"Im not going to heaven because Im gay"

[TheStarlessSkye]

The bible was written supposedly 40 years after Christ "ascended" to heaven.

Just think, in those 40 years, the stories and tellings of what Jesus did could've been twisted, changed and so on.  

[NekrotikKannibal]

Seriously, the Bible and its rules are outdated. Also, it should be remembered that it's been translated and re-translated for centuries. When that happens, words are bound to be translated incorrectly, especially when we're talking about ancient languages. One needs to remember that languages change and develop over time. Medieval English and Medieval French, for instance, aren't the same as their modern day counterparts. It also needs to be remembered that translators are free to interpret what they're translating in any way they want so there are many parts (if not all) of the Bible that may not be the same now as they were originally written.

With that said, the Bible is archaic. There are passages in there about not eating shellfish because they're abominations and not wearing certain fibers. There are passages in there about stoning to death a woman who has been raped. So, why is it that those passages are often overlooked and explained away as being unnecessary and not applicable but other parts of the Bible, such as homosexuality, are followed to the letter? Why is it that, instead of following the religion as it was meant to be followed, people pick and choose which parts are worth following?

Soooo, to end this before I go off on my church box rant, since the principle tenets of Christianity aren't likely to change, your friend would probably be a lot happier as an athiest. He's not going to be happy in a religion where he is told on a daily basis that he is immoral and bound for Hell no matter what he does. It's not worth spending your life miserable and unhappy.  

[Shadow Ra Warrior]

I saw a jihad for love the other day; cannot believe what people had to put up with; its pitiful! Furthermore, there were some people who identified as gay, lesbian, etc who was still in tuned with their religion. My best opinion is to find another religion who are more open.  

[TheStarlessSkye]

You should explore Paganism. There's lots out there ^_^  

[Shadow Ra Warrior]

Azareas Aquarinus

You should explore Paganism. There's lots out there ^_^

Hmm I will keep that in mind; thank you!  

[TheStarlessSkye]

Shadow Ra Warrior

Azareas Aquarinus

You should explore Paganism. There's lots out there ^_^

Hmm I will keep that in mind; thank you!

You're welcome smile  

[Shaun Laurent]

Viceroy Adrian

Hah, this is the exact reason why I left my former religion [Christianity]; if I am something that disproves my previous belief, then that proves to me it is false, no? But really, I do not understand those sorts of people.

Yah....i dont care in religions...i left mine too. same tough.  

[Yoseisame]

I am a Christian, and my mother is a Methodist pastor. My family is supportive of gay rights, and I might be bi. I have a lot of knowledge of the bible. One of the things to remember is that the bible is fallible. The bible was hand copied for years. Therefor there is space for human error. There is a name mentioned in the letters from Paul in the NT, that originally was a female name that a scribe changed to a males.  

[Kyle_Nightly]

Esiris

I think as a Christian he needs to study his Bible better- salvation is open to everyone.

Sorry 'second comment in' but I read you and already have something to say. If someone else has already pointed this out, I apologize.

Okay, so Christians actually study both the Hebrew Bible (Old Test) as well as the Christian Bible. The whole concept of salvation being open to everyone is a concept taken from the New Testament . The Old one however it much more strict in it's judgment. (I'm just going to skip over explaining that everyone seems to go to 'Sheol' in the old one, not modern Heaven or Hell) My point being, the two books run contrary to each other in a lot of ways, it all depends on which one the individual thinking about it has put more weight into.

So no, depending on his personal faith and what he has personally been taught in his family or his Church, he may not believe it is open to everyone. And that is entirely valid.

That said, of course there are Churches out there that will teach you that being Queer is okay and that salvation can be open to everyone. There are circles within circles when it comes to Christianity.

Your statement was also an absolute statement. Which should never happen when discussing a Religion. Everyone's circle is a little different and most can be backed up theologically one way or the other.


As for the topic itself. There are lots of reasons to have faith, even in a Religion that doesn't necessarily accept you for who you are. It could be the way a person is raised, or a belief that participating in said Religion will bring about some good in the world.

When I was a kid, my parents brought me up Christian heavily. Now, I decided to take a step back from it, because the idea of burning in hell for my orientation scared me. Part of me still believes though.
If your friend has found a healthy mental place where in which he can be faithful the way he chooses and comfortable with the beliefs that the ones around him embrace, I think it could be regarded as courageous in a way. It's always a beautiful thing to discover people who are able to just settle into a faith and stay comfortable with themselves.

Sorry, I got into a little rant.

No Judgment here, and sorry to the person I quoted if it offends. That was not the intention if it did, my Religious studies just sent up a few flags at the statement.  

[Kyle_Nightly]

Azareas Aquarinus

The bible was written supposedly 40 years after Christ "ascended" to heaven.

Just think, in those 40 years, the stories and tellings of what Jesus did could've been twisted, changed and so on.

The bible was written both during and after Jesus's death. There are many stories that were edited out of the bible about 500 bc. (Fuzzy on the date, it could be wrong) The bible itself was constructed over a period of time yes, but it's components consist of mainly Mark, Luke, Matthew and John. 3 of which are recording the same stories from different points of view.

Of course there is no way to know if what is written is entirely accurate. If I had to guess, and I'm saying even most Christians would agree with this, it is a lot of interpretation. Because when it comes to the stories, it's all about the messages. Not the facts. If you're looking for proof you've already missed the point.

Also, someone else above mentions the potential for mistranslations. You're right that, that does happen. Actually one of the biggest elements in that Religion is based around a bad translation. We all know about "Mary the Virgin" but actually, the Christian bible was originally written in Greek. The Greek word used to describe Mary, that got translated into "Virgin" is actually supposed to be "Young Girl" .

That aside, the Christian bible was originally in Greek. The thing about it being translated over and over again can be dismissed because for the most part we are still translating from Greek. And then just replicating the modern English prints. So there actually wasn't a whole lot of error room there aside from the blatantly obvious.

Just to clarify, I'm not Christian, despite my last two posts. I just think it's heavily disrespectful to criticize other's beliefs, especially when you don't know anything about them . You can argue about anything, as long as you're respectful and know what you're talking about.

Okay, that's the last thing I'm posting. Leaving this thread now.  

[Esiris]

Kyle_Nightly

Okay, so Christians actually study both the Hebrew Bible (Old Test) as well as the Christian Bible. The whole concept of salvation being open to everyone is a concept taken from the New Testament . The Old one however it much more strict in it's judgment. (I'm just going to skip over explaining that everyone seems to go to 'Sheol' in the old one, not modern Heaven or Hell) My point being, the two books run contrary to each other in a lot of ways, it all depends on which one the individual thinking about it has put more weight into.

Which for a Christian is going to be the New Testament. If they want to ignore the teachings of Jesus for the Old Testament then they're going to be Jewish and not Christians.

Quote:

So no, depending on his personal faith and what he has personally been taught in his family or his Church, he may not believe it is open to everyone. And that is entirely valid.

It's not valid- that's the problem. When people ignore what the Bible says for their own political reason, it may not be illegal- but it isn't valid just because someone thinks it is.

Quote:

Your statement was also an absolute statement. Which should never happen when discussing a Religion. Everyone's circle is a little different and most can be backed up theologically one way or the other.

There are absolutes in religion and "different" isn't the same as "right".

Quote:

sorry to the person I quoted if it offends. That was not the intention if it did, my Religious studies just sent up a few flags at the statement.

It wasn't offensive- just incorrect. Pluralism helps people understand other people, but understanding other people means understanding their mistakes as well. That doesn't magically make their mistakes right though. And with the exception of WBC, I don't know of any Christian church that says being gay sends you to hell, it's always unrepentant fornication in Churches that don't let LGBT people marry outside of cis-hetero-relationships
http://bible.cc/1_timothy/4-10.htm  

[Kyle_Nightly]

Esiris

Kyle_Nightly

Okay, so Christians actually study both the Hebrew Bible (Old Test) as well as the Christian Bible. The whole concept of salvation being open to everyone is a concept taken from the New Testament . The Old one however it much more strict in it's judgment. (I'm just going to skip over explaining that everyone seems to go to 'Sheol' in the old one, not modern Heaven or Hell) My point being, the two books run contrary to each other in a lot of ways, it all depends on which one the individual thinking about it has put more weight into.

Which for a Christian is going to be the New Testament. If they want to ignore the teachings of Jesus for the Old Testament then they're going to be Jewish and not Christians.

Quote:

So no, depending on his personal faith and what he has personally been taught in his family or his Church, he may not believe it is open to everyone. And that is entirely valid.

It's not valid- that's the problem. When people ignore what the Bible says for their own political reason, it may not be illegal- but it isn't valid just because someone thinks it is.

Quote:

Your statement was also an absolute statement. Which should never happen when discussing a Religion. Everyone's circle is a little different and most can be backed up theologically one way or the other.

There are absolutes in religion and "different" isn't the same as "right".

Quote:

sorry to the person I quoted if it offends. That was not the intention if it did, my Religious studies just sent up a few flags at the statement.

It wasn't offensive- just incorrect. Pluralism helps people understand other people, but understanding other people means understanding their mistakes as well. That doesn't magically make their mistakes right though. And with the exception of WBC, I don't know of any Christian church that says being gay sends you to hell, it's always unrepentant fornication in Churches that don't let LGBT people marry outside of cis-hetero-relationships
http://bible.cc/1_timothy/4-10.htm

1. Not necessarily. Of course being Christian puts your faith in Jesus as the savior but that doesn't cancel out continued use of the old testament.

2. Inturpurtation behind Religons continues over time. Everyone's personal faith is going to be a little different. Just because it's not adhering perfectly to the official guideline doesn't make it invalid. Telling someone the way they practice their faith is invalid could be rather harmful. (Unless it's hurting someone or something to that effect)

3. There are absolute statements in Religion, you are right. My comment was about making absolute statement 'about' religion from outside the circle.

4. I can agree to disagree. We've dipped into a religions thing here and I really don't want to argue. I'd probably lose, based on your response I can accept that you likely know a bit more about the subject then I do. However the things I pointed out I'll stand behind, as most of them have to do with inner feelings and the individuals personal grasp on their own respective faith and not with the larger organized picture.

Thanks for responding though, didn't expect that to happen.  

[Esiris]

Kyle_Nightly

1. Not necessarily. Of course being Christian puts your faith in Jesus as the savior but that doesn't cancel out continued use of the old testament.

Quote:

In the Bible the Old Law is canceled.
http://bible.cc/colossians/2-14.htm
Christians say salvation is open to everyone and that the Laws of the Jews don't apply to them- if it did, people wouldn't go to Church on Sunday, it would be Saturday.

This is why I think people should read their Bible more- I was raised with this stuff and I see people cherry picking whatever they want to hurt others. That isn't religion- that's an ego trip.

Quote:

2. Inturpurtation behind Religons continues over time. Everyone's personal faith is going to be a little different. Just because it's not adhering perfectly to the official guideline doesn't make it invalid. Telling someone the way they practice their faith is invalid could be rather harmful. (Unless it's hurting someone or something to that effect)

Religious bigotry hurts LGBT people, bullying from the pulpit increases suicide rates.

I think it's more harmful to have people substituing their hate for Jesus' love and calling it Christianity than I think it is harmful to tell people they're wrong about the Bible, so keeping quiet and letting them sin is doing more harm. People can get over being mistaken, after all God forgives mistakes. Choosing to let other people harm their friends, family and strangers because you don't want to upset them is choosing to let that harm continue and it isn't very loving since Jesus said to Love everybody.

Quote:

3. There are absolute statements in Religion, you are right. My comment was about making absolute statement 'about' religion from outside the circle.

I think that's just replacing what's right for what feels good.

Quote:

4. I can agree to disagree. We've dipped into a religions thing here and I really don't want to argue. I'd probably lose, based on your response I can accept that you likely know a bit more about the subject then I do. However the things I pointed out I'll stand behind, as most of them have to do with inner feelings and the individuals personal grasp on their own respective faith and not with the larger organized picture.

Maybe that's part of the problem- if all Christianity was about was how it made them feel and not what was moral or loving, there might as well be no Christianity. People would make better Satanists if that's the case.

 

[Kyle_Nightly]

Esiris

Kyle_Nightly

1. Not necessarily. Of course being Christian puts your faith in Jesus as the savior but that doesn't cancel out continued use of the old testament.

Quote:

In the Bible the Old Law is canceled.
http://bible.cc/colossians/2-14.htm
Christians say salvation is open to everyone and that the Laws of the Jews don't apply to them- if it did, people wouldn't go to Church on Sunday, it would be Saturday.

This is why I think people should read their Bible more- I was raised with this stuff and I see people cherry picking whatever they want to hurt others. That isn't religion- that's an ego trip.

Quote:

2. Inturpurtation behind Religons continues over time. Everyone's personal faith is going to be a little different. Just because it's not adhering perfectly to the official guideline doesn't make it invalid. Telling someone the way they practice their faith is invalid could be rather harmful. (Unless it's hurting someone or something to that effect)

Religious bigotry hurts LGBT people, bullying from the pulpit increases suicide rates.

I think it's more harmful to have people substituing their hate for Jesus' love and calling it Christianity than I think it is harmful to tell people they're wrong about the Bible, so keeping quiet and letting them sin is doing more harm. People can get over being mistaken, after all God forgives mistakes. Choosing to let other people harm their friends, family and strangers because you don't want to upset them is choosing to let that harm continue and it isn't very loving since Jesus said to Love everybody.

Quote:

3. There are absolute statements in Religion, you are right. My comment was about making absolute statement 'about' religion from outside the circle.

I think that's just replacing what's right for what feels good.

Quote:

4. I can agree to disagree. We've dipped into a religions thing here and I really don't want to argue. I'd probably lose, based on your response I can accept that you likely know a bit more about the subject then I do. However the things I pointed out I'll stand behind, as most of them have to do with inner feelings and the individuals personal grasp on their own respective faith and not with the larger organized picture.

Maybe that's part of the problem- if all Christianity was about was how it made them feel and not what was moral or loving, there might as well be no Christianity. People would make better Satanists if that's the case.

People have always picked the parts they want to follow and the parts they don't. It's annoying yes, but who are we to tell them what they can and can not believe?

Except:

I'm not even sure why you brought up how it's potentially harmful to LGBT* when I already included in brackets "Unless it's harmful..." etc. Because trust me, I know. I was encompassing bullying in my train of thought there. As long as everyone is comfortable and safe, I see little problem with being selective with your faith. The key component here being that everyone is having a good time.

Of course when it starts getting out of hand, or dangerous to an individual or group, that's when it stops being okay.

The guy being talked about in this thread is a member of the LGBT* community, he is also religious and thinks he is going to Hell. If he still thinks it's worth being Religious, despite that belief and is not having aggressive inner struggles, then I am impressed.

Still standing by the "No absolute statements" thing. We're coming at it from two different angles and you seem to think I'm wrong but it's something I keep in mind when regarding any world Religion.

I Grew up with this stuff too, I've seen/experienced my fair share of Queer bashing and slut shaming because of Religion. It was all because of what people choose to put emphasis on and how they chose to practice. That, I believe is wrong.

On the other hand, people with uncertainty about heaven and hell, what leads where and etc. I'd argue the lines there are a lot more blurry. I can accept that there are multiple ways to be a Christian, I don't think this kid believing he is going to hell is exactly cherry picking.

How you got to LGBT* issues is beyond me, I think most people here are aware of the problems we all face in society regarding some Religious views and how those are harmful.

 

[Kyle_Nightly]

Anyways, as a friend I wouldn't try to suggest other faiths to your friend but rather just keep an open ear. He might be perfectly fine but if not it's always helpful to have someone to talk to. 3nodding