God and Gays: The Rite to Bless Same-...

God and Gays: The Rite to Bless Same-sex Unions

There are 1053 comments on the Time story from Jul 16, 2012, titled God and Gays: The Rite to Bless Same-sex Unions. In it, Time reports that:

There is something by now familiar, even reassuring, about what happens in my church every third summer.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Time.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#1032 Dec 10, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually in ancient traditions, the first son got it all unless he died or did something to have it all taken from him and then the second oldest son was in line.
Concerning Jonathan and David, for pro-homosexuals it's convenient for them to take an obviously close relationship existing between these two men, then redefine a few words and turn it into a sexual relationship.
Jonathan had been married for most of his wife. How many wives and concubines isn't known. But if he was like his father, he had many though just one is mentioned.
David had at least eight known wives(maybe more not listed) and as many concubines or "sub-wives". Some he married and others were given to him by God that belonged to King Saul. And one he indirected killed a man to have for the lust that burned in him for her. I personally don't see a lot of evidence for David having homosexual traits there. He spent his entire life acquiring wives and as the verses state, he was very, very sexual active with them.
People can have their opinion he was a homosexual or bisexual but I see no real time evidence to even show such an interest in men.
And I know the non-sexual love a guy can have for another guy that is better/different and more profound then any love he'll feel for a woman. It's a soul felt love that is so different from the love a guy can have for a woman. That doesn't make it a better love but just different. People that knew us swore we gay. But we weren't. We were never sexual with each other and didn't desire to be sexual with each other. But we had a deep and profound love for each other like two people establish in a long term romantic/sexual relationship. Thus I don't know it for fact, but I believe that is the type of a relationship that David and Jonathan had.
Like I said. Saul's three sons were in line to become King - by succession.

As for Jonathan and his wife and children, the Episcopal bishop, Eugene Robinson was married and had children, too. Robinson is homosexual. It is not unusual for a homosexual man to get married to a woman and to have a family.

You are reading details into the story that you cannot prove or disprove anymore than I can. I simply allow for the possibilities, whereas you do not appear to allow the same latitude.

The relationship between Jonathan and David began when Jonathan was smitten in love with David. Eventually, they grew to trust each other, completely.

See your own relationships for what they are. They are your own admittance to the personal significance of these passions.

You say you have loved another man as much or more than you have loved a woman. But, it wasn't sexual.

I don't know you. I don't know what you are capable of or why you are motivated to do what you do. But, if you had experienced a sexual attraction to this man and he had experienced the same toward you, what do you think might have happened?

You say that never happened. But, I say it obviously does happen among some people and that it is not simply a matter of getting up in the morning and deciding that today is your day for being homosexual.

For at least some of these, their sexual identity is a recollection and affirmation of personal nature that is as natural and an integral part of their being as is any heterosexual inclination is for the rest of us.

This is the truth. Modern psychological understanding of the sexuality of human beings concludes that homosexual attraction is a normal variation.

Yes. It is an acknowledgment that goes against much of the superstitious and taboo-generated tribal morality that is written into the books of the bible. But, consider that within the biblical writings, never once is this delved into by the Lord Jesus.

My conclusion is that we (modern psychology) now know better than most people did then. And, in this, I find absolutely no conflict with the Teachings of Christ Jesus.

Rev. Ken

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1033 Dec 10, 2012
If I had a dollar for every GAY person I know who has married and had children....

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#1034 Dec 10, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually in ancient traditions, the first son got it all unless he died or did something to have it all taken from him and then the second oldest son was in line.
Concerning Jonathan and David, for pro-homosexuals it's convenient for them to take an obviously close relationship existing between these two men, then redefine a few words and turn it into a sexual relationship.
Jonathan had been married for most of his wife. How many wives and concubines isn't known. But if he was like his father, he had many though just one is mentioned.
David had at least eight known wives(maybe more not listed) and as many concubines or "sub-wives". Some he married and others were given to him by God that belonged to King Saul. And one he indirected killed a man to have for the lust that burned in him for her. I personally don't see a lot of evidence for David having homosexual traits there. He spent his entire life acquiring wives and as the verses state, he was very, very sexual active with them.
People can have their opinion he was a homosexual or bisexual but I see no real time evidence to even show such an interest in men.
And I know the non-sexual love a guy can have for another guy that is better/different and more profound then any love he'll feel for a woman. It's a soul felt love that is so different from the love a guy can have for a woman. That doesn't make it a better love but just different. People that knew us swore we gay. But we weren't. We were never sexual with each other and didn't desire to be sexual with each other. But we had a deep and profound love for each other like two people establish in a long term romantic/sexual relationship. Thus I don't know it for fact, but I believe that is the type of a relationship that David and Jonathan had.
Jewish Law did NOT practice primogeniture.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#1035 Dec 10, 2012
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Jewish Law did NOT practice primogeniture.
Snyper,

I trust your authority in this cultural matter.

During the period of The Kings, was selection truly a matter of divine selection by revelation through the high priest?

Was there no succession through family?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#1036 Dec 10, 2012
RevKen wrote:
As for Jonathan and his wife and children, the Episcopal bishop, Eugene Robinson was married and had children, too. Robinson is homosexual. It is not unusual for a homosexual man to get married to a woman and to have a family.
Rev. Ken
You have to show/give evidence that Jonathan was a homosexual long before he met David. Can you do that? No you can't. But the story has a lot more circumstantial evidence to show he and David were anything but homosexual or bisexual. And that is the weightier evidence I go by.
The story claims they were both righteous men of God. The story claims they obeyed the laws of Moses. I have read no law of Moses that allows for a man to be married to a woman and a man. I have read nothing in the Bible or other "stated" writings of scriptures where God allowed a man to have a wife and a man as a concubine. The law of Moses doesn't allow for the act of sodomy, something Jonathan and David would have committed as do male same sex couples. They were both married with one or more wives. That information doesn't allow much room for them having a same sex sexual romantic relationship.

Robinson is by no means a homosexual. If he married a woman(and he did)and had sex repeated times with her that he obviously enjoyed(which he did)and procreated children and went on to have one or more relationships with men, he would clinically be defined a bisexual, not a homosexual.
Unless you can show where Robinson stated later that being married to a woman was a horrendous thing he had to subject himself to, that he hated every sickening moment of it, unless he also stated that having sex with her was sickening and repulsive act and made him barf in the bathroom afterwards where he showered severely with a brush and soap to wash the stench of her sex from him, unless you can provide statements to that effect, he's bisexual, not a homosexual(gay). Understand?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#1037 Dec 10, 2012
RevKen wrote:
You are reading details into the story that you cannot prove or disprove anymore than I can. I simply allow for the possibilities, whereas you do not appear to allow the same latitude.
The relationship between Jonathan and David began when Jonathan was smitten in love with David. Eventually, they grew to trust each other, completely.
See your own relationships for what they are. They are your own admittance to the personal significance of these passions.
You say you have loved another man as much or more than you have loved a woman. But, it wasn't sexual.
Rev. Ken
Actually all the details I read into the story are supplied by the story. If the details in the story actually alluded to a gay sexual romantic marriage by these two, I would be pressed to ask some questions.
Questions like has God ever decreed that a man can be married to a woman and a man? Has God ever allowed a man to be married to a woman and have a man as a concubine? If God is so against a man married to a woman committing adultery, why would he allow a man married to a woman to have sex with other men and allow them to break his law against sodomy? If God is so anti-sex out side of marriage/union between a man and woman in the Bible, why would he allow as some people claim for same sex people to screw their brains out if homosexuality is really okay with him? God is not a partial God the Bible states. But being against sex out side of marriage between a man and woman but allowing same sex people to have sex, that's being as partially minded as you can be.
See where the questions are going? The questions create more questions but no scriptural answers. Because God supplied no answers for any of those questions that we know of.
So in this case, it would be wiser to stick with what the story conveys then to convey what one wishes it to mean that it doesn't state at all.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#1038 Dec 10, 2012
Selecia Jones- JAX FL wrote:
If I had a dollar for every GAY person I know who has married and had children....
You can check out the APA site on this if you really disbelieve it. But unless after leaving an opposite sex marriage one declares how horrible/awful/traumatizing/de grading/stressfully-depressing the entire relationship was including the sex, those people aren't homosexuals/lesbians/gay. Their bisexual.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#1039 Dec 10, 2012
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Jewish Law did NOT practice primogeniture.
I'll disagree as does the weightier amount of evidence that supports they did practice it.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/j...

Primogeniture is a persistent and widespread institution whose legal, social, and religious features were reflected in the norms of ancient Israelite society. Biblical legislation gave the firstborn male a special status with respect to inheritance rights and certain cultic regulations, The latter, a part of a complex of cultic requirements, also applied to the first issue of the herds and the flocks, which, in the popular consciousness, were considered particularly desirable as sacrifices.

According to Deuteronomy 21:15–17, a father was obliged to acknowledge his firstborn son as his principal heir, and to grant him a double portion of his estate as inheritance.(Pishenayim means "two-thirds" [see Zech. 13:8], but the intention of the text is that the firstborn shall get whatever fraction a double portion may come to; in the case posited in the text, where there are only two sons, it is two-thirds, but where there are three sons, it is one-half, and so on; cf. the correct inference drawn in BB 123a from I Chron. 5:1ff., which expressly terms Joseph's status as "firstborn" – Joseph received twice the portion of any of his brothers [Gen. 48:5, 22; ef. Rashbam to BB 123a].)

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#1040 Dec 10, 2012
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
Snyper,
I trust your authority in this cultural matter.
During the period of The Kings, was selection truly a matter of divine selection by revelation through the high priest?
Was there no succession through family?
"Succession through family"? Kingship didn't really last long enough to establish a clear trend. What IS clear is that succession through the oldest male child was not a requirement ... even in concept.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1041 Dec 10, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You can check out the APA site on this if you really disbelieve it. But unless after leaving an opposite sex marriage one declares how horrible/awful/traumatizing/de grading/stressfully-depressing the entire relationship was including the sex, those people aren't homosexuals/lesbians/gay. Their bisexual.
No they are not..they are homosexuals...just because you physically can have sex with someone of the OPPOSITE sex does not make you straight.
Robsan5

United States

#1042 Dec 10, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You can check out the APA site on this if you really disbelieve it. But unless after leaving an opposite sex marriage one declares how horrible/awful/traumatizing/de grading/stressfully-depressing the entire relationship was including the sex, those people aren't homosexuals/lesbians/gay. Their bisexual.
Hey Genius, the word is 'they're' not 'their'.
Exactly how many polygamists are against polygamy? 90%?!?

Robert

“For this reason...”

Since: Feb 10

Marriage = Man + Woman 4 Life

#1043 Dec 10, 2012
Selecia Jones- JAX FL wrote:
<quoted text>No they are not..they are homosexuals...just because you physically can have sex with someone of the OPPOSITE sex does not make you straight.
I could not willingly physically have sex with someone of the same sex because I am straight.

Why would someone who is supposedly "gay" have no problem in having straight sex?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#1044 Dec 11, 2012
WotMeWorry wrote:
<quoted text>
I could not willingly physically have sex with someone of the same sex because I am straight.
Why would someone who is supposedly "gay" have no problem in having straight sex?
You would be more inclined if is had been instilled in you from birth that it was the ONLY way to have sex, that you were sick or twisted if you did NOT have sex with the same gender, and if society required it of you in order to form a family, don't you think?

You have NO way of knowing what you would have done if you were raised under and lived under such circumstances.

That is the way it has been for a long time for gay people, and only now is starting to change.

And even straight folks have been known to have sex with the same gender.

Some straight people have sex with the same gender in prison, because of the lack of the opposite sex, and don't seem to have a problem with it.

People have sex with their own hands often enough, but that doesn't make them sexually oriented to themselves.

Never judge ALL people by the things that are true about yourself, based on your own experiences.

“For this reason...”

Since: Feb 10

Marriage = Man + Woman 4 Life

#1045 Dec 11, 2012
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
You would be more inclined if is had been instilled in you from birth that it was the ONLY way to have sex, that you were sick or twisted if you did NOT have sex with the same gender, and if society required it of you in order to form a family, don't you think?
.
No, I don't think even that would have made a difference.

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#1046 Dec 11, 2012
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
"Succession through family"? Kingship didn't really last long enough to establish a clear trend. What IS clear is that succession through the oldest male child was not a requirement ... even in concept.
That's a Middle Age concept....

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#1047 Dec 11, 2012
WotMeWorry wrote:
<quoted text>
I could not willingly physically have sex with someone of the same sex because I am straight.
So you couldn't choose to be gay?

Hmmmmmmmm........

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1048 Dec 11, 2012
WotMeWorry wrote:
<quoted text>
I could not willingly physically have sex with someone of the same sex because I am straight.
Why would someone who is supposedly "gay" have no problem in having straight sex?
The difference between a straight man and a gay man is a six pack of beer...LOL! drink up!
DMAN

Aurora, CO

#1049 Dec 11, 2012
Selecia Jones- JAX FL wrote:
<quoted text>The difference between a straight man and a gay man is a six pack of beer...LOL! drink up!
The difference between a straight woman and a drunk woman is a tale of two holes....(LOL)... Joke..

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#1050 Dec 11, 2012
Selecia Jones- JAX FL wrote:
<quoted text>The difference between a straight man and a gay man is a six pack of beer...LOL! drink up!
Closet Bisexual Detection Device (CBDD)= BEER

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#1051 Dec 11, 2012
WotMeWorry wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I don't think even that would have made a difference.
There is no way for you to know. So don't try to filter the experiences of others through your own life. It never works.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 3 min Doctor Who 42,977
News Thousands of people march during rally at Bosto... 10 min Doctor Who 2,239
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 24 min who cares 22,538
Maybe god is gay! (Dec '09) 26 min June VanDerMark 12,299
News Is Same-Sex Attraction a Sin? 39 min No Teq Cok 8
News Trump's staff picks disappoint, alarm minority ... 43 min WasteWater 270
News Woman Hangs Rainbow Christmas Lights to Protest... 1 hr I Hate Queers 4
More from around the web