex is for procreation and fun within marriage.

The ideal environment for raising children and living a full life.

...

 

 

Ironhorse attempts to speak for all humans.  For you, perhaps.  For others, not necessarily.  

 

...That is the mark. That is the perfection.

...

 

 

Mr. "I'm Perfect and if I'm Not I Decide what is Proper" speaks.

 

...

Anything else is missing the mark. It is sin.

 

Yes, any behavior that does not meet with Tin Pony's approval (or the approval of his imaginary sky fairies) is bad behavior.  Spoken like a true theocrat wannabe.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.