Tabletop Role-play, D&D and Media

Tek7

CGA President, Tribe of Judah Founder & President
Staff member
I don't intend for my reply to be a comprehensive "final word" answer to the concerns raised in this thread, but I did want to weigh in, late as I may be, with some clarifications.

The Bible is the ultimate authority. Whatever we think, feel, or believe must be brought under the authority if Scripture, regardless of our opinions.

The Bible clearly teaches that homosexual activity and lust is sin. If I understand @EDAC's post, he's not disputing this point.

Homosexuality is not the most urgent issue in the context of eternal destiny. Yes, it is sin, but it is rejecting Christ that separates a man or woman from God for eternity. I would argue that American evangelicalism has lost tremendous influence and opportunities to preach the Gospel and glorify God by so often making homosexuality an ultimate issue.

The Bible also clearly teaches us to bring our desires under submission to Christ. He redeemed us for His purposes, not that we may seek ours.

The subject of abstinence as a response to homosexual inclination is not as simple as the subject of homosexual activity and lust. That does not excuse us from discussing it, but it does demand that we take the utmost care to recognize that people on both sides of the discussion are, in fact, people, created in the image of God and desired by God to receive Christ as savior and be conformed to His likeness.

At this time, I am not closing this thread nor am I banning anyone. There is a tremendous amount of thought and experience that has gone in to these posts and I don't feel it benefits us as individuals or as a community to close down discussion at this time.

I hope to return to this thread soon to post more, but please trust that I have taken time to thoughtfully and prayerfully consider how I should respond, but immediately and in the near future.

I ask that you all would pray for me as well, that I would respond in a way that ultimately glorifies God and would point other toward Him rather than drive them away, all the while speaking truth in love.
 
Thread starter #22

The Mighty Gerbil

Tribe of Judah TF 2 Chapter Leader & CGA Admin
Staff member
One of the things I find most interesting about modern, conservative Christianity is this perceived need to make certain that everyone knows that we disagree with same-sex sexual intercourse.
As I said before every time I've brought it up it's because those that support LBGTQ have brought it up FIRST. They made it an "issue" not me. In this case they put it in the D&D rule book, they marched in the pride parade, they choose their side (left out the Lead Rules Designer is married to a dude and Wotc wants to put more LBGTQ in the D&D backstory too). If we are to have any earnest discussion on the moral content of something we can not ignore it. Furthermore with the discrimination against Christians and legalization of gay marriage we clearly aren't bringing the subject up enough. Sin is not a passive thing it's seeks acceptance and growth. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. In this case if Christians are too afraid of being jumped on, in a Christian forum, to even mention it, evil wins.

It relies on using the word "appearance of evil" as the basis for the thought, which is interesting because it relies on the use of the KJV translation since the other major translations translate it differently (either as "every kind of evil" or "every form of evil"). The thought of "we must not do anything that even looks evil" is not as clearly derived from the original text as your posts would make it appear.
If we hold to that standard, Jesus himself would find himself in conflict with 1 Thessalonians 5:22. Consider the scene with the woman caught in adultery. Jesus stands up for the woman first. He protects her. He says nothing about her sin to the crowd. He only addresses the matter of sin with her -- privately -- after the crowd is gone. By your standard, Jesus himself committed a lie of omission -- and I don't think that's the case. (And it's not like it's a secret that the conservative church disapproves of gay marriage / same-sex sexual intercourse / etc. -- the LGBTQ community knows).
What conflict or omission? Jesus never goes up to anyone and says "I'm an adulterer too" or participates in acts that approve of that state. If He omitted anything it was the fact that He, being perfect, could have killed her which is kind of hard when His ministry was centered around him showing He is the perfect Son of God. You are actively calling yourself gay and organizing LGBTQ groups while you avoid saying you disprove acting on it. You are the one who wants to march in the Pride parade, an act that represents them.

I've assumed you are representing yourself as a Christian to them but then you say the LGBTQ community knows the conservative church disapproves of gay marriage. On the other hand you say if you say "I struggle with homosexuality" it would impede your ability to function in the LGBTQ community, which is it?

Also, a couple of fun facts as you toss around the "this is what gets you banned" hammer -- I can discuss, at length, and using plenty of scripture (and I hope you're familiar with Greek and Hebrew, because it matters) why the state of being gay/homosexual is not sinful, why the use of the label gay is not sinful, and I have statistics which back up my statements about how the culture at large uses terms such as "gay" (although you've already declared that those don't matter, I guess because they don't fit your already decided opinions?). Also worth noting is that I am actually a ToJ member (still) and still have some level of staff access at CGA. (So, technically, this is also partly my house/forum, even though I'm not routinely active.)
You make the assertion that I ignore statistics I don't agree with when I very specifically told you why with examples. In fact you've also ignored every reason, explanation, question and link I outlined in all my posts save for this one Biblical quote. This is not a discussion at this point.

I'm unclear how you could argue that the Bible says "the state of being gay/homosexual is not sinful, why the use of the label gay is not sinful" when you said earlier "But the Bible never says that we can’t consider ourselves gay or homosexual. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that having a gay orientation is wrong or sinful. It isn’t in there.". The absence of disapproval is neither approval or disapproval the very best you could hope for is silence.

Regardless I've already mentioned why it is sinful as merely thinking about a sin, is a sin (look above I'm not going to repeat myself again).

As to that one Biblical quote I remembered it because I read KJV, thoughts on other translations didn't occur to me. If you prefer I'm sure we can find things on not entering temptation as you "label" yourself gay and hang out with LGBTQ. I'm sure you know the Bible better than I but that speaks nothing to intent, wanting to do God's will or logic. Not that I compare you to the devil but remember he knows scripture too. I've seen LGBTQ try to use David and Jonathan to justify homosexuality and a Christian gay website debate if Leviticus 20:13 actually condemns homosexuality at all while completely ignoring the "put to death" part (and again I believe the correct course is John 8:1-11 forgive but say don't do it).

If you want to pursue banning me because I disagree with your theological stances and general callousness towards single/celibate people ("I mean if you aren't in or seeking to be in a relationship you aren't effectively "doing" anything so what do you expect help with?" For starters, maybe emotional support because that's hard?) then please go ahead. If the community here is willing to reject me for that, I'd rather get it over with.
...general callousness towards single/celibate people? Edac... do I really have to do this... I am single, never had any romantic relationship, and at 40 for the last 15~ years might, might, have gotten out of my house twice a year on average. I assure you unless you are the boy in the bubble I have far, far, less social contact than you. It's actually far worse than it sounds but I don't like talking about it because I consider excessive pity degrading. Regardless this is not a competition and I care about you regardless of the amount of pain you are in. Only this time apparently saying "If you want empathy ok I CAN relate to not having anywhere to go but I don't expect, or want, Churches to shift their focus from families." was not enough for you.

You have my sympathy Edac, I gave it multiple times, but I will not allow you to use it as a shield to obfuscate the truth. I've seen this tactic frequently. (Off topic: Just today the witnesses of the parkland shooting were using it while at the same time the media ignores any dissenting facts or witnesses https://soundcloud.com/benshapiroshow/ep-504 16:30 ). As a Christian your suffering is not a justification for sin but don't feel alone in suffering either.

Lest you forget you brought up "Suggesting that we protect LGBTQ people was sufficient for Christian communities to remove me from leadership and threaten to ban me from their servers". Thus I warned you what would get you banned just as I tried to address most of your post. Speaking plainly and directly I believe you are upset from your rejection and, perhaps subconsciously, want to be banned so you can go hang with your LBGTQ friends free of guilt. I do not want you banned and pushed you into the very arms I want to keep you from. However if anytime anyone simply wants to mention that something supports LBGTQ you do this I don't see how we can do different (I still don't know what phrasing could possibly be polite enough for you or that the general population is supposed to be using).

I remember long ago an Atheist here raised objections any time you tried to say anything. I am 100% certain people left because they did not have the time to fight him. You worry too much about scaring off potential LBGTQ converts when you should worry first about pleasing God. While we could argue about how upfront we should be about confronting a person with their sin it is more than reasonable to expect discussing sins, abstract from a specific person, on a Christian forum.

So you know, again informing you upfront, no I do not believe you should have moderator rights as I do not believe your values reflect a Christian perspective. We can discuss them but I disagree with having you represent us from a position of authority. If a new member should post and receive a similar response from you, as a mod, those values will be attributed to us.




Completely and totally random thought: Hmm it might be nice for Christians to have a place for fellowship, support and to earnestly talk about what God wants without worrying about getting syntax attacked. I mean it's not like Christ had disciples apart from the people he preached to. Whatever it's clear I'm too "callous" to consider this or sacrifice writing for hours on end instead of just banning.

Still not angry, exhausted, but not angry! (actually quite sad if anything)
 
Last edited:

Tek7

CGA President, Tribe of Judah Founder & President
Staff member
I hope to return to this thread soon to post more, but please trust that I have taken time to thoughtfully and prayerfully consider how I should respond, but immediately and in the near future.

I ask that you all would pray for me as well, that I would respond in a way that ultimately glorifies God and would point other toward Him rather than drive them away, all the while speaking truth in love.
I know it's been nearly 2 weeks since my last post, so I wanted to reassure everyone that I have not forgotten about this thread. I'm hoping to type out an additional reply before the end of the week.
 

PeekABoo

Official Internet Mom
This is quite a lengthy conversation! Sorry I didn't read everything so forgive me if I'm repeating something already said. In Leviticus 18:22 God's Word says "Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable."
1 Corinthians 6:18 says "Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body."

Since gay relations between men are detestable to God and God says to Flee sexual immorality, I don't believe it would please God to label ourselves as a gay person or identify as a member of that following.

We all are tempted to give in to sin in many areas. I'm tempted to lie to get out of trouble at work. I consider lying but I choose not to. Should I go around telling everyone that I'm a Lier and that everyone should just accept me as a Lier?

Say I'm tempted to give in to adultery and cheat on my husband. The thought crosses my mind but I choose to stay faithful to my Husband. Should I at every chance convince the people around me that they should just accept me as I am and join a group called Homosexuals, Adulters, and Liers? The Bible warns us to Flee detestable things, not become a member of the club.
 
Last edited:
I find it interesting, Gerbil, that you made the statement "Hmm it might be nice for Christians to have a place for fellowship, support and to earnestly talk about what God wants without worrying about getting syntax attacked."

Do you know why I brought the matter up in the first place? Because the syntax that was used was attacking. It might not have been meant that way, but it is -- and so essentially the place you suggest is a place that is safe for you but not safe for me.

The Bible does not say that being gay (that is, being attracted to the same sex) is sinful. It does not claim that being attracted to the same sex is detestable. Being gay is not the same as adultery -- being gay reflects an attraction, adultery is an act. The experience of being gay is also much broader than simple sexual attraction.

Here's the bottom line for me: I'm good with God on this, and I'm going to obey him, not men. This will be my last post on this site. Unfortunately, one of the things I've learned over time is that I often have to set boundaries with other Christians and remove myself from situations that threaten my spiritual or emotional health. This thread has made clear to me that this is not a place where I can stay. The prevailing opinion here is clear -- and it is one that would push me away from authenticity, not towards it.

For you folks, this is an issue to be debated and discussed. For me, this is my life. My reality is that I spent a scary portion of my teenage years ready to kill myself because of the distress that I experienced trying to reconcile my faith and my sexuality. I thank God continuously for my parents, because the only thing that stopped me was knowing what that would do to them. But what if my dad/pastor had decided to talk about how he was upset that someone could "support homosexuality" or that "AIDS is God's judgement" (both of which are things that you said, footnote below)? I'll just say I'm very thankful he didn't.

Words matter. It's easy to make demands of others that ask nothing of you. It's easy to offer shallow sympathy (especially when it's balanced with "but you're not a special snowflake" or the like).

I will simply end with this:

One of the experts in the law answered him, “Teacher, when you say these things, you insult us also.”

Jesus replied, “And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.

Luke 11:45-46 (NIV)
---------

The promised footnote: For the first, that's what started all of this. For the second, to quote the whole sentence for accuracy, you said 'I would not say only "AIDS is God's judgement", it omits salvation.' In doing so, you indicated that you agreed with the statement ("I would not say only", which implies "I would say").
 

Patriot

Active Member
But what if my dad/pastor had decided to talk about how he was upset that someone could "support homosexuality" or that "AIDS is God's judgement" (both of which are things that you said, footnote below)? I'll just say I'm very thankful he didn't.
---------

The promised footnote: For the first, that's what started all of this. For the second, to quote the whole sentence for accuracy, you said 'I would not say only "AIDS is God's judgement", it omits salvation.' In doing so, you indicated that you agreed with the statement ("I would not say only", which implies "I would say").
Wholly "out of context statement" Batman!

In context:
The Mighty Gerbil said:
Technically "the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Long before AIDS God judged people and gave them consequences for their sin. I would not say only "AIDS is God's judgement", it omits salvation. However since homosexual behavior is a sin there are clearly worded consequences from sin. Saying "If you reject Christ you will burn in Hell" is true but misleading because it omits God does not want you to burn in hell. You can't teach sin without consequences or salvation without the consequences of sin to be saved from.
And that pretty much sums up this entire discussion. Refusing to answer any of the questions posed while taking offense at statements where no offense was intended.
 

Tek7

CGA President, Tribe of Judah Founder & President
Staff member
The promised footnote: For the first, that's what started all of this. For the second, to quote the whole sentence for accuracy, you said 'I would not say only "AIDS is God's judgement", it omits salvation.' In doing so, you indicated that you agreed with the statement ("I would not say only", which implies "I would say").
Here's the entire paragraph in which Gerbil addresses the subject of AIDS:

Technically "the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Long before AIDS God judged people and gave them consequences for their sin. I would not say only "AIDS is God's judgement", it omits salvation. However since homosexual behavior is a sin there are clearly worded consequences from sin. Saying "If you reject Christ you will burn in Hell" is true but misleading because it omits God does not want you to burn in hell. You can't teach sin without consequences or salvation without the consequences of sin to be saved from.
In this thread, several community members have addressed the subject of homosexuality. Homosexuality is a controversial issue for many reasons, but the Bible is clear that homosexual intercourse and lust is sinful. Again, I don't think @EDAC is denying that.

The Bible does not say that being gay (that is, being attracted to the same sex) is sinful. It does not claim that being attracted to the same sex is detestable. Being gay is not the same as adultery -- being gay reflects an attraction, adultery is an act. The experience of being gay is also much broader than simple sexual attraction.
I find myself unable to agree with EDAC's statement, but this is where the conversation gets very difficult as we're now discussing attraction rather than lust or sexual activity.

I recognize and would like to point out to others there is a difference between attraction and lust; however, I still do not agree that God is "okay" with homosexual attraction, regardless whether a person acts on that attraction or not. I'm also not comfortable with calling the attraction itself a sin because attraction, by definition, is not a choice. We choose what we do with that attraction--we may choose to sin and we may choose not to sin.

There is no perfect comparison to homosexual attraction because it is possible to act on heterosexual attraction, engage in sexual activity, and not sin, so long as the activity takes places in the framework of marriage as the Bible defines it. There is no occasion where homosexual activity is anything but detestable to God.

But while I find myself unable to agree with EDAC on this point, I celebrate his self-control for not acting on homosexual attraction. We do not--can not--know what it has cost him to remain committed to his faith while struggling with this issue. There is a danger of taking that commitment lightly and we should take great care to avoid doing so. Only God knows the heart of a man or a woman and we tread very dangerous ground when we assume to discern the intent of a person.

Here's the bottom line for me: I'm good with God on this, and I'm going to obey him, not men. This will be my last post on this site. Unfortunately, one of the things I've learned over time is that I often have to set boundaries with other Christians and remove myself from situations that threaten my spiritual or emotional health. This thread has made clear to me that this is not a place where I can stay. The prevailing opinion here is clear -- and it is one that would push me away from authenticity, not towards it.

For you folks, this is an issue to be debated and discussed. For me, this is my life. My reality is that I spent a scary portion of my teenage years ready to kill myself because of the distress that I experienced trying to reconcile my faith and my sexuality. I thank God continuously for my parents, because the only thing that stopped me was knowing what that would do to them. But what if my dad/pastor had decided to talk about how he was upset that someone could "support homosexuality" or that "AIDS is God's judgement" (both of which are things that you said, footnote below)? I'll just say I'm very thankful he didn't.

Words matter. It's easy to make demands of others that ask nothing of you. It's easy to offer shallow sympathy (especially when it's balanced with "but you're not a special snowflake" or the like).
Continuing my thought from before the quote, I also concede that this is not simply a theological debate for EDAC as it is for many of us. He has had to live with this struggle for a significant portion of his life. I think it's fair of EDAC and others who profess Christ as savior and struggle with homosexual attraction to ask us to respond with tact and grace, even as we point to the Bible as the ultimate authority and seek to glorify God. These two responses are not mutually exclusive.

In closing, I understand EDAC's decision to leave our forums, but I can't help but be sad at his parting. It is my sincere hope that our community, which includes me, may become more like Christ, including in the areas of grace and love, while maintaining our passion for the Bible and for glorifying God. I pray the same for EDAC and I wish him the best.

I concede that online forums are limited when it comes to discussing controversial and highly sensitive topics and, with few exceptions, are inferior to one-on-one conversations and face-to-face small group discussions. There are many situations where forums provide an excellent platform for conversation; I do not think this is one of them.

This does not mean that I think we should avoid controversial topics entirely, but rather that I believe that we should take special care when approaching such topics here on our forums.

Ultimately, we exist to glorify God and I pray that this post, regardless what it says of me, points to Him as a holy yet also a forgiving and gracious God.
 
Last edited:
Thread starter #28

The Mighty Gerbil

Tribe of Judah TF 2 Chapter Leader & CGA Admin
Staff member
Sorry but I had to get things done and could not read this thread before today (been there and failed because of it too many times). It wouldn't have changed anything anyway and though I prayed to avoid this outcome I can't say I didn't expect it, it is what made me sad. Not much point of saying anything else now only that my efforts to reach Edac remind me of Psalm 127:1 and DC Talk's "So long my friend". Sorry I couldn't reach you Edac.

At one point I had wanted to continue talking about D&D. Some might think that's heartless but it's the very fact that we can't have any serious discussion without fear which made my responses necessary. I tried to be as polite as I could but the fear of disagreement or hurting someones feelings should never be greater than doing what is right by God. If you let it stop you than sin has already won, as it is winning in the world today.

The point is moot as for the moment I'm not that not really in the mood to go back into it anyway.
 
Last edited:
Top