Anti- Christian Crusade.

[River Jordan]

And I say again, you worry too much about "public opinion".
Jesus didn't. Nor should we.

I am quite sure that those who have ears to hear will hear the gospel message.
And those who are repelled by our stance against sin are not going to hear it regardless.

You are reckoning without the power of God....

Sorry, but I don't share your head-in-the-sand naivety. People's preconceptions about our faith affect their willingness to consider it. That's true with any idea or belief.

I mean....basically what you're saying is that the public behaviors of Christians have no influence on what people think of Christianity or how open they are to it. That's ridiculous and borderline delusional.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Hey Marcus....hear that sound? It's the point whooshing right over your head.

Insulting again. I got your point. Your point is to paint your opponents at hypocrites, fanatics, and narrow-minded Puritans. That very depiction itself is mean and unfair, and not how we are to treat one another.

But then you seem to have a problem with being civil while you espouse embracing the world's cozy view of homosexual sin.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Sorry, but I don't share your head-in-the-sand naivety.

More insults. Nice, real nice. You know people might not want to hear your message of open Christianity after they find out how they'd be treated if they disagree with you on a Christian matter.

 

[Barrd]

Sorry, but I don't share your head-in-the-sand naivety. People's preconceptions about our faith affect their willingness to consider it. That's true with any idea or belief.

I mean....basically what you're saying is that the public behaviors of Christians have no influence on what people think of Christianity or how open they are to it. That's ridiculous and borderline delusional.

Head in the sand naivety?

Are we worshiping the same God?


As I have said, Christ did not worry about public opinion, did He?
So the world hates us. Did you think this was something strange and new?

 

[Barrd]

More insults. Nice, real nice. You know people might not want to hear your message of open Christianity after they find out how they'd be treated if they disagree with you on a Christian matter.

That is a very good point, Marcus.
No, insulting one another is not likely to make outsiders real eager to sign up, is it?

 

[Barrd]

Hey Marcus....hear that sound? It's the point whooshing right over your head.

I think Marcus got your point, exactly.
You just aren't getting his.

 

[River Jordan]

Head in the sand naivety?

Yep. Thinking that public preconceptions about our faith don't affect people's willingness to consider it is just.....well, naive. Why do you think people whose business is selling things have marketing campaigns, focus groups, and outreach consultants? I'll tell you why...because they understand that no matter what it is you're trying to sell to people--be it an idea, product, or belief--their willingness to consider it is significantly affected by their impressions of it before you start talking to them.

Do you really disagree with that?

As I have said, Christ did not worry about public opinion, did He?
So the world hates us. Did you think this was something strange and new?

So let's just go out and be as hateable as possible, eh? Let's directly tie Christianity to calling gays Nazis, equating them with child rapists, saying giving them basic civil rights will be the end of civilization, executing gays, and just about every terrible thing we can think of. And when that causes people to start turning away from such a hate-filled faith, we'll just shrug our shoulders and say "Meh....it's the end times".

Onward Christian soldiers!!

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Actually most child pedophiles are homosexual men, outstripping their relative proportion in society by a factor of forty among such miscreants. That sort of slide into depravity happens with homosexual sin. Next up: lets get out the whips and chains, and other weird objects of BDSM.

As one female flight attendant told me long ago during the AIDS epidemic among homosexual male flight attendants after shipping her roommates' stuff back to his mother: 'It's amazing the toys that boys use on boys.' Of course, she didn't ship that stuff home to the bereaving mother.

And I don't know of anyone who calls homosexuals nazis. Liberals who espouse national socialism are like nazis. What does a homosexual commie promote? "Workers unite."

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

And the only people executing homosexuals are muslims. I suggest you carry your tirade over to one of their websites and see how many death threats you get.

 

[River Jordan]

Marcus,

You're one of the most angry people I've ever encountered. You should get help with that. It's not healthy.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Sorry babe, I just passed my first class physical in perfect shape.

 

[Barrd]

Yep. Thinking that public preconceptions about our faith don't affect people's willingness to consider it is just.....well, naive. Why do you think people whose business is selling things have marketing campaigns, focus groups, and outreach consultants? I'll tell you why...because they understand that no matter what it is you're trying to sell to people--be it an idea, product, or belief--their willingness to consider it is significantly affected by their impressions of it before you start talking to them.

Do you really disagree with that?

You honestly equate spreading the gospel message with selling used cars?

The only "advertising campaign" for Christianity is the empty tomb. If that isn't convincing enough, then nothing else is going to be, either.

So let's just go out and be as hateable as possible, eh? Let's directly tie Christianity to calling gays Nazis, equating them with child rapists, saying giving them basic civil rights will be the end of civilization, executing gays, and just about every terrible thing we can think of. And when that causes people to start turning away from such a hate-filled faith, we'll just shrug our shoulders and say "Meh....it's the end times".

Onward Christian soldiers!!

I've never heard anyone calling gays "Nazis".
All sexual perversion is just that....PERVERSION. I don't understand how you don't get that. Would you trust a gay man around your little boy? I know I would not.
"Basic civil rights" do not include the right to sexual perversion. I don't know how anyone ever got that ridiculous notion in the first place. It is unnatural and just plain sick.
No one here is advocating executing gays. That would be Islam, not Christianity. Perhaps you are confused between the two?
No one wants to do "every terrible thing we can think of" to homosexuals, or to anyone else.
We just want people like you to understand that our God has forbidden it, and therefore we cannot condone it, or participate in it.

I don't know if it is "the end times" or not. But I do know this....the world has always hated Christians. We are the ones who have a mandate to be "the light of the world". The world does not like it when we shine the light of God into it's dark corners, and I'm afraid it never will. Those who love the light will come to it...those who would rather remain in the darkness with their sin will not.

It really is that simple...

 

[Barrd]

Marcus,

You're one of the most angry people I've ever encountered. You should get help with that. It's not healthy.

You think him telling you that Muslims will send you death threats if you talk to them the way you have to us is just his anger talking?
Oh, and you thought I was hopelessly naive!

I'll tell you, I was bitterly disappointed in my country when SCOTUS handed down it's decision on gay marriage.
Between this, and abortion, and American Christians whose faith is lukewarm....I'm wondering what has happened to the Home of the Brave?

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Really.

I remember the Connecticut decision whereby the Supreme Court reversed 225 years of jurisprudence and precedence and said that a governing body could take your home - the power of eminent domain - not for the great common good - which is a high test - but just because they could sell your property to another private or commercial enterprise which in turn would do something with your property which would make more tax revenue. This "ruling" by the Supreme Court - the law of the land - NOT - means you have no real right to your own property.

The Supreme Court, in a ruling reversing 240 years of jurisprudence and precedence - with the politically motivated AbominationCare - ruled that the government can force you to buy something, or fine you if you don't. And why isn't healthcare a fundamental Right? Because good health cannot ever be guaranteed. Were the pioneers denied a Right when they lived in the wilderness without modern medicine? No. But they lived and didn't rely on the nanny state to do it.

Recently, and quite without fanfare, the Supreme Court - the law of the land - ruled that your silence CAN be used against you in a court of law. That's right, you have no right to remain silent when you are being arrested without it being used against you! You actually have to cite the 5th Amendment or risk having your silence be used against you! The Supreme Court - the law of the land - said that a prosecutor can say to the jury - "Why of course he's guilty! He said nothing!"

So you want to tell me that just because Ruth Buzzy Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sostupid, Elena Kegel, Steven Breyer-vanilla-ice cream liberal, who are complete idiots, can find some other hapless justice like John Roberts or Anthony not related to any Kennedys - suddenly find another Right which isn't in the Constitution, and hasn't been found in two and half centuries we've had suddenly find that anybody can marry anybody - and this ruling actually opens the door for polygamy in the way it is worded - suddenly makes it legal, good, and moral? - HA!

And then you have the nerve to tell me that young people, who have been brainwashed at school by liberal idiots, cannot accept this deviant sexual practice as a sin - so we have to reverse 5,000 years of God's Law in order to present Christ to them? Well you can go pound sand. The Rock does not move.

 

[Barrd]

Really.

I remember the Connecticut decision whereby the Supreme Court reversed 225 years of jurisprudence and precedence and said that a governing body could take your home - the power of eminent domain - not for the great common good - which is a high test - but just because they could sell your property to another private or commercial enterprise which in turn would do something with your property which would make more tax revenue. This "ruling" by the Supreme Court - the law of the land - NOT - means you have no real right to your own property.

The Supreme Court, in a ruling reversing 240 years of jurisprudence and precedence - with the politically motivated AbominationCare - ruled that the government can force you to buy something, or fine you if you don't. And why isn't healthcare a fundamental Right? Because good health cannot ever be guaranteed. Were the pioneers denied a Right when they lived in the wilderness without modern medicine? No. But they lived and didn't rely on the nanny state to do it.

Recently, and quite without fanfare, the Supreme Court - the law of the land - ruled that your silence CAN be used against you in a court of law. That's right, you have no right to remain silent when you are being arrested without it being used against you! You actually have to cite the 5th Amendment or risk having your silence be used against you! The Supreme Court - the law of the land - said that a prosecutor can say to the jury - "Why of course he's guilty! He said nothing!"

So you want to tell me that just because Ruth Buzzy Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sostupid, Elena Kegel, Steven Breyer-vanilla-ice cream liberal, who are complete idiots, can find some other hapless justice like John Roberts or Anthony not related to any Kennedys - suddenly find another Right which isn't in the Constitution, and hasn't been found in two and half centuries we've had suddenly find that anybody can marry anybody - and this ruling actually opens the door for polygamy in the way it is worded - suddenly makes it legal, good, and moral? - HA!

And then you have the nerve to tell me that young people, who have been brainwashed at school by liberal idiots, cannot accept this deviant sexual practice as a sin - so we have to reverse 5,000 years of God's Law in order to present Christ to them? Well you can go pound sand. The Rock does not move.

I can add nothing to this, Marcus.

I can only bow my head and whisper....

Amen.

This beloved country of mine is in trouble.

We have banished God from our schools, from our courthouses, from our public parks and lands...why we have even banned Him from Christmas and Easter!

Did you know that the Jews had also banned God from their throne? Yep...

1Sa 8:4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,
1Sa 8:5 And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
1Sa 8:6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
1Sa 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
1Sa 8:8 According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
1Sa 8:9 Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

It didn't take too long after that for the nation to be torn apart and destroyed....and they have served at the feet of one conqueror after the other ever since.

I wonder, now that we have done the same, how long it will take for us?

 

[StanJ]

Act 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
Evidently, there are exceptions.
I believe this is one of them.

Not the same thing Barrd. You have a definite propensity for comparing apples to oranges.

 

[StanJ]

First of all, this is not a "public forum". it is specifically a CHRISTIAN forum. Huge difference.
As an American citizen, and putting my Christianity aside for a moment, I do not believe that ANY sexual perversion ought to be legalized. If people want to be perverted in their private lives, as long as they are not hurting anyone, it is none of my or anyone else's business. But when they want to drag it out into the public, it is a different story. I do not care how many wives some guy wants to support, for instance....more power to him and his harem. Until he tries to include little 12 year old girls in his collection. I don't care who is doing what to whom, or what parts of their bodies they are using, as long as they keep it in their bedrooms, and as long as they are both...all?...consenting adults. None of my business. Until they want to parade it down the main street of my town.

Still public.
I doubt very much you can or are even willing to separate your Christianity from your American status. You already made that clear through your posts.
Again you do have a propensity for comparing apples to oranges. You may not care, but the government does, so how sad is that?
So you're OK with gays having sex in their bedrooms but just not doing it in public? Funny, cuz that is your governments POV as well?

 

[StanJ]

Now, as a Christian, I will say again....and maybe you will hear me this time. As with "all other sinners such as liars, fornicators, thieves, lovers of money, hypocrites, drunkards, etc...etc...", we are to love homosexuals as Christ loved them.
If they are hungry, we are to feed them.
If they are naked, we are to clothe them.
If they are sick or in prison, we are to visit them.
We are to give to them if they ask us, good measure, pressed down and shaken together, and not sparing....and ask for nothing in return.
And we must preach to them the gospel.

Good to hear, by why have you not been doing that for gays then? Your previous posts don't convey what you just did here.

 

[StanJ]

I find it quite hypocritical of you to think that it's okay for OTHER people's kids to be taught that "gay is okay"....as long is it is not YOUR kids.
Silly man....do you not know that those other kids outnumber yours by a great majority? What do you think the world will be like when your grandkids are grown?
Days are coming when our progeny will be worshiping in a dark basement....if they dare to worship at all. Mine will be ready for that dark day. Will yours?
Or did you not know that "it is given unto the beast to make war with the saints AND OVERCOME THEM?"

I don't think you realize how hurtful it is that I cannot worship in the church I grew up in because of this...but hey, it's all good, because it hasn't invaded YOUR church yet....although it is on it's way, you can bet on that.

And everything I have brought up is happening, right here, in the United States. What gives you the right to endorse one perversion, but not the others? What, there are more gays than "animal lovers", so that makes homosexuality right, while bestiality is wrong? It is a case of sheer numbers, then? If that is the case, then I may as well close up my Bible and stay at home....there are far more sinners than Christians in the world, so I am defeated before I begin....

I'm not responsible for any other kids but mine, My responsibilities are clearly defined in God's word, and He does NOT tell me to raise up other children. My kids and their kids and their kids will KNOW, as I have raised them as I should have.
Now you're just sounding paranoid Barrd, and again not comparing apples to oranges. Do you really think the end times will NOT come?
I suggest you read Revelation, because it is established as what WILL happen in the future. Do you believe that Americans can repent and avoid the great tribulation to come?

You can DO whatever you want to do. You can find an Episcopalian church that does not feel that way or you can attend an Anglican church that does NOT accept the changes that the Episcopal Church has instituted.
BTW, and FYI, The leader of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which includes the Episcopal Church, released a statement expressing his “deep concern” over the U.S. Episcopal Church’s resolution to change the definition of marriage.
“Its decision will cause distress for some and have ramifications for the Anglican Communion as a whole,” Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said, “as well as for its ecumenical and interfaith relationships.”

You may want to let them know how you feel rather than vilifying gays.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

You may want to let them know how you feel rather than vilifying gays.

You may want to correct Isaiah then too. He speaks ill of others by comparing them to Sodom.

And while you're act correcting the patriarchs, you can correct Paul too. He vilified them directly.

Rom 1:21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised.