Despicable means immoral actions. But is despicable a particularly horrible or serious sin?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sinful would be against God.
Disgusting rather minor habits might be the basis for categorizing someone/something as despicable, without the perhaps aesthetic features being anything against God.
Despicable means immoral actions. But is despicable a particularly horrible or serious sin?
I don't think so. Immoral is sinful, whereas it would seem despicable can be merely UGLY.
Same sex activity that involves genitals, etc..
What's the difference between ugly and dirty?
I've heard people say "ugly and dirty" for things like taking drugs, sexual immorality?
"Dirty" has lots of uses. Dirt may make something appear ugly - then ugliness would be dirtiness.
"Dirty" and "ugly" are pretty loose or vague terms if applying them to immoral things.
Same sex activity that involves genitals, etc..
do you think misuse of reproductive organs is the improper way to argue against homosexuality? People would then argue heterosexual couples have sex for pleasure without wanting to have kids.
Perversion has nothing to do with the consequences of actual sex.
What do you mean?
To me it's about how that area is reproductive organs. is that incorrect arguement?
Sex is only incidentally about reproduction. For older people not at all. Though no doubt reproduction is part of its design.
Isn't the definition of it reproduction and reproductive organs? I read it is needed to propogate the human race.
In another thread somebody said its the source of reproduction but there are many sexual things and many offspring is not one of them.
Hi Pat, ALL SIN IS SIN AGAINST LOVE? How does that idea fit in I wonder?
So for instance, if we are too mired in sin, can there be any love?
GOD IS LOVE - where sin is total there is not God.
Definitions would include that element of reproduction, but it is not a necessary feature of it, not necessarily the result of it.
Notice, God created male and female, not only male or only female. He created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Why? Because this is the purpose of gender: for reproduction and procreation, so that with the authority given humans, we rule over all other living things; we are the caretakers of the earth.
A rejection of false dogma (Islam) and a rejection of active sin (homosexuality), according to God's Word, which is good and holy, can however be easily confused with Islamophobia and Homophobia from a secular viewpoint.
Xenophobia, however, I'm failing to understand as a "Christian value". It's not even remotely Christian, for in Christ we are clearly commanded to love all, and have compassion on the poor and the needy.
I would go on to say that the idea of some kind of "Christian xenophobia" is not Christian at all, but instead a popular value often found in America (I don't expect everyone to agree), for Christians in the rest of the world are broadly speaking pretty pro-immigration.
Patriotism and Christianity shouldn't be confused, for under Christ Jesus there is only one kingdom.
We should be against sin only, but not the sinner specifically...There are 3 values of God that many people like to label "phobias," i.e. mental diseases.
1. Islamophobia - being AGAINST ISLAM.
2. Homophobia - being AGAINST PERVERSION.
3. Xenophobia - being AGAINST IMMIGRATION.
Because all the false accusations, that being against these things is disease (or at least like unto mental diseases), do not seem to be capable of being overthrown, that the language incorporating them is becoming ever more entrenched, it seems necessary to endorse them, take them up as one's own, in order to overcome them.
Hence the necessity to insist these values are very godly, that the godly person will endorse these values. (And the people who enjoy beating up people with these fake names of supposedly irrational fears are quite anti-God.)
Perhaps there is some inherent truth in the "phobic" designation, in that those very concerned for God, who love God greatly, will "get all upset by" recognizing these things are against the will of God and hence we should be (in the present context of language usage) islamophobic, homophobic, and xenophobic?
I see where you're coming from nowYes of course the terms are being somewhat misused, but try persuading those who use them to stop. They are ways to browbeat, to suggest IRRATIONALITY and bigotry having no basis, when condemning these things is THE POSITION OF GOD.
Many have pointed out much usage amounts to no more than NAME-CALLING, but of course that does not deter those who are intent on being anti-God.
If the "two married people" are engaging in sexual perversion, then it should never be considered honorable, only anti-God and totally despicable. Pseudo"marriage" in that case, certainly not true marriage before God.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?