Would Jesus stand in the way of love?

It’s exciting that people who live by the Bible are starting to clue in that Jesus teaches love to ALL people and that boundaries shouldn’t be in put in the way of loving things!

The above is a comment I made to a Christian friend who is in a same-sex relationship upon sharing the previously posted video with him.  He has struggled mightily with coming to grips with his relationship due to the understandings currently shared within Christianity.  Love should be embraced, not looked down upon.

If you are uncertain about this, with all that you know of Jesus’ love, how do you think he would react to a loving same-sex couple?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Sexuality and Gender and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Would Jesus stand in the way of love?

  1. Soduhson says:

    “If you are uncertain about this, with all that you know of Jesus’ love, how do you think he would react to a loving same-sex couple?”

    The same way he’d look at dedicated worship of an idol god.

    • jasonjshaw says:

      How do you equate idol worship with love for another human?

      • Soduhson says:

        Let’s not dive too far into semantics on the “definition of love” and “to whom love is shown”.

        The biggest point is that dedication and love to something sinful doesn’t make it less sinful. Take note that a person who worships an idol can have a lot of commendable appreciation and ethics derived from their faith in the idol, but they are still worshiping an idol god (from a Christian perspective).

        Similarly, there may be a lot of love and dedication in a same sex relationship. That doesn’t automatically make it good. This “love” argument is based on eisogesis (reading into the scriptures). The burden of proof is on the pro same sex marriage side.

      • jasonjshaw says:

        But the Biblical view on the sinfulness of homosexuality is in reference to it being connected with the worship of idols as was prevalent then.

        Homosexuality within a loving, monogamous relationship has nothing to do with idol worship, and this is where I believe context of homosexuality from Biblical times should be called into question when connected with its place in modern times – much like how some of the beliefs in the OT have become far outdated.

      • Soduhson says:

        Correlation =/= Causation

        Idol worship and pagan rituals were generally condemned directly and independently. You’re looking at idol worship as if it means bowing down to a statue. It CAN mean a statue, but an idol can be whatever you make into a god. Replacing something/someone else with god is idolatry. This is why Jesus said “the love of money is the root of all evil” and “you can’t serve God and mammon (translated as money)”. Same sex relationships are an apt comparison to idolatry, if we are still talking from a Christian “what would Jesus say or do” perspective.

        Romans 1:18-27 in particular illustrates this point in that it is a condemnation of subtle idolatry (naturalism, taking the image of God into the image of corruptible man or beast) which eventually results in homosexuality. The key would is “result”. The homoeroticism is condemned independently and directly from the behavior/beliefs that led to it.

        I agree that the contexts should be taken into consideration, but I would argue that the ethics are pretty clear for today’s application. For example, much of the Old Testament wasn’t even followed during Jesus’ time in the first century. We can deduce that they even understood the cultural context of the Mosaic Laws.

      • jasonjshaw says:

        Romans 1:18-27 seems to only be speaking of lustful homosexuality, which I would agree about. I am speaking of homosexuality borne out of love, not lust.

        A friend of mine is both strongly Christian and in a homosexual relationship. He hasn’t lost sight of God. He actually had a very difficult time coming to grips with being in his relationship. It’s clear though, love is at the heart of it, not lust. The Bible only speaks of lustful homosexuality, or homosexuality having to come from lust – which is clearly not the case in today’s reality.

      • Soduhson says:

        I can only speak for myself, but I think that if there was a really strong pro-same sex marriage/Christian case, most believers would be on board with it. Unfortunately there isn’t.

        There’s just a lot of moving the goal posts and supposition. I agree that there is a distinction between lust and love, but what I don’t agree with is the relevance it has to the issue.

        Mostly because scripture doesn’t mention a positive same sex relationship. All we can do is take what is given to us. Homoeroticism is condemned as is.

        Jesus only makes the discussion more difficult (for your side) when his teachings on sexuality (not just acceptance) are taken into consideration.

      • jasonjshaw says:

        I would suggest that only studying what is in the Bible is partial understanding. What is left out of the Bible should be studied as well. Much like in science, the majority of understanding comes from what is visible. The study of dark matter, that which is not visible, is only beginning to take shape to help give us a better view of the full picture.

        I would suggest that Biblical study should be approached in the same way, to ensure we are seeing the full picture.

      • Soduhson says:

        In some respects I agree. The Bible isn’t by any means comprehensive, but I would argue that it’s teachings are sufficient for a believer’s spiritual walk. Also, as a believer, we need to be careful of what answers we’re trying to “fish out”. That even applies to scientific research, it’s not very scientific to presuppose a fact and look for evidence to support it. For Christians, this goes beyond homosexuality.

        I appreciate this conversation, I may blog about it if you don’t mind.

      • jasonjshaw says:

        You’re more than welcome, I encourage connection and discussion.

        I agree that the Bible’s teachings have been sufficient, but that humanity is becoming more aware of understandings that call some Biblical understandings into question.

        I agree, we should be careful to be sure that our understandings fit properly. I think it is reasonable to be uncertain if there is reason to be uncertain, and that clarity on the issue will come if it is what we seek.

        Science actually does presuppose to an extent. They hypothesize based on evidence and then test to determine whether their hypothesis (educated guess) actually produces the results they expected or not.

        I actually read an article today that suggests 1 in 4 Americans doesn’t know that the Earth orbits around the Sun. I found that surprising, but even more surprising was learning that the Vatican only officially accepted this understanding in 1992.

        I think this demonstrates a certain lack of understanding between religion and science. I find it strange that some areas of religion try to write science off as another belief system, when true science seeks understanding outside of any belief system.

      • Soduhson says:

        Okay, this post may be kind of harsh sounding. It’s not my intention though. If you decide to ignore/remove it I will totally understand but I wanted to bring this up. Not to mention I’ve been bothering you a lot so I should probably tread lightly.

        My problem with your last few comments is that it seems contradicts your actual blog post:

        “It’s exciting that people <<>> are starting to clue in that <<>> love to ALL people and that boundaries shouldn’t be in put in the way of loving things!”

        You specifically mention people who live by the Bible and what Jesus teaches. But when I press you for a Bible-based defense you defer to an outside reference. By arguing that the Bible is lacking or flawed are you agreeing that there isn’t a Bible-centered defense for same sex marriage?

      • jasonjshaw says:

        You’re welcome to post anything you like, don’t feel as though you have to hold back.

        You are correct that my argument is that the Bible does not properly cover the issue, as it was likely not an issue that had much, if any, awareness surrounding it at the time aside from the lustful homosexuality that is described. If you look at the bigger picture of Jesus’ words and actions, I believe the issue can be resolved on a basis of lust vs love.

      • Soduhson says:

        Thank you for not getting annoyed. This is an issue that gets more attention than it should; while it shouldn’t be totally ignored either.

        I’ll respond in a blog post. That way we can gain more views (though I need it more than you probably).

      • jasonjshaw says:

        No worries. My main goal is to encourage dialogue and thought in hopes of allowing for a more thorough understanding for everyone involved.

  2. Soduhson says:

    The best the Christian-based pro-same sex marriage side can really come up with is an argument from absence.

    “The Bible does not mention a specific type of same sex relationship, therefore it’s justified.”

    I’m not trying to be obstinate, I’m trying to be objective.

    • Arkenaten says:

      The bible contains much that is questionable and much that is interpreted differently by different sects of Christianity; from homosexuality, to slavery to vegetarian dinosaurs.
      Only an complete moronic idiot would truly accept ”Matthews” account of dead people rising from their graves and going walkabout around Jerusalem.

      Licona stated this was not to be taken literally in his 2010 book and was fired from his job by fundamentalists who demanded a retraction. He refused.

      Now you are cherry-picking a particular aspect of the bible so it can fit it in with Christian doctrine.
      You may consider gay marriage ( and gay sex) distasteful yet was/is not slavery more abhorrent than gay sex/marriage?

      Even incest is condoned in the bible and i would consider this way more heinous than gay sex. but o course apologist s explain this as necessary.
      So bonking your kids to ensure the tribe’s survival is ‘Okayed’ by your god, thus you okay it too?

      Tell, me, would you feel okay having sex with your sibling or child if you were the last family left alive? Would you defer to your god?

      Something to think about.
      And I doubt Noah thought it would have been a question he would have been forced to face either.
      And let’s be honest, most of this anti-gay Christian/religious vitriol is directed against male homosexuality, rather than female homosexuality.
      And this is largely because of penetrative anal sex.

      In the Christian mind in it is all about the Penis.

      Is it any wonder the bible was written by men?
      Is it any wonder all Abrahamic religion is controlled by men?

  3. Pingback: My response to a Christian’s case for same sex marriage | Nathan's thoughts

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s