Forcing the Chruch to accept homosexuality..

[LightHorseman]

KCKID,
Let me be frank. The Bible passages quoted as in post #237, are quoted. They are quoted to show what the Bible says. If they dont mean what they say who could tell anything about what the Bible says!!!
Not accepting they mean what they say in context is disbelief. In context there is no question that these passages condemn same sex relations, there are dozens which countenance man/woman marriage only.
I dont see the point in continuing your argument when all the majority of Christians will do is rightly reject it as continued and determined disbelief.

Dude... Bible wasn't written in English.

 

[Phinehas2]

Lighthorseman,

Dude... Bible wasn't written in English

People can speak different languages.

 

[LightHorseman]

Lighthorseman,
People can speak different languages.

Find me a fluent speaker of both ancient Hebrew and English who agrees with your version of Leviticus and I'll consede the point

 

[Phinehas2]

Lighthorseman,
The Bible translations are done by many scholars fluent in Hebrew, Greek and English. Thats Christianity for you, take it or leave it.

 

[LightHorseman]

Lighthorseman,
The Bible translations are done by many scholars fluent in Hebrew, Greek and English. Thats Christianity for you, take it or leave it.

And many other scholars disagree with the validity of the translations involved. Thats reality for you, take it or leave.

 

[Phinehas2]

Lighthorseman,

And many other scholars disagree with the validity of the translations involved. Thats reality for you, take it or leave.

I'll leave it thanks, I'll stick with Christianity. Christians believe the Bible translations are accurate.

NB one can at the same time be a good scholar but not a believer.

 

[LightHorseman]

Lighthorseman,
I'll leave it thanks, I'll stick with Christianity. Christians believe the Bible translations are accurate.

NB one can at the same time be a good scholar but not a believer.

Yeah, thats not accurate either. Nothing in the Creed mentions "believing Bible translations are accurate".

Indeed, theres a bunch of different Buble translations that Christians ALREADY argue over, and claim to be inaccurate.

Perfectly faithful Christians, who are more learned in ancient Hebrew and Greek than either you or I, disagree with the Bible as you quote it in English.

Stop trying to filter realty through your pre-concieved prejudices, it is exceptionally tiring.

 

[Phinehas2]

Lighthorseman,
The creed is taken from the Bible, Christians believe the Bible translations are accurate in matters of faith. If you are suggesting otherwise I suugest you take the discussion out of the Christian section.

 

[Polycarp1]

Find me a fluent speaker of both ancient Hebrew and English who agrees with your version of Leviticus and I'll consede the point

Actually, I can probably find you one without much effort. But then, I live about 20 miles from a major Southern Baptist Convention seminary (inerrantist/literalist/YEC)

 

[Polycarp1]

Lighthorseman,
The creed is taken from the Bible, Christians believe the Bible translations are accurate in matters of faith. If you are suggesting otherwise I suugest you take the discussion out of the Christian section.

The Creed was written by a Church Council. It's possible to find Scriptural warrant for each of its doctrines, but that's not the same as "it's taken from the Bible."

By the way, Phinehas, in your understanding where did the Bible come from? I'm not talking inspiration, but where on the mortal plane did it originate, and why?

 

[onemorequestion]

The Creed was written by a Church Council. It's possible to find Scriptural warrant for each of its doctrines, but that's not the same as "it's taken from the Bible."

But, it is exactly the same as saying that something is not compatible with the Biblical witness.

Sound familiar?

By the way, Phinehas, in your understanding where did the Bible come from? I'm not talking inspiration, but where on the mortal plane did it originate, and why?

P2,

Here's how Jude (right from the opening chap 1) did it and why:

3Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

4For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you.

They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

5Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. 6And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.

7In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

__________________________________________________________

And Peter, and John, and James and of course Luke as well. So often forgotten as a Christian that had to contend for the faith as well.

 

[Phinehas2]

Polycarp1,
Yes, sure the creeds were written by a church council, but they were taken from the Bible. Would you like the references?
Christians believe the Bible translations are accurate in matters of faith. If you are suggesting otherwise I suggest you take the discussion out of the Christian section.

 

[Phinehas2]

onemorequestion is correct. but I have emphasised more
3Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

4For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you.

They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

5Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. 6And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.

7In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.



It cant be 'we' unless it is those who share the same faith once delivered.
And denying Jesus Christ is not an addition, changing the grace of God into a licence of immorality IS denying the grace of God which is underserved favour in saving us from sin. If one is not accepting the sin one is not acknowledging the sovereignty of Jesus Christ.

 

[drich0150]

I have to confess, drich0150, that you lost me at the apes.*

Time and time again the so-called 'clobber' scriptures (Book, Chapter and Verse, both OT and NT) have been identified and explained in rather great detail by a number of people on this forum. These explanations differ greatly from what you and others believe them to mean. This does not mean that these explanations are wrong. So, what, precisely, do you want other than what has already been given?

* Will explain the meaning of that expression if asked.

Since I have written this out about 20 different times in this thread alone I will simply cut and paste a response directed at another poster:
Why can't you seem to answer the scripture i have put fourth identifying Homosexuality as a sin?

Why do you keep harping on your tired argument? (Over and Over and Over again) From what I have read there is only one who continually goes back to the well you have polluted. And yet you champion this defeated argument at the first sign of semi relevance. Can you not think ANY legitimate evidence to silence my particular identification of the homosexual sin? Or is it you have not been told how to think about it yet?

Let me refresh your memory as to the exact argument:
Homosexuality is a sin because Sex outside of Marriage is a sin. Now because there is Absolutely No Context in The Whole of the Bible to Sanctify a Homosexual relationship in marriage, that puts all Homosexual sex well with in the Realm of SIN..

But also know that this sin is like any other. There is forgiveness for this sin if one can repent of it. Forgiveness only comes through Repentance, not through Acceptance or pride. The Bible teaches Jesus died for the forgiveness of our sins. Teaching and or believing that their is acceptance in sin negates the Gospel of the Bible...

As you can plainly see I have not used or pointed to ANY of the scriptures you or others have "explained." And yet Homosexuality can still be deemed as a sin. So please, the challenge has been issued per your request.

 

[drich0150]

There is?

Yes

Thats what most homosexuals do, don't they?

Changing or trying to force a doctrine of unbiblical tolerance upon the Church is not "just being gay."

If you do not believe this is happening at all then simply read some of these posts.

 

[drich0150]

Find me a fluent speaker of both ancient Hebrew and English who agrees with your version of Leviticus and I'll consede the point

As I have demonstrated many times Homosexuality can still be deemed as a sin without the specific verses in question.
Post 225 is the most recent..

 

[onemorequestion]

Since I have written this out about 20 different times in this thread alone I will simply cut and paste a response directed at another poster:
Why can't you seem to answer the scripture i have put fourth identifying Homosexuality as a sin?

Why do you keep harping on your tired argument? (Over and Over and Over again) From what I have read there is only one who continually goes back to the well you have polluted. And yet you champion this defeated argument at the first sign of semi relevance. Can you not think ANY legitimate evidence to silence my particular identification of the homosexual sin? Or is it you have not been told how to think about it yet?

Let me refresh your memory as to the exact argument:
Homosexuality is a sin because Sex outside of Marriage is a sin. Now because there is Absolutely No Context in The Whole of the Bible to Sanctify a Homosexual relationship in marriage, that puts all Homosexual sex well with in the Realm of SIN..

But also know that this sin is like any other. There is forgiveness for this sin if one can repent of it. Forgiveness only comes through Repentance, not through Acceptance or pride. The Bible teaches Jesus died for the forgiveness of our sins. Teaching and or believing that their is acceptance in sin negates the Gospel of the Bible...

As you can plainly see I have not used or pointed to ANY of the scriptures you or others have "explained." And yet Homosexuality can still be deemed as a sin. So please, the challenge has been issued per your request.

Fantastic reply drich.

When you look at the "Jesus didn't say anything about . . . " position, you are bottomline looking at permissiveness right in its face. Literally the "anything goes" mantra.

The New Testament details what sexual and moral holiness is, and gay behavior is antithetical to that clear and precise teaching. There are far more than just five clobber passages to drive the gay agenda away from harming the Church.

 

[onemorequestion]

As I have demonstrated many times Homosexuality can still be deemed as a sin without the specific verses in question.
Post 225 is the most recent..

That is the liberal merry-go-round of "Where's your proof?" And when that is shown: "Where's your evidence?" And when that is re-shown?

"Where's your proof?"

Now you see why Jesus advised to cast the dust off your feet and move on.

 

[drich0150]

That is the liberal merry-go-round of "Where's your proof?" And when that is shown: "Where's your evidence?" And when that is re-shown?

"Where's your proof?"

Now you see why Jesus advised to cast the dust off your feet and move on.

I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. Even though this is like 1000th time I written this message i want the new guy to have the same chance I have given the rest of them.

 

[onemorequestion]

I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. Even though this is like 1000th time I written this message i want the new guy to have the same chance I have given the rest of them.

I know. I do the same.

The baggering and baggering from that side though, does take its toll. But of course that's the idea.