Mark, you're right in that we know of each other but I'm not sure if we do know each other well. Before I elaborate further I, too, will qualify that I have no ill will or elitism towards you on this matter. However, I would like to know you 'well' by having a discussion in person about the most important part of your life (your faith). I know that only casually because of reading things you write in your weblog, or on Facebook. To know someone 'well' I expect to be confronted by, to be immersed in, that most important aspect of themselves. If you know that I'm gay and a Gnostic Christian by the same token, I would suggest that you don't know me well, either. We don't know each other well, but we know enough, I suppose.
As I pointed out to Tyler, my interpretation of Romans is not anymore convenient than his interpretation or your interpretation. Suggesting that someone has a particular slant isn't an argument. I might have said, "Of course Tyler believes this because he is an 'ex-gay'," but that wouldn't be an argument. I hope you see why arguing that I believe my interpretation just because I'm gay is not any more legitimate.
On that note, there is nothing wrong with the desire to be loved and accepted by Jesus, and that is the impetus for others who embrace a "gay-friendly" interpretation. To those that don't, I put the question: is it more important to be Christ-like or Christian?
It takes courage to speak up about what you believe in. I'm not going to pretend it is easier for you because you're a Christian and in the majority--it is tough because of your nature, and I respect that. It's tough for me sometimes, too. However, evangelizing is not a requirement for holding a belief. You have had experiences in your life where through your evangelism you have brought someone closer to God and Christ. This will not be one of those experienes. I am a devout Gnostic Christian and believe that not only am I very close to God, but I, like all human beings, contain a divine aspect of God that cannot be diminished by the rulers of this world or advocates of social inequality. This is not to say you are a social conservative; I have the great hope that you are not and have given you the benefit of the doubt because I want to avoid prejudice.
Knowing how this ends, do you want to discuss religious ethics with me? I do not want to cause undue stress in your life, so I would not want to talk about these things with you under the pretense that I am going to change my mind. That has been my experience with evangelism in the past after I had rejected Catholicism and before I embraced the one, true God. I know the stress a religious discussion for the wrong reasons might cause you because I'm experiencing it in my friendships with other Christians, namely Catholics, who claim to love me as an equal human being (and specifically an American citizen who pays taxes) but deny me my basic civil right to civil marriage and, arguably, my human right to marriage.
You shouldn't feel bad about getting sidetracked by glorifying God--Paul does the same thing in Romans 1:25.
Submitted by Kevin Endsley on Sat, 04/11/2009 - 13:03.
thanks for your concern
As I pointed out to Tyler, my interpretation of Romans is not anymore convenient than his interpretation or your interpretation. Suggesting that someone has a particular slant isn't an argument. I might have said, "Of course Tyler believes this because he is an 'ex-gay'," but that wouldn't be an argument. I hope you see why arguing that I believe my interpretation just because I'm gay is not any more legitimate.
On that note, there is nothing wrong with the desire to be loved and accepted by Jesus, and that is the impetus for others who embrace a "gay-friendly" interpretation. To those that don't, I put the question: is it more important to be Christ-like or Christian?
It takes courage to speak up about what you believe in. I'm not going to pretend it is easier for you because you're a Christian and in the majority--it is tough because of your nature, and I respect that. It's tough for me sometimes, too. However, evangelizing is not a requirement for holding a belief. You have had experiences in your life where through your evangelism you have brought someone closer to God and Christ. This will not be one of those experienes. I am a devout Gnostic Christian and believe that not only am I very close to God, but I, like all human beings, contain a divine aspect of God that cannot be diminished by the rulers of this world or advocates of social inequality. This is not to say you are a social conservative; I have the great hope that you are not and have given you the benefit of the doubt because I want to avoid prejudice.
Knowing how this ends, do you want to discuss religious ethics with me? I do not want to cause undue stress in your life, so I would not want to talk about these things with you under the pretense that I am going to change my mind. That has been my experience with evangelism in the past after I had rejected Catholicism and before I embraced the one, true God. I know the stress a religious discussion for the wrong reasons might cause you because I'm experiencing it in my friendships with other Christians, namely Catholics, who claim to love me as an equal human being (and specifically an American citizen who pays taxes) but deny me my basic civil right to civil marriage and, arguably, my human right to marriage.
You shouldn't feel bad about getting sidetracked by glorifying God--Paul does the same thing in Romans 1:25.