Can We Answer Pro-Gay Theology?
Posted by truthtalklive on 24 June, 2009
This post was filed in Christian Living, Christian Teaching, Jesus Christ, Truth and has 97 comments
Can you be a practicing homosexual and a Christian? There are churches that not only accept openly homosexual members but celebrate their choices.
Pro-gay & theology are not terms that many thought we would ever see linked together.
Today on Truthtalk Live, Dr. Michael Brown, President of the Fire School of Ministry and host of the national syndicated radio program “Line of Fire” asks the question: “Can we answer pro-gay theology?’
Find us on: 
97 Comments on “Can We Answer Pro-Gay Theology?”
Dr. Brown: Are you saying that if I, knowing it is sin, lust and give in to temptation and either have sexual fantasies, look at porn or engage in sexual activity with a woman (I am a man) that isn’t my wife then I can’t claim to be a Christian? What if I only do it once? Or twice? What is the limit before I can no longer call myself a Christian? How would this differ for a Homosexual?
My previous post has to do with a comment made in your video.
Post 1 – scott: What if I only do it once? Or twice? What is the limit before I can no longer call myself a Christian?
We aren’t expected to be perfect, but we are expected to pursue perfection. If you are sinning proudly, then there is no way in hell that you are repentant. If you are sinning and denouncing your sin (and thereby sinning less and less) then it sounds more like you’re doing the best you can. With that in mind, remember that you won’t fool God.
Scott,
There’s really quite a difference in the two situations. The “gay Christian” who is a practicing homosexual claims that his acts are NOT sinful in God’s sight and that he does not need to repent of them. In contrast, you speak of a situation in which you recognize that your thoughts and actions are sinful and that you seeking true and lasting repentance. So, the big issue is not the acts themselves but whether we recognize them as sinful and renounce them with God’s help.
With regard to your question of “How many times?”, the Word of God is not specific on this subject (for many obvious reasons). But it does tell us plainly in numerous passages (e.g., 1 Cor 6, Gal 5, and Eph 5) those who willfully continue in unrepentant sin — be it immorality or drunkenness or covetousness — will not inherit God’s kingdom. See also Matt 7:21.
We are not saved by good works, but we are saved to holiness, and those who claim to be Jesus’ sheep must demonstrate that by a changed life.
I am interested in this question:”How would this differ for a homosexual?”
Don’t forget to join Dr. Brown, Fred Phelps, the members of Westboro Baptist Church and other Christian homophobes for the event in Uptown Charlotte on July 25th.
Dr. Brown: Is there any difference between a person who struggles with same sex lust, as I might struggle with opposite sex lust, and gives in to temptation as I might give in to temptation if both are very repentant? Can either still claim to be a Christian?
Can you be a practicing adulterer and a Christian? A glutton and a Christian? A gossiper and a Christian? Hold grudges and be a Christian? All of which are equally if not more frequently condemned in the Bible than homosexuality. And homosexuality, when it is condemned, is in the context of pagan temple acts, or general sexual promiscuity including heterosexual promiscuity, or violent sexual assault, or listed among the purity codes many of which we no longer follow. So why do we single out homosexuals as the one group of sinners that must change and become perfect BEFORE they may receive Christ? Why must they suddenly change their sexual orientation upon accepting Christ or be rejected from the fellowship of God? Of hat other group of sinners do we require that? I can tell you that Christ does not require such an outward act. HOmosexuals are saved by grace just as much as heterosexuals, and not by anything that they do or don’t do.
Dr. Brown writes: “those who willfully continue in unrepentant sin — be it immorality or drunkenness or covetousness – will not inherit God’s kingdom.” So we can will ourselves to be free of sin? Or are you saying that there is willful sinning, and sinning against one’s will, and homosexuality is the former, and all the heterosexual sins are the latter. Like all of the adulterous males now attending our churches (do you really think it is only Governors and Senators that engage in such activities while outwardly leading an morally righteous life)? A person struggling with their sexual orientation needs the unconditional love of God as much as anyone, even if they continue to struggle after they are saved.
And from religioustolerance.org: The word “arsenokoitai” in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy:
“Arsenokoitai” is a Greek word that appears to have been created by Paul when he was writing 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. No record remains of any writer having using the term before Paul. It has been translated as “abusers of themselves with mankind” in the King James Version (KJV):
“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind”, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.” (Emphasis ours)
The KJV was finished 1611 CE when there was no single word that referred to homosexuals or homosexuality. The translators were forced to use this awkward phrase. The term “homosexual” was only created in the late 19th century. More recent versions of the Bible translate arsenokoitai here as:
“homosexuals,” (NASB);
“homosexual perversion,” (NEB);
“homosexual offenders,” (NIV).
In doing this, they appear to have little respect to the actual meaning of the original Greek verse. By using the term “homosexual” the translators changed the scope of the verse. The original Greek refers to men only; the English translation refers to both males and females; i.e. to gays and lesbians.
The author of 1 Timothy also used “arsenokoitai.” The KJV translated it similarly:
“Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.”
What does “arsenokoitai” really mean?
Nobody knows for certain.
“Arsenokoitai” is made up of two parts: “arsen” means “man”; “koitai” means “beds.”
Although the word in English Bibles is interpreted as referring to homosexuals, we can be fairly certain that this is not the meaning that Paul wanted to convey. If he had, he would have used the word “paiderasste.” That was the standard Greek term at the time for sexual behavior between males. We can conclude that he probably meant something different than people who engaged in male-male adult sexual behavior.
Many sources have speculated about the meaning of “arsenokoitai:”
“Homosexual offenders:” The NIV contains this phrase. Suppose for the moment that Paul had attacked “heterosexual offenders” or “heterosexual sexual offenders.” We would not interpret this today as a general condemnation of heterosexuality. It would be seen as an attack only on those heterosexuals who commit sexual offences. Perhaps the appropriate interpretation of this verse is that it does not condemn all homosexuals. Rather it condemns only those homosexuals who engage in sexual offences (e.g. child sexual abuse).
Male prostitutes in Pagan temples: One source states that the Septuagint (an ancient, pre-Christian translation of the Old Testament into Greek made between the 3rd and 1st century BCE) translated the Hebrew “quadesh” in I Kings 14:24, 15:12 and 22:46 into a Greek word somewhat similar to “arsenokoitai.” This passage referred to “male temple prostitutes” – people who engaged in ritual sex in Pagan temples. 1 Some leaders in the early Christian church also thought 1 Corinthians was referring to temple prostitutes. Some authorities believe that it simply means male prostitutes with female customers – a practice which appears to have been a common practice in the Roman empire.
Pimp: Another source refers to other writings, written later than 1 Corinthians, which containe the word “arsenokoitai:” This includes the Sibylline Oracles 2.70-77, Acts of John, and Theophilus of Antioch’s Ad Autolycum. The source suggests that the term refers “to some kind of economic exploitation by means of sex (but not necessarily homosexual sex).” 2 Probably “pimp” or “man living off of the avails of prostitution” would be the closest English translations. It is worth noting that “Much Greek homosexual erotic literature has survived, none of it contains the word arsenokoitai.” 3
Masturbators. At the time of Martin Luther, “arsenokoitai” was universally interpreted as masturbator. But by the 20th century, masturbation had become a more generally accepted behavior. So, new translations abandoned references to masturbators and switched the attack to homosexuals. The last religious writing in English that interpreted 1 Corinthians 6:9 as referring to masturbation is believed to be the [Roman] Catholic Encyclopedia of 1967.
Very interesting post Kash.
Kash: ” Why must they suddenly change their sexual orientation upon accepting Christ or be rejected from the fellowship of God?” There you go again with the constant distortions and not understanding scripture. You should have listened to the show, and if you did listen to the show I take it to mean you have a wrong view of God and are more of a disgrace to the Lord.
“and if you did listen to the show I take it to mean you have a wrong view of God and are more of a disgrace to the Lord.” So your are the judge of other people’s views of God and whether or not they are a disgrace? And you rail against the government wanting to engage in “thought policing”, yet here you are telling me what I believe AND that it is completely wrong AND that I am somehow a disgrace to God. This, of course, is the sort of attitude that leads people to start deciding who deserves to live and who doesn’t. You know, like the supreme council of Iran.
By the way, what is it exactly that you find so disgraceful? My willingness to acknowledge that a homosexual person drawn to faith in God is as saved by grace as you are? That salvation is a sovereign act of God with nothing to do with what we do or are? It is you who undermine the power of God by declaring, much as the false teachers that came to Galatia after Paul had left and confused the believers, that it is what we do or don’t do that makes us worthy of God.
Kash: Again you put words in my mouth. What do you not understand about the sin nature, or God’s moral order? And no you don’t seem to know the God of the Bible vary well. Yes, salvation is of the Lord and him only. You don’t seem to know anything about real liberty and true holiness. You say that you are a christian, well I’m holding you accountable to believe rightly about the God we serve.
Kash:”That salvation is a sovereign act of God with nothing to do with what we do or are? This last part of your question “or are?” is wrong, God made them male and female and Jesus say’s as much and they are honorable. Homosexuality is sin plain and simple and you want to help justify it and that is a disgrace.
“You say that you are a christian, well I’m holding you accountable to believe rightly about the God we serve.” What is it that I believe wrongly? You continue to accuse me of wrong thinking and wrong believing, but what specifically is wrong with how I view homosexuals as fellow sinners in need of salvation no better and no worse than any other sinner?
“Homosexuality is sin plain and simple and you want to help justify it and that is a disgrace.” It is not plain and simple, since the word “homosexual” didn’t exist until the 1800s. Also, I am not in a position to justify anything, only God can justify. Sexual sins are the same, whether homo- or heterosexual. They are sins of the flesh, and they are forgiven by God. We are to strive against sexual immorality, lust, idolatrous sexual practices. We all fall short because we live in a world that worships sex. It is everywhere – on TV we watch, in books we read, in advertisements we can’t help but see unless we could somehow walk around with a blindfold. Homosexuals are no more or less prone to sexual sin than any human, and are no more or less able to be saved by Christ.
Kash:”It is not plain and simple, since the word “homosexual” didn’t exist until the 1800s.” Exactly, the word didn’t exist but the behavior did and you are saying that God created them that way and I’m saying they are born with a bent toward sin, (yes the same as us) but God doesn’t say these two men(or women) are ok to be together because I made them that way. Now thats bad theology!
Besides it’s also an attack on the family, if you really think about it.
“Besides it’s also an attack on the family, if you really think about it.” I HAVE thought about it, and I don’t see how its an attack on the family. There are plenty of same sex couples raising children without any legal or financial protection for the children. If you had your way, those children would be ripped away from the family and placed….where, exactly? Many same sex couples are raising children from previous marriages, but others are raising children with special needs that no one else wanted to adopt. If you really care about the children, you want them in the most stable family situation possible. That is not always the biological mother and father, just as many children are being raised by only one parent even though that is not the Biblical ideal, either. If you really care about “families”, then you would be for same sex unions for monogamous couples, because whether you think they are good families or not, the fact is, they are families.
Kash:”If you really care about “families”, then you would be for same sex unions for monogamous couples, because whether you think they are good families or not, the fact is, they are families.” WRONG AGAIN , you have not thought about this issue or else you wouldn’t have given that ridiculous answer.
If they are not families, what are they?
And do you really think Jesus wants you to tell the children in those families that they are NOT a family and don’t deserve protection under the law? That they should be torn apart and placed in foster care or in an institution or with a heterosexual couple they are not related to?
Paul post 20 and 22,
[Smile]
Paul, would you please elaborate and tell us exactly why you feel this way about homosexuality being an attack upon the family? If the reasons that you have are not based upon your theological beliefs, then that would be all the better, but either way I’m keenly interested in whatever evidences that you may possess that helps to support the statement you made within post 20.
Please be very specific. After all, you wouldn’t want us to get any wrong impressions about what your thinking, right[smile]?
Just a note here….has anyone seen or heard of the change Jade Goody’s mother has made recently?
It is good to hear from you once again Maz.
No Maz, I know nothing of Jade Goody’s mother, only Jade Goody and her death.
John: I watched a programme where she was interviewed about her daughter Jade and her fight against cancer. She also spoke of her own determination to stop abusing drugs, which she did, and when she went to Tenerife (I think) in her grief following her daughters death, she met a man…….after 25 years of living as a lesbian, she fell in love with him and she has now entered a heterosexual relationship that she says is ”it”. Talk about a change! She looked a changed woman!
Long time no see ladies and gents… been away and lurking for a while. Just wanted to say I agree with Kash here (as I often do on social justice issues). I know how many conservative religious folk interpret the Bible and its views of homosexuality. But I think a more studied and nuanced look at the culture in which Paul was writing and the language he used (as Kash pointed out) should at least lead one to a more tempered religious opinion. I honestly dont know where I come down as far as whether the Bible condemns modern homosexuality, but I don’t think it’s an open and shut case as some would lead us to believe.
Chris C: It is not a matter of ”religious opinion” it is a question of what the Word of God actually says about it. And ”modern homosexuality” is the same as it has been for thousands of years. A man with a man, and a woman with a woman. What other type is there?
“And ”modern homosexuality” is the same as it has been for thousands of years. A man with a man, and a woman with a woman. What other type is there?” Well, for one thing, is there only one type of heterosexual relationship? Are you defining type by the sexual act involved or the quality of the relationship? Is rape the same thing as sex? Is child molestation just heterosexual sex as long as it is a child of the opposite gender of the adult? I think not. The words used by the original writers of the Bible carry the same type of differences as the words “sex” versus “rape”. The words and contexts themselves carry far different connotations depending on which verse you are referring to. And the variances in the way the words were translated show that ambiguity (as I have pointed out in previous posts, see post 10 for instance).
Maz post 28,
Maz, I’d think of her as more of a bisexual than a full-fledged homosexual. One of those types that falls in love with “people” while overlooking whatever their gender may be. I may be wrong, as may be you, however. It’s not as if we both actually know this woman personally, you know what I mean? She’s gone through a shock. Many people make radical changes within their lives after going through such ordeals.
Let’s just see how long that heterosexual relationship lasts before using it as an example of how all homosexuals everywhere can completely change their sexual orientation, shall we?
Chris C. post 29,
I have missed hearing from you. I trust your studies are going well?
Maz post 30,
“It’s not a matter of “religious opinion”it is a question of what the Word of God actually says about it.”
Maz, both of those things sound like the same thing to any non-Christian that reads your post. This is why I wanted Paul to try and back up the claim he made within post 20 with some, any, reasons that were not based upon his theological beliefs. Statements like “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” only have any power for a Christian in a debate/argument/political rally/etc. if it’s directed at another Christian[or a homophobic ass]. But try using such argumentation with someone of another theological belief system, or none at all[respectively] and it just makes one sound unreasonable and bigoted. Theological beliefs change. Do you know what the ancient Aztecs had to say about homosexuality? Does anybody actually remember,or care to remember[smile]?
And why would anyone?
Such things from a Christian perspective are only important to Christians[And yes Maz I know that this is a Christian website, but if you are thinking of this as a retort then your missing my point.]. If you going to try and change the world your going to have to use a different technique to help make your point with people.
Unless…..you just help your type of Christianity become soooooooo powerful in the world that you can make being a homosexual illegal, and perhaps in time banish all homosexuals to penal colonies/reservations or be executed.
I’d rather you just try the first option though[smile].
Maz: “What other type is there?” Um, wee there was pederasty involving catamites and all that stuff back then which is widely regarded as unethical these days. Also, in greco roman culture, being sexually penetrated was a sign of submission. That is why women were penetrated by men, to be frank about it. So for a man to be penetrated by another man meant that one man had to have been submissive in the relationship, which was incongruent with the cultural vision of men, women, and sexual relationships.
“It is not a matter of ”religious opinion” it is a question of what the Word of God actually says about it.”
yes but the Bible was written 2000 years ago when ideas both culturally and socially about homosexuality were very different than today. Paul was a product of the greco roman culture. if we disregard this we can easily take his words out of their cultural context. My whole point in the original post was to say that I think what the BIble actually says is a bit grey.
Kash: ”Well, for one thing, is there only one type of heterosexual relationship?”
I’m not here to argue the point over again, but a heterosexual relationship is a man and a woman, as opposed to homosexual, which is a man with a man, and a woman with a woman. Simply put.
John: ”Let’s just see how long that heterosexual relationship lasts before using it as an example of how all homosexuals everywhere can completely change their sexual orientation, shall we?”
I only posted it out of interest. These things do happen. And some do last.
John: ”Maz, both of those things sound like the same thing to any non-Christian that reads your post. ”
But this is the mistake they make. Yes, there is a lot of ”religious opinion” going around, but true spirit-filled Christians rely on what the Bible SAYS, not on their own opinion. You may think it is my opinion, but I rely completely on the Bible to reveal what is true and what is not, with the help of the Holy Spirit ofcourse, no one can understand this Book without HIM.
”and it just makes one sound unreasonable and bigoted.”
Only because they (you) don’t believe what the Bible says.
”Theological beliefs change”
Those who believe in Christ and read, study and trust in His Word cannot change their beliefs when they are rooted in that Word, because Gods Word does not change. If we get it wrong somewhere….and I have been known to be wrong!!….then yes, we have to change to come in line with what the Word says. It is still all down to what Gods Word SAYS.
”
If you going to try and change the world your going to have to use a different technique to help make your point with people.”
There is no magical ”technique” to change the world. CHRIST is the answer for the world today, the problem is for a lot of the world they just don’t want Him to change their lives, they are far too ”happy” living the way they please. The gospel of salvation has never changed, though the way the Church sometimes presents it has, and some ”techniques” I am afraid to say are truly lacking in spiritual application!! We don’t hear the word ”repent” much anymore, and this is the basics for receiving forgiveness and salvation from God. Repentance of sin. There is no ”technique” to replace this.
Chris C: Whatever the act, men with men and women with women is homosexuality. And the Bible was written as much for today, as it was for those 2000 years ago. Gods Word is as relevent for people today as ever, because Gods Ways don’t change and neither does His Word. What was sin then, is still sin now.
It sounds as if you missed the points that I was trying to make Maz. Why did you think I brought up the Aztecs?
John: Don’t know, but we are obviously not looking at this the same way (but then we wouldn’t would we?).
Maz: “I’m not here to argue the point over again, but a heterosexual relationship is a man and a woman, as opposed to homosexual, which is a man with a man, and a woman with a woman. Simply put.” Right. And heterosexual sex is sometimes sinful, and sometimes not. It depends on the circumstances. I am simply pointing out that the Bible is ambiguous on whether all homosexual acts are condemned or not, and whether “being a homosexual” is a sin or only certain homsexual acts are a sin. And even if you are of the belief that just to be a homosexual is a sin, whether you act upon your desires or not, how is it different than a Christian struggling with sex addiction, or porn, or the other things that many heterosexual Christians struggle with even after they are saved? Why must a homosexual conquer their desires before you will offer them salvation? I assure you, Christ makes no such demands. Any homosexual who claims to have a saving knowledge of Christ should be encouraged. It is between that person and God in what manner they are able to live a righteous life. For some, they might be able to suppress their homosexual desires and live as a heterosexual. I suspect that many who are able to do that were more bisexual than strongly homosexual. For others, it might be a celibate life, but that is a hard choice and as the Catholics have found out, fraught with trouble of its own. For many it may be a monogamous long time relationship with a beloved person of the same gender. If that bothers you, just remember: the longer they are together, the less frequently they are probably engaging in sex, if they follow the pattern of heterosexual marraiges. (That was supposed to be a joke, to lighten the mood).
Kash: Heterosexual relationships are not sinful in themselves, only when they are perverted in some way. But homosexual relationships OF ANY KIND are sin. And I would disagree that the Bible does not state that homosexuality is sin. It most certainly does. I have heard all the arguments and all the reasons and excuses why certain scriptures don’t mean this or that, but when you take the teachings of scripture as a whole, Gods plan is, always has been and always will be for one man to marry one woman, nothing less. Families do not grow from two men or two women. That was NEVER Gods way or Gods will.
I think it is quite clear, and I agree with it, what Dr. Michael Brown said in the video clip…..that a man who is a homosexual who comes to faith in Christ, recognising that his life style is sin, and though struggling with his lustful feelings, seeks to repent and live for Christ and not to please those lustful feelings, is fogiven by God and is a Christian. But a homosexual that becomes a Christian, yet does not repent of his homosexual life style and does not in any way seek to turn from the practice of homosexuality will reap the consequences. Just like someone who is heterosexual yet thinks he or she can continue living in sin or living a sexually perverted life, cannot possibly expert to receive Gods blessing or Gods sanction. God commands that ALL MEN EVERYWHERE REPENT. Homosexuality is a sin and therefore should be repented of.
Prime example of purely man-made dogma: God commands that ALL MEN EVERYWHERE REPENT
Bernie: I didn’t think you would like that. It means you have to let go of your pride and humble yourself.
Maz, everyone is “perverted” in someone’s eyes[smile].
Hopefully other readers understood what I was trying to explain to you within the lower section of post 32[?].
John: The main question is, is what we do perverted in Gods eyes? If so, we have to change…..with Gods help.
Maz post 46
Or, people could just choose another more tolerant Deity to serve[grin].
I jest with you Maz because I know that such an option cannot exist within your perception of the universe[smile].
Christian homosexuals will just have to do……whatever they feel they need to do.
The points that I was making to you and Paul within the lower section of my post 32 revolved around Paul’s remark within post 20, least we forget, and when one makes such a claim then they will need more than theological beliefs if they wish to try and convince anyone outside of their personal version of theology. They will need support from science, statistics, things of this nature that will appeal to and convince everybody. Homosexuality is not something that is comparable to the problems associated with, say, smoking cigarettes or alcoholism, which has negative health effects upon individuals that are so well documented and easily confirmed scientifically that NOBODY ANYWHERE with any good sense can deny them.
This is a war the christian right has lost, but continues to fight. We’ll continue moving in the direction for Gay Rights, and there is nothing that can be done to stop it. All that is left to determine, is how long until homosexuals are going to be allowed to marry the people they love. Hopefully soon.
John: ”….they will need more than theological beliefs if they wish to try and convince anyone outside of their personal version of theology. They will need support from science, statistics, things of this nature that will appeal to and convince everybody.”
But the gospel is not believed through science or statistics, or some natural phylosophical thought process, it is a SPIRITUAL matter, don’t you understand, God is SPIRIT, not Someone Who is tested by science or statistics, God has to be believed in by FAITH, it is a SPIRITUAL concept, not of this world. But there are things in this natural world that reveal that there is a Supernatural Being Who created it all, and also there are many millions of people who testify to their change of life through the POWER of this Creator God that has moved in their lives. If you want scientific evidence of God you will never see it, you don’t even see creation around you as coming from this Creator God, so how on earth will you see HIM?
The Bible tells us that it is through the foolishness of preaching that people are saved. That is, foolishness to the world! But in that preaching of the Word, is the power to save and deliver a soul from sin, death and hell, they just need to accept it….BY FAITH.
X: God is watching you…..do not be deceived. And the battle is the Lords…..and He has already WON!!
Maz: “Just like someone who is heterosexual yet thinks he or she can continue living in sin or living a sexually perverted life, cannot possibly expert to receive Gods blessing or Gods sanction.” There you go again, putting conditions of the grace of God that Christ himself never did. What about the other sins that we commit every day? Or is it only sexual sins that when we committ we automatically lose our salvation?
Maz: “But homosexual relationships OF ANY KIND are sin.” This is not what the Bible says, and it is certainly not what Jesus said. You could make a case that Paul held this opinion, but only by expanding his actual words on the subject that were addressing specific situations, similarly to how people have expanded his words on women’s role in the church (again, that he meant to address only to a specific troublesome situation) to the point of not allowing them to hold leadership positions, even though Paul clearly mentioned women with leadership positions in his letters.
We should let homosexuals enter into civil unions, but protect the right of religious organizations to refuse to perform a ceremony that they fundamentally disagree with. We should probably not call it marriage, since marriage does stand for the ideal of Adam and Eve (even though they did not live up to the ideal, and no one has ever since). If we are going to deny homosexuals civil unions on the grounds that it “cheapens” marriage, then we would have to also deny people to get married more than one time. We would have to say, well, they can get married once, but after that it has to be a civil union, because its not what God intended. Which is, of course, ridiculous. We should separate marriage, which is a religious ceremony and sanctioned by the church, from civil unions, which is a civil institution recognised by the government. Hetersexual couples can do both, and homosexual couples can do both if they get “married” in a homosexual affirming church. It would protect everyone’s civil rights AND freedom to practice their religion (including if they believe all homosexuality is a sin and shouldn’t be recognized by their particular denomination). It wouldn’t be the first time some churches refused to recognize marriages that others embraced (think good old Henry VIII). Then we could get on with the business of winning sould for Christ, instead of arguing about whose sins are so bad that they can’t be saved until they absolutely positively stop sinning.
Here is the letter from Dan Choi to the president. http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/11/gay-soldier-dont-fire-me/
Seriously. Do we discharge servicemen who look at porn, or are sexually promiscuous outside of the confines of the base? Why should a homosexual who is not engaging in homosexual activity while deployed be fired simply for who he is? Do people really think that homosexual men and women will engage in some sort of homo-orgy in the barracks if we let them admit thier orientation? Do we really think the soldiers who serve together don’t already know anyway? This is a ridiculous policy. And as far as sexual misconduct: that is more likely to happen with heterosexual men and women…oh, wait, it already DID happen. Remember Tailhook, for example? And again: those accused of sexually assaulting the prisoners at Abu Gharib are heterosexual. So you can hardly make the case that homosexuals are somehow less able to control their sexual appetites than heterosexuals.
Kash: So do you go around committing sin every day because of the grace of God? You know what the Bible says about that!
We have both read Romans 1 on the subject and that should be the end of the story. Men should naturally have sexual relations with women, and women should have sexual relationships with men….within marriage ofcourse……NOT MEN WITH MEN AND WOMEN WITH WOMEN WHICH IS UNNATURAL. It is not what God intended and is not sanctioned by Him ANYWHERE in His Word.
Kash: We already have marriages in Church for those who want a religious service, and marriages within a registry office for those who don’t. But marriage between one man and one woman is what God intended for the human race. Many Churches will refuse to remarry divorced people, because they believe the scriptures forbid remarriage between divorced people.
And don’t you realise that if homosexuals aren’t ”married” they are actually having sex outside of marriage? Sex should be within the marriage union, and that union must be between two people of the opposite sex, otherwise God will not recognise any union which is outside His will. Meaning, that sex between two males or two females is not a recognised union in Gods eyes. So how can He bless the union of a homosexual couple in a Church who are Christians?
Kash: We DO all want to win souls for Christ, but we are on a thread about homosexuality, so we are debating that particular subject. I don’t concentrate on this ALL the time!!!!
Maz: “So do you go around committing sin every day because of the grace of God? You know what the Bible says about that!” No, in spite of my best intentions to the contrary, I commit sins every day in spite of the grace of God. But I am covered by that grace, and my sins forgiven. Sexual sins are not a weakness of mine, but I struggle with pride, anger, addiction to buying things on ebay, etc. You seem to think the Bible says that to keep living in the grace of God you must become perfect, and that if you are not perfect, you forfeit that grace. Except that Jesus ALREADY died for your sins, even the ones you haven’t committed yet. I do not preach that people should not strive against their sinful desires, I simply don’t accept that “homosexuality” per se is sinful. And you can claim as often as you want that the Bible does say that simply to be a homosexual is a sin, but I think you are wrong.
“Many Churches will refuse to remarry divorced people, because they believe the scriptures forbid remarriage between divorced people.” Yes, such as the Catholic church. At least they are consistent.
“Meaning, that sex between two males or two females is not a recognised union in Gods eyes. So how can He bless the union of a homosexual couple in a Church who are Christians?” Well, obviously, many people will continue to believe that God would never bless such a union. But that does not mean that the government couldn’t legally recognize such a union. And although two men or two women who commit to each other is not the Biblical ideal, I do believe that in this fallen world, that if those two people are loyal to each other and to God, and live honest, hardworking, charitable lives, serving others and serving God, loving God and loving their “neighbor”, they have as good a chance of getting into heaven as any of us do.
Kash: ”I commit sins every day in spite of the grace of God.”
Let me understand you correctly, do you try NOT to commit sin, or do you think that the grace of God will cover any you do commit without any effort on your part? Do you figth the tendency to get angry, be prideful, or do you keep away from e-bay so you don’t buy anything? Or do you just think that they are your ‘weaknesses’ and you can’t do anything about it?
Are’nt we to resist?
I’m not going to argue anymore with you about whether homosexuality is sin, when you continue to reject what Gods Word clearly says about it. You will have to face God with your position on what sin is or is not.
”Well, obviously, many people will continue to believe that God would never bless such a union.”
Do YOU think He would?……..Bless a marriage union between homosexuals?
”
And although two men or two women who commit to each other is not the Biblical ideal,”
Oh….so although you don’t think it is sin, you don’t think it is ”the Biblical ideal”? What do you mean by ”the Biblical ideal”???
”I do believe that in this fallen world, that if those two people are loyal to each other and to God, and live honest, hardworking, charitable lives, serving others and serving God, loving God and loving their “neighbor”, they have as good a chance of getting into heaven as any of us do.”
So good works play a part do they? And being ”loyal to God” means not to continue in sin when He has shown us clearly what is sin.
“So good works play a part do they?” Well, when we are saved by grace, we are so grateful we tend to do good works out of gratitude to God. “And being ”loyal to God” means not to continue in sin when He has shown us clearly what is sin.” It means trying your best not to sin. And you and I disagree about what is clearly sin in this matter.
“Do YOU think He would?……..Bless a marriage union between homosexuals?” Short answer? Yes.
maz: “What do you mean by ”the Biblical ideal”???” I would think that would be obvious. The kindgom of Heaven. Represented in Genesis by Eden. Represented in Revelations by the New Jerusalem. No more death, mourning, crying, or pain.
Maz post 49,
I believe that you have once again missed my point.
I couldn’t help that notice that you never disputed/criticized option number two at the bottom of my post 32, but instead criticized the former option[frown, head cocked to the side with one raised eyebrow].
John, your “stage directions” crack me up.
Kash: #61, ”And you and I disagree about what is clearly sin in this matter.” As far as homosexuality is concerned…yes.
Kash: ” “Do YOU think He would?……..Bless a marriage union between homosexuals?” Short answer? Yes”
Goodness Kash, now I know how off-the-Word you are. How on earth or in Heaven can God bless a union that He calls UNNATURAL. Read Romans 1 again, and again, and again….until the TRUTH hits you between the eyes, for as yet you are blind to it.
Kash #63….That is not what I would see as the Bibical ideal as far as homosexuality is concerned……the Biblical ideal is one man for one woman…..THAT is the Biblical ideal of union between two people who love each other and unite in flesh and spirit, and produce offspring.
John #64, I’v looked at #32, but not sure what you are on about.
Do you mean….” Unless…..you just help your type of Christianity become soooooooo powerful in the world that you can make being a homosexual illegal, and perhaps in time banish all homosexuals to penal colonies/reservations or be executed.
I’d rather you just try the first option though[smile].”
If God ruled this world, as Jesus will one day, homosexuality would NOT be allowed to exist, infact when Christ comes back to Jerusalem to reign as King on Davids throne there will be no sin on the earth at that time….which will include homosexuality amongst all others.
I’d rather see homosexuals helped to repent and turn from their sin rather than executing them.
I think that if some Christians are so militant about the Laws of our Land being a reflection of God’s sovereignty, then recognizing that we should allow same-sex unions should be a given. A gift God gives EVERY person, believer or not, is the power of free will. Granted, we as a society cannot allow behavior which adversely affects others (i.e. murder, theft, rape, etc.). But I hardly see homosexuality as something that harms me personally. If someone wants to abuse their body in an inappropriate relationship (gay OR straight), as much as my heart breaks for them, my family and I are not harmed. It is, however, my obligation to share the truth, in love, to ANYONE envolved in sin or who does not know the Lord. But trying to convince them of their wrong-doing is not my place. I just pray that the Holy Spirit convict them of ANY sin in their life. If homosexuality is a problem they face, then I trust the Lord to deal with it. To deny people their free-will to act on their conviction (be it righteous in the eyes of God or not) is to deny them their God-given right as a human. God allows me, a heterosexual, to defy His will daily yet does not smite me. Why do the “Christian Pharisees” of the day place so much emphasis on this sin above every other? If all the time spent protesting gay soldier’s death and bashing people was spent praying for these lost individuals, then maybe some progress would be made. I will say Dr. Brown is a man who seems to pray as much as speaking out (maybe more). I listen to his broadcast daily and respect him highly. He is not the biggoted homo-phobe some on this thread have postured [ugh-um...Bernie, who thinks every person of faith is a hater]. Kudos, Doc.
Eventhough I think gays should have equal rights and protections under the law via civil unions, I do believe homosexuality is a sin, equal in its unrighteousness as any other. My simple way of concluding this doesn’t lie within some rigorous interpretation of greek manuscripts. I find that everywhere in the New Testament where romantic relationships (marriage) is discussed it is always in the context of one man and one woman. Jesus, as well as the Gospel writers and apostles always make the distinction of the role of HUSBAND and WIFE (denoting male and female). If homosexual activities (sex, etc.) were to be sanctioned by God just as heterosexuals, then why wasn’t this distinction made? Jesus, Paul, or Peter (on’es who spoke specifically about marriage) never use the greek word for “sexual partner” or some ambiguous nonsense. It was very succinct. Husband, wife. For sexual relations to be found holy in the eyes of God, one must be married. However, marriage is NEVER spoken of in terms of same-sex. I think it’s a HUGE point that cannot be overlooked.
Tyler: ”To deny people their free-will to act on their conviction (be it righteous in the eyes of God or not) is to deny them their God-given right as a human.”
If you lived in the days of Moses, that choice wouldn’t have been there, and God instructed Moses on how to deal with sin in the camp. We may not like what God commanded then, but we can’t ignore the fact that God showed exactly what He thought of sin at the time. Ofcourse, we live this side of the cross, and Jesus brought grace and truth, but that does not mean we can now do what we like and think we can get away with the consequences. If Jesus paid such a costly price to set these people free from their sin, then we must (like Paul) by all means save some!
Those who continue to sin willfully…..and that is the key word….WILLFULLY, after they have come to know the truth, cannot possibly think they can receive Gods forgiveness while so doing.
”Why do the “Christian Pharisees” of the day place so much emphasis on this sin above every other?”
For a start, the Pharisess were hypocrites, they didn’tcare about other people, they were’nt trying to save people from a fate worse than death, they were just religious. And this sin is no different than any other sin, except that there are people…..and some Christians…who think it isn’t a sin. I mean, would you say murder wasn’t a sin, or stealing, or coveting, or lying, or adultery? Why are these sins and not homosexuality? God speaks as expressly in His Word about these sins as He does about homosexuality. But some just won’t accept what His Word says concerning this particular sin.
And I do not go ”bashing” these people, we pray for all those who are lost, including homosexuals, they need
Jesus, but they first need to know that it is a sin in the eyes of God to commit sodomy. It is NOT NATURAL! Come on now, do you realy think that intimate act between two men is NATURAL? Did God intend men to have THAT kind of intimacy? You cannot possiblysay other than NO.
”
I do believe homosexuality is a sin, ”
Well, I’m glad to hear that, because I was wondering!
”If
homo
sexual activities (sex, etc.) were to be sanctioned by God just as heterosexuals, then why wasn’t this distinction made?”
Exactly.
”
For sexual relations to be found holy in the eyes of God, one must be married. However, marriage is NEVER spoken of in terms of same-sex. I think it’s a HUGE point that cannot be overlooked.”
Exactly…again. Atleast we agreed at the end!
Paul, you never answered my request within post 25. If you can’t do it, then just let me
Kash post 65,
I’m happy that you find my method of self expression amusing, Kash. I do such things in the hopes that they will help others have a better understanding of what my intentions/feelings are to people when my posts are read. I actually do do these things as I type them[smile].
Maz post69,
Perhaps someone else here can try to explain to you what I meant, assuming that others here understood what I meant that is. I don’t know if any more of my efforts will help.
Sorry Paul, I meant to finish with saying to you “…then just let me know, and I will stop asking you about it.”
Maz, John was trying to point out to you that to a non-Christian, “religious opinion” and “what the word of God says” are the same thing. You can’t try to convince someone who doesn’t think the Bible is the word of God that something is so just because the Bible says it is so. First, you have to convince them that the Bible is from God, then, you have to convince them that how YOU interpret the Bible is the correct way, and THEN maybe you can get with your argument. Until then, everything you say to them is just your religious opinion, from their point of view.
Ehhh, close enough Kash. And I thank you for your efforts.
I really thought that my comments within post 47 would have clarified things enough for Maz, but then, I never claimed to be very good at expressing myself to “normal people”.
Maz: “…Jesus brought grace and truth, but that does not mean we can now do what we like and think we can get away with the consequences.”
That’s the whole point, Maz. A great deal of people DO think they can do whatever they want with out answering to any higher authority. But one must be objective–if our land is supposed to be run by the Laws found in Scripture then there should be no problem with Islamic countries imposing sharia law within their borders, or communities in non-Islamic countries (i.e. England). We all know the attrocities that come from this legal system. To non-beleivers it is all the same thing. We can never FORCE non-believers to adhere to the Law of God by legislating our faith. It’s wrong. God Himself doesn’t FORCE us to obey any of His commands. We do what we want, and reap the “due recompense of our sin”–FROM GOD–not from the legal system of America. The legal system that killed Jesus was not that of the Romans, but the religious system of the Jews. In the Gettysburg Address, President Abraham Lincoln said, “…this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” This means freedom for ALL people–gay, straight, bi, trans-whatever, atheist, muslim–every American citizen. Not just heterosexual, Spirit-filled Christians deserve protection from our government. This doesn’t justify sin AT ALL, but it’s the foundation of our nation. Freedom for all. Not “freedom to obey a God you do not believe exists”. If you lived in an Islamic country that judged you based on sharia law, you would call for a revolution. Same thing here.
“For a start, the Pharisess were hypocrites, they didn’t care about other people, they were’nt trying to save people from a fate worse than death, they were just religious.”
Then my analogy was perfect. A great number of Christians today fall into this group, including the “Baptist bunch” protesting the death of gay soldiers AT THEIR FUNERALS, screaming that they are burning in hell and such. What a disgrace to the name of Christ!!! These people have become what the Bible refers to as “twice the sons of hell”, because they know the Truth, yet use it as a weapon against non-believers. They are worse than the non-believer but are too deceived to notice.
“And I do not go ”bashing” these people, we pray for all those who are lost, including homosexuals, they need Jesus, but they first need to know that it is a sin in the eyes of God to commit sodomy.”
First: Whoa, Maz. “I”? “We”? Don’t take my comments personally. I never addressed that comment to you or any group you associate with. If it was the afore mentioned vipers, then I do pray for you. But you don’t seem to be the type to carouse with such hate filled people. Second: You obviously didn’t read my extensive post on another thread about the medical research which proves the degredational effects of sodomy on the human body. I think it is a reprehensible practice. But God does not judge the outward manifestation of sin (sodomy, in this case). This was how God dealt with sin in the Old Testament. Rather, God sees the perversion of the heart and changes us from the inside-out. He doesn’t want us to “not practice sodomy”, per se. He wants us to have a God-honoring love relationship with our spouse. By doing so, one will not committ sodomy. It hits at the core of the problem, not the subsequent negative manifestations. But Christians get so high-centered on the outward manifestation of sin in the lives of others that they totally forget that it is something much deeper. It is a legalistic, OT view of sin.
“Well, I’m glad to hear that, because I was wondering!”
Just because I think gay Americans should have the same freedoms and liberties (in the eyes of the GOVERNMENT) doesn’t mean that I automatically think that it is an exceptable lifestyle in the eyes of GOD. I belive in the seperation of church and state because the government must be for EVERYONE. But even Jesus said, “”For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are FEW who find it.” Entrace into the Kingdom of God is not a birthright, as is goverment protection. It is a personal seeking, finding, and continual realtionship.
Kash: ” First, you have to convince them that the Bible is from God, then, you have to convince them that how YOU interpret the Bible is the correct way, and THEN maybe you can get with your argument”
The Bible tells us to ”preach the gospel to every creature” and to testify of Gods love to them. The Word is very important to show them any Truth, but only the Holy Spirit can convince anyone of it. I get frustrated when people stubbornly oppose the Bible, God and Christians. If they don’t WANT to see the truth, no amount of ”convincing” will save them. It is by the power of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.
John: You ask of me what I can’t give you. If I could prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Bible was the Word of God would you then believe it? If I could prove to you beyond a shadow of doubt that God is the only Creator of the Universe and Jesus Christ is His Only Son, then would you believe it? You may say ”yes”, but the thing is….I CAN’T PROVE IT THAT MUCH TO YOU. To believe in God takes FAITH. If we had that amount of proof about God and His Word we would’nt need FAITH. So, as I said to Kash, I can’t ”convince” you just by good argument….it is a spiritual enlightenment, only by the Holy Spirit, through the power of the Word of God, and if your heart is open to receive the Truth, then He will enlighten you. ”Seek and you shall find…”
Tyler: ”But one must be objective–if our land is supposed to be run by the Laws found in Scripture then there should be no problem with Islamic countries imposing sharia law within their borders, or communities in non-Islamic countries (i.e. England). ”
They do already. But if the laws of the land were governed by the Bible they wouldn’t allow sharia law to operate, just as an Islamic country would not allow Christianity a say in their laws.
”We can never FORCE non-believers to adhere to the Law of God by legislating our faith. It’s wrong. ”
Didn’t God FORCE the Israelites to adhere to His laws in the OT (under pain of death I may add!)? Did He do it for their hurt or for their good? Gods laws are the best, and if people don’t want to live by His laws it is because they want to SIN. One day, the Lord will return and their will be righteousness in the earth again. It will be almost like Heaven.
One wonders why people don’t want that kind of world!
”This means freedom for ALL people–gay, straight, bi, trans-whatever, atheist, muslim–every American citizen”, this WILL NOT HAPPEN under the Lord Jesus reign! He will have NO other gods before Him!
Tyler: ”Freedom for all. Not “freedom to obey a God you do not believe exists”.”
Don’t you realise that the laws of the land come from the ten commandments! And people do not have the freedom to break them or they end up in prison!
”A great number of Christians today fall into this group, including the “Baptist bunch” protesting the death of gay soldiers AT THEIR FUNERALS, screaming that they are burning in hell and such. What a disgrace to the name of Christ!!! ”
I totally agree with you!
”But you don’t seem to be the type to carouse with such hate filled people.”
Absolutely not!
”You obviously didn’t read my extensive post on another thread about the medical research which proves the degredational effects of sodomy on the human body. I think it is a reprehensible practice.”
Yes, I did.
”God sees the perversion of the heart and changes us from the inside-out. He doesn’t want us to “not practice sodomy”, per se. He wants us to have a God-honoring love relationship with our spouse. By doing so, one will not committ sodomy.”
If you mean that no one can change unless God changes their heart first, then yes I agree, but God doesn’t want people to sin atall.
”Just because I think gay Americans should have the same freedoms and liberties (in the eyes of the GOVERNMENT) doesn’t mean that I automatically think that it is an exceptable lifestyle in the eyes of GOD. I belive in the seperation of church and state because the government must be for EVERYONE.”
The original idea of separation of Church and State is not what people usually believe today. God should not be separated from governement. A nation…..the whole nation….will suffer for the laws that are made by government that go against Gods ways. America will suffer for the sins of the government….laws that allow abortion, homosexuality and anything else that is against Gods will and which causes much grief to His heart.
”Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any peoples.”
Maz: “Don’t you realise that the laws of the land come from the ten commandments! And people do not have the freedom to break them or they end up in prison!”
Yes, our founders drew inspiration from the TC’s as a moral code. However, I can’t say that our prisons are occupied by adulterers, idolaters, carvers of graven images, those use His name in vain or work on Sunday (or don’t keep the Sabbath holy), don’t honor their mother and father, or covet their neighbor’s possessions. These are not offenses punishable by federal, state, or local law. So, yes, you can break the TC’s and not break the laws of the land.
“They do already. But if the laws of the land were governed by the Bible they wouldn’t allow sharia law to operate, just as an Islamic country would not allow Christianity a say in their laws.”
I know. In Islamic countries, as well as your own (hence my annotation). It is wrong for a Christian to take away the right of another to serve any god they choose, or committ willful sin. God doesn’t do it, so who are we to? Plus, Paul very clearly states that this world is ruled by evil principalities, powers, and rulers in high places and that satan is it’s prince. A “Christian government” has no place on earth. Although I must submit to my Presidents authority (unless it usurps God’s Word), I answer to the King of Kings first. Jesus is my King, and He said that His Kingdom is “not of this earth”. To institute “Christian law” is no different than the law of the OT. Same motive, same purpose.
“Didn’t God FORCE the Israelites to adhere to His laws in the OT (under pain of death I may add!)?”
Absolutely not. He just made their circumstances worse and worse so they had nothing left but His salvation. Some still defied Him. Did He force Adam and Eve to sin? Its the opposite end of the same spectrum. God cannot make you follow Him any more than He can make you NOT follow Him. He has no power to make you do one or the other. He can change your outward situations, inpart wisdom, show you truth, bless you, curse you…whatever He wants. But YOU still have the ultimate choice to follow Him or not. It’s a simple Biblical principal.
“this WILL NOT HAPPEN under the Lord Jesus reign! He will have NO other gods before Him!”
Yes, Maz, I agree whole-heartedly. But I’m living in the here-and-now, trying to reach the lost in THIS generation. We know the battle is won and the Lord is returning for His bride, but this has nothing to do with the topic. I know homosexuality (along with every other sin) will not be a factor in the Kingdom, but it has nothing to do with current government that represents EVERY citizen. Do you think non-believers or atheist will submit to a Christian government?! There would be a revolution.
Tyler: No, I realise God does not force people to do anything, after all, He gave us free will, and if we want to follow Him, we can, and if we want to sin, we can. But His heart breaks for those who continue in sin and refuse to follow His ways, and He longs to bless those who do seek to follow Him and live for Him. The governement is not immune from this. God ultimately wants everyone to follow His ways and His will, and that includes everyone who is in government aswell. I know things won’t change until Jesus comes back, but that doesn’t mean that I think we should allow every evil under the sun to continue until then. We must speak out for righteousness in this earth whether people will listen or not.
Maz: “I get frustrated when people stubbornly oppose the Bible, God and Christians. If they don’t WANT to see the truth, no amount of ”convincing” will save them. It is by the power of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.” Yes, but you often do not seem to be arguing for the love of Christ. You come across as preaching the judgment of God. I am just saying that if you start with the judgment of God before you have taught and modeled the love of Christ, you are not going to be very successful in your attempt to spread the gospel.
Kash: When it is necessary we have to tell people of judgment aswell as mercy, you can’t leave the latter out. People need……people NEED to know the Truth that will save them from an eternal Hell. It is often on my mind…..the most awful place imaginable….I DON’T WANT ANYONE TO GO THERE!
And I have mentioned several times how Christ showed His great love for us by dying in extreme agony on the cross, paying the greatest price any man can pay….FOR US! THAT is GODS LOVE in action. Why do people resist such amazing love?
It is up to God to convict them of their sins, not me.
Kash: Absolutely. But we are commissioned to tell them the gospel….and not to sugar coat it either. Ezek: 3 v 18-19: 33 v 8-9.
Yes, we tell them the gospel, the “good news”. Judgment is not our job or our work. Keep reading Ezekial and ask youself: Am I putting stumbling blocks between people and the saving knowledge of Christ?
And Ezekial is writing before Christ freed us from death under the law.
Kash: It’s convenient at times to place certain scriptures ”before Christ” so it lets us off the hook about warning people of the consequences of sin. We are’nt in the position of judging or condemning anyone, but warning people that their sin could take them to hell if they reject Christ is better than leaving them in blissful ignorance. You don’t fail to warn someone who is in a burning house to get out just because it may upset their comfort. Remember, WE may be free from judgment and death, but lost souls are still under Gods wrath. John 3 v 16-18 (and this is Jesus speaking) tells us they are condemned already. Condemned to what? To Judgment and Hell if they do not repent.
Kash: What would you say about Jesus asking the rich young ruler about the OT commandments then? He seemed to think they were still relevant. He often asked his hearers ”what does the scriptures say?” So Jesus gave a lot of authority to the OT.
Yes, but if someone were in a burning house, you would just try to rescue them and worry about lecturing them about sleeping with cigarettes or leaving a kerosene heater too close to the curtains later, right? And as far as the rich young ruler, Jesus made it clear that keeping the commandments wasn’t what made one righteous. It was loving others even to the point of sacrificing your worldly comfort (or holier than thou comfort).
Kash: You missed the point. People need to be warned of the consequences of sin. If they don’t know they are lost and bound for hell then they will possibly reject Christs love and go on in their ignorance.
There are an awful lot of people who think they are going to Heaven because they are good enough or that they aren’t as bad as that. And there are an awful lot of people who are bound for hell and completely unaware of their destiny without Christ as Savior. You don’t think we should warn them?
No, you missed the point. If they know Christ, they are bound for glory. So quit throwing their sin in their faces. Throw them the love of Christ. Then leave it up to Christ to convict them of their sin, ITS NOT YOUR JOB. Now go read the types of things that put you in with the goats: sexual sins aren’t on the list.
Maz post 78,
It seems as if you have already forgotten what it was that you agreed with me on within my post 53 on the site “How Can We Know That Jesus Lived, Died, And Rose Again?”.
Kash: Firstly, you presume that they ALL know Christ. But if they really and truly KNOW HIM, they would be convicted of sin by the Holy Spirit, and as homosexuality is a sin (and you don’t believe that) then they would know in their heart of hearts that it is wrong. But if they want to hold onto being a Christian and their homosexual lifestyle they will try all ways to excuse their sin or deny it altogether….and YOU are helping them do that! Do you think that is the way of love? Love is sometimes harsh and it hurts to tell someone they are wrong, but if it is for their spiritual good then we cannot NOT tell them. That is true LOVE, to tell someone when they have gone wrong and lead them back onto the right road. At the end of the day, I don’t want anyone to go to hell because they have been deceived into thinking that they are a Christian when they aren’t. God forbid that we should be the instrument of that deceit!! I want people like Bernie and Fred to KNOW Jesus in their hearts and LOVE Him with all their hearts, not have some mental assent….or even worse not have Him atall. So, is it not my job to tell people about the truth that is in His Word? Am I to just keep silent and let them go on in their sin and just ”leave it to God”. God uses us all to spread the light of Gods love and forgiveness….but people need to know that they need that forgiveness and deliverence from sin.
You seem to be confused as to what we must do and what God does. God gave us the commission to Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature….and that includes the homosexual. It is not enough to tell them God loves them and then leave them to live in their sin. They need to know, by loving instruction from the Word, that their old lifestyle is sin, and they need to repent of it. If they have a true heartfelt conversion, the Holy Spirit would convict them of sin and strengthen them to turn from that sin. He does this with all of us.
And your
words lack the love you keep on at me about!!
John: It was your line in post #53 to someone else, ”Have you ever considered the possibility that your attitude is your own biggest shield against getting proof of the Divine?” which was what I was agreeing with more than anything. So what did I forget?
Silly me, I had thought that you were agreeing with my overall message. That first line is but a simple summery of the entire post. It actually leads to bigger and deeper things/possibilities.