Is homosexuality an Abomination before the Lord?

[rmw8855]

Hey Jim - I'm Word of Faith and I don't believe that.

But you do KNOW those who do. Have you seen my debates with those who do?

I actually don't spend that much time in WOF, so I missed your debates. There are not that many active threads in WOF.

And yes I do know some who believe that. We will have to talk about it sometime in another thread. (Warning - I am NOT a debater)

 

[JimfromOhio]

I actually don't spend that much time in WOF, so I missed your debates. There are not that many active threads in WOF.

And yes I do know some who believe that. We will have to talk about it sometime in another thread. (Warning - I am NOT a debater)

Then I will drop this example for now. I was trying to make a point.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Amen.

Carnal person is a Christian who still has self on the throne (selfishness). Christ is still in there somewhere, running around, but He is not in charge, and the life is still in chaos. There's no Lordship. For a Spiritual Christian, Self is off the throne (self-less), Christ is on it, and the life is all in order.

jim you keep saying you are done but keep coming back..what's up bro?

 

[JimfromOhio]

jim you keep saying you are done but keep coming back..what's up bro?

By refusing to answer questions when those who bickered when some don't answer questions (i.e yesterday). Didn't I remember seeing some posts where people got mad about not answering their questions and avoiding them?

This place is so confusing.

 

[SolomonVII]

You feel no need to qualify what you are saying, Time, by pointing out the myriad of other things that are classified as sins as well?

What makes you so different?

HUH? lol
I didnt qualify anything i posted scripture

Sorry, my response9 above) was a little confusing.
Just trying to say that all the initial responses were essentially saying the same thing as yours, but the only difference was that Time's (Wolf's?) did not list off a whole bunch of abominations too along with the subject at hand.

Kind of like an old Woody Allen movie, where poor ole neurotic Woody was trying to disguise his condom purchase by buying one hunded other items along with the condoms, many of the first post tried to disguise their 'yes' in a list with a hundred other sins to qualify or disguise what they were actually saying.

Time's post stood out as not trying to do that. Straight to the Scriptural point, bim, bam boom., no trying to cover up the fact that the scripture was being taken at face value, on the one point alone.

So my response was not a criticism, but an attempt at very dry humor. While other are walking gingerly on egg shells, Time stomped them eggs real good.

But, embarrassed or not, virtually all conservatives were making the same purchase-that the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination, and that is what they believe.

 

[Lisa0315]

Sorry, my response9 above) was a little confusing.
Just trying to say that all the initial responses were essentially saying the same thing as yours, but the only difference was that Time's (Wolf's?) did not list off a whole bunch of abominations too along with the subject at hand.

Kind of like an old Woody Allen movie, where poor ole neurotic Woody was trying to disguise his condom purchase by buying one hunded other items along with the condoms, many of the first post tried to disguise their 'yes' in a list with a hundred other sins to qualify or disguise what they were actually saying.

Time's post stood out as not trying to do that. Straight to the Scriptural point, bim, bam boom., no trying to cover up the fact that the scripture was being taken at face value, on the one point alone.

So my response was not a criticism, but an attempt at very dry humor. While other are walking gingerly on egg shells, Time stomped them eggs real good.

But, embarrassed or not, virtually all conservatives were making the same purchase-that the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination, and that is what they believe.

hmm...I wasn't embarrassed. I was honest.

Lisa

 

[Time2BCounted]

Sorry, my response9 above) was a little confusing.
Just trying to say that all the initial responses were essentially saying the same thing as yours, but the only difference was that Time's (Wolf's?) did not list off a whole bunch of abominations too along with the subject at hand.

Kind of like an old Woody Allen movie, where poor ole neurotic Woody was trying to disguise his condom purchase by buying one hunded other items along with the condoms, many of the first post tried to disguise their 'yes' in a list with a hundred other sins to qualify or disguise what they were actually saying.

Time's post stood out as not trying to do that. Straight to the Scriptural point, bim, bam boom., no trying to cover up the fact that the scripture was being taken at face value, on the one point alone.

So my response was not a criticism, but an attempt at very dry humor. While other are walking gingerly on egg shells, Time stomped them eggs real good.

But, embarrassed or not, virtually all conservatives were making the same purchase-that the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination, and that is what they believe.

ok i gotcha, its been a long day lolol

 

[SolomonVII]

hmm...I wasn't embarrassed. I was honest.

Lisa

I am sorry for any perceived slur on your character Lisa.

None was attended, I assure you.

Indeed you were being very honest, and sincere, and forthright in all of your answers to me, and I appreciated that very, very much.
You are a credit to not just conservative Christians, but indeed to all Christians that post here. You always have been.

But with conservative Christians being perceived as the enemy in this topic, like you said, (to paraphrase)it is often necessary to define what we mean and what we don't mean. To the extent that just saying where we stand on these issues we have to defend ourselves off against charges of hate-mongering, there is always the potential embarrassment of being lableled as such with actual hate-mongerers.



Am I explaining myself satifactorily, or just digging myself deeper into a hole here?

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

.

 

[Nadiine]

I am sorry for any perceived slur on your character Lisa.

None was attended, I assure you.

Indeed you were being very honest, and sincere, and forthright in all of your answers to me, and I appreciated that very, very much.
You are a credit to not just conservative Christians, but indeed to all Christians that post here. You always have been.

But with conservative Christians being perceived as the enemy in this topic, like you said, (to paraphrase)it is often necessary to define what we mean and what we don't mean. To the extent that just saying where we stand on these issues we have to defend ourselves off against charges of hate-mongering, there is always the potential embarrassment of being lableled as such with actual hate-mongerers.

Am I explaining myself satifactorily, or just digging myself deeper into a hole here?

Basically, anytime a Christian speaks out regarding a biblical moral truth, we're open for attack.

John the Baptist told the King that he was in sin by committing adultery. Look where he ended up for pointing out a moral sin.

I think that says it all. But I'd gladly take some people jeering at me with name calling than being beheaded or imprisoned for calling sin what it is. That's just the risk we take for following Christ - no servant is greater than his master.

If the world LOVES US, then we should actually start doing some heavy introspection to see if we're in the faith at all; becuz the world obviously isn't seeing you the way the Bible paints the believer.
The "Christianity" today seeks friendship with the world by watering down God's truths or keeping silent about those that are "controversial"...
I think there actually mite be more love of the world than love of God in that type of Christianity (depending on how far some take it) -- some soul searching would be a good idea.

 

[CTyer]

This is true. It IS sad that it is true, but it is true just the same. Peace in Christ, CT

Basically, anytime a Christian speaks out regarding a biblical moral truth, we're open for attack.

John the Baptist told the King that he was in sin by committing adultery. Look where he ended up for pointing out a moral sin.

I think that says it all. But I'd gladly take some people jeering at me with name calling than being beheaded or imprisoned for calling sin what it is. That's just the risk we take for following Christ - no servant is greater than his master.

If the world LOVES US, then we should actually start doing some heavy introspection to see if we're in the faith at all; becuz the world obviously isn't seeing you the way the Bible paints the believer.
The "Christianity" today seeks friendship with the world by watering down God's truths or keeping silent about those that are "controversial"...
I think there actually mite be more love of the world than love of God in that type of Christianity (depending on how far some take it) -- some soul searching would be a good idea.

 

[CTyer]

A most excellent post Lisa.

Well, here is the thing about practicing sin...If we are striving for perfection, then, we would give up all sinful relationships. There is just no way that a person would not be convicted to do that from everything I have read in Scripture. Those who are practicing homosexuals AND are claiming to be Christians, well, it just does not add up. Same goes for adultery, same goes for any other sin.

Now, that does not mean that someone who is gay, gets saved, strives for perfection, and in a Spiritual crisis falls into sin again, is not saved. It means that the person would repent, be chastened, and hopefully mature in the Lord so that it would become less and less likely that they would fall into that same sin again.

To say that one can go about sinning, unrepenting, is, (if it is possible, and I just don't believe that it is), but if it is possible, it is an abuse of grace which is a sin in of itself.

There is just no way around this one. Sexual sin is sin and one cannot practice sin without consequences.

Lisa

 

[Epiphanygirl]

Yes, it is....

 

[ContentInHim]

Conservative Christians only please.

Is it instrinsically infalmmotory to answer yes to this question?

Should conservative Christians that answer yes have the right to voice their opinion at foru.ms?

I certainly hope so. Too bad the poll wasn't open.

Now I'll go back and read through the thread.

 

[ContentInHim]

If in the question you're asking about the sexual act itself, then yes.
If in the question you're asking about the attraction / orientation, then no.

Agreed!

I believe that God gives us all trials. Mine is widowhood because it's the first time I've been without a man. Thankfully, I'm now saved and I see things differently, but prior to that, I could be in real trouble now.

 

[SolomonVII]

Vambram
I am sorry, I was not talking about you or anyone here, I should have said that in my post. I mean nominal christians who do not really follow the Bible, to them the homosexual is hated because he or she is differant and it is not based on morals but comes out of being bigoted and has the same root as sexism or racism, but these people use the Bible as an excuse to hate the sin and the sinner but rationalize away there own fornication.
Agian sorry if anyone thought I meant people here

Indeed, this a very good observation.
For not once in this thread has anyone, to my recollection, expressed any hatred toward homosexuals.

"Abomination" has been defined time and again here according to biblical sources or tradition, or even possibly social effects.
Relevant discussions and disagreements have centered on whether salvation is possible, whether there is there different degrees of sin and how homosexuality fits into sexual sin in general, or whether homosexuality is defined through attraction or behavior, but whatever the diagreements, nobody here has come out as bigoted or hateful against any homosexual person.

This never even entered in the discussion once.

It is good then to realize that amongst those (here) who take the Bible most seriously, it is a baseless accusation to assume that their beliefs are based in prejudice and bigotry. As such, to insist that they must keep defending themselves against such accusations is a form of bigotry and base politicking in and of itself.

Conservative Christians, and Christianity in general are just not the problem for homosexuals. No, it is the rednecks, or street rubbies, and those nominal to the Christian message that homosexuals most have to fear of being bashed by. Thise with a little bit of knowledge are the most dangerous indeed.

Certainly there is a very real and profound and unbridgeable difference betwen liberals and conservative Christians on this subject, and between conservative Christians believe, and what practicing homosexuals believe about themselves. Authentic reading of the bible in the biblical tradition of the last 2500 years ensures that this will be so.

But to assume that the typical Conservative Christian is opposed to homosexual behavior based on any underlying sense of bigotry or prejudice or hatred or revulsion is more than just unfortunate name-calling, or smearing of the conservative Christian label.

Really, on the evidence of this thread, it would be a downright lie to maintain any of those insinuations against the conservative Christian, as he/she present himself here in this forum.

 

[SolomonVII]

And just as an aside, given that a paltry 5 voted no, and that none of these five entered into the discussion, this would be a fairly good indication that conservative Christians do indeed own this forum, and are very much capable of setting the agenda here.

We can afford a little magnanamity toward those who do not think as we do.

Really 5 votes are likely a good indication of how few people read the OP of a poll before voting, rather than anything else.

 

[Nadiine]

I think we have to remember in all of this that people aren't completely blind or ignorant to moral sin. God has installed an inner conscience in all human beings - His laws are written on our hearts to inwardly feel right and wrong in our spirits.

Just claiming something is not wrong, doesn't mean that they do not FEEL it is wrong deep within and are simply in rebellion to God & His moral commands. I believe the Bible calls it searing the conscience.

I also used to support and participate in premarital sex... but I can assure you that in my heart & soul, I KNEW it was wrong, I just rebelled becuz I thought it was unfairly restrictive and it made me mad.
It doesn't stop people from knowing right and wrong.

Romans 1:18-32 shows us how this gradually happens and when we continue in the rebellion, God turns us over to our lusts & desires.

 

[rmw8855]

And just as an aside, given that a paltry 5 voted no, and that none of these five entered into the discussion, this would be a fairly good indication that conservative Christians do indeed own this forum, and are very much capable of setting the agenda here.

We can afford a little magnanamity toward those who do not think as we do.

Really 5 votes are likely a good indication of how few people read the OP of a poll before voting, rather than anything else.

I agree. This is the Conservative Christian Congregation and this thread proved that we can carry on a discussion about an emotionally hot topic without getting angry or allowing others to derail us.

 

[Nadiine]

I agree. This is the Conservative Christian Congregation and this thread proved that we can carry on a discussion about an emotionally hot topic without getting angry or allowing others to derail us.

True, but at the same time I thought our rules forbid guests to debate against the SOF of an area, and if a member went against this, it's also grounds for termination since it's against the SOF too?

I could be wrong, and don't mean to burst any party bubbles & be a party pooper lol, I'm happy about it too.