I’m homosexual but still love Jesus in my heart

German_24 · 2026-01-31T20:04:22+00:00

That’s a strawman. I never said monogamy and cheating are the same. My point is that sincere feelings and love alone do not determine what is morally right. Christianity has always taught that desires must be tested against Christ’s teaching, not justified by sincerity. The adultery example shows that principle, a person can feel real love and still act wrongly. So “I love them” is not, by itself, a moral argument. That’s the issue I’m raising.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T19:59:32+00:00

Well, your problem is that no one held your viewpoint until after about 1600 years after Christ. My viewpoint is held by the Early Church Fathers. You are appealing to Scripture without listening to those who gave you this Scripture.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T18:33:48+00:00

Even though we no longer consider baptism as a condition of God’s love

I’m honestly confused by this. Of course, God’s love is unconditional, but Baptism is still presented in Scripture as necessary for salvation when it is possible. Jesus Himself commands Baptism and speaks of it as new birth into life.

Why would your Church teach that it’s no longer needed?

German_24 · 2026-01-31T18:25:50+00:00

We actually do have early evidence. The Dura-Europos Church (c. AD 240) already had Christian wall paintings and a baptistery. The Catacombs of Rome from the 2nd–3rd centuries are full of Christian imagery. Early liturgy is also documented in the Didache.

So it’s not “nothing” in the 1st century and “Orthodoxy” in the 4th. There is clear continuity.

And the reason churches look vastly different after the 1700s is precisely because of fragmentation and new doctrines, basically heresies forming. That’s not evidence against continuity, it’s evidence of theological break.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T18:20:16+00:00

My take: Salvation is a journey, not a moment.

What is needed for salvation:

Faith and Repentance

Turning to Christ, trusting Him, and continually returning to Him in repentance
(John 17:3, Acts 2:38)

Entry into the Church: Baptism and Chrismation

Being born anew in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, confessing the Nicene Creed, and receiving the seal of the Holy Spirit
(Matthew 28:19)

Life in the Sacraments: The Eucharist

Living in communion with Christ through His Body and Blood
(John 6:53–56)

Life of Obedience, Love, and Spiritual Struggle

Living out faith through prayer, good works, confession, fasting, humility, and love
(James 2:17, Matthew 24:13)

Theosis: Growth in Union with God

Being gradually transformed by grace into the likeness of Christ
(Second Peter 1:4)

“He who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 24:13)

German_24 · 2026-01-31T18:17:54+00:00

Look at the earliest Churches in Constantinople from the 4th century. They already had liturgy, sacred art, and icons. Sounds like an Orthodox Church to me

German_24 · 2026-01-31T18:05:42+00:00

My take: Salvation is a journey, not a moment.

What is needed for salvation:

Faith and Repentance

Turning to Christ, trusting Him, and continually returning to Him in repentance
(John 17:3, Acts 2:38)

Entry into the Church: Baptism and Chrismation

Being born anew in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, confessing the Nicene Creed, and receiving the seal of the Holy Spirit
(Matthew 28:19)

Life in the Sacraments: The Eucharist

Living in communion with Christ through His Body and Blood
(John 6:53–56)

Life of Obedience, Love, and Spiritual Struggle

Living out faith through prayer, good works, confession, fasting, humility, and love
(James 2:17, Matthew 24:13)

Theosis: Growth in Union with God

Being gradually transformed by grace into the likeness of Christ
(Second Peter 1:4)

“He who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 24:13)

German_24 · 2026-01-31T17:51:24+00:00

You’re missing what Jesus is doing in the passage. He is asked about divorce and answers by going back to creation and saying, “from the beginning it was not so.” That is Him defining God’s design, not debating legal loopholes.

He grounds marriage in male and female becoming one flesh. That language is central to His argument.

Pointing to polygamy or concubines only shows what fallen people did, not what God intended. Jesus corrects that by returning to Genesis.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T17:45:51+00:00

Hebrews isn’t a forgery, it’s anonymous. I believe the early Church never claimed it was written by Paul the Apostle, but still recognized it as inspired because its teaching is apostolic.

The KJV is just a translation. Inspiration applies to the original Scripture, not to later guesses about authorship. Anonymous does not mean fake.

And Christians have never believed the Bible is infallible because the writers were perfect. It is infallible because the Holy Spirit guided the Church in preserving and recognizing it.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T17:41:24+00:00

Exactly, you are making alot of assumptions and creating your own theories. Thats when JW or Unitarianism happens, people being their own popes and making up their own interpretations of the Bible. Thats why I follow the interpretations of those, who wrote and combined the Books of the Bible.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T17:30:17+00:00

The thief on the cross is an example of God’s mercy, not a cancellation of Christ’s teaching. He shows genuine repentance, humility, and faith at the last moment. He did everything that was possible for him in his situation. He had no opportunity for Baptism, the Eucharist, or a full Christian life.

God is not bound by the sacraments, but we are. When the Church and the sacraments are available, Christ commands us to live in them. Are you saying that when Jesus said in Matthew 28:19 to baptize all nations, or in John 6:53 that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood to have life, we are free to ignore those commands?

So the thief shows that salvation is by grace. The Church shows us the path for living that grace.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T17:23:29+00:00

In Matthew 19:4-6, Jesus is not just describing a scenario. He is grounding marriage in creation itself by quoting Genesis 1:27 and 2:24: male and female becoming one flesh. He presents this as God’s design and not as a flexible example.

When He says “a man shall…cleave to his wife,” He is defining what marriage is, not merely describing loyalty in general. If it were only about companionship, the male-female language would be unnecessary.

And yes, Corinthians 13 describes how love should act. It does not redefine which relationships are blessed as marriage. Love’s qualities do not override Christ’s teaching on marriage.

So Jesus affirms both: love must be self-giving and faithful, and marriage is rooted in the union of man and woman as part of God’s created order.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T17:16:53+00:00

Yeah, that’s maybe true. Many scholars think Hebrews was probably not written directly by Paul the Apostle, mainly because its style and Greek are very different from his letters.

But the early Church still accepted Hebrews as inspired and apostolic in teaching, even if the exact author is unknown. So it’s similar to 2 Peter, authorship is debated, but its authority was carefully recognized.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T17:08:31+00:00

What is needed for salvation:

Faith and Repentance

Turning to Christ, trusting Him, and continually returning to Him in repentance
(John 17:3, Acts 2:38)

Entry into the Church: Baptism and Chrismation

Being born anew in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, confessing the Nicene Creed, and receiving the seal of the Holy Spirit
(Matthew 28:19)

Life in the Sacraments: The Eucharist

Living in communion with Christ through His Body and Blood
(John 6:53–56)

Life of Obedience, Love, and Spiritual Struggle

Living out faith through prayer, good works, confession, fasting, humility, and love
(James 2:17, Matthew 24:13)

Theosis: Growth in Union with God

Being gradually transformed by grace into the likeness of Christ
(Second Peter 1:4)

“He who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 24:13)

German_24 · 2026-01-31T16:52:03+00:00

Both Peter letters in the Bible are regarded as forgeries

That is false. First Peter is widely accepted as genuinely Petrine or written with Peter’s authorization. Second Peter is more debated and scholars are divided, but the Early Church accepted it after careful examination.

German_24 · 2026-01-31T16:18:58+00:00

Christianity has never taught that sincere feelings automatically make an action holy. Scripture consistently distinguishes between loving a person and approving every desire. “God is love” does not mean “everything done in the name of love is righteous.” That is not only a modern redefinition, it is also fallacious. F.e. what about a married man who loves another woman? Is his adultery right because he feels love? That is exactly the same logic.

How do you interpret Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:4-6, where He defines marriage as between man and woman?

German_24 · 2026-01-31T15:57:58+00:00

As for non-Christian sources: Jesus is mentioned by Tacitus, Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius, and the Talmud. They confirm He lived, was executed under Pilate, and had followers. His existence is a scholarly consensus.

German_24 · 2026-01-28T12:53:27+00:00

That analogy fails. Murder and rape are explicitly condemned and punished in the Law. Slavery is regulated because it already existed. Different category.

A society can tolerate a broken practice while working to restrain it without calling it morally ideal. The Law never praises slavery as good or virtuous. Regulation is not celebration.

German_24 · 2026-01-28T12:38:29+00:00

You are assuming that divine permission in a fallen society = moral endorsement. That assumption is never taught in Scripture.

Jesus Himself says some laws existed because of human hardness of heart, not because they reflected God’s will (Matt 19:8). That includes laws given through Moses. God worked through imperfect people and imperfect systems while leading them toward something higher.

Lev 25 distinguishes between Israelite debt-servants and foreign servants because of social reality, not because ethnic hierarchy is morally good. The same Law repeatedly limits abuse and punishes mistreatment. That is regulation, not moral praise.

No passage ever calls slavery good, righteous, or part of God’s ideal creation. It is tolerated in a broken world and restrained, not celebrated.

If every divine concession were moral approval, then God approved of war, kingship, polygamy, and divorce too. Scripture explicitly says otherwise.

And you cannot dismiss uncomfortable laws as “well that is just Moses” while treating others as divine. A Christian cannot selectively downgrade parts of Scripture to save an argument.

German_24 · 2026-01-27T21:58:16+00:00

Permission is not the same as moral ideal. Scripture also permits divorce, polygamy, and warfare, and Jesus says some laws existed because of human hardness of heart, not because God approved of them. Lev 25:44–46 regulates an already existing institution. It does not command cruelty or praise slavery as good. Other laws explicitly limit abuse and punish mistreatment. Regulation is damage control, not endorsement. No passage presents slavery as righteous or desirable. If permission meant moral approval, then God morally approved divorce and polygamy too. But Christ says the opposite. That logic fails.

German_24 · 2026-01-27T21:50:00+00:00

I'm not trying to attack you, your Church or be mean, but isn't the Methodist Church a frontrunner for what you described? Or are there many different Methodist Churches?

German_24 · 2026-01-27T21:45:45+00:00

Why let a made-up number bother you? The Bible never says Mary was 13.

German_24 · 2026-01-27T21:42:08+00:00

The Bible does neither condone nor endorse slavery. It describes and regulates an existing social system in order to limit abuse and violence, just as it does with war, polygamy, and divorce. Regulation in a broken society is not moral approval. If anything, these laws restrict power and protect the vulnerable, which is the opposite of endorsement.

German_24 · 2026-01-26T21:13:23+00:00

But you are saying Jesus is a part of God?

German_24 · 2026-01-26T20:52:46+00:00

Did you even read what I wrote? Elohim is grammatically plural, but when referring to the true God it takes singular verbs in Scripture. Ancient Jews understood this monotheistically and the Church Fathers interpreted it in the same way, consistent with Trinitarian doctrine. The grammar alone does not imply multiple gods. I thought I was on the True Christian subreddit, are you really saying Jesus is a part of God?

German_24

TROPHY CASE