Has anyone ever found a way to reconsile being Gay/Bi/Lesbien and being a Christian?

[Drich]

I don't understand why you think Christ's sacrifice means that you don't have to live strictly by the law. Matthew 5:19 very clearly says otherwise:

"Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

It's funny how you can make the bible say what you want when you ignore the surrounding coontext. Lets look at the whole passage:
18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

So, if you were serious about understanding this whole passage in it's proper context i should think your next question would be: what is the righteousness of the Pharasees?
(Because Jesus said your righteousness had to exceed the righteousness of the Pharasees.)
Quite simply put, the pharasees were a ruling class of preists who believed in an afterlife, but the were also extremely legalistic, following the law as closly as possiable in some instances and exploiting loop holes in others. The used the law to benfit themselves. (Kinda like how you and other are insisting that NT Christianity is supposed to adopt OT Judaism.)
Verses21-48 of Mat 5 explains/closes the loop holes in the "righteousness" of the pharasees. Or rather the 'righteousness' of living as close to the laws of moses as humanly possiable.

Because again Christ says we must exceed the righteousness of the pharasees, not meet their righteousness head on. The only way this is possiable is through the blood attonement He offers when He is sacerficed for our sins.

For Again it is by the law that we have the right of attonement through sacerfice. and it is ONLY through this attonement that our righteousness can ever hope to exceed the righteousness that comes with doing your best to live a perfect live.

Perhaps you can fail to follow those laws and still get to heaven, but it is painfully clear that those who follow those old laws closest to the letter get the choicest reservations in Heaven.

Oh, really? Is that what you think Christ says? What about everything Christ says and does to condemn the efforts of those who proclaim to live by the law? also what do you say of the contrast between how the 'religious elite" are treated, against the dregs (those who openly and knowing are sinful, yet repentant) who the elite have rightfuly (according to the same law) cast aside?

It seems to me in order for your exegesis of Mt 5 to work you have to throw out 2/3's of Jesus' working ministry.

How do you reconsile your interperation of Mat 5 against what Jesus actually did?

Therefore, you are expected to do your very best to follow those psychotic old laws, and the judgement you receive will take into account how weill you adhered to them.

Kinda like the pharasees and scribes did back in Jesus' day?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...rsion=NKJV

So, those Christians who are not stoning gays to death or killing disobedient children or adulterers will have almost as much to answer for as we apostates and heathens.

Indeed we do.

Thankfully we sought the attonement offered, so that we may freely and openly love God with all of our being, rather than be subject to a standard no one can ever hope to keep.

---

Well, this actually raises an interesting question I hadn't thought of until now: you're not required to follow the ot laws to get into heaven, I get that.

It's not how it works exactly but from the outside looking in, it may seem that way. if you want further explaination then ask. if not your know understanding is close enough for this arguement.

But are the laws of the old testament still holy?

Yes they are, but define holy.

Perhaps they aren't instructions to you specifically, but at one time they were things one did to get into god's good books, right?

With or alongside the sacerficed animals needed to cover the sins committed.

Has that changed?

Yes, in that passage in Mat 5 Ryan keeps bring up, Jesus changed or 'completed the Law" so to make it impossiable for anyone to earn their way to heaven by following the law.

Because logically, doing those things now, when you still have grace, should only impress your lord more, right?

No. It is no longer about following the law like the pharasees did. this is what Christ meant in Mt 25 and 26:

25 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence.[f] 26 Blind Pharisee, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also.

The 'cup' is the outward showing or appearence of following the law. The whole of Mat 26 Jesus is speaking about all the different ways the pharisees failed as leaders. For the followed the law/did exactly what the law said but ignored the Spirit or meaning/purpose of the law. the pharisees consentrated on the litteral following of the law so closly(what people could see and judge) the often times found themselves in opposition of the actual purpose of the law.

For examples the Commandment to keep the sabbath. In the Spirit of the Law God wanted his people to rest one day aweek. Well the pharasees added so many different ademdems to this command that keeping the sabbath became this terriable burdomsome thing for the people. They wound up working twice as hard to keep the "sabbath holy."

Christ saw this and cndemned it. His focous was to have us redirect our efforts on the meaning of the law.

---

I don't think I can help much here. I'm bi, but I wasn't and haven't been a christian when I found it out, so...

In typical christian fashion, however, one might reconcile one's faith by describing the leviticus rule as no longer applicable, claiming it to be poetry, denying flat out that it exists, or telling people that they're interpreting it wrong.

taken from post 4:

(Even)If you ignore what paul says about it, (In the New Testament) homosexuality can still be identified as a sin. why/how? Simply put the NT tells us that any sex, even the thought of it outside the confines of a Santified marriage is a sin. A sin like anyother. It is not the unforgivable sin it is not the sin that some how ranks higher than all others, it is a sin. One we need repent of, to find forgiveness.