Against my Relationship

I had decided to desist from posting, for some personal reasons. But there is one thing that does make me post. A consistent, and sure energizer. When people in Uganda use their positions to hit out at me as a homosexual, I do post.

Now, I live in a homosexual relationship. We have been together for more than 7 years, me and my lover. I love him. He loves me. I know and believe that.

In the Sunday Vision, in the Faith section, there is a long article from Joash Mayanja Nkangi, where the old venerable gentleman, former minister of Justice and a host of other things, and an influential man in the country assails my relationship with my lover.

Saw the article yesterday. Didnt like the heading. Didnt even read it. Thought of posting it here. Desisted.

Today, I have just finished making love with my lover. Sated, happy, content, I cannot help the devil rising up in me to thumb my nose at the gentleman.

I love my love, and my love loves me.

Here is a gentleman who uses his high learning, and his bible, to prove to me how sinful my love is. Somehow, for some reason, I am not convinced. But, here is his thinking.

Homosexual marriages are not holy

Mayanja-Nkangi

THOUGHT OF THE DAY

The media has it that a top Anglican theologian has concluded that, “an active sexual relationship between two people of the same-sex might… reflect the love of God in a way comparable to marriage, if it has the same character of absolute covenanted faithfulness...” (The New Vision, August 8, 2008).

Astonishingly, the theologian believes that, “parts of the Bible relating to homosexuality were addressed to heterosexuals looking for sexual variety in their experience”, rather than “to gay people in a relationship”. But this conclusion is spiritually flawed and untenable.

First of all, the theologian’s conclusion lacks scriptural validity. God addressed Himself to all the Israelites and not to heterosexuals only. Leviticus 18:22 says: “Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence.” Of course “lie with” is a euphemism for “have sex with”. Thus Moses spoke to all the people of Israel who were capable of behaving in the prohibited manner. This referred to all the men of Israel, including the future “Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16) i.e. today’s Christians. This prohibition was concerning human sexuality for all time. Contextually all Israelites were to shun the abhorrent “practices” of the Egyptians (Leviticus 18:27) and these constituted homosexuality. The essence of the command was (is) not, in the mode or technique of effecting the sexual act but in the nature of the act, and the individuals involved.

A male was not to have sexual relations with another male. The caution, “Do not lie with a male” can mean: “Stop lying with a male... now”, or at anytime in future.” The prohibition was directed to any homosexual Israelites at the time and thereafter, and not only to the heterosexuals.

Secondly, it would have been inconceivable for God to prohibit homosexual behaviour by “heterosexuals”, as the theologian maintains, and yet exempt the real culprits, the homosexuals. Homosexuality (the practice of Egyptians) was abhorrent to God, regardless of who engaged in it, whether it was the heterosexuals “looking for sexual variety in their sexual experience” as the theologian claims, or the homosexuals. Christians must be on their guard, lest they succumb to sin due to theological sophistry.

The Egyptians must have been both heterosexual (or else no children would be born) and homosexual. God could not have found their heterosexuality detestable, for He Himself had instituted and blessed it at creation. (Genesis 1:26-27). So it was the homosexuality that irked Him. The Israelites were not to copy this vile Egyptian practice.

The objective of homosexual behaviour, as that of heterosexuality, is having sex with someone. For a heterosexual Israelite to engage in a homosexual relation would be to commit adultery, which God had already prohibited at Mount Sinai: “You shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14). The Decalogue, however, did not tackle homosexuality hence the new commandment in Leviticus. The theologian, therefore, is wrong to maintain that God only was only concerned with the heterosexual Israelites who craved homosexual extra-marital relations and not “gay people who were in a relationship”, however stable it was.

Other Biblical texts which condemn homosexuality are no less specific or non-discriminatory as between homosexuals and heterosexuals: For example Romans 1:26-27: “...God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”

1 Corinthians 6:9 is no less condemnatory: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived, neither the immoral nor idolators nor sexual perverts will inherit the kingdom of God.”

As argued above, the parties to the prohibited sexual relationship are important, apart from the relationship itself. For when the Lord Jesus was asked by the Jews about the “lawful” conditions for divorcing one’s wife, He referred them to the Creator’s design for human sexuality, and in so doing highlighted the crucial centrality of gender in permissible sexual relationships, as follows: “Have you not read that He who made them from the beginning made them male and female... for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife... what therefore, God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:3-6). Thus Christ put His seal on the “male and female” marriage relationship as being the only one acceptable to God, and never between a male and another male, or a female and another female.

The authority of the Lord’s word abides forever (Mark 13:31). Therefore, anyone who calls him or herself a “Christian” must heed this, and never ignore, reject, or compromise what Christ prescribed. May the Lord, therefore, guard His Flock against “shameful lusts” (Romans 1:26). “You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the Lord. Your God,” commands the Lord in Leviticus 18:4.

Christians enjoy God’s gift of sexuality and marital bliss within the degrees of freedom as prescribed by Him. Marital relationships outside these limits are abhorrent to God and sinful. Sin being lawlessness or breach of God’s commandment ( l John 3:4), marital same-sex relationships contravene God’s express command and are, therefore, sinful.

Same-sex relationships may be enjoyable for those who indulge in them, but so was Eve’s (fruit) of the forbidden tree, for it “was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom” (Genesis 3:6). Nevertheless, these apparent benefits did not turn the eating of the fruit into righteousness, nor prevent man’s expulsion from the Garden of Eden.

St. John warns against the seductive “lust of the flesh and the eyes and the pride of life” (1 John 2:6). The current theological ambivalence about the sanctity of same-sex marital relationships is an ill wind that blows no Christian any good. It is hurting Christ’s flock. Christians must vigilantly resist Satan’s mortal tricks at every turn.

Gay relationships are sinful

- The avoidance of same-sex relationships is God’s command and its contravention is lawless and sinful.

- An active sexual relationship between two people of the same-sex, even if “it had about it the same covenanted faithfulness” of the heterosexual relationships, is abhorrent to God.

- This venerated ‘covenanted faithfulness’ is nothing, but a continuous breach of God’s commandment against such unions; a continuing wallowing in sinful rebellion against God.

- The stability of homosexual marriages cannot convert the sin into righteousness but only aggravates it. Sin cannot reflect God’s covenant love, which is holy, any more than can dirt reflect a detergent. The two are qualitatively different. Sin only reflects itself.

- “What partnership have righteousness and iniquity? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? (2 Corinthians 6:14). “God is light and in Him is no darkness at all”. (1 John 1:5).

- God’s love is constituted by obedience to his word and commandments (1 John 5:3). Consequently, same-sex covenants of carnal love, which are contracted in disregard of God’s command for human sexuality, can never reflect God’s covenant love for His people. The latter is pure and divine; the former is impure and sinful.

- The stability of such relationships attracts St. Paul’s incisive question: “Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? (Romans 6:1). “By no means!”

- Redemptive grace is available to and for him or her who cries out to God in repentance for forgiveness: This is the message of the Cross. But persistence in rebellion is of no avail.

- The writer is a concerned Christian

Published on: Saturday, 11th October, 2008

Talk of using the bible to bash gay people!

The Bible and the Real Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah

Its a fact that I am not a believer. For now, I assert my right not to believe in anything.

I did not read the original article from Rev Kasibante, but I was struck by the answer that he gave to someone who attacked him. The letter is headlined 'I have no agenda to defend gays'

No, I did not know that the real sin of Sodom and Gomorah was not homosexuality!

Monitor Online | Letters to the Editor Date 13/09/2007

I wish your readers to note that it’s not I who would want them to believe this. It is the very Bible that Aligawesa claims he understands that says it in Ezekiel 16: 49. I quote: “This was the iniquity of your sister, Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, over-abundance of bread, and leisure, but they did not extend their hand to the poor”. People reading the Bible should also use their intellect. According to Genesis 18, God would have spared Sodom and Gomorrah if ten righteous persons were found there.

Now, I will have to hide this from my mate, because he is a christian and one of the reason I keep giving him (why I do not believe in his god) is that the bible has incontrovertible proof to the fact that god hates me. Well, at least Ssempa and Nsaba Buturo would have me so to believe.

Now, another thing here.

I saw this joke on a yahoo group, lgbtanglicans. Apparently it is old. And maybe out moded. For a Ugandan audience, I decided to adapt it a little bit, and I first posted it here. But I thought I should also bring it here.

Dont mistake me. I am not Christian. (Dont know why I keep saying that. Maybe because Christians keep trying to convert me, or condemn me.) I have not checked the scriptures mentioned. I assume they are correct since I picked it from a Christian discussion group!

Dear Pastor Ssempa:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's
Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to
share that knowledge with as many people as I can. For
example, when someone tries to defend the homosexual
lifestyle, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly
states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

However, I do need some advice from you regarding some of the
other specific laws and how to follow them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it
creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev.1:9). The problem
is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them.
Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as
sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you
think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she
is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19-24.
The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most
women take offense.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both
male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring
nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Rwandese,
but not Kenyans. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Kenyans?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.
Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I
morally obligated to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish
is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God
if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear
reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there
some wiggle room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including
the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly
forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead
pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear
gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting
two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by
wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread
(cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme
a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble
of getting the whole town together to stone them
(Lev.24:10-16) ? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a
private family affair like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these
things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that the Bible is eternal and unchanging.

Do I need to add a comment to that? No?

Well, that is my post for today.

Gug