I am not sure what you mean. However, the Bible says “For God loved the world in this way: He gave His one and only Son, so that => EVERYONE <= who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save → the world ← through him”. John 3:16-17
Those people who condemn LGBTQ+ people must think that they’re superior to God, but THEY ARE NOT!
You quoted John 3:16–17, but you did not finish the thought. You cherry-picked mercy and skipped the mirror. The same Jesus who said “God so loved the world” also said this in the very next verse:
“Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (John 3:18).
You do not get to tear that verse out. You do not get to pretend belief is optional or that sin is undefined. Jesus did not just come to offer a warm feeling. He came to save us from something. And that something is wrath, judgment, and sin.
Now let me ask you plainly. What is He saving us from if there is no judgment? What does it mean to perish if there is no sin? What does it mean to believe if you get to redefine the terms?
You brought up LGBTQ+ as if calling sin what God calls sin is arrogance. But Scripture says otherwise. “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality… will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–10). The Greek there is exact. ἀρσενοκοῖται (arsenokoitai), men who lie with men. Paul is not vague.
And then the gospel. “And such were some of you. But you were washed. You were sanctified. You were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:11). You cannot preach John 3:16 and ignore 1 Corinthians 6. The gospel is not affirming sin. It is saving sinners.
So ask yourself, are you defending Christ or editing Him? Are you preaching love as God defines it or sentimentality that shields sin from light?
To call sinners to repent is not superiority. It is obedience. To remain silent while souls march to destruction—that would be arrogance indeed.
If you want the real Jesus, take all His words. Not just the ones that fit a slogan. “He who rejects Me and does not receive My words has a judge. The word I have spoken will judge him on the last day” (John 12:48).
The question is not whether God loves the world. He does. The question is whether you love His Son enough to preach the truth the way He did.
Johann.
It’s worth noting that all of these refer to acts. Not orientation.
The question is “Can you be both Christian and gay”–“gay” is an orientation, it is attraction to a person of the same gender.
Scripture also condemns heterosexual acts that are committed outside the bonds of holy matrimony. But being straight–and therefore attracted to persons of the opposite sex–including attraction toward someone who isn’t one’s spouse–is not a sin (except when it becomes lust).
Without making a distinction between orientation and action, the issue is muddied and ends up being mere moralistic diatribe.
There are then deeper ethical concerns we can discuss when it comes to our attractions–which are always, because of sin, going to be disordered. And that gets us to the moral issues of the mind and heart and how we look at other people around us–for the commandment to love cannot be observed if we are objectifying another human person. And that is where orientation can never be an excuse to justify sinful thoughts and feelings toward other human beings–but the “shape” of that orientation is almost inconsequential. Gay and straight people equally objectify, lust, and sin against their fellow human beings, thereby profaning the Image of God.
And yet, still, a distinction must be made between orientation and action. And the Church has long had something to say about this–the Church has always called people who are outside the covenant and bond of holy matrimony to lives of godly chastity and celibacy. Some choose to make this a permanent vocation of their God-given sexuality; to commit themselves to a life of chastity and celibacy.
Given the preponderance of evidence backing it up, orientation is not a choice. Nobody wakes up one day and say “I’m gay” or “I’m straight”, it’s just there in their bodies and minds. What we do with it is a different matter. If we remember that heterosexuality acted upon outside of the vocation of marriage is no less sinful, then we do well to recognize that all sexuality is intended by the Creator to be used not for selfish gratification; but to be exercised in a godly way–in the gracious gifts of committed marriages and the rearing of children.
Each and every one of us has a broken and damaged humanity we have inherited from Adam. Being gay is not somehow worse than being straight. Acting as though homosexuality is somehow a grievous offense–moreso than heterosexual offenses, or that gay people are especially sinful when we are all just as sinful as the other–then we fail to be faithful preachers of the Law and proclaiming repentance; and if we cannot properly recognize that the Law crushes all of us under its holy heel, then we are very likely to fail to recognize the depth and goodness of the mercy of the Gospel toward all sinners.
Ah, TheologyNerd, you’ve brought out the white gloves of nuance and tried to finesse a theological landmine with surgical precision. And while your tone is polished and your syntax tight, I’m about to lovingly rip the wrapping paper off this tidy package of half-truths and misplaced mercy.
You’re right to point out the distinction between attraction and action. But what’s quietly lurking behind your careful academic tone is a dangerous idea: that “orientation” is somehow neutral. That same-sex attraction, though disordered, is just another shade of brokenness to be tucked under the rug of shared human fallenness.
But here’s the thing: Scripture doesn’t just deal with what we do—it deals with what we desire. Jesus didn’t say, “Only adultery is sin.” He said lusting after someone is already adultery in the heart (Matthew 5:28). So don’t try to insulate same-sex attraction from the call to repentance just because it hasn’t crossed the finish line into behavior. The starting blocks are still in sin’s domain.
Orientation, as you’ve described it, isn’t a morally neutral feature of the human condition—it’s a fallen feature that must be brought into submission to Christ just like any other disordered desire. You don’t coddle the flesh—you crucify it (Galatians 5:24). That goes for the straight guy tempted to lust after women and the man who’s romantically attracted to another man.
And while you’re keen to keep the Church’s call to celibacy for the unmarried, you slide past a crucial point: the modern LGBTQ+ movement isn’t promoting celibacy. It’s not saying “I experience these desires but submit them to Christ.” It’s saying “These desires define me and must be affirmed—even celebrated—in the Church.” That’s not orientation; that’s idolatry wrapped in rainbow paper.
Now let’s talk theology of the Imago Dei. Yes, all sin profanes it. But the kind of sin matters too. Romans 1 doesn’t just list homosexuality among other sins—it spotlights it as a sign of God giving people over to a debased mind. That’s not “garden variety” lust. That’s the descent into rebellion.
So let’s stop pretending that pointing this out is moralism. It’s biblical realism. And let’s not act like calling sin what it is somehow hinders the Gospel. Paul names homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9, and then says, “Such were some of you. But you were washed…” Not coddled. Cleansed.
Yes, we’re all broken. Yes, the Law crushes us. But the Gospel doesn’t coddle our orientation—it confronts it, transforms it, and invites us to be made new.
So no, being tempted doesn’t make you un-Christian. But affirming your orientation as identity while resisting the transforming work of the Spirit? That’s not faithfulness—that’s rebellion in theological robes.
Jesus saves sinners. He doesn’t bless sin’s labels.
—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth.
See my response to @Benny.
Proverbs 27:5 says, “Better is open rebuke than hidden love.”
Ephesians 5:11 commands, “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.”
Galatians 6:1 exhorts, “Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness.”
Jude 23 instructs us to “save others by snatching them out of the fire.”
The goal is not condemnation but rescue. Love that yanks someone out of sin is not hatred but a fierce compassion that refuses to let them perish where they are.
True love confronts sin to bring healing and freedom through Christ.
Not so?
Johann.
But since you responded to me, let me answer.
Ah, the old “orientation vs. action” partition – neatly packaged, artfully worded, and yet tragically void of biblical traction. Let’s slice this clean with Scripture, not sentiment, and let the sword of the Spirit do its work.
First, the Word of God does not recognize “orientation” as a morally neutral category to be insulated from judgment.
It does not say, “Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman, unless thou feelest it as orientation only.” The verb in Leviticus 18:22 is תִּשְׁכַּ֖ב (tiškab), Qal imperfect of שָׁכַב (shakab) – to lie down, sexually – and it is condemned not just because of the act, but because of the male-male desire underlying it.
Paul does the same in Romans 1:26–27, where he rebukes πάθη ἀτιμίας (pathē atimias) – dishonorable passions – not just the acts, but the inward affections themselves. This is orientation. And he says it is παρὰ φύσιν – against nature.
You say, “It’s not a choice.” Scripture answers, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick” (Jer_17:9).
No, we didn’t wake up one day and say, “I want this corruption.” We inherited it. Romans 5:12. But inheritance is not exoneration. “The imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen_8:21), but the Judge does not wink at corruption simply because it is congenital.
Second, Christ does not call people to manage their sinful orientations – He calls them to crucify them. “Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (Gal_5:24).
The verb is ἐσταύρωσαν – aorist active indicative of σταυρόω – they nailed it to the cross. Not pampered it. Not justified it under therapeutic vocabulary. Executed it.
You cannot walk in the Spirit and simultaneously justify the flesh (Rom_8:13–14). That includes heterosexual lust, homosexual desire, greed, bitterness, gossip, or pride. They are all to be slain, not tolerated.
Third, Jesus said, “Everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matt_5:28). That is orientation turned inward.
So no, the “shape” of the attraction is not inconsequential. It matters to whom the affection is directed and why. And Christ draws a line straight from the orientation to the verdict: “Gouge out your eye” – ἔξελε αὐτόν – imperative verb. Rip it out. Do not analyze it. Do not theologize it. Cut it off before it kills you.
Fourth, your appeal to church tradition for celibate gay believers sounds noble, but it is a construction nowhere found in the early church fathers. Find me a single quote from Ignatius, Justin Martyr, or Chrysostom that describes SSA as a neutral identity to be managed through celibacy. You won’t. The early church called all forms of same-sex desire shameful, unclean, and demonic. They didn’t have categories for “orientation” theology – neither did Paul.
Finally, don’t muzzle the Gospel under a flood of therapeutic nuance. “Such were some of you” – ἦτε τινὲς τοιοῦτοι (1Co_6:11) – past tense. Not such are some of you, but you’re managing well. No. You were, but now you’re washed, sanctified, justified. No exceptions. No orientation clause. Christ did not die to give us coping strategies. He died to make us new.
So no, I will not soothe rebellion with liturgical ambiguity. I will not baptize desires Scripture condemns. I will not recast the sword of the Spirit as a therapeutic pillow.
You ask, “Can you be Christian and gay?”
I ask, “Can you be alive and crucified at the same time?”
You cannot serve Christ and coddle the flesh. One must die. Choose.
Cross References:
Lev_18:22, Rom_1:26–27, 1Co_6:9–11, Gal_5:24, Matt_5:28–30, Jer_17:9, Gen_8:21, Rom_8:13–14
Greek and Hebrew roots: שָׁכַב (shakab), πάθος (pathos), σταυρόω (stauroō), ἔξελε (exele)
We truly respond, but the response is only possible because truth – ἀλήθεια – was unveiled,
and in that unveiling, the soul bent, bowed, broke – and believed.
And the desires that once reigned were dragged to the cross and nailed there.
That is not bigotry. That is victory.
Correct?
Johann.
Benny, buckle up, because tossing John 3:16 like a theological UNO reverse card doesn’t erase the rest of the Bible—or the full context of what belief in Christ actually means.
Yes, God so loved the world. Every tribe, every tongue, every sinner—absolutely. But loving the world doesn’t mean affirming its rebellion. That verse is about salvation from sin, not a permission slip to remain in it. The same Jesus who said He came to save also said, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 4:17). That’s not condemnation. That’s invitation—to leave behind the old life and step into newness.
You said, “EVERYONE who believes…” Amen. But believing in Christ isn’t some vague, mushy “I think He’s neat” emotional nod. It’s surrender. It’s a trust so real that it produces obedience (John 14:15: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments”). You can’t claim His name while denying His Word. That’s not faith. That’s fraud.
Now let’s talk about this accusation: “Those who condemn LGBTQ+ people must think they’re superior to God.” No sir. Calling sin what God calls sin isn’t superiority—it’s submission. The real arrogance is saying, “I know the Bible says this, but my version of love is better.”
Nobody here is saying LGBTQ+ folks are beneath God’s grace. Quite the opposite—we’re saying they need it just like everyone else does. But grace that doesn’t call for change isn’t grace—it’s enablement.
We don’t “condemn” people—we call them to the Cross, where sin meets mercy, and lives are made new. But don’t twist God’s love into a blanket that covers rebellion while leaving the heart unchanged.
Want to talk John 3:16? Then let’s talk about the kind of belief that surrenders everything—including our sexuality—to the lordship of Jesus Christ.
Because the God who saves is also the God who sanctifies.
—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth. (Even if some have me on ignore.)
How many of us can truely say we do not suffer temptions of lust, anger, envy, etc and if we apply Jesus’s explaination in the sermon on the mount we will have sinned.
Yes we repent of our sins, but is the x drunkard stuggling with his desire for a drink still saved?
If he is saved is the man struggling with his temper or his lusts for pretty girls saved?
Why do people say that a man struggling with same sex desires is not saved?
Fact we are ALL sinners saved by grace and that will include murderers, rapists, drunkards, theives and homosexuals.
What is important is are they, are we, seeking to be obedient to God.
Problem here @Who-me
Breaking News: You Were a Mess-But You’re Not Anymore!
Paul just went off in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, listing off everything that kept people out of God’s kingdom-fornicators, thieves, drunkards, idolaters… you name it.
And just when you think, “Uh oh, that was me,” BOOM-verse 11 drops like a redemption anthem:
"Such were some of you!"
That’s right. Past tense. You were that. You lived that. You were defined by that. But not anymore!
Paul doesn’t stop there-he delivers the gospel in three powerhouse words:
Washed (apolouō) – You’re clean. Sin? Gone.
Sanctified (hagiazō) – You’re set apart. Holy, baby!
Justified (dikaioō) – You’re declared righteous. Court case? Over.
Mic-drop moment: You were once lost, but now you’re transformed!
Paul isn’t sugarcoating the past-he’s highlighting the transformation. Christianity isn’t just “Stop sinning”-it’s “You’ve been changed!”
What this means:
Your past doesn’t define you.
Your future is secured in Christ.
You’re not just forgiven-you’re transformed.
Paul’s message hits different because it’s not just about leaving sin behind-it’s about stepping into a new identity.
When discussing this online, bring out the power of transformation. It’s not just about “Christians shouldn’t sin”-it’s “Christians have been fundamentally changed.”
Discussion Points:
How does the past tense of “such were some of you” shape our view of salvation?
Does sanctification mean instant change or a process?
What role does identity play in Christian living?
You’re not who you were. You’re who He’s made you to be!
No transformation, no Christianity.
J.
Yes…BC (before Christ)
If a homosexual repents God can forgive him
But not homosexual in active practice - only in the past before Christ
The one word that throws your question off is the word “practicing.” If they are practicing a sinful lifestyle that the Bible clearly says is wrong, they have no way to demonstrate their repentance from the sins that Jesus died to forgive. On the other hand, if they are a committed Christian who lives a life of singleness without homosexual activity, they are welcome to be members of the body of Christ.
As i have already explained brother @BrotherDavid.
Johann.
Johann, I just my opinion on this…I wanted to add my take on this, that’s all- Not to add to or take away from anything you posted
And you are absolutely spot on brother.
J.
A word that keeps coming up in Holy scripture is “renew”. Re-New means to us to make something like new, to renovate, or restore. This is, as @Johann has pointed out, the heart of sanctification; this renewing is a one-time act which we experience as a lifelong process. It is what has been done, and it is experienced as what is being done. In the life of one who struggles with yielding to unholiness, either this renewing has happend, and is happening, or it has never happened at all. Most of what we call “growing in Christ” is described as “shedding the old man”. The process of progressive sanctifiaction can be thought of as much as a continual removal of the old as much as a progressive putting on the new.
------------------accomplished ----------------
“Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him, where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and in all.” Colossians 3:9-11
------------------ process ------------------
“And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” Romans 12:2
“Therefore we do not lose heart. Even though our outward man is perishing, yet the inward man is being renewed day by day.” 2 Corinthians 4:16
“…that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.” Ephesians 4:22-24
I believe we must work as dilligently at the removal of the old as we submit to the doning of the new.
KP
You are right, @KPuff, since the removal of the old nature is just as prominent in Colossians 3 as putting on the new nature is. And it all starts with Jesus’ resurrection power operating in our lives (Colossians 3:1).
Sanctification is war, not arrival. The command to be renewed (Romans 12:2, Ephesians 4:23) is present tense in Greek-presbe imperative-ongoing, continuous, never complete in this life.
Paul never claimed sinlessness. In fact, he groaned, “Who will deliver me from this body of death?” (Romans 7:24). And yet, he pressed on “toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:14). That’s tension. That’s battle.
Colossians 3 says,“You have put off the old man”-**perfect tense, already done. But then immediately, Paul says, “Put to death what is earthly in you”(Colossians 3:5)-present imperative.
See the paradoxical pairs right through scripture?
Already accomplished, yet actively being applied. It’s like the Israelites at Jericho-God says, “I have given you the city,” yet they still had to march, shout, fight.
The new man is real. The battle remains. That’s why we’re told, put off… be renewed… put on (Ephesians 4:22–24). If we were already perfect, Paul wouldn’t give these commands.
If the flesh were gone, there’d be no need for the armor (Ephesians 6:10–17). But we’re still in bodies that crave old chains. So we fight-not to earn salvation, but to walk worthy of the One who saved us (Colossians 1:10).
1 John 1:8 punches false perfection in the mouth: “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” But 1 John 2:1 guards the gospel flame: “I write this to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”
So no-we’re not preaching perfection.
We’re preaching war.
Victory in Christ, yes-but lived out with grit.
Holiness pursued, not claimed.
Renewing, not finished.
Glory-still future.
Sinless perfection is a heresy that flatters the flesh while denying the Word.
But relentless renewal is the mark of the Spirit-filled.
So we don’t settle for sin.
We don’t excuse the flesh.
And we don’t pretend to have arrived.
We renew.
Daily.
Desperately.
With eyes on Jesus,
And swords in hand.
Johann.
Sanctifcation is not an instant event, it is a process, so a Christian saved from being a drunkard will still struggle with the desire to drink. A thief will struggle with the desire to get rich quick via theift etc etc
It is this that spoils your argument that you do not recognise that Christians will sin, it is why there are so many warnings about temptation and not sinning addressed to Christins in the epistals.
Sanctification is both instantaneous and progressive.
Initial Justification and Sanctification A Progressive Sanctification, Christlikeness
Acts 26:18
Romans 15:16
1 Corinthians 1:2-3,30; 6:11
2 Thessalonians 2:13
Hebrews 2:11; 10:10,14; 13:12
1 Peter 1:2 Romans 6:19
2 Corinthians 7:1
Ephesians 1:4; 2:10
1 Thessalonians 3:13; 4:3-4,7; 5:2
1 Timothy 2:15
2 Timothy 2:21
1 Peter 1:15-16
Hebrews 12:14
Thanks.
J.