Gay preaching on proper sexuality: Born Gay

Status
Not open for further replies.

OllieFranz

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
5,328
351
✟23,548.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Let me get this straight. I point out that Paul says that it takes a gift to live a celibate life. That one can not live up to a commitment to celibacy without the gift, so he recommends marriage as a second choice for those that can't live a celibate life. That these are the only choices available to the Christian who wishes to serve God. And somehow just because I occasionally use the word "grace" instead of the word "gift," I'm saying that this gift "licenses" sin?

No, I'm saying that your insistence that gays cannot follow Paul's advice to marry, you are condemning them to burn. You are calling Paul, and through Paul, God, a liar when He promised everyone a "way to escape" temptation.

I am not calling for "licensing" sin. I'm calling for compassion. Homosexuality is nowhere condemned in the Bible. Certain acts of promiscuity are condemned, which include male-male promiscuity. Certain acts of rape are condemned which include raping men. Certain acts of idolatry which are expressed sexually are condemned including men with male acolytes.

No one in the Bible is commanded to live a celibate life, although Jesus suggests and Paul advises that it frees one up to devote more time to the work of the Gospel, but if one does not/can not commit to a celibate life, one must marry to have an acceptable outlet for their sexual urges. Yet you would deny this outlet to a whole class of people because....

Because you don't believe they are really gay?

Because you don't think that they are sincere in their faith? Or that they

Because you think that they can be "cured" by the church? Or by faith in Jesus?

The problem is that none of these reasons are supported either by Scripture or by experience.
 
Upvote 0

AlAyeti

Just a guy
Jan 14, 2010
991
40
✟16,354.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Let me get this straight. I point out that Paul says that it takes a gift to live a celibate life. That one can not live up to a commitment to celibacy without the gift, so he recommends marriage as a second choice for those that can't live a celibate life. That these are the only choices available to the Christian who wishes to serve God. And somehow just because I occasionally use the word "grace" instead of the word "gift," I'm saying that this gift "licenses" sin?

I just pointed out the error in your use of the concept of grace. I know well that marriage is only a man and a woman in Christian reality, life and theology. How, or why, do you think you can change that for a 21st century pop culture movement?

No, I'm saying that your insistence that gays cannot follow Paul's advice to marry, you are condemning them to burn.

Obviously I have never ever said such a thing. marriage is a well defined situation in the New Testament. As is sin, repentance, forgiveness and grace.

You are calling Paul, and through Paul, God, a liar when He promised everyone a "way to escape" temptation.

And whay pray tell is that? I've never heard or read such a thing. And as I have shown quite often, I can handle any Biblical debate tactics your side throws at me. Escape temptation? Only when your dead.

I am not calling for "licensing" sin. I'm calling for compassion.

You are demanding that same-sex unions be called a marriage. There is no justification or support for that to be inflicted on The Church.

Homosexuality is nowhere condemned in the Bible.

Then nothing is condemned in the Bible. Here we anything go! But back to reality . . ., I have shown over and over again that homosexuality is soundly condemned "in the Bible."

Certain acts of promiscuity are condemned, which include male-male promiscuity.

To use your logic: NO, it is not. Nothing is condemned.

Certain acts of rape are condemned which include raping men.

What if someone is given a sexual assault orientation tag to their sexual proclivities? It only takes a certain kind of people to take power in government to make that happen. No, wait a minute, there are literally thousands of convicted sexual predators walking our streets. People that deserve to never see the outside of a prison for their entire lives. What kind of politics let's them free?

What if The Huns were to make a political comeback?

Certain acts of idolatry which are expressed sexually are condemned including men with male acolytes.

Much of acting like the world is considered idoloatry without doing obeisance to a shrine idol. You are positing the world and its ways as a part of Christian doctrine.

No one in the Bible is commanded to live a celibate life, although Jesus suggests and Paul advises that it frees one up to devote more time to the work of the Gospel, but if one does not/can not commit to a celibate life, one must marry to have an acceptable outlet for their sexual urges.

An acceptable outlet is immutably defined. Anything not it is a sin. Where do you get the right to call a same gender partnership a "marriage?"

"Hi Paul, nice to meet you, I'm Steve. This is my husband Bill."

Does that sound even remotely appropriate in Christian reality?

Yet you would deny this outlet to a whole class of people because....

Of Gospel truth.

Because you don't believe they are really gay?

Gay is a label for homosexual made up in the sixties to sound better then homosexual. It was employed into vernacular for the gay agenda to take root.

Because you don't think that they are sincere in their faith?

That is not an option for me or any other Christian. But, "by their fruit you will know them."

Or that they

Have chosen the world and its ways. THAT, would be accurate.

Because you think that they can be "cured" by the church? Or by faith in Jesus?

Healed from what? Do women or men stop their sexual functions when they choose homosexual sex? Lesbians stop ovulating and Gay men stop producing sperm?

Are you saying faith in Jesus cannot bring healing or repentance and forgiveness?

The problem is that none of these reasons are supported either by Scripture or by experience.

Wrong on count one and count two is strictly your personal opinion.
 
Upvote 0

OllieFranz

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
5,328
351
✟23,548.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No, I'm saying that your insistence that gays cannot follow Paul's advice to marry, you are condemning them to burn. You are calling Paul, and through Paul, God, a liar when He promised everyone a "way to escape" temptation.

And whay pray tell is that? I've never heard or read such a thing. And as I have shown quite often, I can handle any Biblical debate tactics your side throws at me. Escape temptation? Only when your dead.

There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].
1 Corinthians 10:13
The phrasing "way to escape" was not my own, and refers to the grace to endure temptation, not to its elimination. (see also 2 Corinthians 12:7-9)

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that you were merely denying the (strawman) supposed claim that God would remove temptation, despite the fact that I have only ever used the phrase "way to escape" in reference to the passage above, and in fact have argued with you about both the passage and the gift to endure temptation that it promises several times on this board, including earlier in this very discussion.

But it does make me wonder which you would rather that I believe: that you have the memory and attention span of a two-year-old, or that you are willing to deliberately "misunderstand" a discussion we have had several times before without the misunderstanding just because to recognize the source of the quote would mean you would have to consider the truth of my argument.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.