Christian "gay Bashing"

[Selene]

Every time I looked this thread was on Homosexuality. If we were on a thread on say stealing then we would be discussing the sin of stealing. HOEWVER, this thread was on homosexuality and of course it was to paint those that disagree with it as the mean old Christians.

Hello Religusnut,

I think that whenever there is a thread on homosexuality (the act), homosexuals will take it personally and feel it is an attack on them rather than an opposition to the behavior or lifestyle. Homosexuals tend to take the stand that they were born that way and therefore, their rights is being violated because they don't have the right to marry. They make the claim that they are unable to have certain rights that married couples have such as inheritance, visitation rights at the hospital, etc. In my opinion, these are merely excuses.

I am a single person, and I can give my assets to whoever I want. If a homosexual wants to give their assets to their partner, they can make out a will like me. I can declare who gets to visit me if I am hospitalized as well. Homosexuals also have the right to marry just like everyone else. And like everyone else, they can't marry persons of the same sex. What the gay community really wants is not the right to marry because they already have that, but they want the recognition. They want society to recognize them and normalize their behavior.

If they get this recognition as they did in Massachusetts, the next step is for them to adopt children. And this is the real issue that concerns me the most. There are some people (especially the gay community) who say that all a child needs is a loving home. The ideal family has always been a loving home that consist of both mother and father. Studies have shown that single parenting is not very ideal and that there is always something lacking (a father figure or a mother figure). What impact will there be if a child was raised in a home with gays despite that they are loving? Would the child be confused and grow up being confused of his/her own sexual identity and role?

In states that have already recognized same sex unions or same sex marriages, the gay community are already working into pushing a curriculum in the public schools to teach very young children that homosexual relations is normal. Nowhere in any of our curriculum do we have a curriculum for elementary children about heterosexual marriages; yet, the gay community wants to push their curriculum onto the schools. There is already a children's book entitlted The King and I portraying homosexuality as being normal. This book is geared for elementary level as young as first grade.

In Christ,
Selene

 

[aspen]

Hello Religusnut,

I think that whenever there is a thread on homosexuality (the act), homosexuals will take it personally and feel it is an attack on them rather than an opposition to the behavior or lifestyle. Homosexuals tend to take the stand that they were born that way and therefore, their rights is being violated because they don't have the right to marry. They make the claim that they are unable to have certain rights that married couples have such as inheritance, visitation rights at the hospital, etc. In my opinion, these are merely excuses.

I am a single person, and I can give my assets to whoever I want. If a homosexual wants to give their assets to their partner, they can make out a will like me. I can declare who gets to visit me if I am hospitalized as well. Homosexuals also have the right to marry just like everyone else. And like everyone else, they can't marry persons of the same sex. What the gay community really wants is not the right to marry because they already have that, but they want the recognition. They want society to recognize them and normalize their behavior.

If they get this recognition as they did in Massachusetts, the next step is for them to adopt children. And this is the real issue that concerns me the most. There are some people (especially the gay community) who say that all a child needs is a loving home. The ideal family has always been a loving home that consist of both mother and father. Studies have shown that single parenting is not very ideal and that there is always something lacking (a father figure or a mother figure). What impact will there be if a child was raised in a home with gays despite that they are loving? Would the child be confused and grow up being confused of his/her own sexual identity and role?

In states that have already recognized same sex unions or same sex marriages, the gay community are already working into pushing a curriculum in the public schools to teach very young children that homosexual relations is normal. Nowhere in any of our curriculum do we have a curriculum for elementary children about heterosexual marriages; yet, the gay community wants to push their curriculum onto the schools. There is already a children's book entitlted The King and I portraying homosexuality as being normal. This book is geared for elementary level as young as first grade.

In Christ,
Selene

Hi Selene,

I think people who engage in conversations about homosexuality tend to throw around terms like "recognition" and "normal" and may confuse them. To recognize something is not the same thing as normalizing it. Homosexuals are not asking you to condone their behavior, they are asking you to recognize that they exist in the community. Since they already exist in the community, it makes it easier to recognize them. The reason they want to be recognized is because they do not want to be marginalized or discriminated against. It has nothing to do with evil conspiracies to take over the world and recruit our children for their gay parades. They simply want to live in a world where they do not have to fear being arrested for expressing their sexuality in the privacy of their own bedrooms and be able to rely on the police to respond if they are victims of a crime. Contrary to your statement about homosexuals being allowed to receive information about their partners in the hospital; there are several states that do not recognize homosexual partners as relatives and will not release any information about the patient. Also, many employers will not provide health coverage to domestic partners - gay or straight - this needs to end. Homosexual partners cannot file joint taxes. Some states can refuse to rent housing to homosexuals. Some states refuse to prosecute companies that refuse to hire homosexuals.

I think you might be interested to know that most states - in fact, I think all states allow homosexuals to adopt children - there is no law against single people adopting children and many homosexuals have adopted children - it happens regularly. There is no evidence that gay parents raise gay children; however, there is ample evidence that a two parent home is vastly better than a one parent home for raising healthy children.

I do not condone homosexuality, but I support all efforts to provide protection for all citizens of our country and ensure that everyone is allowed the same chance at the pursuit of happiness that I enjoy.

Peace

 

[religusnut]

My question was aimed at those that profess to be Christian that are so intent on helping them in the agenda that you pointed out.

There are those on here that are going to do everything in their power to point out anything they can grasp at straws to find that will make those that have eyes to see what is happening as far as this push for homosexuality to be recognized as normal look like intolerant imbeciles.


Wow - I read your post three times and I cannot make sense of it.......let me try again.

Your were trying to ask Christians that want to help promote the homosexual agenda......ask them what?
Some people on this board are going to try to make people who recognize that homosexuals are pushing an agenda look intolerant and stupid?

Ok I think I got it.

I have not seen anyone on this board trying to make anyone look stupid. I think several Christians, including myself, are wondering if other Christians are:

1. Singling out homosexuality as a greater sin than other sins
2. Supportive of laws that discriminate against people who choose not to hide their homosexuality or criminalize the practice of homosexuality - prop 8 in California, anti-sodomy laws in Idaho and elsewhere
3. Supportive of the practice of discriminating against people who are homosexual - denying housing, refusing to disclose medical information to partners, deny employment based on sexual orientation.
4. Supportive of pointing out personal sins of homosexuals as part of a comprehensive effort to share the gospel with them.

I think that is about it. Nobody here can 'make' you feel anything - that is up to you. We are simply hoping that you will review your behavior and make sure it is the most effective way to love God and your neighbor.

Peace

From what I have seen you won't make sense of it.

If you profess to be a christian and you think that homosexuals ought to be allowed to be married, adopt children, and openly appear as normal to society which there is nothing normal about them then I see where you definitely have problems understanding anything. If you think sodomy ought to be legalized and openly allowed yep you definitely do not understand.

There is no sin that is more repulsive than this one. Any person with morality will agree with that one.
From all appearances you have become so consumed with the things of this world that you have no clue as to the things of God. The Bible says that a friend of the world is an enemy of God does it not?

 

[religusnut]

Hi Selene,

I think people who engage in conversations about homosexuality tend to throw around terms like "recognition" and "normal" and may confuse them. To recognize something is not the same thing as normalizing it. Homosexuals are not asking you to condone their behavior, they are asking you to recognize that they exist in the community. Since they already exist in the community, it makes it easier to recognize them. The reason they want to be recognized is because they do not want to be marginalized or discriminated against. It has nothing to do with evil conspiracies to take over the world and recruit our children for their gay parades. They simply want to live in a world where they do not have to fear being arrested for expressing their sexuality in the privacy of their own bedrooms and be able to rely on the police to respond if they are victims of a crime. Contrary to your statement about homosexuals being allowed to receive information about their partners in the hospital; there are several states that do not recognize homosexual partners as relatives and will not release any information about the patient. Also, many employers will not provide health coverage to domestic partners - gay or straight - this needs to end. Homosexual partners cannot file joint taxes. Some states can refuse to rent housing to homosexuals. Some states refuse to prosecute companies that refuse to hire homosexuals.

I think you might be interested to know that most states - in fact, I think all states allow homosexuals to adopt children - there is no law against single people adopting children and many homosexuals have adopted children - it happens regularly. There is no evidence that gay parents raise gay children; however, there is ample evidence that a two parent home is vastly better than a one parent home for raising healthy children.

I do not condone homosexuality, but I support all efforts to provide protection for all citizens of our country and ensure that everyone is allowed the same chance at the pursuit of happiness that I enjoy.

Peace

I agree that most states do allow this. HOWEVER there is no way that this ought to be allowed. Also why should 95% of the people of this country have their rights trashed for 5% to have theirs trashed. Non homosexual men do not want to deal with these people in most situations. Normality is no where in this picture and homosexuality is not normal by any standards.

Why should the people of this world be taught that perversion is normal to protect the rights of those that are perverted.

If they want to argue that they are born that way, I suggest that they be "Born Again".

Instead of spending so much time teaching the normality of perversion. I suggest that society be allowed to take that time and money and teach the perversion of this sickening behaviour.

Hi Selene,

I think people who engage in conversations about homosexuality tend to throw around terms like "recognition" and "normal" and may confuse them. To recognize something is not the same thing as normalizing it. Homosexuals are not asking you to condone their behavior, they are asking you to recognize that they exist in the community. Since they already exist in the community, it makes it easier to recognize them. The reason they want to be recognized is because they do not want to be marginalized or discriminated against. It has nothing to do with evil conspiracies to take over the world and recruit our children for their gay parades. They simply want to live in a world where they do not have to fear being arrested for expressing their sexuality in the privacy of their own bedrooms and be able to rely on the police to respond if they are victims of a crime. Contrary to your statement about homosexuals being allowed to receive information about their partners in the hospital; there are several states that do not recognize homosexual partners as relatives and will not release any information about the patient. Also, many employers will not provide health coverage to domestic partners - gay or straight - this needs to end. Homosexual partners cannot file joint taxes. Some states can refuse to rent housing to homosexuals. Some states refuse to prosecute companies that refuse to hire homosexuals.

I think you might be interested to know that most states - in fact, I think all states allow homosexuals to adopt children - there is no law against single people adopting children and many homosexuals have adopted children - it happens regularly. There is no evidence that gay parents raise gay children; however, there is ample evidence that a two parent home is vastly better than a one parent home for raising healthy children.

I do not condone homosexuality, but I support all efforts to provide protection for all citizens of our country and ensure that everyone is allowed the same chance at the pursuit of happiness that I enjoy.

Peace

I agree that most states do allow this. HOWEVER there is no way that this ought to be allowed. Also why should 95% of the people of this country have their rights trashed for 5% to have theirs trashed. Non homosexual men do not want to deal with these people in most situations. Normality is no where in this picture and homosexuality is not normal by any standards.

Why should the people of this world be taught that perversion is normal to protect the rights of those that are perverted.

If they want to argue that they are born that way, I suggest that they be "Born Again".

Instead of spending so much time teaching the normality of perversion. I suggest that society be allowed to take that time and money and teach the perversion of this sickening behaviour.

 

[Selene]

Hi Selene,

I think people who engage in conversations about homosexuality tend to throw around terms like "recognition" and "normal" and may confuse them. To recognize something is not the same thing as normalizing it. Homosexuals are not asking you to condone their behavior, they are asking you to recognize that they exist in the community. Since they already exist in the community, it makes it easier to recognize them. The reason they want to be recognized is because they do not want to be marginalized or discriminated against. It has nothing to do with evil conspiracies to take over the world and recruit our children for their gay parades. They simply want to live in a world where they do not have to fear being arrested for expressing their sexuality in the privacy of their own bedrooms and be able to rely on the police to respond if they are victims of a crime. Contrary to your statement about homosexuals being allowed to receive information about their partners in the hospital; there are several states that do not recognize homosexual partners as relatives and will not release any information about the patient. Also, many employers will not provide health coverage to domestic partners - gay or straight - this needs to end. Homosexual partners cannot file joint taxes. Some states can refuse to rent housing to homosexuals. Some states refuse to prosecute companies that refuse to hire homosexuals.

I think you might be interested to know that most states - in fact, I think all states allow homosexuals to adopt children - there is no law against single people adopting children and many homosexuals have adopted children - it happens regularly. There is no evidence that gay parents raise gay children; however, there is ample evidence that a two parent home is vastly better than a one parent home for raising healthy children.

I do not condone homosexuality, but I support all efforts to provide protection for all citizens of our country and ensure that everyone is allowed the same chance at the pursuit of happiness that I enjoy.

Peace

Hello Aspen,

The homosexuals want us to recognize them by allowing us to adopt same-sex unions or same-sex marriages. We already know that they exist in our society. If recognition of their existance is all they are looking for, they don't need to pursue same sex unions or impose curriculums in our public schools portraying homosexuality in a positive light. They would not be suing churches who don't want to marry them or sue publishing companies that publish the Bible because the Bible states that homosexuality is a sin. However, all those things are happening.

In Christ,
Selene

 

[S.T. Ranger]

The debate about "singling out" the sin of homosexuality above others is a platform from which homosexuality is defended.

I would just say this: it is one of the sins mentioned specifically in scripture that is not only advocated by special interest groups, but has made its way into our education programs.

If thieves began to hold parades, no-one would take it seriously. But if they did, there would be much more opposition to it than there has been to this particular sin.

Would we stand by if the government not only legalized drug use (sorcery), but began to allow textbooks and teachers to promote it?

If it was taught in public school that not only is it acceptable to use drugs, if you speak against it, you are intolerant?

That is one of the primary issues with this particular sin, and to say that it is being singled out may be true...but then, they are the ones stepping into the firing line.

I would venture a guess that there is a higher percentage of homosexuals in this country than there were thirty years ago, due to the agressive tactics of that movement. If drug use is legalized, and promoted as homosexuality has been, I would venture another guess that drug use and users would increase.

I do think that hatred toward homosexuals is wrong, but please, don't tell me that if homosexuality offends me, I am wrong. I don't claim to be sinless, but I can tell you this...I hate even the sin that is in my own life.

The culture that surrounds rap music is another issue that offends me. The message that is found in much of popular rap is not something that I think anyone would try to cast in a light of being acceptable, yet, those involved have chosen for themselves to be involved in it. I throw this in just to try to give perspective concerning my views. I do not think it is healthy for anyone, and is a cause for violence, drug use, and death...which it glorifies.

Concerning this issue, however, I think the one who had a ministry to these people is probably the only one who can really give an opinion that matters. Most of us are not exposed to them, and their lifestyle really doesn't affect us directly. But the man in the video, I agree with him, and if God has called him to this ministry or not, I can't say.

There are some who use God and scripture in their hatred for a particular group, and that is wrong, but there are some who have a ministry toward certain focal points (i.e., homo., abortion, homeless, etc.) who have been called by God to minister to those groups.

It isn't for me to decide, but God.

I guess the main point I am trying to make on this issue is this: the homosexual agenda has, I believe, drawn more people into sin by making it acceptable. Why is it singled out? Because they step into the firing line. In order for "the other sins" to be singled out, there will need to be an equivalent movement, such as there is with abortion.

If drug users united, and focused on doing their best to make drug use acceptable, it would not just be Christians that stood up against it (which I think was illustrated by the last vote on it in Cal.).

I don't think there is a person on this forum that would not object if another sin was made into a movement such as these two have been.

GTY

 

[aspen]

From what I have seen you won't make sense of it.

Hey, you can pretend that your message is simply too righteous for me to possibly understand with my tragic worldly mind - whatever you need to defend your special hatred for the specific sin of homosexuality - whatever helps you prop up your intolerance of people you are called to love. However, I am going to describe what I am seeing.

If you profess to be a christian and you think that homosexuals ought to be allowed to be married, adopt children, and openly appear as normal to society which there is nothing normal about them then I see where you definitely have problems understanding anything. If you think sodomy ought to be legalized and openly allowed yep you definitely do not understand.

Here you go again, trying to outlaw sin you are not tempted by. Dismissing divorce, fornication, and adultery, but making sure to condemn people who are least like you. And that is exactly what you are calling for legal condemnation.

There is no sin that is more repulsive than this one. Any person with morality will agree with that one.

No. Only a bigot would pick a pet sin to condemn.

From all appearances you have become so consumed with the things of this world that you have no clue as to the things of God.

Yeah.....I see it all now......here I am, too busy loving my neighbors and God - and even your enemies, to condemn sinners just like me and you.

The Bible says that a friend of the world is an enemy of God does it not?

The Bible tells us to love our enemies.....so I am guess I will keep on loving your enemies for you.

[font="tahoma][size="2"]I agree that most states do allow this. HOWEVER there is no way that this ought to be allowed. [/size][/font]
[font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[color="#5D5D5D"][font="tahoma][size="2"]The only reason you have for not wanting homosexuals to adopt children is because you have decided it is a worse sin than all others.[/size][/font]
[font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[color="#5D5D5D"][font="tahoma][size="2"]Also why should 95% of the people of this country have their rights trashed for 5% to have theirs trashed.[/size][/font]
[font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[color="#5D5D5D"][font="tahoma] [/font][/color][color="#5D5D5D"][font="tahoma][size="2"]How are your rights being violated? Why does anyones rights have to be trashed? We do not have the right to discriminate against people as Americans, nor do we have the moral right to discriminate against people (not even our enemies) as Christians! Who do you think you are? Even God himself, whom you claim is so angry and intolerant, allows people to live their lives - why do you feel that you have the right to overstep God's tolerance??[/size][/font]
[font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[color="#5D5D5D"][font="tahoma][size="2"] Non homosexual men do not want to deal with these people in most situations.[/size][/font]
[font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[color="#5D5D5D"][font="tahoma][size="2"]Ah, so here it is....in all it's ugliness.....if men are repulsed than God forbid we allow anyone to feel uncomfortable. Men don't want to deal with a lot of things....men need to be redeemed. Since when do we decide what is right and what is wrong based on how men feel in most situations?[/size][/font]
[font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[color="#5D5D5D"][font="tahoma][size="2"] Normality is no where in this picture and homosexuality is not normal by any standards. [/size][/font]
[font="tahoma][size="3"] [/size][/font]
[font="tahoma][size="3"]Homosexuality exists whether you think it is normal or not. This is not about what is 'normal' it is your attempt to avoid reality. The problem is, you appear to be willing to go to any length to avoid reality just so you can feel comfortable, no matter who you hurt.[/size][/font]
[font="tahoma][size="3"] [/size][/font]
[font="tahoma][size="3"]Here is the saddest part - you are the one who feels attacked! You are the person who thinks his rights are being violated because you cannot legally discriminate against homosexuals (American citizens) and there may be a time when it will no longer be a crime.....You are the person who is going to walk away from this conversation angry because everyone sees your intolerance and bigotry and how dare anyone make you feel uncomfortable! [/size][/font]
[font="tahoma][size="3"] [/size][/font]
[font="tahoma][size="3"]At the very least, I am glad to see there is still a real need for laws to protect these Americans - they are not exaggerating.
[/size][/font]

Hello Aspen,

The homosexuals want us to recognize them by allowing us to adopt same-sex unions or same-sex marriages. We already know that they exist in our society. If recognition of their existance is all they are looking for, they don't need to pursue same sex unions or impose curriculums in our public schools portraying homosexuality in a positive light. They would not be suing churches who don't want to marry them or sue publishing companies that publish the Bible because the Bible states that homosexuality is a sin. However, all those things are happening.

In Christ,
Selene

First I want to say that I believe you have a good heart about this matter - I think that you have nothing personal against American citizens that happen to be gay. I also agree that churches should have the right to marry only the people they want to marry - no American has the right to be married in a specific church or denomination. I agree that certain people have taken their agendas too far, within the homosexual community and within the Christian community. I think that is why we need to talk about this more.

Peace

 

[aspen]

The debate about "singling out" the sin of homosexuality above others is a platform from which homosexuality is defended.

Could it also be that people tend to single out the sin of homosexuality?

I would just say this: it is one of the sins mentioned specifically in scripture that is not only advocated by special interest groups, but has made its way into our education programs.


It is a sin that is mentioned in the Bible - you are correct. It is also practiced by a certain segment of the population, which happen to be discriminated against in our country. I agree that kids are learning that certain segments of the population are homosexual. I do not believe that educational curriculum concerning homosexuality is used to glorify the practice or recruit children. I think it is included to help children of homosexual couples feel normal, not homosexuals themselves.

If thieves began to hold parades, no-one would take it seriously. But if they did, there would be much more opposition to it than there has been to this particular sin.


Indeed. However, children learn about thieves in school too.

Would we stand by if the government not only legalized drug use (sorcery), but began to allow textbooks and teachers to promote it?

I hope not, but I do hope my kids learn about the dangers of drugs in school as well as home because it can harm them, unlike homosexuals or homosexuality.

If it was taught in public school that not only is it acceptable to use drugs, if you speak against it, you are intolerant?


But, I am intolerant of drug use....I have no problem admitting that - it sounds like you are too.

That is one of the primary issues with this particular sin, and to say that it is being singled out may be true...but then, they are the ones stepping into the firing line.


I agree there is certainly a firing line and they are willing to face it to make sure that they, as American citizens get to have the same rights as all other Americans, despite their personal sin - just like heterosexuals.

I would venture a guess that there is a higher percentage of homosexuals in this country than there were thirty years ago, due to the agressive tactics of that movement.

Only if you believe that homosexuality is an attractive lifestyle alternative, but that goes against all we know about homosexuality, both biologically and psychologically. In fact, I know of no homosexual that would choose to remain gay if they were suddenly attracted to the opposite sex and I was born in SF and lived in Eugene OR for a decade so it is safe to say I have known quite a few homosexuals. I think there are more people who feel safe to live publically as homosexuals now because more people are choosing not to discriminate against them.


If drug use is legalized, and promoted as homosexuality has been, I would venture another guess that drug use and users would increase.

I agree - drugs are the most addicting substances on Earth. Homosexuality is something most homosexuals try to avoid admitting at all costs until they become suicidal and have to face the true about their sexuality.

I do think that hatred toward homosexuals is wrong, but please, don't tell me that if homosexuality offends me, I am wrong.

That is so honest! I appreciate your statement. You do not have to like homosexuality! You can be offended if you want to - seriously. I have no problem saying that I believe homosexuality is a deviation from God's plan, but I am not ashamed to say that I am intolerant of sin, either. It seems that Christians often want to be offended by homosexuality, but are not willing to say they are intolerant of it - I am not sure why.... We are free to disagree with behavior in this country as long as we do not discriminate against PEOPLE. Having an opinion is not discrimination.

I don't claim to be sinless, but I can tell you this...I hate even the sin that is in my own life.


I understand.

The culture that surrounds rap music is another issue that offends me. The message that is found in much of popular rap is not something that I think anyone would try to cast in a light of being acceptable, yet, those involved have chosen for themselves to be involved in it. I throw this in just to try to give perspective concerning my views. I do not think it is healthy for anyone, and is a cause for violence, drug use, and death...which it glorifies.

I agree. I am very intolerant of the message of RAP music. I am also not fond of the music, itself.

Concerning this issue, however, I think the one who had a ministry to these people is probably the only one who can really give an opinion that matters. Most of us are not exposed to them, and their lifestyle really doesn't affect us directly. But the man in the video, I agree with him, and if God has called him to this ministry or not, I can't say.


I think all Americans can have an opinion about this issue. It doesn't mean that our opinions will become legislation.

There are some who use God and scripture in their hatred for a particular group, and that is wrong, but there are some who have a ministry toward certain focal points (i.e., homo., abortion, homeless, etc.) who have been called by God to minister to those groups. It isn't for me to decide, but God.


Indeed. However, I have no problem saying I am intolerant of people who witness Christ with doctrine and not love. It is as if they don;t want to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty for fear that they may catch something from the people they are witnessing to - I don't think this is what Christ had in mind when he said "pick up your cross and follow me".

I guess the main point I am trying to make on this issue is this: the homosexual agenda has, I believe, drawn more people into sin by making it acceptable. Why is it singled out? Because they step into the firing line. In order for "the other sins" to be singled out, there will need to be an equivalent movement, such as there is with abortion.


I disagree, but we all have opinions. My focus is on protecting the rights of all Americans.

If drug users united, and focused on doing their best to make drug use acceptable, it would not just be Christians that stood up against it (which I think was illustrated by the last vote on it in Cal.).


I tend to believe the small growers stopped that proposition, but ok.

 

[[email protected]]

Those who truly love their sin and hate God because of it:
- are the most strident in their political activism to legalize their wickedness in public
- are the most vocal in their efforts to obtain society's approval
- are the most vindictive in their attack upon those who point out its sin, error and self-destruction
- are those who seek to justify their sinful actions by condemning those of good character and honor
- are those who ask for love's consideration and show none in return
- are the chief hypocrites in the land, for they seek nothing but the satisfaction of their own lust

(ref: Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, Inc.)

Despite all wailing, groaning, and knashing of teeth to the contrary it is still sin in the eyes of God and worthy of eternal punishment unless repented of....

Making a thing legal doesn't make it right.

 

[aspen]

Sounds like you are right again, RJP - what a relief since the only other option for someone of you mindset is to be afraid.

Peace

 

[S.T. Ranger]

Hello Aspen, just a side-note: I notice you don't quote the statements you address individually, and just wondered if you had the same problem I did when I first came to this form...not having the copy function on left-click. You can highlight, then hit CTRL + C to copy, then use the paste function, or, CNTL + V (had to have my nephew show me this.

You probably already know this, just thought I would throw it in in case you didn't.

The debate about "singling out" the sin of homosexuality above others is a platform from which homosexuality is defended.

Could it also be that people tend to single out the sin of homosexuality?

That was the reason for my post. It is singled out in the sense that this is one of the things that receives a lot of media attention.

I would just say this: it is one of the sins mentioned specifically in scripture that is not only advocated by special interest groups, but has made its way into our education programs.

It is a sin that is mentioned in the Bible - you are correct. It is also practiced by a certain segment of the population, which happen to be discriminated against in our country. I agree that kids are learning that certain segments of the population are homosexual. I do not believe that educational curriculum concerning homosexuality is used to glorify the practice or recruit children. I think it is included to help children of homosexual couples feel normal, not homosexuals themselves.

My sympathy for them is as it is for all who are lost. Not that I am saying that someone gay can't be saved, or that their lifestyle will not carry over after salvation. What I am saying is that once we are saved, the Spirit of God begins the process of removing sin from our lives. We can yield to His work in our lives, or we can rebel against Him, but the bottom line is this: God in His word calls this sin, and God Himself singled it out as sin.

There is no question it is sin.

You say:

I do not believe that educational curriculum concerning homosexuality is used to glorify the practice or recruit children.

Do you think that the glamorization of sin in movies dulls down the senses of the people who watch them?

Watch an old Dracula movie, chances are, it will not scare people today, as it did back then. Why? Seared consciences.

Right and Wrong should be declared openly, without excuse.

If thieves began to hold parades, no-one would take it seriously. But if they did, there would be much more opposition to it than there has been to this particular sin.

Indeed. However, children learn about thieves in school too.

But do the schools teach them, "Its okay to steal," or do they teach that stealing is a lifestyle to be avoided? That is not a good comparison.

This was the main point I tried to express. If schools began to look at stealing as something that one must decide for themselves, and should they choose not to become thieves, they should not "look down" on those who do.

Except for the ones who grow up and be law enforcement officials.

There is really no difference with our children who grow up to become saved.

Would we stand by if the government not only legalized drug use (sorcery), but began to allow textbooks and teachers to promote it?

I hope not, but I do hope my kids learn about the dangers of drugs in school as well as home because it can harm them, unlike homosexuals or homosexuality.

You're kidding, right? You don't believe homosexuality can harm?

If it was taught in public school that not only is it acceptable to use drugs, if you speak against it, you are intolerant?

But, I am intolerant of drug use....I have no problem admitting that - it sounds like you are too.

I am. So why is it that its okay to be intolerant of drug users but not homosexuals, if one believes it to be wrong? And you and I, as Christians, really have no choice but to accept God's word that it is sin, it is wrong.

When I was saved, I was still using drugs. God took that out of my life. I believe that when homosexuals are saved, He will do the same.

That is one of the primary issues with this particular sin, and to say that it is being singled out may be true...but then, they are the ones stepping into the firing line.

I agree there is certainly a firing line and they are willing to face it to make sure that they, as American citizens get to have the same rights as all other Americans, despite their personal sin - just like heterosexuals.

I disagree. They seek to change laws and customs. Same sex marriage is not an equal right. If a movement arose that sought to allow men to marry cows, should they be granted that right? Not a good example, you might say, but the principle applies.

If a movement arose to legalize multiple wives, should they be granted that right? If no, why not? Shouldn't they also be given equal rights?

I would venture a guess that there is a higher percentage of homosexuals in this country than there were thirty years ago, due to the agressive tactics of that movement.

Only if you believe that homosexuality is an attractive lifestyle alternative, but that goes against all we know about homosexuality, both biologically and psychologically. In fact, I know of no homosexual that would choose to remain gay if they were suddenly attracted to the opposite sex and I was born in SF and lived in Eugene OR for a decade so it is safe to say I have known quite a few homosexuals. I think there are more people who feel safe to live publically as homosexuals now because more people are choosing not to discriminate against them.

Do we need secular doctors to determine that this is sin? Should their findings make obsolete what God has said?

As far as them feeling safe, well, I agree with you. I do not approve of those who inflict physical violence (or mental) upon anyone because of who they are. All Americans should be able to live in safety.

However, if my neighbor has a lifestyle that affects me and my family, such as, he likes to shoot guns and sometimes hits my house...we are going to have a problem.

If one person's sin is affecting others, then it becomes an issue that should be dealt with. The glamorization of homosexuality in movies, and the teaching of it in public schools is in my opinion, forcing something on me that I would rather not have to be exposed to.

Bikers are a class all unto themselves, having a particular culture and mannerisms, and I don't really care for that.

If drug use is legalized, and promoted as homosexuality has been, I would venture another guess that drug use and users would increase.

I agree - drugs are the most addicting substances on Earth. Homosexuality is something most homosexuals try to avoid admitting at all costs until they become suicidal and have to face the true about their sexuality.

As far as addiction goes, you have entered an area that I am familiar with.

Drug use, in my opinion, doesn't hold a candle to lust. Again, no statistics (and by the way, all of this is just my opinion, it isn't meant to be anything more than that), but pornography probably brings in more money than drug use (illegal drugs, that is). Of course, I would include most of the movies that are made these days that promote sexual promiscuity, not just hardcore products.

As far as suicide, I believe that to be the work of Satan, and I would think that drugs and alcohol produce by far more suicides than homosexuality.

Shouldn't we then have sympathy for the drug users, and legalize it, so that the destructive patterns they have chosen for themselves won't cause them more angst?

I do think that hatred toward homosexuals is wrong, but please, don't tell me that if homosexuality offends me, I am wrong.

That is so honest! I appreciate your statement. You do not have to like homosexuality! You can be offended if you want to - seriously. I have no problem saying that I believe homosexuality is a deviation from God's plan, but I am not ashamed to say that I am intolerant of sin, either. It seems that Christians often want to be offended by homosexuality, but are not willing to say they are intolerant of it - I am not sure why.... We are free to disagree with behavior in this country as long as we do not discriminate against PEOPLE. Having an opinion is not discrimination.

Would you consider murder a deviation from God's plan, or, would you consider it a direct violation of the will of God? So we see homosexuality singled out by both sides...some sins we have more sympathy for, some we don't.

As far as intolerance goes, I am. I will no more gloss over that sin than I will the sin I commit. I think one of the things to be addressed concerning this issue would be, who is throwing the stones? I can't point my finger at a homosexual and claim I am better than they are, but at the same time, I don't have to say that what they are doing is right...not and still be able to say I believe God's word to be true.

It seems to me that the man picketing has been discriminated (in general, not just the posted video) against as well. Should he be? By Christians?

I don't claim to be sinless, but I can tell you this...I hate even the sin that is in my own life.

I understand.

I think all Christians can understand that.

The culture that surrounds rap music is another issue that offends me. The message that is found in much of popular rap is not something that I think anyone would try to cast in a light of being acceptable, yet, those involved have chosen for themselves to be involved in it. I throw this in just to try to give perspective concerning my views. I do not think it is healthy for anyone, and is a cause for violence, drug use, and death...which it glorifies.

I agree. I am very intolerant of the message of RAP music. I am also not fond of the music, itself.

But, we have to understand the biological and psychological aspects, right? (a little humor there...very little) We have noise level laws that are ignored by many that listen to rap, and in this way they impose their lifestyle on those who do not want to hear it.

But really, they have rights too, right?

Concerning this issue, however, I think the one who had a ministry to these people is probably the only one who can really give an opinion that matters. Most of us are not exposed to them, and their lifestyle really doesn't affect us directly. But the man in the video, I agree with him, and if God has called him to this ministry or not, I can't say.

I think all Americans can have an opinion about this issue. It doesn't mean that our opinions will become legislation.

It may stop legislation, though. If we as Christians believe sin to be sin, we should be more active when sin is seeking to establish itself.

There are some who use God and scripture in their hatred for a particular group, and that is wrong, but there are some who have a ministry toward certain focal points (i.e., homo., abortion, homeless, etc.) who have been called by God to minister to those groups. It isn't for me to decide, but God.

Indeed. However, I have no problem saying I am intolerant of people who witness Christ with doctrine and not love. It is as if they don;t want to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty for fear that they may catch something from the people they are witnessing to - I don't think this is what Christ had in mind when he said "pick up your cross and follow me".

When it comes to witnessing there are many different approaches, and even with those who witness, they will go through stages themselves as they learn to speak to people about Christ. As I am sure you know.

Sometimes, a hardline approach is necessary. I'll be honest, I was only able to watch about a third of the video, but what I did see of the guy witnessing, I didn't see anything unloving about what he was doing.

His point was true: he was showing love to them by pointing out that their lifestyle is in direct opposition to God's will, which is an indication that they are not saved.

If we heard of a church who's Pastor was a drunk, and he taught that there was nothing wrong with him preaching while under the influence of alcohol, or that his congregation was drunk and drinking while he preached...would that change scripture's stance on drunkenness?

As far as rolling up our sleeves, how many Christians are willing to be a witness for Christ...period?

Much less to a group that is surrounded by so much controversy, both in the church, and the world.

I guess the main point I am trying to make on this issue is this: the homosexual agenda has, I believe, drawn more people into sin by making it acceptable. Why is it singled out? Because they step into the firing line. In order for "the other sins" to be singled out, there will need to be an equivalent movement, such as there is with abortion.

I disagree, but we all have opinions. My focus is on protecting the rights of all Americans.V

Well, how about the rights of those who do not want homosexuality flaunted in their face? Even the relations of a man and a woman are something that I believe should be a private affair (no pun intended).

If drug users united, and focused on doing their best to make drug use acceptable, it would not just be Christians that stood up against it (which I think was illustrated by the last vote on it in Cal.).

I tend to believe the small growers stopped that proposition, but ok.

If one practices homosexuality, okay, you have that right as a human being. I agree that none should live being fearful for their life. But keep it to yourself. I don't want to hear about anyones sexuality.

But to say they seek equal rights is ridiculous.

What they seek is to openly flaunt their sexuality. If it were not so, there would be no issue. And they call this gay pride.

It is pride, to be sure.

GTY

 

[aspen]

Hello Aspen, just a side-note: I notice you don't quote the statements you address individually, and just wondered if you had the same problem I did when I first came to this form...not having the copy function on left-click. You can highlight, then hit CTRL + C to copy, then use the paste function, or, CNTL + V (had to have my nephew show me this. You probably already know this, just thought I would throw it in in case you didn't.

Thanks! I did not know. Everything I am not replying to I agree with you on - which is most of your post. What I liked the most about your comments is your obvious compassion for sinners like us.

Do you think that the glamorization of sin in movies dulls down the senses of the people who watch them?

Yes. And I do believe that TV shows and movies that show sex are damaging both in the way relationships are exaggerated or glorified and the manner in which everyone is exposed to unrealistic images of the human body. However, I do not share your belief that homosexual relationships on TV and movies promote heterosexuals to become homosexual. Although, they may encourage sexual behavior, it is most likely going to be what comes naturally for each group.

Right and Wrong should be declared openly, without excuse.

Christians are called to be moral people, and thankfully, we have God's law and the prompting of the HS to guide us - without God we would be morally lost - we were created to love and rely solely on God for our morality. Adam and Eve were entirely unequipped to take on their new responsibilities of determining good from evil. The fruit did not give them any new abilities - it just gave them new responsibilities and a tendency to be self seeking instead of God seeking. This is where I have the biggest dilemma, because I am not surprised at all when I see nonbelievers making sinful choices, nor am I under any illusion that pointing out their sin is going to register anything more than contempt in their hearts. So, all I am left with is the choice to practice the sanctification Christ is working in my heart and mind and respond with love. Do I accept their behavior? not at all - and I believe they can see that when they see the choices I make in my own life based on God's morality. But as far as pointing out their personal sin, I put my trust fully in God alone to work in their hearts. I believe the only reason we are even able to see personal sin in others is for our own sanctification.

You don't believe homosexuality can harm?

I do not believe homosexuality is attractive to heterosexuals. Of course, public displays of any kind of sexual activity is inappropriate and harmful.

So why is it that its okay to be intolerant of drug users but not homosexuals, if one believes it to be wrong?

You can be intolerant of homosexuality - it is your right, as long as you do not discriminate against them because they happen to be homosexuals. Here's the difference, drug users are breaking the law and often need to sell their drugs in our communities in order to support their habits. Meth users have a reputation for committing crimes to get their next fix, as well as selling. I do not believe homosexuals pose a threat to the community. Unfortunately, for people who do decide to go against new societal norms about tolerance of homosexuals and acceptance of their "lifestyles", there are consequences. It is the price of going against a culture that is moving towards embracing different ideas and ways of doing things. I am certainly not going to waste time getting angry about it or believing I can stop opposition to my beliefs - I've got too much serving and loving to do - time is short and I've got a lot of practicing of God's work in my heart and mind to do before we are all called home.

When I was saved, I was still using drugs. God took that out of my life. I believe that when homosexuals are saved, He will do the same.

I am glad to hear that God blessed you in that way. Unfortunately, homosexuals are usually repelled by the church rather than invited in - which makes it harder to form Christ-centered relationships with them - I think that is why many Christians approach them by pointing out their sin first - it is the first thing we see. Of course, it often increases the gulf between Christians and homosexuals.

I disagree. They seek to change laws and customs.

We live in a Post-modern world - whether we like it or not. Laws and customs are being challenged and changed to accommodate a wider variety of cultures, religions, political parties, and ideas. Homosexuals want to have a seat at the table just like everyone else. I am not saying it is right or wrong, it is just reality. My response is to practice the sanctification Christ is working in my heart and mind by loving God and my neighbor through obedience and service. I really believe that God's love is what people really crave and is the best way to attract and witness Christ to others.

Same sex marriage is not an equal right.

I am not sure why this is the first issue people jump to when it comes to the homosexual agenda - they are asking for so many more reasonable things. Instead of fighting gay marriage recognition by the government, which I truly believe is a lost cause for people who are against it - I think we need to approach this issue in a way that makes it clear that we will not tolerate state or federal laws mandating changes in our churches regarding this issue or any other issue that may compromise our beliefs. It is important not to overreact to secular gay marriage because looking like bigoted, haters is not going to help us protect our churches and doctrines from government infringement. The fact is, God allows people to dig their own graves and people to enjoy his justification and sanctification and salvation - I choose to love and leave the rest up to God.


If a movement arose that sought to allow men to marry cows, should they be granted that right? Not a good example, you might say, but the principle applies.

Yeah, this one is pretty weak - but I did use the thief example - lol. I believe two consenting adults can do whatever they want within the laws of this country without fear of being beaten or killed or discriminated against. An adult who wants to pursue livestock, children, or vulnerable citizens (mentally ill / cognitively impaired, etc) or anyone else that is not an adult is participating in an abusive relationship and that should always violate a person's civil rights - well, except the cow (a violation of barnyard rights?) :)

If a movement arose to legalize multiple wives, should they be granted that right? If no, why not? Shouldn't they also be given equal rights?

I think this is a real possibility - and it doesn't help that the Bible appears to support the practice or at least tolerate it. If all the parties involved are adults and the US has not become a theocracy, I am not sure how anyone is going to be able to stop it. All citizens over 18 should already be enjoying equal rights, anyway. The fact is, the constitution is not supposed to discriminate against any citizen - we do not take away a person's right based on lawful behavior we do not approve of - only people who forfeit their full rights by breaking the law are placed in a different category.

Do we need secular doctors to determine that this is sin? Should their findings make obsolete what God has said?

I do not discount science. All truth is God's truth. I do not think the Bible tells us that homosexuals recruit people. The story of Sodom talked about rape, not sex between consenting adults.

I would think that drugs and alcohol produce by far more suicides than homosexuality.

Suicide is suicide, right?

It seems to me that the man picketing has been discriminated (in general, not just the posted video) against as well. Should he be? By Christians?

I do not see where his rights have been violated. He is being confronted by Christians - I do not think he is being discriminated against, nor do I believe he is discriminating against any of the homosexuals he is confronting. When you have opinions that go against the norms of society, you are going to be confronted and it may be uncomfortable.

Sometimes it seems like you want it both ways - you want to be able to have intolerant views of homosexuals without experiencing any social consequences......that may have been the reality of life before 1965, but our culture is different today.

His point was true: he was showing love to them by pointing out that their lifestyle is in direct opposition to God's will, which is an indication that they are not saved.

I believe that Paul preached cognitive, emotional, and behavioral Truth. I am intolerant of people who only value doctrinal correctness and witness cognitive Truth - I think it rings hollow to the listeners.

If we heard of a church who's Pastor was a drunk, and he taught that there was nothing wrong with him preaching while under the influence of alcohol, or that his congregation was drunk and drinking while he preached...would that change scripture's stance on drunkenness?

Well, I do not believe homosexuals should be ordained. Also, I believe homosexuality is a sin along with drunkenness, but that is not particularly relevant outside the church.

Well, how about the rights of those who do not want homosexuality flaunted in their face? Even the relations of a man and a woman are something that I believe should be a private affair (no pun intended).

I do not know what 'to flaunt' means? Although, I sure do hear it a lot in regards to homosexuals, within Christian circles. The fact is, a homosexual flaunting his / her behavior is a relative term. You know, the guys who murdered Mathew Sheppard claimed that he flaunted his homosexuality in front of them and that is why they killed him, yet he was a very low-key person and they approached him first. Also, we live in a society today where we are going to see differences that are going to make us uncomfortable. You are the only person who can decide how to feel - no one else can make you feel any emotion.
Well, I ended up erasing some comments that I actually disagree with and addressed others that I do not disagree with. In all, I appreciated working through your post and enjoyed our conversation.
I do have to add this last observation however - ever since I posted my thread about Liberalism - I have been thinking a lot about the comments people posted, most were predictably, pro-conservative and with the exception of reversing two joke lists from pro-conservative to pro-liberal, I refrained from really making any general comments, but I have to say this now:
It seems like conservatives speak in the language of what "should be" a lot. The majority of your post, in fact (I am not claiming to know if you are conservative or liberal) was an attempt to promote how the world "should be" and why is should be that way. I think Liberals deal with "what is" - in this way I guess I am liberal. Most of my responses seem to point out how the world works rather than how it should work.

Anyway, thanks

 

[S.T. Ranger]

Do you think that the glamorization of sin in movies dulls down the senses of the people who watch them?

Yes. And I do believe that TV shows and movies that show sex are damaging both in the way relationships are exaggerated or glorified and the manner in which everyone

is exposed to unrealistic images of the human body. However, I do not share your belief that homosexual relationships on TV and movies promote heterosexuals to become homosexual. Although, they may encourage sexual behavior, it is most likely going to be what comes naturally for each group.

When sinful behavior is depicted in the movies (any form of media), it has power to sway the minds of those who watch. I know how one's feelings toward something can be affected by the things one is exposed to. I was brought up being taught the dangers of drugs and alcohol, but because my interests turned toward hard rock, it swayed my opinion toward drinking first, and then drugs. I mean, if they (those I admired) were doing it, maybe mom and dad just didn't know what they were talking about, right?

And I think most would agree that when we are young, we begin to rebel against the things we were told when we were young. It is in man's nature to rebel.

At thirteen, drinking became acceptable, though I would never use drugs.

At fourteen, marijuana, became acceptable, though I would never use "hard drugs."

At fifteen, there wasn't a drug I wouldn't use, as long as it wasn't in a needle...I never progressed to that.

All of this was due to the combination of a rebellious heart (which I was born with) and the things that I was exposed to (and exposed myself to).

Movies have that same affect. Thirty years ago, the hero wore a white hat (and maybe a dusty, floppy hat sometimes...love that Indiana Jones), the villian a black hat, and we never had to guess who the good guy was.

In today's movies, often, the good guy is a bad guy...i.e. vampires, werewolves, Riddick.

Bad is good, good is bad. This is what children are being brought up on today. And I think our society reflects this type of "training."

So I still will say, that what things are portrayed to our children today are affecting their ability to discern good and evil.

Concerning this subject, how are we to tell our children that "What God has said is true," and then turn around and say, "But we live in a different time today...?"

Right and Wrong should be declared openly, without excuse.

Christians are called to be moral people, and thankfully, we have God's law and the prompting of the HS to guide us - without God we would be morally lost - we were created to love and rely solely on God for our morality. Adam and Eve were entirely unequipped to take on their new responsibilities of determining good from evil. The fruit did not give them any new abilities - it just gave them new responsibilities and a tendency to be self seeking instead of God seeking. This is where I have the biggest dilemma, because I am not surprised at all when I see nonbelievers making sinful choices, nor am I under any illusion that pointing out their sin is going to register anything more than contempt in their hearts. So, all I am left with is the choice to practice the sanctification Christ is working in my heart and mind and respond with love. Do I accept their behavior? not at all - and I believe they can see that when they see the choices I make in my own life based on God's morality. But as far as pointing out their personal sin, I put my trust fully in God alone to work in their hearts. I believe the only reason we are even able to see personal sin in others is for our own sanctification.

I disagree that Adam and Eve were unequipped: Genesis 1:31 (KJV) tells us that when God had created man, He said "it was very good."

Genesis 2:15 (KJV) shows God's instruction to man to work in it, and to guard it. In order for Adam to carry this out, he would have to understand what to do...and what not to do. One thing he was told not to do is this: Genesis 2:16-17 (KJV).

One thing that was not good was man's being alone. God made Woman: Geneisis 2:23-24 (KJV). I think Adam would have been able to see the good in this.

Genesis 3:6 (KJV) indicates that Eve, before eating of the fruit, saw that it was good. Her words also indicate she understood that to disobey God's command...was evil.

My pesonal belief is that Adam and Eve knew good and evil, not that they were ignorant golems stumbling around in the garden. What they did not know concerning good and evil were the consequences, because until they ate of the tree, they had incurred no consequences.

(sorry about that...rambling a bit)

Concerning "seeing personal sin in others," this is one of the points I am trying to get across: we seldom see the personal sin of others. And I will use my own sin at salvation as an example. When I was saved, I was still using drugs. I didn't follow "proper Christian conduct" and confess my sin to the people of the church (for I was a babe), but hid that sin from them. It was God that took that sin from my life, it really was not my own efforts. I tried for ten years to quit...I could not.

No matter the sin in one's life when they are saved, most do not go around broadcasting their personal sin, but keep it to themselves. Not so with homosexuality.

Why is that?

You don't believe homosexuality can harm?

I do not believe homosexuality is attractive to heterosexuals. Of course, public displays of any kind of sexual activity is inappropriate and harmful.

I agree. And the things that appear on television these days leave little to the imagination. I take just as much offense to that as I do this movement. I am not singling it out above it...but I do group it in with it.

So why is it that its okay to be intolerant of drug users but not homosexuals, if one believes it to be wrong?

You can be intolerant of homosexuality - it is your right, as long as you do not discriminate against them because they happen to be homosexuals. Here's the difference, drug users are breaking the law and often need to sell their drugs in our communities in order to support their habits. Meth users have a reputation for committing crimes to get their next fix, as well as selling. I do not believe homosexuals pose a threat to the community. Unfortunately, for people who do decide to go against new societal norms about tolerance of homosexuals and acceptance of their "lifestyles", there are consequences. It is the price of going against a culture that is moving towards embracing different ideas and ways of doing things. I am certainly not going to waste time getting angry about it or believing I can stop opposition to my beliefs - I've got too much serving and loving to do - time is short and I've got a lot of practicing of God's work in my heart and mind to do before we are all called home.

New societal norms.

And there you have it. If you oppose new societal norms, you are on the wrong side of the argument. Sexual promiscuity is the new societal norm, and I am against that as well. It results in STDs, abortions (which result in both the death of the child and sometimes the death of the mother), unwed mothers. The horrors involved with those things are often overlooked.

When I was saved, I was still using drugs. God took that out of my life. I believe that when homosexuals are saved, He will do the same.

I am glad to hear that God blessed you in that way. Unfortunately, homosexuals are usually repelled by the church rather than invited in - which makes it harder to form Christ-centered relationships with them - I think that is why many Christians approach them by pointing out their sin first - it is the first thing we see. Of course, it often increases the gulf between Christians and homosexuals.

If I had gone in to the churches I attended proclaiming, "I am a drug user, I feel God's okay with that, and you guys have no right to judge me," what would have been the proper response?

Paul's instruction for a man engaged in heterosexual fornication was this: 1 Corinthians 5:5 (KJV); 1 Corinthians 5:1-5 (KJV).

Concerning his teaching on those who lust after "unnatural uses," Romans 1:26-27 (KJV), what should the discipline of the Church be?

I disagree. They seek to change laws and customs.

We live in a Post-modern world - whether we like it or not. Laws and customs are being challenged and changed to accommodate a wider variety of cultures, religions, political parties, and ideas. Homosexuals want to have a seat at the table just like everyone else. I am not saying it is right or wrong, it is just reality. My response is to practice the sanctification Christ is working in my heart and mind by loving God and my neighbor through obedience and service. I really believe that God's love is what people really crave and is the best way to attract and witness Christ to others.

I am not saying they should not have a seat at the table in the secular world, for indeed they already have that. But I do not believe the Church is to bow to the world concerning righteousness, which should be the goal of every believer, and that through the work of the Holy Spirit.

If I continue in a sin, something outlined in scripture as against the will of God, am I not quenching and grieving His Spirit, which seeks to conform me to the image of Christ.

I see a difference here between showing the love of Christ and conforming to the things of the world.

Same sex marriage is not an equal right.

I am not sure why this is the first issue people jump to when it comes to the homosexual agenda - they are asking for so many more reasonable things. Instead of fighting gay marriage recognition by the government, which I truly believe is a lost cause for people who are against it - I think we need to approach this issue in a way that makes it clear that we will not tolerate state or federal laws mandating changes in our churches regarding this issue or any other issue that may compromise our beliefs. It is important not to overreact to secular gay marriage because looking like bigoted, haters is not going to help us protect our churches and doctrines from government infringement. The fact is, God allows people to dig their own graves and people to enjoy his justification and sanctification and salvation - I choose to love and leave the rest up to God.

There will be those who claim to be Christians that will bring reproach to Christ. That does not mean we begin to accept the actions of the world as the new societal norm.

We may as well say that we cannot be judgemental and leave those poor drunk drivers alone (I was one of them, too). After all, who are we to say when a person is not capable of driving, and at what point he is incapable of controlling a car. After all, science has revealed much concerning learned response and condition, and the argument could be made that some people actually operate a vehicle better after having a few beers, or a couple of joints.

I worked for years in the learned condition of being high. When I didn't have pot, I did not function as well.

If a movement arose that sought to allow men to marry cows, should they be granted that right? Not a good example, you might say, but the principle applies.

Yeah, this one is pretty weak - but I did use the thief example - lol. I believe two consenting adults can do whatever they want within the laws of this country without fear of being beaten or killed or discriminated against. An adult who wants to pursue livestock, children, or vulnerable citizens (mentally ill / cognitively impaired, etc) or anyone else that is not an adult is participating in an abusive relationship and that should always violate a person's civil rights - well, except the cow (a violation of barnyard rights?) :)

What, you don't think cows should have rights? It may sound facetious, but, those who would be cruel to animals will more than likely be cruel to other people. Two consenting adults really can do whatever they want...if they keep it personal and in private. But when it is brought into the public, that is where they impose their actions on others.

And that is one of my points. This movement doesn't want to do that. You might bring up "spousal benefits," but I would remind you, this is a special right they seek, because marriage has always been accepted as between a man and a woman in this country.

If a movement arose to legalize multiple wives, should they be granted that right? If no, why not? Shouldn't they also be given equal rights?

I think this is a real possibility - and it doesn't help that the Bible appears to support the practice or at least tolerate it. If all the parties involved are adults and the US has not become a theocracy, I am not sure how anyone is going to be able to stop it. All citizens over 18 should already be enjoying equal rights, anyway. The fact is, the constitution is not supposed to discriminate against any citizen - we do not take away a person's right based on lawful behavior we do not approve of - only people who forfeit their full rights by breaking the law are placed in a different category.

You speak of the law of this land, I speak of the law of God, which takes precedence over the laws of man.

We cannot get around the fact that God has said, "Don't do this." Should we also allow drunkenness? After all, alcohol is legal, according to the law. One can get as drunk as he wants...as long as he isn't in public. If a movement tried to make public drunkenness a new societal norm, should we also be loving and show the love of Jesus by being tolerant? Or does God's word for the Christian settle the issue...without dispute?

Do we need secular doctors to determine that this is sin? Should their findings make obsolete what God has said?

I do not discount science. All truth is God's truth. I do not think the Bible tells us that homosexuals recruit people. The story of Sodom talked about rape, not sex between consenting adults.

I do not discount science either. Recruitment is not the issue, sin is the issue.

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is about sin. Unrighteousness. Genesis 18:20 (KJV).

The attempt to rape the two angels was not the reason they were there, nor the single cause of their destruction. This just shows the condition of the society, and apparently, this attack was not considered counter to the societal norms.

I would think that drugs and alcohol produce by far more suicides than homosexuality.

Suicide is suicide, right?

But your argument is that we be tolerant to help prevent people from committing suicide. Why are homosexuals shown such great compassion when suicide is rampant, and there are so many others that need help?

The "discrimination" of homosexuals as a cause for suicide may be true, but I would suggest to you that homosexuality, like every other sin, is a symptom of an even greater problem...being without Christ. Being without the Spirit of God, Who causes us to walk in His statutes.

It seems to me that the man picketing has been discriminated (in general, not just the posted video) against as well. Should he be? By Christians?

I do not see where his rights have been violated. He is being confronted by Christians - I do not think he is being discriminated against, nor do I believe he is discriminating against any of the homosexuals he is confronting. When you have opinions that go against the norms of society, you are going to be confronted and it may be uncomfortable.

Sometimes it seems like you want it both ways - you want to be able to have intolerant views of homosexuals without experiencing any social consequences......that may have been the reality of life before 1965, but our culture is different today.

Though his rights may not have been violated, this very video is an attempt to cast witnessing to homosexuals in a bad light. You are saying that "maybe pre-1965 people could discriminate without consequence, but not today..."

I agree, our culture is different, evidenced by the escalation of public crime and violence. What brought us to that point? It is a defection from a knowledge of God.

Because many have been "enlightened," and see no need to bring their children "in the way they should go," our culture is vastly different.

We as Christians are to take that light to the world, and those who have taken the word of God to the world have been persecuted far longer and to greater extent than homosexuals. In our world today, Christians, our brothers and sisters in Christ...are being put to death, which is something we should be praying for.

But how many are even aware of this? The homosexual agenda for many in this country is a greater cause, and this is where they expend their energy.

If we as Christians want to be involved in eternal matters, let us concentrate on those who are being discriminated...unto death. It happens every single day.

His point was true: he was showing love to them by pointing out that their lifestyle is in direct opposition to God's will, which is an indication that they are not saved.

I believe that Paul preached cognitive, emotional, and behavioral Truth. I am intolerant of people who only value doctrinal correctness and witness cognitive Truth - I think it rings hollow to the listeners.

Paul preached Jesus Christ, and him crucified. Scripture is clear that we are not be hearers only, but doers of the word. But that applies to all. It cannot be used as a means of defense or offense, it is merely the truth. Christ within us, and our yielding to His work in our lives will achieve conviction of sin, righteousness, and judgement. This applies, I believe, to the saved as well as those God is drawing unto Himself.

Our lives should example Christ.

If we heard of a church who's Pastor was a drunk, and he taught that there was nothing wrong with him preaching while under the influence of alcohol, or that his congregation was drunk and drinking while he preached...would that change scripture's stance on drunkenness?

Well, I do not believe homosexuals should be ordained. Also, I believe homosexuality is a sin along with drunkenness, but that is not particularly relevant outside the church.

So why pick up a torch for those outside of the Church? It makes no sense to me, because it seems to me to be a defense of sin.

Well, how about the rights of those who do not want homosexuality flaunted in their face? Even the relations of a man and a woman are something that I believe should be a private affair (no pun intended).

I do not know what 'to flaunt' means? Although, I sure do hear it a lot in regards to homosexuals, within Christian circles. The fact is, a homosexual flaunting his / her behavior is a relative term. You know, the guys who murdered Mathew Sheppard claimed that he flaunted his homosexuality in front of them and that is why they killed him, yet he was a very low-key person and they approached him first. Also, we live in a society today where we are going to see differences that are going to make us uncomfortable. You are the only person who can decide how to feel - no one else can make you feel any emotion.
Well, I ended up erasing some comments that I actually disagree with and addressed others that I do not disagree with. In all, I appreciated working through your post and enjoyed our conversation.
I do have to add this last observation however - ever since I posted my thread about Liberalism - I have been thinking a lot about the comments people posted, most were predictably, pro-conservative and with the exception of reversing two joke lists from pro-conservative to pro-liberal, I refrained from really making any general comments, but I have to say this now:
It seems like conservatives speak in the language of what "should be" a lot. The majority of your post, in fact (I am not claiming to know if you are conservative or liberal) was an attempt to promote how the world "should be" and why is should be that way. I think Liberals deal with "what is" - in this way I guess I am liberal. Most of my responses seem to point out how the world works rather than how it should work.

Anyway, thanks

Those who murdered Matthew Sheppard were murderers. Plain and simple. What they did was evil. I will defend their sin no more than I will any other sin, but, will call it what it is.

And how can I judge that their actions were sinful? Because God has made it clear, in His word. This is the rule which we are to discern good and evil.

That doesn't mean that we will perform in perfect compliance to the will of God, but, if we seek to be obedient to His word, and His revealed will concerning mankind, I think we will find that it will be "us", not "them," that He does His greatest work in.

It is easy to point fingers, and look at the sin of others, and judge them. But the word of God, I believe, first and foremost works in our lives.

That applies to all. The one who is being taught of God will be able to witness to others, but first, his own life is in view before God. God isn't going to change the hearts of others through me...He is going to change their hearts Himself. He is the Holy Spirit, not me.

He may use me to that effect, but it is He Who works in those hearts.

I haven't looked at the "Liberalism" thread, and actually, am surprised I have posted in this one. But, I am glad I have, and have enjoyed the discussion as well. This is a topic that most have their minds set on, and few will change their positions, for whatever reason. I prefer to stay in the areas of doctrine that all of us should be in agreement on. And I feel this is one, that, as a body, we should at least be in agreement that if God says something is sin, then it is.

Concerning "how the world should work, and how it actually works," God has made this clear to us.

The world is under a curse, separated from God. By His grace we have been brought into the light, and into relationship with Him through Jesus Christ. We should have a heart like that of God, not willing that anyone should perish, but that they might have, not only eternal life, but, life more abundant in the here and now.

The gospel message will bring those caught up in destructive lifestyles which are symptoms of their true condition, without hope and God in this world. It can help those who are miserable enough to commit suicide better than any rights guaranteed by the writings of man.

This will probably be my last post in this thread.

GTY

 

[aspen]

I have a few things to add after reading your post, GTY

1. I will always defend the churches' right to teach God's laws and Christ's love in church. No one has the right to come into the church and demand that the church change it's teachings to accommodate the individual or group.

2. I will always look out for the rights of all citizens of the USA, in the public arena. No one should have less rights than someone else unless they give their rights up by breaking the law.

3. I am realistic about the idea that people are going to be uncomfortable in our pluralistic society. Some homosexuals are going to be uncomfortable with God's laws and some Christians are going to be uncomfortable with the fact that homosexuals are allowed to have the same rights in our society as all citizens. Tough. We all have to learn to lump it sometimes.

4. God's laws are for God's people. He does not force His laws on others, and neither should we. The law of God takes precedence over the law of the land for Christians - not for nonbelievers. If we lived in a Christian Theocracy like the people of the OT, then the externalized law of God would be applicable to all people.

5. The Pharisee's enforced the Law, without love. As Christians we are supposed to be sharing the Love of Christ as a fulfillment of the Law. What this means is that we are supposed to share an internalized law to others in the form of love through service. Instead, many Christian continue to share the externalized law, just like the Pharisees, believing it alone is love. Unbelievers view Christians that all only sharing the law as people who just want to point fingers and demand them to follow an arcane set of rules because a God they do not believe in has created laws they do not believe in to control people He does not love. Letting people know that God is love first and then introducing the law promotes the freedom of the law, rather than bondage.

6. Christ calls us to serve the lowly and downtrodden, not convert the lowly and downtrodden before we serve them. I think a lot of us look at the sinners Jesus ministered to as grateful and meek and compliant - when probably many of them were proud, and obnoxious and could have even flaunted their sin. Jesus still loved them - they may have walked away from him like the rich man did, but He did not walk away from them. The only time Jesus told the disciples to walk away is when people were not receptive to the gospel - internalized law in the form of love and service. The sinners had to reject the gospel before the disciples moved on to serve others.

7. We are coming at this issue from different directions. You seem to believe that homosexuality is a sin, should not be recognized by the law because God said so, case closed. I believe that all people have the right to the pursuit of happiness in our society as long as they follow the law, even it if makes other people uncomfortable.

8. I think Christians often get into the trap of demanding nonbelievers to behave in a certain manner in order to help Christians have lower anxiety. We cannot expect nonbelievers to manage our anxiety.

9. You mentioned the comparison between legalizing drug to help the drug addict not feel suicidal. That make little sense, since the drugs themselves (especially alcohol) are the reason they are suicidal. On the other hand discrimination of homosexuals adds to the problem of homosexual suicide.

10. Finally, Christians are called to a different standard than nonbelievers - we are supposed to be the light of the world. This does not mean that we are supposed to enforce Christian standards on nonbelievers - we are simply called to love them

 

[aspen]

Those who truly love their sin and hate God because of it:
- are the most strident in their political activism to legalize their wickedness in public
- are the most vocal in their efforts to obtain society's approval
- are the most vindictive in their attack upon those who point out its sin, error and self-destruction
- are those who seek to justify their sinful actions by condemning those of good character and honor
- are those who ask for love's consideration and show none in return
- are the chief hypocrites in the land, for they seek nothing but the satisfaction of their own lust

(ref: Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, Inc.)

Despite all wailing, groaning, and knashing of teeth to the contrary it is still sin in the eyes of God and worthy of eternal punishment unless repented of....

Making a thing legal doesn't make it right.

Those who value 'correct doctrine' over people:
-are the most strident in their public condemnation of nonbelievers and others who do not follow their code.
-are the most vocal in their efforts to be rejected by society in order to support their persecution complex.
-are the most vindictive in their attack upon those who preach the gospel of God in love.
-are those who believe that good character and honor are developed by the adherence to an external code, rather than meeting and serving others in love, where they are at.
-are those who never admit their faults, but point out everyone else's
-are the chief Pharisees in the land because they know they can't meet their own demands for adherence to their code, which they put on unbelievers.

It seems like they just don;t get it - the Law was made for people, not people for the Law.

Just because a behavior doesn't meet the moral standards of correct doctrine doesn't mean that we fail to protect the rights of people who engage in those behaviors.

 

[religusnut]

Those who value 'correct doctrine' over people:
-are the most strident in their public condemnation of nonbelievers and others who do not follow their code.
-are the most vocal in their efforts to be rejected by society in order to support their persecution complex.
-are the most vindictive in their attack upon those who preach the gospel of God in love.
-are those who believe that good character and honor are developed by the adherence to an external code, rather than meeting and serving others in love, where they are at.
-are those who never admit their faults, but point out everyone else's
-are the chief Pharisees in the land because they know they can't meet their own demands for adherence to their code, which they put on unbelievers.

It seems like they just don;t get it - the Law was made for people, not people for the Law.

Just because a behavior doesn't meet the moral standards of correct doctrine doesn't mean that we fail to protect the rights of people who engage in those behaviors.

You are a clear cut case of the blind trying to lead. Problem is many you are trying to lead aren't blind enought to follow.
Homosexuality is perversion those that practice it fast get to a point that they have been given over to a reprobate mind. You wish to help society enforce that as normal. It is not.

Their hole perverted agenda is to suduce others into their perversion most especially children.



They are sick and anybody that supports and defends them is just as sick for supporting them.

 

[S.T. Ranger]

I have a few things to add after reading your post, GTY

Okay, one more reply (maybe?).

And, GTY is just a sign-off...Grace to You. Just being lazy, which is funny, some of the posts can include thousands of words, but, I shorten "may God bless you and keep you to...GTY.

What can I say, I'm a bum.

1. I will always defend the churches' right to teach God's laws and Christ's love in church. No one has the right to come into the church and demand that the church change it's teachings to accommodate the individual or group.

We agree on this. Doctrine is to be found, taught, and kept through the instruction of the word, which is taught us by the Holy Spirit.

2. I will always look out for the rights of all citizens of the USA, in the public arena. No one should have less rights than someone else unless they give their rights up by breaking the law.

You mistake my belief that this is sin as meaning that I do not think all should be protected. I believe, as I have said, that all should have the right to live free of fear.

As far as rights go, we may differ on that slightly. I don't think all have "the right" to teach doctrine. Paul instructs that only proven men are to be put in the place of leadership. I use this as an example.

That we should discipline those who commit violence against others is a given. And, God's word teaches that as well.

3. I am realistic about the idea that people are going to be uncomfortable in our pluralistic society. Some homosexuals are going to be uncomfortable with God's laws and some Christians are going to be uncomfortable with the fact that homosexuals are allowed to have the same rights in our society as all citizens. Tough. We all have to learn to lump it sometimes.

We are not to be part of the world system. While we must live, work, and have dealings with the world does not mean that we embrace their positions as acceptable.

4. God's laws are for God's people. He does not force His laws on others, and neither should we. The law of God takes precedence over the law of the land for Christians - not for nonbelievers. If we lived in a Christian Theocracy like the people of the OT, then the externalized law of God would be applicable to all people.

And this is the point that I think you are failing to grasp: while God's laws are intended for "His people," the consequences for failure to comply with His law...are for every man and woman.

They will not be held as innocent. They will receive the wages their actions bring. And this truth overrides any tolerance that we might feel we should bestow. Our concern should first and foremost be the "warning of every man" of the sentence of death that awaits them.

5. The Pharisee's enforced the Law, without love. As Christians we are supposed to be sharing the Love of Christ as a fulfillment of the Law. What this means is that we are supposed to share an internalized law to others in the form of love through service. Instead, many Christian continue to share the externalized law, just like the Pharisees, believing it alone is love. Unbelievers view Christians that all only sharing the law as people who just want to point fingers and demand them to follow an arcane set of rules because a God they do not believe in has created laws they do not believe in to control people He does not love. Letting people know that God is love first and then introducing the law promotes the freedom of the law, rather than bondage.

One means of fulfilling the law is to do that which the law was intended for...to bring men to Christ. That is a hard thing to do sometimes. We can do this without being judgemental, and in fact, usually when most witness, it isn't establishing an arcane set of rules, it is sharing the knowledge of Christ.

It is true there are Phaisaical believers who seek to bring men under bondage again, but not all are like that. When we understand sin, especially our own sin...it is much harder to point fingers.

6. Christ calls us to serve the lowly and downtrodden, not convert the lowly and downtrodden before we serve them. I think a lot of us look at the sinners Jesus ministered to as grateful and meek and compliant - when probably many of them were proud, and obnoxious and could have even flaunted their sin. Jesus still loved them - they may have walked away from him like the rich man did, but He did not walk away from them. The only time Jesus told the disciples to walk away is when people were not receptive to the gospel - internalized law in the form of love and service. The sinners had to reject the gospel before the disciples moved on to serve others.

Our service runs in a prioritized manner, at least, for me it does.

1- Service to God (of what value am I to others if I am not in fellowship to God?).

2-Service to our spouses (how can I claim to be one who loves if I do not love my spouse?)

3-Service to our family (God created the family first).

4-Service to others of the faith (how can we claim to Christ's if we do not love one another?)

5-Service to my fellow man (how can I claim love if their eternal fate does not matter to me?)

6-Service to our pets...especially cows (just seeing if you were actually reading this)


That order is just a guideline I follow, and I believe that it may be arranged differently for some, though the first three never change, I believe. That is just my opinion, by the way.

For those called to be evangelists, the preaching of the word may be a stronger necessity: Acts 6:1-4 (KJV). Here we see the twelve have seen their own priority was prayer and ministering the word over helping the needy.

7. We are coming at this issue from different directions. You seem to believe that homosexuality is a sin, should not be recognized by the law because God said so, case closed. I believe that all people have the right to the pursuit of happiness in our society as long as they follow the law, even it if makes other people uncomfortable.

As non-Christians, they do have the right, if pursued lawfully.

But we are not coming from different directions, we are talking about two different things.

They also have the right to worship idols, Satan, and Oprah, if they choose, but should we confuse their rights with the truth?

Should we not tell them their need for the Savior? We should.

8. I think Christians often get into the trap of demanding nonbelievers to behave in a certain manner in order to help Christians have lower anxiety. We cannot expect nonbelievers to manage our anxiety.

I don't.

We understand that the nonbelievers do not understand spiritual things. This would be like trying to get a four-year-old to drive us to the grocery store.

The old saying is true, "You got to get 'em lost before you can get 'em saved."

How can one repent if they do not know they are in need of repentance? The focus of witnessing to homosexuals should be no different than it is with every other lost person...they are sinners, and there is a Savior.

I do think that this issue is one that becomes a platform for hatred on the part of some, but that does not change the fact that if someone is living a lifestyle that indicates they are in rebellion to the word of God, then it is not a stretch of the imagination to suppose that they have not the Spirit of Christ...that they are in need of the gospel message.

9. You mentioned the comparison between legalizing drug to help the drug addict not feel suicidal. That make little sense, since the drugs themselves (especially alcohol) are the reason they are suicidal. On the other hand discrimination of homosexuals adds to the problem of homosexual suicide.

One does not have to be homosexual to be persecuted. All over the world, many children are beat up, mentally abused, and made to feel "different." Some will commit suicide.

The analogy stands, as it was brought up as a defense for homosexual rights. I will no more defend a person's right to violate God's word than I will defend the drunkard's right to drink.

Neither do I upbraid homsexuals or drunks for their SINS, but try to speak to them about SIN. That is the bottom-line of this issue. The drunkard and the homosexual who know not God and obey not the gospel are equally in need of the gospel message. At no time have I ever advocated treating either with anything but compassion, seeing as you and I both, and, all those who have come to a saving knowledge of Christ...were in the same position they were.

We all have SINS, but it is the issue of SIN that needs to be addressed.

10. Finally, Christians are called to a different standard than nonbelievers - we are supposed to be the light of the world. This does not mean that we are supposed to enforce Christian standards on nonbelievers - we are simply called to love them

Christianity, as you know, cannot be "forced on" anyone. Salvation is the work of God alone.

How can a natural man understand the word of God except the Holy Spirit guide him? He cannot.

Our job is to share the gospel message, not bring people to the law, which is exactly what is done when people try to "enforce Christian standards," or "establish an arcane set of rules."

Jesus said that they were to do what the Pharisees taught, not what they did.

God's law is holy, righteous, just, true, and eternal, and what He has revealed to man concerning His heart will not change.

I think, Aspen, that you are indignant of the way tht some who profess to be believers treat homosexuals, and I can understand that. But I don't think we should make excuses for sin, or those who openly rebel against what God's word teaches.

We have to be careful as to how we witness, and this applies, not just to homosexuals, but to all who are lost. But the message must be clear, that all men must be saved through Jesus Christ, Who died for the sin that all outside of Christ will have to answer for...themselves.

We are to carry that message, and as we do so, not forget from whence it was that we came from...the same boat.

Grace and peace be with you (GTY).

 

[mjrhealth]

There is this fruit, its called sin, if you ate of this pie it would lead to death. The problem is christians, take this fruit, cut it into lttle pieces, ans say this piece is worse than that piece, ecen though its all part of the same fruit. Being judgemental is part of that fruit. it leads to the same consequence, christians love running around judging others, if makes them feel better than them, Paul said he felt he was the worst of the sinners because he knew what he was. One should be careful running around judging others for is it not written, Jesus said to love all men, He gave us the holy spirit to convict us of our sin not chrstians to run aorund pointing the finger. When we go to people in love, it allows God to work, when we go in condemnation we do the work of satan, Again whose side are you on.

In His Love

 

[aspen]

Sorry, I keep carrying this on - you are fun to talk with, Ranger

As far as rights go, we may differ on that slightly. I don't think all have "the right" to teach doctrine. Paul instructs that only proven men are to be put in the place of leadership. I use this as an example.

Well, I certainly do not think all people who teach are correct and those who are not correct are going to have to face God one day, but all people still have the right to teach anything they want (within the bounds of the Law) in our country. Is it wise - nope. Is it protected under the constitution - yep. It is up to us to decide to listen or not.

We are not to be part of the world system. While we must live, work, and have dealings with the world does not mean that we embrace their positions as acceptable.

I totally agree with you that we are not suppose to be apart of the world system. Let me be clear, I believe homosexuality is a sin - it should never be apart of church doctrine - it should never be an accepted part of a Christian lifestyle - it should always be challenged within Christian circles and in regard to Christian sanctification. Unfortunately, homosexuals are apart of the world system and they need to be protected by it and they need to have their rights protected by the same system.


And this is the point that I think you are failing to grasp: while God's laws are intended for "His people," the consequences for failure to comply with His law...are for every man and woman.


Actually, I am fully aware of this fact. All people will feel the consequences of the law, one day. I think where we may differ is that I believe people have the right to choose Hell. I really do. There is not one homosexual out there today who does not know that many Christian believe that homosexuality is a sin. They already know and they are in different stages of working it out in their lives. Homosexuals are not stupid - they understand their dilemma, better than any heterosexual can understand it. So, when someone already knows that they are not accepted for a particular reason and people still tell them about their behavior - it is harassment. Christians make the mistake of seeing all homosexuals who march in gay day parades as militant and sure of themselves in their sin - they are not! Many are working out their understanding of homosexuality and what it means to them. So, in fact, all those Christians that are protesting are actually helping the homosexuals to believe that they are being attacked (which drives them deeper into their community), turns them off to the church (believing that all Christians are like Fred Phelps), and helps them to accept the militant rhetoric they are hearing from their community (it must be true because look at all the people carrying signs)


Gay day parades and the protesters that follow after them are just as affirming to homosexuals as the rejection and "persecution" Mormon missionaries experience on their missions. The LDS Church does not send missionaries into the world to witness to nonbelievers (most mormon missionaries experience one conversion in two years of their mission), it is to convert the missionary! Most mormon missionaries come back from their mission converted - they have experienced all the opposition everyone promised they would - their beliefs must be true!!

They will not be held as innocent. They will receive the wages their actions bring. And this truth overrides any tolerance that we might feel we should bestow. Our concern should first and foremost be the "warning of every man" of the sentence of death that awaits them.


Here's the difference. We are responsible for making sure everyone gets the message, but we are not responsible for what anyone does with the message. Homosexuals have already rejected the picketing message - but have they received the loving message? Not based on an experiment at the Portland Oregon Saturday Market - here is what happened:


A man decided to open up a confession booth at the Saturday Market - this booth was a place for him to apologize for all the hurt the church has caused or failed to recognize in other people. He taped some of the confessions - homosexuals were crying and experiencing a life changing event. The man did not apologize for doctrine - he apologized for behaviors.


It is time for us to embark on a different approach to the homosexual problem.


One means of fulfilling the law is to do that which the law was intended for...to bring men to Christ. That is a hard thing to do sometimes. We can do this without being judgemental, and in fact, usually when most witness, it isn't establishing an arcane set of rules, it is sharing the knowledge of Christ.


I think Protestants are caught in their heads - they are suffering from the "tinman" syndrome. We are not called to simply share the "knowledge" of Christ!!! We are called to witness the knowledge, love, and action of Christ. The rules are arcane if we only stop at witnessing the knowledge of Christ. The Law did lead to Christ - before Christ came to earth - as soon as He arrived He fulfilled the Law - the Holy Spirit arrived soon after and allowed us to live the knowledge and the love. We are called to witness the full experience - knowledge, love, action.

It is true there are Pharisaical believers who seek to bring men under bondage again, but not all are like that. When we understand sin, especially our own sin...it is much harder to point fingers.


You are right, But the Pharisaical believers are the loudest and the most talked about in homosexual circles - they are what homosexuals expect when they hear the word Christian. This is why I speak out against witnessing in a cold presentation of the knowledge of the Law, rather than the gospel. It is sad to me when Christian resist these ideas so much.

I liked the cow reference :)


For those called to be evangelists, the preaching of the word may be a stronger necessity: Acts 6:1-4 (KJV). Here we see the twelve have seen their own priority was prayer and ministering the word over helping the needy.


It is not a case of doing one or the other. If we are fully converted - mind, heart, and soul (body in action) we are able to preach a living gospel rather than just the cold hard facts of the law. Jesus did it all - any we are called to do the same.

They also have the right to worship idols, Satan, and Oprah, if they choose, but should we confuse their rights with the truth?


I've never advocated calling homosexuality the truth.

Should we not tell them their need for the Savior? We should.

They have already heard the 'cold, hard facts', now we need to preach the love. I have never heard of a homosexual converting at a gay day parade rally - never. The message I get from Christians that picket or hand out tracts is that they are fulfilling their obligation to witness - without any intension of actually helping anyone, but themselves.


How can one repent if they do not know they are in need of repentance?


They know they are rejected from the Christian community until they give up the one community that accepts them.


Also,

One does not have to be homosexual to be persecuted. All over the world, many children are beat up, mentally abused, and made to feel "different." Some will commit suicide.


And all people need the same consideration - we are called to care for all people.

The analogy stands, as it was brought up as a defense for homosexual rights. I will no more defend a person's right to violate God's word than I will defend the drunkard's right to drink.


But, drunkards have the right to drink


The obese have the right to overeat


The homosexual has the right to live in the manner they choose to live


Your support is not needed.

Neither do I upbraid homsexuals or drunks for their SINS, but try to speak to them about SIN. That is the bottom-line of this issue. The drunkard and the homosexual who know not God and obey not the gospel are equally in need of the gospel message. At no time have I ever advocated treating either with anything but compassion, seeing as you and I both, and, all those who have come to a saving knowledge of Christ...were in the same position they were.


I think the picketing Christians on the video are only preaching knowledge - and no one is listening.

How can a natural man understand the word of God except the Holy Spirit guide him? He cannot.


Then why are we picketing them? If we know they cannot hear?

Our job is to share the gospel message, not bring people to the law, which is exactly what is done when people try to "enforce Christian standards," or "establish an arcane set of rules."


I agree - but so many Christians are out they preaching a cold set of laws.

I think, Aspen, that you are indignant of the way tht some who profess to be believers treat homosexuals, and I can understand that. But I don't think we should make excuses for sin, or those who openly rebel against what God's word teaches.


I agree. I hope you realize that I am not making excuses for sin or advocating others to do so.

We have to be careful as to how we witness, and this applies, not just to homosexuals, but to all who are lost. But the message must be clear, that all men must be saved through Jesus Christ, Who died for the sin that all outside of Christ will have to answer for...themselves.


Agreed.

Thanks again for the conversation!

 

[Anastacia]

Quote "I will always look out for the rights of all citizens of the USA, in the public arena. No one should have less rights than someone else unless they give their rights up by breaking the law."

I will not comprise my beliefs as a Christian, not for anyone.


Quote: " God's laws are for God's people. He does not force His laws on others, and neither should we. The law of God takes precedence over the law of the land for Christians - not for nonbelievers. If we lived in a Christian Theocracy like the people of the OT, then the externalized law of God would be applicable to all people."

The Bible says not to be a part of our children's sin. I don't want to help any one sin.


Quote: "The Pharisee's enforced the Law, without love. As Christians we are supposed to be sharing the Love of Christ as a fulfillment of the Law. What this means is that we are supposed to share an internalized law to others in the form of love through service. Instead, many Christian continue to share the externalized law, just like the Pharisees, believing it alone is love. Unbelievers view Christians that all only sharing the law as people who just want to point fingers and demand them to follow an arcane set of rules because a God they do not believe in has created laws they do not believe in to control people He does not love. Letting people know that God is love first and then introducing the law promotes the freedom of the law, rather than bondage."

Christians who call sin "sin", they get falsely accused of being like the Pharisees. This should not be. The Pharisees did not believe in Jesus. The Pharisees followed man-made rules. Christians who call sin "sin" and say that homosexuality is a sin, these Christians are not doing anything wrong, they are speaking the Truth, and they should not be compared to the Pharisees for doing so.

Mark 7
[sup]5[/sup] So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

[sup]6[/sup] He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

“‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
[sup]7[/sup] They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’ [sup]8[/sup] You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”


Quote: "Christ calls us to serve the lowly and downtrodden, not convert the lowly and downtrodden before we serve them. I think a lot of us look at the sinners Jesus ministered to as grateful and meek and compliant - when probably many of them were proud, and obnoxious and could have even flaunted their sin. Jesus still loved them - they may have walked away from him like the rich man did, but He did not walk away from them. The only time Jesus told the disciples to walk away is when people were not receptive to the gospel - internalized law in the form of love and service. The sinners had to reject the gospel before the disciples moved on to serve others."

I've heard other Christians say almost this exact same thing. But what people fail to realize, is that all were baptized with John's baptism of repentance, all except the teachers of the law and the Pharisees, that's what the Bible tells us. John the baptist prepared the way for Jesus. If the Jews repented of their sins and were baptized, and this was a preparing of the way for Jesus.....then this tells us that they admitted sin. So, I don't think you give a good account by saying many of them "were proud, and obnoxious and could have even flaunted their sin.." Also, Jesus did tell people what sinning was, and he also told people to stop sinning. So we as Christians should continue to say homosexuality is sin, as well as tell what other sins there are.

Luke 7
[sup]29[/sup] (All the people, even the tax collectors, when they heard Jesus’ words, acknowledged that God’s way was right, because they had been baptized by John. [sup]30[/sup] But the Pharisees and the experts in the law rejected God’s purpose for themselves, because they had not been baptized by John.)

Luke 1:17 And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous--to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."


Read here what John the baptist says to the sinning Pharisees... He called them "vipers." And you say that Christians who say homosexuality is a sin are like the Pharisees? I think you got that turned around.

Matthew 3:7But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? [sup]8[/sup] Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. [sup]9[/sup] And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. [sup]10[/sup] The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.