Homosexuality and the church

[RedCeltic]

I know this topic has been done to death on this board.. but I thought that important points had been raised on an e-mail list from the socialist party (USA). This is from an e-mail to that list by David McRenolds. David, is not a christian, but is gay.. and ran as the Socialist Party candidate for President of the US in 1980 and 2000.

================================================== ==========================


On homosexuality, you won't find a single word spoken by Jesus which even
discusses the issue. Paul does, yes, and Paul, as one can tell immediately from
his letters, was very troubled, fearful of women, urging men to avoid
involvement with them if possible, but if necessary, then get married. But Paul
wasn't Jesus. And Jesus lived in a time and place where homosexuality was at
least as common as it is now, if not within the Jewish community from which he
came, certainly in the Roman community which surrounded him.

He had time to speak about women and the importance to treat them as equals (his
talk with the woman at the well is very important because at that time no man,
certainly no a rabbi, would ever have entered into a conversation with a strange
woman in such a private way. That Jesus did so tells us a great deal about his
ease with women). He spoke powerfully against abusing children. He took notice
of adultery and warned that the thought was as serious as the act, and "let him
without sin cast the first stone".

Yet not a single word, one way or the other, about homosexuals. Christians need
to explore the Judaic hostility to homosexuality which simply transferred over
to Christianity, without any basis - not a word - in what Jesus himself taught.

This is an area where study, while it certainly won't make you gay - that is
foolish - will help you to see that there is a subtantial difference between an
Old Testament, in which slavery was acceptable, animal sacrifices expected,
adultery punished by death, etc. etc., and the entire spirit of the first three
books of the New Testament.

Fraternally
David McReynolds (not a Christian but raised in the Baptist Church - and always
impressed and moved by the gospels)

[The Feral Underclass]

I am not sure, but was this an attempt to convince christian voters that jesus wants him to be president? if it was I think it's nasty. He does not address any of the issues facing gay people. he is obviously only interested in appealing to to an audience in the best way he can.

The issue should not be about whether jesus said it was ok or not, the issue should be the descrimination and oppression perpetrated by the state. This is what is important. Identifying that society alienates and isolates teenagers in and in some cases forces them to suicide. The issue should be that the US government allows parents to send their 14 year old son and daughter to a "correctional treamtment centre" to be "cureed." These are issues that society has to deal with.

his argument should have been, that what he does in his bedroom should not conern anyone else, and that he has the right to sleep with anyone he wishes (consentual of course). he should have been hammering home the fact that gay people are equal. Not pandering to some christian right's prejudice's in the hope of gaining some votes. Disgusting tactics!...Just another day in the land of the bouregois!

[RedCeltic]

No.. this wasn't a campain.. this was something he wrote last night in an e-mail to a christian clergy member who said that he is against homosexuality, but considers himself a socialist. It's not a "Platform" it was only a fucking e-mail response.

[The Feral Underclass]

Ok!...you didnt make that clear...I take back everything i said :)

[cubist]

i like that post red,


homosexuality isn't promoted in the christian ideal, it is a sin as far as they are concerned, ironically thier are gay churches and things but thats becuase the faith says love everyone and treat all as you would yourself,

jesus was a socialist by the faiths standards note, faith not church, the church is corrupt it is a hierachical profit making structure that holds too many historical powers and has been corrupted by the inherent human action of greed the actual story of jesus on its own teaches wonderfull human values.

[RedCeltic]

I personally believe that the Christian religion as a whole is something that Jesus wouldn’t recognize as the end product of his teachings. The establishment of the Church is very much Paul’s doing, and not his. I’m not even sure that Jesus would have truly believed in a church, or simply believed in informal gatherings.

What is lost through the 2000 years of his teaching being filtered through hierarchical, dogmatic churchmen, and monarchs is the truly rebellious spirit of the man. (I say man not god because while I admire him, I don’t worship him.) Paul’s teaching do much to create this kind of power where he talked about the need to honor and obey those who rule over you, which if you read the direct words of Jesus, is quite different than what he had been talking about. If Jesus believed that, he would never have lead his campaign to reform the Jewish religion that he saw as being held hostage from the common people by the elite and temple priests. Of course, there are no direct sources of what Jesus said, we can only go by what Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John had said in the four gospels, where they attempt to quote Jesus. All of the books in the New Testament are written after his death, some hundreds of years later. The oddest being the book of revelations written by a guy who in my opinion was quite mad.

But back to the church and homosexuality… one can see quite clearly by reading the bible, that the church’s position on homosexuality is based on the teachings of Paul, not from Jesus… and Paul, while had been friend of him, is not Jesus, and voices his own opinions. To say Paul speaks for Jesus, is to say that every churchman including Pat Robertson speak for him.

This isn’t to say that we can’t learn the opinions of Jesus through the gospels that actually quote him and talk about his teachings. We can learn a lot about Karl Marx’s opinions through Engels’ book “Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State” because, although the book was published after the death of Karl Marx, it was the result of dialogue between Marx and Engels over Morgan’s ethnographic studies. Paul’s letters however are not of this nature, and are a product of his own mind.

[cubist]

i agree red thats some nice writing, i have been brought up a baptist but i don't believe, and don't attend though i do feel there is a omnipitent being that created the world, though that is completely personal and not up for debate