Gays, liberal Christianity and consistency

[Jonesboy]

Hello all, I'm a 20 year old (male) student from London UK excited to be signing in for the first time. Here is my little religion story, please feel free to comment. In fact, please do or I'll never graduate to full membership.  <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sad.gif" alt="" title="sad" />  I'm afraid the substance doesn't really justify the length, and I apologise. It has helped me clarify my thoughts just to write it down, even if it remains unread.

I was born into a Methodist family, or more accurately my mother was/is a Methodist and leader of the Sunday School, whereas my Dad kept out of it. I attended church pretty much weekly from birth until going to university at the age of 18. The church was typically Methodist (British Methodist that is): i.e. fairly liberal, avoiding fire and brimstone etc.

While I was a teenager, I slowly came to realise that I was gay. It never even crossed my mind that there was any contradiction between my religion and my sexuality. I didn't have any boyfriends, but I fully intended to if the opportunity arose. This was probably to a large extent because of my attitude to my religion: I believed in God, as it were, 'intellectually' but I didn't really draw any spiritual value from it. I rarely prayed, and when I did I didn't feel particularly close to God or, indeed, any different from how I usually felt.

The beginning of the end for my Christianity was at the age of 18 when one day, when I was at church, I suddenly thought 'do I really believe in this?' So I read 'The God Delusion' and 'God is Not Great' and they seemed quite reasonable, but I kept on going to church and I wouldn't have identified, to myself or others, as an atheist.

Then I went to university somewhere with lots of evangelical Christians, who believed all the things I never did. To cut a long story short, one of them became my boyfriend. He told me that he was gay, and that he could only do anything about it now, because he'd lost his faith. He had thought, and still did, that Christianity and homosexuality were incompatible. We debated this point; I argued that the Bible was open to interpretation, etc etc. He said if we pick and choose bits to follow, it's just like any other book. More on that in a moment, but the other point he made was that he didn't think I'd ever really believed in Christianity, that I liked going to church and singing hymns and whatnot, but never really took it seriously. And, he argued, if someone genuinely believes Christianity is true isn't it the most amazing thing? How could anyone be a 'Christmas-only' Christian, for example, if they actually believed in Jesus?

I found the second point more persuasive than the first - he's probably right that I never really believed it, and I've slowly but surely come to consider myself an atheist. But it's the first point that got me thinking. I put it to my Mum, who pointed out quite legitimately that nobody follows all the biblical rules - why should someone feel they can't engage in homosexual relations but could wear a mixed fabric shirt or eat shellfish or whatever. I suppose the obvious response for an atheist would be to say that the Ian Paisley types are hypocrites just like the Bishop Spong types, but I did wonder (if anyone's still reading) whether atheists do think that, if I can put it like this: Given Christianity, homosexuality is a sin.

I've tried to extricate myself from 'my' church and tell my parents that I don't really believe it any more, and frankly I'm surprised how disappointed they are (even my Dad who, inconveniently for me, has recently become a church-goer.) I think I've been guilty of confusing the two issues my boyfriend made: that I never really believed and that Christianity and homosexuality are incompatible, with the result that my parents think I won't go to church because I think everyone is appalled by my relationship. Every time we discuss it it gets a bit awkward - I don't quite know how to tell them I didn't believe 'properly' in the first place. 'Mum, I think you're peddling those little children dangerous lies' somehow seems to strike the wrong note.

It isn't possible tp extricate oneself from the church. Even science and psychology has its best parts rooted in the church, and they dictate our beliefs. Not only that, but our moral standards in public and science also come from thousands of years of christianity. There's no escape.

[not your typical...]

It isn't possible tp extricate oneself from the church. Not only that, but our moral standards in public and science also come from thousands of years of Christianity. There's no escape.

If it is so impossible, how are there Atheist? And moral standards? That comes from an individual's view point. Ex: You might find it rude to be greeted by being called a bitch, whereas in my circle and our standards, it's not an insult but a term of endearment. I do believe it's possible to extricate oneself from church, just a one can join the church. It's all in a matter of will.

[Jonesboy]

It isn't possible tp extricate oneself from the church. Not only that, but our moral standards in public and science also come from thousands of years of Christianity. There's no escape.

If it is so impossible, how are there Atheist? And moral standards? That comes from an individual's view point. Ex: You might find it rude to be greeted by being called a bitch, whereas in my circle and our standards, it's not an insult but a term of endearment. I do believe it
s possible to extricate oneself from church, just a one can join the church. It's all in a matter of will.

There is no escape, it is true. Reliogious or supernatural alternatives to God are found everywhere in science, and especially in psychology which has strong links to christianity, and even in maths and logic. New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.
Morally, we are all, almost irretrievably, thoroughbred christian. Best example I can think of is our attitude to drugs and altered states.

[Davin]

New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

[not your typical...]

There is no escape, it is true. Reliogious or supernatural alternatives to God are found everywhere in science, and especially in psychology which has strong links to christianity, and even in maths and logic. New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.
Morally, we are all, almost irretrievably, thoroughbred christian. Best example I can think of is our attitude to drugs and altered states.

U must live in a Bible belt area, cuz the attitude towards drugs in the places I frequent is, 'more drugs, more love.' And while America was built on christian principles, a lot has changed since then. How do you explain kids being suspended for having a Bible with them in school? Or getting written up for praying? That's doesn't sound very thoroughbred Christian to me.

[Asmodean]

it is a touchy topic, where you can lose friends and families over if you're not careful.

If you are not careful..? I'm sorry, but if a friend leaves you over your sexual orientation, you are most probably better off without the asshole to begin with. The same goes for family.

I don't see why someone would want to be "careful" around friends and family, as being yourself is a nice and sure way to get rid of all the trash and keep the good friends who actually accept you for you.

[not your typical...]

I don't see why someone would want to be "careful" around friends and family, as being yourself is a nice and sure way to get rid of all the trash and keep the good friends who actually accept you for you.

I completely understand your point, but I can agree with him. The friend thing, if they can't accept u then forget them, but as for family. I have a strong belief that there is a big difference between family and relatives. I don't have a very large family, but I have tons of relatives. But I'd never come out to any of them. I told my friends when I first found out, but as for telling my mother and the few cousins I consider family, that'll never happen.

[Jonesboy]

There is no escape, it is true. Reliogious or supernatural alternatives to God are found everywhere in science, and especially in psychology which has strong links to christianity, and even in maths and logic. New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.
Morally, we are all, almost irretrievably, thoroughbred christian. Best example I can think of is our attitude to drugs and altered states.

U must live in a Bible belt area, cuz the attitude towards drugs in the places I frequent is, 'more drugs, more love.' And while America was built on christian principles, a lot has changed since then. How do you explain kids being suspended for having a Bible with them in school? Or getting written up for praying? That's doesn't sound very thoroughbred Christian to me.

Our traditions and social outlook are all christian, whether or not the Bible or praying is in favour. There is much more to christianity than the menagerie of the Bible.
The attitude to drugs and psychology reflect christian principles, whether or not you are for or against drugs. Any drug experience that doesn't fall in with the moral menagerie handed down to us is struck off.

[Jonesboy]

New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

[not your typical...]

What you're describing right now is a paradox. You're saying that regardless of how we as a society acts, society is based off of Christian principles. So by being against drugs, we're Christian, and by being for them, we're still Christian? By banning Bibles and prayer, we're Christian and when they were allowed, we were Christian. You might want to rethink you're definition of Christan. Beign a Christian is not just believing in the birth, death, and resurrection of JC, but being a follower of his word and keeping God's commandments. So Now that you have the true definition of Christianity, explain how today's society is consumed by it.

[Davin]

New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

I have no idea what any of that is supposed to mean. Keep in mind that I know a great deal about autism, and none of anything you said even comes remotely close to anything about it.

[Jonesboy]

What you're describing right now is a paradox. You're saying that regardless of how we as a society acts, society is based off of Christian principles. So by being against drugs, we're Christian, and by being for them, we're still Christian? By banning Bibles and prayer, we're Christian and when they were allowed, we were Christian. You might want to rethink you're definition of Christan. Beign a Christian is not just believing in the birth, death, and resurrection of JC, but being a follower of his word and keeping God's commandments. So Now that you have the true definition of Christianity, explain how today's society is consumed by it.

Experiential censorship qualifies both pro- and anti- drug attitudes in the west.

Compare and contrast christian (western) and eastern societies, and tribal societies. There's a huge difference. The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. This stern fundamentalism is our moral hangover from the dogmatic promotion of the menagerie of the Bible.

[Jonesboy]

New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

I have no idea what any of that is supposed to mean. Keep in mind that I know a great deal about autism, and none of anything you said even comes remotely close to anything about it.

The medical model is christian based and so seeks to diminish a person's profile or autonomy if that person behaves in ways that challenge christian society.
The way to eliminate the threat of people's social non-compliance is to describe them in terms of a pseudo-medical category, like autism.

This is different in non-christian countries.

[not your typical...]

Experiential censorship qualifies both pro- and anti- drug attitudes in the west.
Compare and contrast christian (western) and eastern societies, and tribal societies. There's a huge difference. The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. This stern fundamentalism is our moral hangover from the dogmatic promotion of the menagerie of the Bible.

... Honest question. Are you drunk/high/under the influence of any legal and/or illegal substance(s)? Because if so, it would justify how everything you've said throughout this thread makes sense in you're head.

[Jonesboy]

Experiential censorship qualifies both pro- and anti- drug attitudes in the west.
Compare and contrast christian (western) and eastern societies, and tribal societies. There's a huge difference. The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. This stern fundamentalism is our moral hangover from the dogmatic promotion of the menagerie of the Bible.

... Honest question. Are you drunk/high/under the influence of any legal and/or illegal substance(s)? Because if so, it would justify how everything you've said throughout this thread makes sense in you're head.

Do you understand this sentence:
"The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. "

I showed that around my house. The opinion was that with average reading ability and allowance for context it looks straight forward. Who did you say was drunk or on drugs.