Homosexuality

[Foreigner]

Your arguments on this topic are shallow and unsupportable.
They have already been refuted. You would know if you would but look.

How exactly can you say "I'm not going to sift through 41 pages searching for something that isn't there to begin with" ........if, by your own admission, you haven't even looked?

That means you are claiming to be smarter than the 50 or so people that have posted in this thread on both sides of the issue without even seeing what they wrote. Your arrogance is staggering.

There were a number of people that tried to make the exact same points you are attempting to....and they did a much better job of it.
It would actually help your own misguided cause to read what they said.

You say, "You SPECIFICALLY stated that Jesus finds homosexuality/gay marriage reprehensible. That claims to be a direct quote from Jesus."
Nothing I said claims to be a "direct quote from Jesus." I feel sorry for you that you apparently do not know God's heart.


If you were to say that God is grieved by abortion, I could - by your standard - then demand a specific quote from Jesus about abortion.
If you were to say that God opposes racism and racial violence, I could - by your standard - then demand a specific quote from Jesus on racism.
If you were to say that God opposes the slave trade, I could - by your standard - then demand a specific quote from Jesus on the slave trade.

Because if He doesn't speak of it specifically, He obviously didn't feel that way, right?

Please wrap your mind around that and quit pretending you have a grasp on something you don't.

You are about 1200 posts shy of knowing what has been discussed here. You should get started.....




.

 

[KCKID]

Your arguments on this topic are shallow and unsupportable.
They have already been refuted. You would know if you would but look.

How exactly can you say "I'm not going to sift through 41 pages searching for something that isn't there to begin with" ........if, by your own admission, you haven't even looked?

That means you are claiming to be smarter than the 50 or so people that have posted in this thread on both sides of the issue without even seeing what they wrote. Your arrogance is staggering.

There were a number of people that tried to make the exact same points you are attempting to....and they did a much better job of it.
It would actually help your own misguided cause to read what they said.

You say, "You SPECIFICALLY stated that Jesus finds homosexuality/gay marriage reprehensible. That claims to be a direct quote from Jesus."
Nothing I said claims to be a "direct quote from Jesus." I feel sorry for you that you apparently do not know God's heart.


If you were to say that God is grieved by abortion, I could - by your standard - then demand a specific quote from Jesus about abortion.
If you were to say that God opposes racism and racial violence, I could - by your standard - then demand a specific quote from Jesus on racism.
If you were to say that God opposes the slave trade, I could - by your standard - then demand a specific quote from Jesus on the slave trade.

Because if He doesn't speak of it specifically, He obviously didn't feel that way, right?

Please wrap your mind around that and quit pretending you have a grasp on something you don't.

You are about 1200 posts shy of knowing what has been discussed here. You should get started.....

Well, if you're this hostile toward me for simply asking that you supply me with a scripture to support what you previously claimed then it's not surprising that you have such a negative attitude toward homosexual people. Jesus said NOTHING about homosexuality/gay marriage, as you know. And, if you didn't know, then now you do. Case closed!

.

 

[KingJ]

.

Dude.
Not to rain on your silly little parade, but this thread has had more than 1200 individual responses.
That fluff you are shoveling has been refuted time and time again in this thread.
Instead of wasting our time, why not go back and peruse some of the 41 pages of discussion that occured before you got here?

That's a good boy.

This is exactly why threads like this are closed. There are always newcomers who just come to state their opinion and do not care about reading what anyone has posted!! Foreigner, he need only read the last 3 pages!!


KCKID, perhaps giving your testimony or background in the new members section will help people to take you seriously. At the moment I just get a headache from reading your tripe!

 

[Foreigner]

Well, if you're this hostile toward me for simply asking that you supply me with a scripture to support what you previously claimed then it's not surprising that you have such a negative attitude toward homosexual people. Jesus said NOTHING about homosexuality/gay marriage, as you know. And, if you didn't know, then now you do. Case closed!

You are being dishonest. You didn't just "simply ask" me for a scripture to support my point.

What you ACTUALLY said was:
"Would you kindly point out where Jesus said that homosexuality/gay marriage is reprehensible? Either that or will you otherwise retract that remark? The reason? Because it's a lie."

1st - You requested a scripture that I never claimed existed (implying that if Jesus didn't say it in black and white, then He didn't feel that way about something).
2nd - You felt that if I couldn't satisfy your request, that I should then - just because you desire it - retract that statement.
3rd - You then called it a lie, which means you were never really expecting the scripture because you felt you already knew it didn't exist.

All this in your VERY FIRST POST TO THIS BOARD. Yet you wonder why people aren't all warm and fuzzy about you.

Combine that with the arrogance of stating that none of the previous 1200+ posts in this thread are worth even considering - even though you haven't even perused them - and you have pretty well voided the possibility of you being taken seriously.

You should ponder a little on that. M'kay pumpkin?




.

 

[dragonfly]

Hi Foreigner,

Thanks for selecting the question in question. I would like to say something very short, because I don't have time to hang around at the moment.


Now, to you, KCKID, (not angry, not mean, not gay-bashing), I'm guessing you call yourself a Christian because you had to justify your desire to join a Christian message board. If you don't have any relationship with Jesus Christ, please would you own up? I'm not asking so HammerStone will throw you out, although he does throw out people from time to time, regardless of whether they call themselves a Christian or not.

The reason I mention that is, that there is an assumption that a Christian holds to a few basic tenets of truth about the written word of God in the Book we call the Bible. One of them is that there is one God, one Lord, who sent His Son in the appearance of human flesh, who called the whole world to repentance, preached truth and righteousness, and after dying on a cross to take away the sin of the world and appease God's wrath, was raised from the dead; after teaching his disciples how to understand scripture, he ascended to heaven, and His Father sent the Holy Spirit to enable those who wanted to be freed from Satan's grip (ownership) to partake of the life of God through faith in Christ Jesus, having the hope of resurrection in the world to come. Now there is an expectation upon Christ's disciples that they will resemble Him in thought, word and deed - a light to the world.

So... about your question: Would you kindly point out where Jesus said that homosexuality/gay marriage is reprehensible? Either that or will you otherwise retract that remark? The reason? Because it's a lie.

I hope it is clear that I believe Jesus Christ was aptly described by his disciple John as 'the word made flesh'. This is a huge statement. It means that anything Jesus didn't say to His disciples, either doesn't matter, or, He'd already covered it in what He'd told His servants the prophets - of which Moses is one of the most notable, since Moses very specifically prophesied 'that Prophet' who would be like himself, namely, Jesus Christ.

Here, then, is what 'the word' said before He was made flesh:

20 Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife, to defile thyself with her. 21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the Lord. 22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. 23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: itis confusion. 24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: 25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomits out her inhabitants.

In the New Testament, Jesus Himself when appearing to John long after His ascension, to deliver further revelation, said:


14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. 21 To him that overcomes will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. 22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Now this is interesting. Jesus said there 'even as I also overcame'. Is He saying that He was tempted to idolatry (rich and increased with goods) but that Father had ordained that 'the Son of Man has no-where to lay His head'? Is He saying that He was tempted to compromise (lukewarm) but 'the zeal of His Father's house had eaten Him up'? Is He saying that He could understand what it is to be tempted to participate in homosexual activities (because He is still waiting for the preparation of His bride to be completed, (and He was an entirely normal male))?

I'm asking these questions because of another section of the New Testament where this is written of Him by another:


11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. 12 For the word of God is alive, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. 15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.


Further along in the same book we read this about our great High Priest:

26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;

28 For the law makes men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, makes the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.


The Son of God is consecrated (dedicated to holiness and holy purposes) for evermore. Peter exhorts Christ's followers:

15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; [That means entire lifestyle.]
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.


Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Hebrews 10:11 And every [Old Covenant] priest stands daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; 13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. 14For by one offering he has perfected [completed] for ever them that are sanctified. 15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;


Colossians 3: 1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sits on the right hand of God. 2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. 4 When Christ,who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory. 5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: 6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: 7 In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.

These exhortations apply to all Christians, not just those leaving homosexual imaginations or lifestyle, or unmarried partnerships to live holily and wholly for God.

There is no such thing in the Bible as 'homosexual marriage', for the obvious reason that God made man in His own image and likeness, male and female, to multiply. To suggest that the image of God is a homosexual union, is an abomination which is also a lie. It is very clear from Leviticus 18 that His objections to all abominations, is that they were practised by those who did not worship Him - they worshipped idols.

Colossians 2:6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: 7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9 For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; 10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power.



(I know I didn't give every scripture reference, but if you check them out in context, it's impossible for a Christian to justify an unholy lifestyle in the light of the the blood which Christ shed for us, to break the power of sin over us, and redeem us from the grip of sin and Satan.)



So really, it's a lie that homosexual/gay marriage is not reprehensible in God's sight.

It would be reprehensible of Christians not to inform those who are unaware of God's gracious gift of forgiveness, cleansing, a new heart and a new spirit, to keep this great gospel a secret, since Christ definitely instructed that it should be preached to every creature.



May you be blessed with all spiritual blessings in Christ Jesus in the heavenlies, as you trust in His life and power. :)

 

[brightmorningstar]

KCKID

That may well be the case in a few cases, even more than a few, but the street runs in both directions. Generally speaking, homosexuals (a mere label often used derogatively) have been forced into a defensive position because of Christians.

Absolutely not. This has little to do with homosexuals and much to do with secualr liberalism and lgbt activsim which in its blind sick fury has been allowed to cancer society.
A recent ComRes poll in the UK, of those who identified as homosexual. found about only 1 in 6 were really bothered about 'gay marriage' for example. Yet against the majority of his party, the majority of hsi voters, the PM forced through this issue without any election manifesto pledge.
Its going to cost him at least the leadership and almost certainly the election.

Other than their right to be who they are

the objection is not who people are. People are men and women and men and women have corresponding genitalia. Its about what people do. If it was about who people are then there is no more scientific proof that people 'are' paedophiles than people 'are homosexuals. Its a deception.

Are homosexuals not about simply wanting to be accepted by society and receiving equal rights as human beings?

They are recognised as human beings, it is same-sex sexual relationships that are recognised as disordered.

What does this mean? Are you saying that homosexuals - by virtue of their homosexuality - are also liars?

No, there are thise who identify as homosexual, who I know who do not consider same sex reltionships as marriage, there are atheists who dont, but yes there are lgbt activsists and secular liberals who most certainly are lying about the issue

That we have thousands of different Christian denominations indicate quite clearly that Christians rarely see eye to eye with other Christians.

There are people who identify as homosexual who dont believe same sex relations are correct, there are plenty with unwanted same sex desires, but what would make them homosexual is their same sex attraction. Similarly there are people who call themselves Christian who support same sex relations, but what make a Christian is belief in and seeking to follow Christ, whose Nt teaching excludes and condemns same sex relations.

Most everyone interprets scripture in their own image. So do you. God hates the very things that we hate.

Scripture says God detests same sex relations, a man with a man instead of a woman.

That's a pretty accurate description of Jesus, don't you think? The only one's Jesus had a field day with were the self-perceived righteous ones.

Jesus was harsh with those who thought they knew better than Him and argued with Him. .

Today's churches abound with those of the very same pharasaical attitudes. Do the math.

You do it, The Pharisees argued with what Jesus taught, just as you are doing.


Would you point out from the Bible where it states that homosexuality is a sin?[/QUOTE]I am sure we have already done that many times, Same sex sex is sin.. Gen 19, Lev 18, 20, Judges 19, 1 Cor 6-7, Romans 1.
Now point out where men with men instead of women is countenanced or with respect quite the debate.
shut up

Where does it state (in the Bible) that homosexuality is a sin?

There is no concpet of homosexuality or homogoblins in the Bible, just man and woman, God's creation purpose for them in faithful union, and condemnations of other sexual acts such as men with men.
Today is no different from then, at Sodom, at the time of Leviticus and at the time of Greece in the first century some societies considered same sex relations normal. One difference today is we have looked for some scientific cause of homosexuality and found none.

 

[KCKID]

My question that seems to have some of you throwing unreasonable tantrums and pretty well aligning me with Satan still stands. Foreigner: Where in scripture do we find Jesus stating that He finds homosexuality/gay marriage reprehensible? I don't need to read ALL of the posts in this lengthy thread since I'm addressing a specific post. Moreover, I see no reason that a newbie should have to wait months to establish themselves on the forum before they respond to someone's post.

If I'm to be seen as a trouble maker for asking a specific question of someone who made a specific claim and I'm banned from the forum as a consequence for doing so then I really don't want to be here to begin with. Man up, Foreigner, and present the scripture or retract your statement. I don't care about the hostilities from your forum buddies that have been leveled at me ...this is between you and me. Okay? As said previously, I'll respect you for retracting the statement and will not pursue it any more. Deal?

 

[marksman]

My question that seems to have some of you throwing unreasonable tantrums and pretty well aligning me with Satan still stands. Foreigner: Where in scripture do we find Jesus stating that He finds homosexuality/gay marriage reprehensible?

I am sure foreigner will answer in due course but here is an answer to keep you going.

The word reprehensible is a loaded adjective and probably not relevant. What we need to look for is the general revelation of scripture to be able to develop biblical truth. In respect of homosexuality it goes something like this....

In Genesis 2:24 God said....Therefore, a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they shall become one flesh.

Note, not leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, or his boyfriend, or girlfriend, or his brother, or mother and so on.

No, the ONLY configuration that God created was a man and his wife.

Now Jesus said in support of what his Father said ....MarK 10:5 And answering, Jesus said to them, With respect to your hardheartedness he wrote this command to you. But from the beginning of creation "God made them male and female. Because of this, a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh; so that they no longer are two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God yoked together, let not man put apart."

Note, not leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, or his boyfriend, or girlfriend, or his brother, or mother and so on.

That means both the Father and Jesus are one on this. God set out his plans and Jesus supported them, so all alternative configurations are not approved by God...or Jesus.

Thankyou for your comments. I will answer them one by one from many years experience reading and researching.

That may well be the case in a few cases, even more than a few, but the street runs in both directions. Generally speaking, homosexuals (a mere label often used derogatively) have been forced into a defensive position because of Christians.

The truth is, the majority of Christians are apathetic to anything regarding homosexual. They just don't want to get involved.

And no, homosexuals have not been forced into a defensive position. They have taken the offensive to shut down any comment that queers their pitch.

Other than their right to be who they are without being verbally molested or physically bashed what other subject matter would they come up with and spin it to make the other side look bad? Are homosexuals not about simply wanting to be accepted by society and receiving equal rights as human beings?

Compared to 30 years ago the acceptance of homosexuality is total. Howard in Australia changed 74 pieces of legislation to give the same rights to homosexuals as everyone else, so it is no use asking for equal rights when you have them.

These days, people who are not homosexual are having to fight for their right to freedom of speech and religion as the homosexuals are opposing anyone who disagrees with them, some times with violence and guns.

If you care to read a previous post of mine where I set out the 10 myths of homosexuality, they spin all these to avoid the truth.

What does this mean? Are you saying that homosexuals - by virtue of their homosexuality - are also liars? What is 'the good story' that they are 'not telling the truth' about? Are vague comments such as the above supposed to give your anti-gay argument more credibility?

I don't deal in anti-gay arguments. I deal in the truth and there is a difference.

I have documents on my computer that show homosexuals spin the truth to avoid it. I have been to conferences where homosexuals have spun the truth to avoid it.

The good story that they are telling you will find in my post '10 myths of homosexuality.'

That we have thousands of different Christian denominations indicate quite clearly that Christians rarely see eye to eye with other Christians. Most everyone interprets scripture in their own image. So do you. God hates the very things that we hate.

And your evidence that I interpret scripture in my own image is......

Yes that is the case so we don't want another homosexual denomination doing the same to further their cause.

That's a pretty accurate description of Jesus, don't you think? The only one's Jesus had a field day with were the self-perceived righteous ones. Today's churches abound with those of the very same pharasaical attitudes. Do the math.

From what I have seen, heard and read, the homosexual movement has become very self righteous and pharisaical.

Has it ever occurred to you that it might be YOU that is inept with regard to context and the general revelation of scripture?

Possibly but highly unlikely as I have been a christian for 58 years; I have four degrees two of which included theology; and I have been taught by some of the finest theologians worldwide. One recent study I did took me two years to complete and included reading over 40 books so I am not the dip and taste sort of person.

It isn't a matter of 'making someone happy'. It's more a case of not using scripture with which to dehumanize another human being simply because we think that we have God's permission to do so.

Being emotionally pejorative is not the stuff of intelligent debate. What is written in the scriptures was written by God, not me and I have not been given permission to change it, unlike the homosexuals who have attempted to change every scripture that says something they don't like.

Would you point out from the Bible where it states that homosexuality is a sin? Forget the 'abominations' of Leviticus which meant something entirely different for those for whom it was written and CERTAINLY has no relevance to we today. Where does it state (in the Bible) that homosexuality is a sin? In fact, where in the King James Bible or the original manuscripts is the word 'homosexual' even found?

Buggery is not used in the bible but everyone knows what it is and that it is not approved by God. The same goes for homosexuality.

If you can be bothered to study the bible in its entirety which I have done more than once, to get the general revelation that is set out, you will find that ALL sex outside of marriage is proscribed. It give no indication that ALL sex outside of marriage is proscribed EXCEPT homosexuality or whatever you want to call it.

Well, I don't know about you but I would feel somewhat insecure if all I'd heard throughout my life was the so-called 'love' message of most Christians telling me that I'm an abomination and that "God hates fags! See Leviticus 20:13." Do you know that the last words some homosexuals heard before they were beaten to death was "Fag! Fag! Fag! ..."? Insecure . . .?

I started up a support group for homosexuals who did not want to be one. It ran for about 10 years.

Not once in all that time did any of the people who were part of it say that their insecurities were the result of what Christians say because they found that was not the truth as I built a solid group of Christians who supported the ministry and made sure that every time they turned up at church they were showered with love and acceptance.

All of them did say that their insecurities were the result of a distant or unemotionally engaging father.

If you don't mind, I will stick with reality, not some emotional rhetoric that homosexuals love to use to avoid the truth and accepting responsibility for their own insecurities.

 

[aspen]

Don't worry KCkid - the majority of people reading your posts on this topic probably think you have presented some good points - even Foreigner - that's why he has resorted to criticising you for being arrogant (how dare you disagree with foreigner!). Just wanted you to know I appreciate your point of view.

 

[KCKID]

I'm not responding to your post, marksman, in the fashion that I normally would (point-by-point) because I'm really having diffculty with the posting system on this forum ...perhaps it has something to do with my browser settings or something similar. Some of my responses to posts finish up on the tailend of my response to someone elses post. This is not intended and makes reading for others (I'm sure) difficult. I apologize for that but, right now anyway, I can't seem to do anything about it.

Okay, I appear to have gotten off on the wrong footing here but I make no apologies for requesting the actual scripture or withdrawal of statement that I asked of Foreigner. As for your saying that Foreigner will respond in due course, he's already responded as have others, as you can see, with hostility and insults.

From the get-go I'll make my position clear. Not that I need to affirm myself to anyone ...I AM a practicing Christian while still being a mere human being with human failings who is supportive of gay marriage. I don't condone immorality per se (whatever that might mean to each individual) but, that said, what two people do - whether heterosexual or homosexual - in private is no concern of mine. And that's pretty well it. While I disagree with some of your views and probably give a nod to the parts of your posts that refer not so much to 'homosexuality' but to 'human' traits, I DO appreciate your relatively (relative to other posts) calm demeanor while discussing a topic that you obviously disapprove of. There is no need for hostility simply because someone else has a different take on a particular issue.

You mention God's early plan for man and woman. Well, the success/longevity of such relationships has been abused by millions pretty much since day one. Even Adam and Eve and their kids can hardly be used as a measure for a successful family unit. And, homosexuals had nothing to do with it. As it was, God was fine with not only the woman being the property of the man (his home was the highest priority and the woman merely 'a helper') but also with polygamy. The wise ol' Solomon had wives and concubines that were too numerous to count. One man, one wife? God approved? What went wrong? Those trouble making homosexuals? No. People are people and, being human, they commonly screw things up big time.

The comments of Jesus about the Torah suggestion (it was NEVER a command) for marriage? Well, Jesus would not have even brought up the subject if He hadn't been asked a question about divorce. And, divorce is precisely what Jesus responded to. Now, I realize that this quote by Jesus is the only quote by Jesus that the anti-gay brigade can level at homosexuals; however, this has nothing to do with homosexuality at all ...even in inference. What it DOES address - and is mostly ignored by the MAJORITY of Christians - is that Jesus' statement CLEARLY condemns divorce and remarriage! And yet, how many divorcees/remarrieds sit in the pews of many thousands of Christian Churches, many holding positions of power? Hypocrisy? Double standards? Selectivity of scriptures? You tell me.

As said, I don't automatically equate homosexuality with 'sex' any more than I equate heterosexuality with 'sex'. One's sexual orientation has nothing to do with that person's 'human-ness'. Yes, homosexuals 'sin' as do heterosexuals AS DO WE ALL! "There is none righteous, no, not one," says our friend Paul. To Paul's credit he even referred to himself as 'the chief of sinners'. My 'evidence' that you interpret scripture in your own image is that you (appear to) ignore that Jesus called out those who judge others and will be so judged themselves and bring judgment on the homosexual. And, while this thread IS about homosexuality I would wager (it's purely a guess) that you have no similar concerns for the Church with regard to the rampant divorce/remarriage rate that the Church, generally, turns a blind eye to.

Anyway, greetings from Townsville in Nth QLD. If you have specific questions to ask of me let us try to stay level headed and ask away! I TOO have years of experience on this and other scriptural topics. ;)

Don't worry KCkid - the majority of people reading your posts on this topic probably think you have presented some good points - even Foreigner - that's why he has resorted to criticising you for being arrogant (how dare you disagree with foreigner!). Just wanted you to know I appreciate your point of view.

Whew ...thanks so much! Just when I thought that I had no friends. You've made my day ...!

I'm sorry, aspen ...as I've already commented previously to posting problems, my response to your post has been tagged on to the tailend of marksman's post for some reason. THIS response might also be tagged on similarly. I don't intend for that to happen. Does anyone know why this is occurring?

 

[Foreigner]

Okay, I appear to have gotten off on the wrong footing here but I make no apologies for requesting the actual scripture or withdrawal of statement that I asked of Foreigner. As for your saying that Foreigner will respond in due course, he's already responded as have others, as you can see, with hostility and insults.

-- Kid, honestly.....
You didn't make a "simple request."

What you said was: "Would you kindly point out where Jesus said that homosexuality/gay marriage is reprehensible? Either that or will you otherwise retract that remark? The reason? Because it's a lie."

Again,
- You requested a scripture that I never claimed existed (implying that if Jesus didn't say it in black and white, then He didn't feel that way about it).
- You felt I should have to retract the remark if I couldn't satisfy your level of proof, just because you require it.
- You then called the idea that Jesus opposes gay marraige "a lie," which means you were never really expecting the scripture because you felt you already knew it didn't exist.

Still waiting for you to share the scriptures where Jesus says abortion, beating your wife, or selling your kids into slavery is wrong.

Apparently, if you can't provide a scripture of Him saying flat out it is wrong, then is isn't, right?
Please tell me why then - according to the standard YOU PUT FORTH - I can't say it's a lie that Jesus opposes them?

You set the standard of proof in your VERY FIRST POST. Why not live up to your own level of requirement?

From the get-go I'll make my position clear. Not that I need to affirm myself to anyone ...I AM a practicing Christian while still being a mere human being with human failings who is supportive of gay marriage. I don't condone immorality per se (whatever that might mean to each individual) but, that said, what two people do - whether heterosexual or homosexual - in private is no concern of mine. And that's pretty well it. While I disagree with some of your views and probably give a nod to the parts of your posts that refer not so much to 'homosexuality' but to 'human' traits, I DO appreciate your relatively (relative to other posts) calm demeanor while discussing a topic that you obviously disapprove of. There is no need for hostility simply because someone else has a different take on a particular issue.

- "I don't condone immorality per se (whatever that might mean to each individual)." Huh?

So, as far as opposition to immorality, we can put you down as a "definite maybe?" <_<
Apparently, the individual now decides what is an isn't immmoral....it that it?

What it comes down to is this.
Do you really think that Jesus wants Christians putting the seal of approval on homosexual marraige?
If you believe that homosexuality is wrong, then your answer must be no.
If you believe that homosexuality is no big deal, then your answer will be yes.

It is incompatible to believe that homosexuality is a sin that God does not condone, yet as a Christian you would be wrong to not support homosexual marraige.

So it comes down to this. Is homosexuality compatible with God's will and the Gospel, or is it not.

Let's start there, shall we?


Kid, you are going to like Aspen.
He claimed in this very thread that homosexuality is indeed a sin in God's eyes and that unrepentant homosexuals will not see heaven, but if you are a Christian and won't put your seal of approval on gay marraige, you are "violating their civil rights."

He also supports unrestricted abortion. He feels the danger the unborn may face at the hands of a possible unfavorable childhood justifies it.
He likes to say we shouldn't doubt what the Holy Spirit can do, but apparently that doesn't apply to children that He "knit together in their mother's womb."

I think the two of you are going to get along just fine.




.

 

[mjrhealth]

Do you really think that Jesus wants Christians putting the seal of approval on homosexual marraige?

Jesus would rather that all christians would pray, for God to change the world, but they are too busy trying to do it themselves. This topic will never end, even when it closes, for the day comes when you all stand before Jesus, and He will show you how you judged them, and you will see how wrong you all are.

Joh 8:15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
Joh 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

I hope you understand.

In al His Love

 

[KCKID]

-- Kid, honestly.....
You didn't make a "simple request."

What you said was: "Would you kindly point out where Jesus said that homosexuality/gay marriage is reprehensible? Either that or will you otherwise retract that remark? The reason? Because it's a lie."

Again,
- You requested a scripture that I never claimed existed (implying that if Jesus didn't say it in black and white, then He didn't feel that way about it).
- You felt I should have to retract the remark if I couldn't satisfy your level of proof, just because you require it.
- You then called the idea that Jesus opposes gay marraige "a lie," which means you were never really expecting the scripture because you felt you already knew it didn't exist.

Still waiting for you to share the scriptures where Jesus says abortion, beating your wife, or selling your kids into slavery is wrong.

Apparently, if you can't provide a scripture of Him saying flat out it is wrong, then is isn't, right?
Please tell me why then - according to the standard YOU PUT FORTH - I can't say it's a lie that Jesus opposes them?

You set the standard of proof in your VERY FIRST POST. Why not live up to your own level of requirement?

Well, I guess we could keep going around in circles here. I would just suggest that in future any claim that any of us can't back up just forget it.

- "I don't condone immorality per se (whatever that might mean to each individual)." Huh?

So, as far as opposition to immorality, we can put you down as a "definite maybe?" <_<
Apparently, the individual now decides what is an isn't immmoral....it that it?

Yes, in some cases, pretty much. I don't see a committed relationship between two people of the same gender to be immoral but you apparently do. You apparently don't see someone on their second or third marriage to be immoral - and nor do I - but the scriptures (Jesus, in fact) term this as adultery. And, adultery was - and still IS in some Middle East countries - punishable by death. The Sambian Tribe of the New Guinea Highlands perform a culture of sexual rituals between men and boys in order to make future warriors out of the boys. This results in what we would refer to as both gay sex and pedophilia but the Sambians don't regard this as anything immoral. I find it immoral that sports icons are paid vast sums of money while so many others in the world are suffering (some starving to death) because they can't afford the bare essentials. I find it immoral that our gluttenous society wastes so much food on a daily basis that could supply these very same people with nourishment and sustainance but we don't even give it a thought. We're too busy watching crap like Master Chef and other banal shows on TV to ever consider giving to these 'the least of my brethren' as instructed by Jesus. And yet, as soon as 'homosexuality' is mentioned the eyes of Christians roll over in their heads as they get off on their feeding frenzy bleating on about God, Jesus, immorality, sin, sin, sin . . .etc. etc. I find this alone to be immoral but I guess you don't.

What it comes down to is this.
Do you really think that Jesus wants Christians putting the seal of approval on homosexual marraige?
If you believe that homosexuality is wrong, then your answer must be no.
If you believe that homosexuality is no big deal, then your answer will be yes.

I believe that Jesus would respond in a similar manner to that of the adultress woman and her accusers. I believe that Jesus would stoop down and begin to write their own cherished sins in the dirt. Then He would rise and ask for a show of hands from these self righteous Christians as to who of them had never sinned. They would be humbled and leave the scene with their tails between their legs.

It is incompatible to believe that homosexuality is a sin that God does not condone, yet as a Christian you would be wrong to not support homosexual marraige.

The love and commitment between two people cannot be a sin. Jesus = L-O-V-E. That's all we need to know as far as I'm concerned.

So it comes down to this. Is homosexuality compatible with God's will and the Gospel, or is it not.

I know of no one who, in actuality, behaves in a manner that is compatible with God's will. If they did they would be perfection itself. I would wager that the majority of Christians don't have any idea of what God's will IS. Christians talk a lot about how others should behave, however! ;)

Let's start there, shall we?

Well, if we can ...then let's.

 

[dragonfly]

Hi KCKID,

The posts of all of us to different people, if not interrupted by another poster, will appear in the same frame for up to 48 hours after the first part of the post was made. This was a choice made by HammerStone some time ago.

There is one added advantage to this, in that the normal time for editing - which used to be quite short, but is now longer, though not sure how long - is extended until the next new poster.

You can adjust the white space between sections of your post addressed to different people, either when you make the post initially, or, by editing it in.


Brother, you are not making sense. A disciple of Jesus Christ is supposed to be coming into agreement with Him about everything, and yes, mjrhealth, demonstrating the love of God. The love of God has the power to bring men and women into a right relationship with God, first, and then with their fellow humans. It isn't going to happen the other way round. No-one who is out of fellowship with God can be right with their neighbour by God's standard.

I don't see a committed relationship between two people of the same gender to be immoral but you apparently do.

Don't you realise... that God calls it immoral? Aren't His detailed statements in scripture clear enough for you?


In the end, your choice/decision to disagree with God's clearly expressed, superior-to-human understanding, will fall alongside many other scriptures in which God makes clear the attitudes and behaviours He is looking for from His worshippers, and your non-compliance will be unmistakable.

John 12:48 He that rejects me, and receives not my words, hath one that judges him:the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

 

[KCKID]

Hi KCKID,

The posts of all of us to different people, if not interrupted by another poster, will appear in the same frame for up to 48 hours after the first part of the post was made. This was a choice made by HammerStone some time ago.

There is one added advantage to this, in that the normal time for editing - which used to be quite short, but is now longer, though not sure how long - is extended until the next new poster.

You can adjust the white space between sections of your post addressed to different people, either when you make the post initially, or, by editing it in.

Thanks for the explanation. I'll try to take it all in and see how I go from here on in. My last post to Foreigner turned out quite good ...not the contents, perhaps, which he no doubt will disagree with ;) but the post itself.

Brother, you are not making sense.

A disciple of Jesus Christ is supposed to be coming into agreement with Him about everything, and yes, mjrhealth, demonstrating the love of God. The love of God has the power to bring men and women into a right relationship with God, first, and then with their fellow humans. It isn't going to happen the other way round. No-one who is out of fellowship with God can be right with their neighbour by God's standard.


Don't you realise... that God calls it immoral? Aren't His detailed statements in scripture clear enough for you?

What I believe, what I do, what I say makes sense to me. I learned some time ago that Jesus is not found in a book. Sure, the words that are ascribed to Him are found in the Bible but the Person of Jesus is found within the heart. And, for those of you who truly believe that the Bible IS Jesus, then we'll be at odds with each until kingdom come. Being able to quote the Bible might be theologically strong but it becomes absolutely meaningless the moment someone strips another person of their dignity and their humanity with condemning words from the Bible. And this, coupled with good old fashioned ignorance - of both scripture and the compexities surrounding human-ness - is where we are at right now with regard to this issue. I will not be a party to a type of Christianity that stands in judgment of another or/and demeans another human being.

In the end, your choice/decision to disagree with God's clearly expressed, superior-to-human understanding, will fall alongside many other scriptures in which God makes clear the attitudes and behaviours He is looking for from His worshippers, and your non-compliance will be unmistakable.

John 12:48 He that rejects me, and receives not my words, hath one that judges him:the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

In that case I will be judged for my stand against any so-called 'Christian message' that is used for the sole purpose of spreading hatred and dehumanizing any other person. Moreover, I'm perfectly okay with that.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Jesus would rather that all christians would pray, for God to change the world, but they are too busy trying to do it themselves. This topic will never end, even when it closes, for the day comes when you all stand before Jesus, and He will show you how you judged them, and you will see how wrong you all are.

Joh 8:15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
Joh 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

I hope you understand.

In al His Love

Well the Biblical testimony of God describes men with men instead of women as error, a barrier to the Kingdom, the result of turning from God and the truth, and also that the judgment is with Christ. So you have decided you believe the bit about judgment but decided you dont believe the bit about the error of homosexuality and proposed that we wuill be wrong. Dont you mean you think Jesus will be wrong?

KCKID,

What I believe, what I do, what I say makes sense to me. I learned some time ago that Jesus is not found in a book. Sure, the words that are ascribed to Him are found in the Bible but the Person of Jesus is found within the heart.

or not as the book tells us. Jesus said His words are spirit and life when we do what He teaches. Someone claiming Jesus is in their heart doesnt mean He is, the test is whether they seek to do what He teaches which is in the book. Now someone could get told as well and receive the Holy Spirit, but it would be the same words.
Now no Bible believers think the Bible IS Jesus, but those who dont believe what the Bible says do seem to think we do as you have shown.

Being able to quote the Bible might be theologically strong but it becomes absolutely meaningless the moment someone strips another person of their dignity and their humanity with condemning words from the Bible.

Fully agree with you there, Satan knows the scripture.

And this, coupled with good old fashioned ignorance - of both scripture and the compexities surrounding human-ness - is where we are at right now with regard to this issue.

Yes that's what you have been shown. Remember in the Nt where Jesus responds to Satan's temtatiosn and twists with the scripture, it is written. Remember? Oh sorry I forgiot you dont believe the scripture.

I will not be a party to a type of Christianity that stands in judgment of another or/and demeans another human being.

Well we agree there, but the issue is homosexuality (page 42 now) and homosexuality isnt another human being is it? All your homosexuals are men and women are they not? They are all created in God's image and loved by God, and have corresponding genitalia for sexual relations do they not?

In that case I will be judged for my stand against any so-called 'Christian message' that is used for the sole purpose of spreading hatred and dehumanizing any other person. Moreover, I'm perfectly okay with that.

Then you are standing against what you falsey accuse others of.

 

[aspen]

One of the mistakes I am seeing within this discussion is the idea that Christians must be in agreement with Christ. Of corse we are supposed to obey Christ's commandment to love others unconditionally, but that is not the same as being in intellectual agreement with Calvin's, Wesley's, Pope's or the Republican party's theological interpretation of scripture. Christians are supposed to be known for their obedience to carry out Christ's love, not by our understanding of scripture.

One of the mistakes I am seeing within this discussion is the idea that Christians must be in agreement with Christ. Of corse we are supposed to obey Christ's commandment to love others unconditionally, but that is not the same as being in intellectual agreement with Calvin's, Wesley's, Pope's or the Republican party's theological interpretation of scripture. Christians are supposed to be known for their obedience to carry out Christ's love, not by our understanding of scripture.

 

[KCKID]

Well the Biblical testimony of God describes men with men instead of women as error, a barrier to the Kingdom, the result of turning from God and the truth, and also that the judgment is with Christ. So you have decided you believe the bit about judgment but decided you dont believe the bit about the error of homosexuality and proposed that we wuill be wrong. Dont you mean you think Jesus will be wrong?

While this remark was not aimed at me I'd like to respond to it. According to scripture simply being human is a barrier to the Kingdom. "There is none righteous (worthy), no not one," according to Paul. We are all 'in error' because we're human. So, why is it that those who are unworthy and in error continually tell others that they are unworthy and in error?

KCKID,


or not as the book tells us. Jesus said His words are spirit and life when we do what He teaches. Someone claiming Jesus is in their heart doesnt mean He is, the test is whether they seek to do what He teaches which is in the book. Now someone could get told as well and receive the Holy Spirit, but it would be the same words.
Now no Bible believers think the Bible IS Jesus, but those who dont believe what the Bible says do seem to think we do as you have shown.

But, are not Jesus' teachings very much about unconditional love? It seems as though you're adding your own slant to this by stating that there ARE conditions to Jesus' unconditional love. How does that work?

What, precisely, is a 'Bible-believer'? I mean, what does a 'Bible-believer' do with texts such as those found in the Old Testament where disobedient children are to be executed? And, what about the death penalty for those who profane the Sabbath? That would include every mainstream Christian who claims Sunday as the Sabbath. What about the stoning until death of adulterers? That would include those who are divorced and in their second or third marriage who sit in the pews of many Christian Churches. Where do we draw the line with regard to what parts of the Bible we believe and those we outright reject? Again, seriously. what IS a Bible-believer' other than mere words with little substance? Is this a legitimate question or will I be insulted and belittled again simply for having asked it?

Fully agree with you there, Satan knows the scripture.

Yes that's what you have been shown. Remember in the Nt where Jesus responds to Satan's temtatiosn and twists with the scripture, it is written. Remember? Oh sorry I forgiot you dont believe the scripture.


Well we agree there, but the issue is homosexuality (page 42 now) and homosexuality isnt another human being is it? All your homosexuals are men and women are they not? They are all created in God's image and loved by God, and have corresponding genitalia for sexual relations do they not?

Then you are standing against what you falsey accuse others of.

I can't itemize portions of your post and respond to them individually without getting all messed up. It just doesn't seem to work. So, this might come across as being rather disjointed. I never said that I don't believe scripture. I said that being a Christian is not dependent on one's ability to quote scripture. So often quoting scripture only serves to puff one up while belittling another. And, that sickens me. As for genetalia ...if that is the be all and end all to loving another person then anyone who has sex for any other reason than procreation is not using their genetalia as intended by God. So, recreational sex is a no-no. That said, and without meaning to be crass, what IS the difference between non-procreational sex (sex used for intimate pleasure only) whether one is heterosexual or homosexual? My logical viewpoint is 'there is no difference'. Should I, perhaps, suspend logic in this instance?

 

[dragonfly]

Hi KCKID,

But, are not Jesus' teachings very much about unconditional love? It seems as though you're adding your own slant to this by stating that there ARE conditions to Jesus' unconditional love. How does that work?

If you think through the terms and conditions set out by God in scripture, the only 'unconditional' part was God's decision to die for all sin, regardless of what that sin was, how often it had been committed, and regardless of how many people had been damaged or destroyed (killed) by one person's sins.

The purpose of God making that choice and decision, was to create a totally level praying field for every human being who will ever live, who is willing to turn from 'the sin' - that is, to turn from the power of sin over which men and women had no control until after Jesus had died, (having cried, 'It is finished', when He abolished death (the penalty for acting out 'the sin') and destroyed the devil who kept mankind in bondage to fear of death). God did this for the express purpose of giving believers the power to live for righteousness separated to God in worship, obedience and true holiness, and an incorruptible inheritance. He asks us to love people with the same attitude as to their eternal welfare. The terms and conditions have not really changed at all. We are ambassadors of God's 'unconditional' love to all mankind, and we are not expected to turn a blind eye to their idolatry, but to call them to repentance.

Homosexual behaviour is a choice, however profoundly it has become rooted in the thinking and practises of the individual. Paul makes totally clear in 1 Corinthians 6, that homosexual behaviour is incompatible with receiving the eternal inheritance which is being prepared for those who abide by God's conditions for fellowship with Him. Those who claim a love for God and attend churches, but yet do not abide in Him - persisting in their idolatry (of which homosexual behaviour is one kind of idolatry - mainly mutual self-worship with another like-minded individual), will be denied by Christ.

Scripture makes clear in all it's allusions to idolatry, that worshipping idols is a choice. We know from the NT that many idolaters turned from their idols to the living God. What this means is that many fornicators and sexual perverts turned from that behaviour to abstinence or chaste relationships. Marriage is honourable in all and the bed undefiled. (Heb 13:4)

There is no place in scripture where the follower of God legitimises the behaviour of those not following God.

Scripture is clear that God's mission, and the mission of the great company of preachers of righteousness, is to call to all people to enter into right relationship with Him through faith in the work of His Son, Jesus Christ. Before Christ, Israel was called upon to believe in His promises, but now that the most major promise of all - Gen 3:15 - has been fulfilled and the Spirit of grace and power has been poured out by the most High God, it is only a matter of time before all those who have refused His gracious offer of salvation from sin, will reap the final outcome of what they have been sowing: the wrath of God.

I believe that Christians need not feel obliged to support sinners in their sin. This line of thinking is entirely humanistic, and really has no place in God's economy. Twentieth century philosophers did a great job of wimpifying the Church away from the very obvious conclusion of scripture, that God's holiness and justice reacts against being overly attached to sinful human nature, even though He does not 'take pleasure' in destroying unrepentant sinners. The name 'Israel' (= God prevails) indicates that one of the most sensible things a human being can do, is recognise his need of the Saviour God who saves undeserving mankind and persists in calling him back to Himself so that He can bless him with eternal life.

Another victory for humanists, is that Christians have fallen for every lie which invites them to believe that homosexuals cannot help what they think and do, even to the extent of accepting that they've been 'born' that way. The gospel is that Christ is able to deliver to the uttermost, including from the spirits of homosexual desire which are being promoted in this age. The 'way' homosexuals have been born (descendants of Adam like the rest of us) is what makes them vulnerable to corruption - like the rest of us. We all have a weakness towards one sin or another, and we all have the same choice: to understand the enemy so that we can overcome him, or, to accept the default fatal sin-and-death outcome of our resistance to God's love.

Look at what the king of Sodom said to Abraham during an important moment of worship in Genesis 14. He said, 'Give me the souls'.

Nothing has changed.

 

[KCKID]

Hi KCKID,

If you think through the terms and conditions set out by God in scripture, the only 'unconditional' part was God's decision to die for all sin, regardless of what that sin was, how often it had been committed, and regardless of how many people had been damaged or destroyed (killed) by one person's sins.

The purpose of God making that choice and decision, was to create a totally level praying field for every human being who will ever live, who is willing to turn from 'the sin' - that is, to turn from the power of sin over which men and women had no control until after Jesus had died, (having cried, 'It is finished', when He abolished death (the penalty for acting out 'the sin') and destroyed the devil who kept mankind in bondage to fear of death). God did this for the express purpose of giving believers the power to live for righteousness separated to God in worship, obedience and true holiness, and an incorruptible inheritance. He asks us to love people with the same attitude as to their eternal welfare. The terms and conditions have not really changed at all. We are ambassadors of God's 'unconditional' love to all mankind, and we are not expected to turn a blind eye to their idolatry, but to call them to repentance.

Homosexual behaviour is a choice, however profoundly it has become rooted in the thinking and practises of the individual. Paul makes totally clear in 1 Corinthians 6, that homosexual behaviour is incompatible with receiving the eternal inheritance which is being prepared for those who abide by God's conditions for fellowship with Him. Those who claim a love for God and attend churches, but yet do not abide in Him - persisting in their idolatry (of which homosexual behaviour is one kind of idolatry - mainly mutual self-worship with another like-minded individual), will be denied by Christ.

Scripture makes clear in all it's allusions to idolatry, that worshipping idols is a choice. We know from the NT that many idolaters turned from their idols to the living God. What this means is that many fornicators and sexual perverts turned from that behaviour to abstinence or chaste relationships. Marriage is honourable in all and the bed undefiled. (Heb 13:4)

There is no place in scripture where the follower of God legitimises the behaviour of those not following God.

Scripture is clear that God's mission, and the mission of the great company of preachers of righteousness, is to call to all people to enter into right relationship with Him through faith in the work of His Son, Jesus Christ. Before Christ, Israel was called upon to believe in His promises, but now that the most major promise of all - Gen 3:15 - has been fulfilled and the Spirit of grace and power has been poured out by the most High God, it is only a matter of time before all those who have refused His gracious offer of salvation from sin, will reap the final outcome of what they have been sowing: the wrath of God.

I believe that Christians need not feel obliged to support sinners in their sin. This line of thinking is entirely humanistic, and really has no place in God's economy. Twentieth century philosophers did a great job of wimpifying the Church away from the very obvious conclusion of scripture, that God's holiness and justice reacts against being overly attached to sinful human nature, even though He does not 'take pleasure' in destroying unrepentant sinners. The name 'Israel' (= God prevails) indicates that one of the most sensible things a human being can do, is recognise his need of the Saviour God who saves undeserving mankind and persists in calling him back to Himself so that He can bless him with eternal life.

Another victory for humanists, is that Christians have fallen for every lie which invites them to believe that homosexuals cannot help what they think and do, even to the extent of accepting that they've been 'born' that way. The gospel is that Christ is able to deliver to the uttermost, including from the spirits of homosexual desire which are being promoted in this age. The 'way' homosexuals have been born (descendants of Adam like the rest of us) is what makes them vulnerable to corruption - like the rest of us. We all have a weakness towards one sin or another, and we all have the same choice: to understand the enemy so that we can overcome him, or, to accept the default fatal sin-and-death outcome of our resistance to God's love.

Look at what the king of Sodom said to Abraham during an important moment of worship in Genesis 14. He said, 'Give me the souls'.

Nothing has changed.

While I'm not adept enough to respond adequately to the above, it does - with all due respect - come across as if you're delivering a sermon. Generally speaking, I dislike sermons because they are hardly ever - just ever so occasionally - representative of realism. Sure, it might make the preacher feel good and sincere - even important - as well as some of his flock - those that are still awake and coherent - who oftentimes are more than content to relate condemning scriptures to everyone else but them. I was, however, particularly interested in a couple of places in the above post. One is where you say that homosexuality is a choice as if by your saying that automatically makes it so. I disagree, as do many others. Those homosexuals that I've heard give their testimony claim that they have 'always felt different' with regard to their (homo)sexual tendencies. Some, even many, fought these tendencies because they wanted to fit in with the norm. They say point blank that this was not a choice but something that 'they are'. Are homosexuals somehow disqualified or incapable of determining that they are genetically 'wired that way' because you somehow know better than they do? This is not to mention, of course, that psychology (the APA and others) OVERWHELMINGLY disagrees with you. So, why is it so important for you to state with no hesitation at all that homosexuality is a choice? Well, by doing so you have a specific, not just a general, 'biblical sinner' that you can target with your sermons. LOGICALLY speaking - if logical thinking is allowed or encouraged within Christian circles - it would be totally illogical for a person with natural heterosexual tendencies to go - and for NO good reason, mind - against a natural orientation and CHOOSE, instead, something that is totally unnatural to them. What you appear to be saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that a homosexual is 'a deviant heterosexual' ...is that correct? If someone can explain the logic behind this kind of thinking then I'm all ears.

I'm also interested in your comment pertaining to Christians not being obliged to support sinners in their sin. Well, it was always my understanding that the Church is likened to a hospital where Jesus is the great Physician. Jesus Himself said that He did not come for the righteous but for the sinner. The sinner. Isn't that ALL of us? Does that not indicate that ALL of us that attend Church are 'in our sin'? We are only made righteous through the blood of Jesus since our sins, past present and future are imputed to Him. So, in reality, none of us have attained perfection and never will. So, whether we be gay or straight we are still miserable sinners ...as filthy rags? It seems to me that we are ALL in the same boat. Would it be necessary to conduct a roll call each Sunday to determine who, truthfully, is and who is not 'still in their sin'? Furthermore, would we not be deceiving ourselves if we were to state, even though convinced that it be true, that we were NOT still in sin? Who determines this? As said, I'm all ears.