a reply to: seagull
Thank you for bothering to respond. Sometimes I just despair. Not of you, of course, but of the English language. You ask:
Homosexuality is not a sin. Because it's just another label of love that some find uncomfortable. How is love a sin?
If the conversation hasn't gotten so hot and heavy that it has been reduced to slogans, any thoughtful Christian will tell you that homosexuality
(the sexual attraction to members of the same sex) is not a sin. I don't think it's a sin either. But here's the first place that English gets us
For some, "homosexuality" means an attraction to members of the same sex, for others it means, forgive the vulgarity, screwing members of the same
sex. The difference is crucial, but usually glossed over. For Christians, the attraction is no sin. For homosexual activists, the screwing is no
sin. That's one of the reasons why conversations on the subject turn fruitless very quickly.
The concept that homosexuality is only a label for a love that some find uncomfortable, may also be applied to necrophilia, bestiality, and
pedophilia. (Here, I am assuming that we're referring to the sex act.) It seems that you would argue that the objects of sex in these cases are not
consenting adult humans, but I see no reason to think that's the last word on the subject.
There was a time when sex outside of marriage was not only considered a sin, but a violation of law. I believe it still is in many parts of the
Mid-east. Then the law was changed to say that sex outside of marriage was not illegal, but if it was with a member of the same sex, we had a
violation of sodomy laws. It moved further to say sex without marriage with anyone over a certain age who consented, was fine and dandy. Yet now you
seem to assure us that the requirement that the sex partner be an adult is set in stone and immutable? I don't believe it for a second.
There are groups within and without the psychological community pressing for sex with minors to be considered normal. Just as, after considerable
outside influence, the American Psychological Association changed it's diagnosis of homosexuality.
Can you guarantee, that Muslims won't go to American courts claiming that their culture allows for child marriages, so they should have that
privilege here? Can you assure me they will never find a sympathetic judge to allow it? Finally, can you guarantee that American pedophile groups
wont go the Courts and argue that if Muslims have the right, they should, too? Of course, you can't and I wouldn't expect it.
I believe you to be a man of honor, and at this point you would begin to protest, but to what avail? You would become just one more protester who
will be rolled over and ignored. What authority could you rely on at that point to say that sex with children is wrong? Especially since the "sex
with children" group would bring up doctor after doctor to testify that it does the child no harm if it isn't forced. We have been there, seen it,
and watched protests fail, time after time.
How about polygamy and Sister Wives
? Will polygamy become acceptable before sex with minors does, or after?
And we return to
How is love a sin?
No Christian thinks it is. Love everybody, good on ya. But having sex with anybody and everybody? You're asking how that
can be a sin?
That question can be answered without a lot of research.
Where I part ways with many of you, is that I challenge any ones ability to understand the mind of God.
You don't part ways with me,
or any thoughtful Christian. The claim isn't that the mind
of God is known, but that what He left us in His Word can be known.
As for creating evil? By allowing, in the creation, mortals free will, he does allow for its presence. Perhaps as a test? I don't know, nor
will I ever know, this side of death. Any one who claims to is practicing hubris on a grand scale.
Know with 100% certainty? No. But I have
a very good idea, shared by many, many others. Creatures without free will can't love in any meaningful sense of the word, they are robots. By
giving us free will, God gave us the opportunity to love and be loved. That includes being free to love or hate Him. (I don't think that answers
condemns me as possessing inordinate hubris.)
That's the problem with dogma. Dogma, unless I'm badly mistaken (and I allow for the possibility, trust me...), allows for only one true way.
...and I doubt that that is the reality of it. Dogma, of whatever system, says "I have the answers to all things, for everyone." That's not faith,
faith is believing there are answers, but that we have to look for them. Faith is believing that we will find our answers.
This paragraph provides so much material for discussion, that I think I'll pass for now. It should suffice for me to say that I think it's exactly
backwards. The idea that we can't know the mind of God, and that faith is that we will eventually find out what our
answers are, is the one
belief that claims to provide the answer to every question. It's the same answer, in fact, to every question: "Spend your life looking and believe
that some day you will find the answer."
Even the Catholic Church isn't as dogmatic.