Can You At Least Admit that The Act is Wrong?

DMagoh · Jul 18, 2007

UberLutheran said:
Of course there isn't.

I thought it was a well known fact that every problem in Western civilization, from the U.S. trade imbalance to the War in Iraq to the nine trillion dollar national debt and the fact that China is selling us cheap goods and thus financing our debt through the trade imbalance, to poverty, Ebola, Lassa fever, bubonic plague, all the genocides of the 20th century, the U.S. Civil War, WWI and WWII, the influenza pandemic of 1918 and the 70 million people killed during the Stalinist Purges could be traced back directly to homosexuals.

So is that a 'NO' to the question then...there is nothing positive about homosexuals in the Bible?

DMagoh · Jul 18, 2007

DMagoh said:
Isnt that cute. That pagan and a lot of the liberal Christians on this forum seem to be in agreement an awful lot.

To answer your question, I dont expect you to hang on every word, but I do believe the Bible and believe in Jesus so I am qualified to enter the debate, just like you. However, someone who disregards my Savior as someone no more real than Bugs Bunny, is hardly someone ANY Christian should receive advice from about the fictious Jesus.

UberLutheran said:
Was that a demonstration of the "compassionate conservatism" that your President and your party are always talking about?

Where is the LOVE, DMagoh?

Love has nothing to do with accepting someone's advice. If you honestly believe you should accept advice on spiritual matters from a pagan, that's a bit concerning.

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

MrPirate said:
A major point is that what the bible says is not clear.

While the pro-discrimination group will wail loudly and gnash tier teeth at this it doesn’t change the fact that there is serious questions about the translation of the four verse generally used to justify their personal prejudice. The best argument the pro-discrimination group can provide is an appeal to history, that is stating that since many have always hated this particular minority and forced certain interoperations of key verses then it is all right to continue.

The bible is much clearer on many topics that are rejected by modern Christians.
Slavery
Racism
Animal sacrifice
The use of rape to force marriage on a woman

These and many other topics are publicly condemned as “wrong” despite their biblical support.

Take your post and exchange the references to homosexuals to blacks
Would you attack people who support racial equality as you are attacking people who reject discrimination against homosexuals?

A major point is that what the bible says is not clear.

The Bible is very clear when you are using Its FULL COUNSEL. God does not author confusion. It's clear. Folks just don't want to accept it.

While the pro-discrimination group will wail loudly and gnash tier teeth at this it doesnt change the fact that there is serious questions about the translation of the four verse generally used to justify their personal prejudice. The best argument the pro-discrimination group can provide is an appeal to history, that is stating that since many have always hated this particular minority and forced certain interoperations of key verses then it is all right to continue.

I'm not at all deterred from dealing with God's truth for the sake of being called discriminatory. The same measure is applied to the committing of homosexual acts as is applied to the false doctrines of Islam, Jehovah's Witnesses and others.

The club is EXCLUSIVE. And Jesus Christ holds the key. And if by His standard of truth it appears that Christians are discriminating, then so be it.

Take your post and exchange the references to homosexuals to blacks

Would you attack people who support racial equality as you are attacking people who reject discrimination against homosexuals?

If the Black acts were identified in God's Word as wrong, I would point out that wrong too.

And what's with the "attack" language? Who has been attacked? I asked a question.

How is pointing out that the committing of homosexual acts as wrong as identified in Gods Word an attack?

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

DMagoh said:
Unfortunately Zaac, the answer is NO.

Despite there being numerous verses in the Bible, there are men on this forum that have become experts at reinterpreting, twisting, making excuses for, making assumptions, and basically see what they want to see. They have to take numerous verses from the Bible and change the way they read, make complicated explanations for them, and/or eliminate them altogether for various reasons:

One verse is only condemning unhospitality

One verse is only condemning homosexual rape

One verse is only condemning uncleanliness

One verse is only condemning male prostitutes

One verse is only condemning engaging in homosexual acts during pagan worship

One verse is only condemning heterosexual men engaging in homosexual acts

One verse the word homosexual was translated wrong

How many verses have to be manipulated? Basically, if you can read the Bible and justify homosexuality, then you have the ability to justify ANY sin you want to.

So, so true. God's truth simply isn't that complicated that folks have got to twist and manipulate the text.

Anyone who fnds themselves doing this can be sure that they are searching for their own understanding instead of leaning on God for His.

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

DMagoh said:
See what you're up against Zaac? MrPirate actually equates engaging in homosexual acts with being black.

You are learning some Liberal Truths today. For example...

Liberal Truth #7 - If you think someone is sinning, it means that you either HATE him, or secretly desire to do what he is doing

You might be interested in a complete listing of Liberal Truths that we have compiled from this Forum. If so, refer to:
http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=35604950&postcount=412

I have noticed that in the past. If you, in accordance with God's Word, tell someone that something is against His Word, you're suddenly discriminating or attacking them or being hateful.

It's a reflex that keeps people from dealing with how they want things to be in relation to how GOD says they should be.

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

TheFathersDaughter said:
Well, no. Because CLEAR is only an adjective if you're reading the one version of the English bible that uses the word 'homosexual' in Roman's. Any other English version can be read any number of ways and you can't possibly say that way is "well it condemns homosexuality" without looking into it.

Ungh ungh. I didn't ask about homosexuality. I asked about the committing of homosexual ACTS.

The one most use is Roman's, I've found, is only relevant to the time and to Paul himself.

Now you know you need to stop. Why would God give you His Word if you got to pick and choose which parts are relevant? He could have kept ALL of it if you would be allowed to do this.

Again, I go right back to what you're talking about authoring confusion. This will always quickly show you what is of God and what is not.

A God of order does not intend for His children to wallow in confusion. And that's exactly what would happen if every person got to decide that certain parts of His Word were only relevant to the time period in which they were written.

Man authors confusion, not God. And I can clearly say that your comment is of man and not of God.

Paul didn't condone ANY sort of relationship and wished that everyone could remain celibate. Why would he condone homosexuality if he didn't even condone heterosexuality?

You have taken your stance on this issue and infused it into Paul's response and made PAul to be saying something that he was not saying.

Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed for several reasons. Even if the majority of S&G were homosexuals, to claim outright they were destroyed ONLY for homosexuality is pushing it. Leviticus is just Jewish Code, not Christian law.

I wold have no Biblical reason to say that S&G were destroyed merely because of the homosexual acts taking place when God's Word says that there were no righteous people therein.

By this account, we know that there were all sorts of sinful acts taking place and the committing of homosexual acts just happened to be the ones showcased. But God destroyed the cities because of ALL the sin, not justthe committing of the homosexual acts.

The reason we don't admit it is because it isn't true. It would be like admitting the sky is green and the grass is blue. Ridiculous. Why admit something you know isn't true?

For it not to be true, you would have to think that God is a liar and that His Word is not true. That would put you in the same boat as the Muslims.

Imagine if Martin Luther King Jr. "admit" that the discrimination against him was alright.

Imagine if Ghandi "admit" that Indian's are only second rate citizens.

Or to the most unimaginable degree, imagine if Christ "admit" He wasn't really God.

Obviously, none of those are true but the second you admit it's true, people will believe it. People are far more likely to believe someone who AGREES with them then they are to believe someone who DOESN'T. I'm not going to admit anything that isn't true to please those who don't agree.

Again, where have I asked anyone anything about discrimination?

I asked about the committing of homosexual acts. It is an individual choice. So what's with the continued cries of discrimination when you get to choose to commit the act or not commit it?

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

Wiccan_Child said:
I see no condemnation of homosexuality in the original texts of the Bible. In that regard, I agree with the Bible: homosexuality is not something to be condemned.

Wiccan Child, I am in agreement with that. The Bible speaks to the committing of HOMOSEXUAL ACTS not homosexuality.

UberLutheran · Jul 18, 2007

DMagoh said:
So is that a 'NO' to the question then...there is nothing positive about homosexuals in the Bible?

You tell me. It's not as though you're about to read anything I have to post, anyway.

You might want to check out 1 Samuel, regarding the story of David and Jonathan but I know that Baptists have their own interpretation of that story (which, of course, is the right interpretation. )

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

UberLutheran said:
And what makes you think all Christians are hanging on every word you (and the other fundamentalists) say? Despite what many fundamentalists like to think, fundamentalists don't represent all of Christianity, and frankly I'm tired of their misrepresentations of the faith.

Unfortunately, this is how many feel. But true men and women of God are not detracted from God's Work because of this.

For liberal Christendom is as much to blame as is the heretic for the confusion that has entered the houses of many in reference to God's Word.

People need to hold true to God's Word. And if liberals were doing this, there would be nothing to say. Unfortunately, political correctness and accommadation has replaced the reverence of God's Word.

For decades, God's church has been placated and pacified into being salated by the world instead of being salt.

How can anyone look at God's Word and make him into a lair in order to suit their own desires?

DMagoh · Jul 18, 2007

UberLutheran said:
You tell me. It's not as though you're about to read anything I have to post, anyway.

So is that a 'NO' to the question then...there is nothing positive about homosexuals in the Bible?

UberLutheran said:
You might want to check out 1 Samuel, regarding the story of David and Jonathan but I know that Baptists have their own interpretation of that story (which, of course, is the right interpretation. )

1) When a verse specifically condemns homosexuality in black words on white paper, you dont believe it. Such as...

In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Romans 1:27

Which specifically says...

They abandoned natural relations with women;
They are inflamed in lust for other men;
They have commited indecent acts with other men; and
They will receive the due penalty for their perversion.

BUT

2) If homosexuality is NEVER mentioned, like in the story of David and Jonathan, then you read into it that they are homosexuals.

Interesting concept, this reading the black words on white paper any way you want. Seems like if you dont read the words as they are actually written, you can make it say anything you want!

By the way, I cant wait to see the look on your face when you meet David and have to explain to him why you kept telling people he was a homosexual. This guy slew a giant, and I dont think he's going to be real happy with you.

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

UberLutheran said:
You tell me. It's not as though you're about to read anything I have to post, anyway.

You might want to check out 1 Samuel, regarding the story of David and Jonathan — but I know that Baptists have their own interpretation of that story (which, of course, is the right interpretation. )

I am a firm believer in Biblical exposition. In order to do a proper job, you have to EXEGETE what is there. You have to deal with what the text says, not what you want it to say.

Once you have exegeted and dealt with what the text says you may ISOGETE and make application.

But your Isogetical application cannot conflict with God's EXEGETED Word. If it does, your extrapolated interpretation is WRONG.

SO don't read anything into Jonathon and David's relationship that God's EXEGETED Word has said.

If you do, you once again open the door for confusion and conflict with the FULL COUNSEL of the Word, and God's people IMMEDIATELY know that the premise is not of God.

UberLutheran · Jul 18, 2007

DMagoh said:
So is that a 'NO' to the question then...there is nothing positive about homosexuals in the Bible?

1) When a verse specifically condemns homosexuality in black words on white paper, you dont believe it. Such as...

In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Romans 1:27

Which specifically says...

They abandoned natural relations with women;

They are inflamed in lust for other men;

They have commited indecent acts with other men; and

They will receive the due penalty for their perversion.

BUT

2) If homosexuality is NEVER mentioned, like in the story of David and Jonathan, then you read into it that they are homosexuals.

Interesting concept, this reading the black words on white paper any way you want. Seems like if you dont read the words as they are actually written, you can make it say anything you want!

By the way, I cant wait to see the look on your face when you meet David and have to explain to him why you kept telling people he was a homosexual. This guy slew a giant, and I dont think he's going to be real happy with you.

Well, maybe David will slay me the way he slew Goliath and maybe you and several members of this forum will be there to watch (and rejoice)!

UberLutheran · Jul 18, 2007

stelow said:
[1 Corinthians 6:8-10]

8Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

9Know 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,

10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

The bible is clear but the truth is not going to set well with the lovers of darkness.

Well, there we have it: a proof-text, right from the KJV (e.g., God).

Feel satisfied, now?

ChaliceThunder · Jul 18, 2007

By the way, I cant wait to see the look on your face when you meet David and have to explain to him why you kept telling people he was a homosexual. This guy slew a giant, and I dont think he's going to be real happy with you.

Wow...fist fights at the Heavenly Banquet.

Certainly you cannot find evidence for this in Scripture?

ReformedChapin · Jul 18, 2007

ChaliceThunder said:
By the way, I cant wait to see the look on your face when you meet David and have to explain to him why you kept telling people he was a homosexual. This guy slew a giant, and I dont think he's going to be real happy with you.

Wow...fist fights at the Heavenly Banquet.

Certainly you cannot find evidence for this in Scripture?

Does plain reason count? Or did you throw that out of the window?

ChaliceThunder · Jul 18, 2007

NewGuy101 said:
Does plain reason count? Or did you throw that out of the window?

Point...get one.

ReformedChapin · Jul 18, 2007

ChaliceThunder said:
Point...get one.

...

Markus6 · Jul 18, 2007

Zaac said:
The club is EXCLUSIVE. And Jesus Christ holds the key. And if by His standard of truth it appears that Christians are discriminating, then so be it.

I feel like you are misrepresenting the gospel here. Christianity is not an exclusive club where Jesus Christ works as a bouncer turning away people he doesn't like the look of. It's more like a club so exclusive that none of us can get in but the owner's son helps everyone who wants to get in get in by becoming their friend.
Also there is a 'standard of truth' but again we can't attain that standard, we need grace.

ReformedChapin · Jul 18, 2007

Markus6 said:
I feel like you are misrepresenting the gospel here. Christianity is not an exclusive club where Jesus Christ works as a bouncer turning away people he doesn't like the look of. It's more like a club so exclusive that none of us can get in but the owner's son helps everyone who wants to get in get in by becoming their friend.
Also there is a 'standard of truth' but again we can't attain that standard, we need grace.

Actually there is an exclusive club, but it's not of Jesus turning people away but of people never being able to accept the truth except through God's grace.

Zaac · Jul 18, 2007

Markus6 said:
I feel like you are misrepresenting the gospel here.

I think you misrepresented what I said. Christianity IS exclusive. You either come by way of Jesus or you don't.

Christianity is not an exclusive club where Jesus Christ works as a bouncer turning away people he doesn't like the look of. It's more like a club so exclusive that none of us can get in but the owner's son helps everyone who wants to get in get in by becoming their friend.
Also there is a 'standard of truth' but again we can't attain that standard, we need grace.

No qualms with that. That's the same thing I was referring to when I said that it's exclusive.

Can You At Least Admit that The Act is Wrong?

DMagoh

Guest

DMagoh

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

DMagoh

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

ChaliceThunder

Guest

Chapin = Guatemalan

ChaliceThunder

Guest

Chapin = Guatemalan

Veteran

Chapin = Guatemalan

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency