Originally Posted by K-Dog
My biggest problem is this, though: any discussion on the sinfulness of homosexuality comes down to one of two options. Either homosexuality is a sin and it is therefore covered by the blood of Jesus, or it isn't a sin and homosexuals have committed other sins (as have all people) and need the blood of Jesus for the forgiveness of those. Either way, the conclusion is that forgiveness for homosexuals is both available and necessary.
Hi Keith. Having read your first posts, I'm inclined to believe you that your intentions are friendly. As such, I'd like to share -- in what I hope is an equally friendly way -- a few thoughts on what you've written.
Many here on the Forums are indeed Christian, however, many are not; references to the Gospels and the "blood of Christ" will have varying relevance. For some, it will be antagonistic.
Christian or not, the notion of "sin" will also be interpreted widely. For me, "sin" is that which takes us away from God the Creator. A secular humanist might view "sin" as a "wrong" causing harm to oneself or one's society. Considering that, for many here (most I would wager), their gayness/queerness/difference has actually made them more
spiritual -- i.e.
to God -- and causes no harm to themselves or society, the idea that it would be "sinful" or "wrong" makes no sense whatsoever.
Your quoted text above seems to want to hedge its bet on the sinfulness question by arguing that "either way" the "sinner" is offered forgiveness through Christ. I would argue that this is a false dichotomy that presupposes much and ultimately dances around the issue.