Do you think that homosexuals go to hell 2

[ToBeLoved]

That is silly. The gate is narrow, not impossible. Is the teaching difficult and you want to leave too, or are you like Peter who said 'where are we to go, we've left everything?'

When you love God, there is no where else to go, because there is no where else that you would ever want to be.

 

[Marius27]

That seems like an odd comment since you are not pointing out any specific doctrine but making a general statement. Seems if you were seriously trying to address something it would be specific and more than two vague sentences. Ask questions if you have a specific point. Thanks.

I've made specific points numerous times, and people just stick their fingers in their ear and say "nuh uh, the out of context modern English is the only true meaning!"

It's pointless wasting my time on people who believe they're incapable of being wrong and will never evaluate their beliefs.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I've made specific points numerous times, and people just stick their fingers in their ear and say "nuh uh, the out of context modern English is the only true meaning!"

It's pointless wasting my time on people who believe they're incapable of being wrong and will never evaluate their beliefs.

Maybe your not communicating as well as you think you are then, because more than one person isn't hearing what you say you are saying.

We can only understand what your words communicate.

That is not meant as an insult. Sometimes I over communicate when I need to. More is more, not less.

 

[Marius27]

Maybe your not communicating as well as you think you are then, because more than one person isn't hearing what you say you are saying.

We can only understand what your words communicate.

That is not meant as an insult. Sometimes I over communicate when I need to. More is more, not less.

I'm communicating just fine. You can't get through to people who reject any type of evidence and always believe their views are right, now matter how much controversy is involved with those beliefs. 1 Corinthians 6:9 is a perfect example. People here claim it condemns all homosexuals. But what is that based on? We know the use of "homosexuals" is an error, because the Greek word does not refer to homosexual women. So then, we look at homosexual men. But where does the belief come from that the Greek word refers to all homosexual men? Paul invented the word. He chose not to use the other Greek words that already referred to homosexuality and his audience was well aware of. Why is that? And why has the word changed meaning numerous times through the last 2000 years? During the Reformation, Protestants universally translated that word as masturbators. At one point in history, it meant kidnappers. And in classical literature following Paul's invention of the word, we find it always used to refer to economic sins/vices. Never is it found among sexual sins.

So why should I accept the modern day viewpoint, when none of the evidence supports that and people have viewed it differently for 2000 years? What makes conservatives today right, but Martin Luther, Protestants, and those in the first few centuries of Christianity wrong?

 

[Svt4Him]

I've made specific points numerous times, and people just stick their fingers in their ear and say "nuh uh, the out of context modern English is the only true meaning!"

It's pointless wasting my time on people who believe they're incapable of being wrong and will never evaluate their beliefs.

Or maybe we've heard this argument, and know it's wrong.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I'm communicating just fine. You can't get through to people who reject any type of evidence and always believe their views are right, now matter how much controversy is involved with those beliefs. 1 Corinthians 6:9 is a perfect example. People here claim it condemns all homosexuals. But what is that based on? We know the use of "homosexuals" is an error, because the Greek word does not refer to homosexual women. So then, we look at homosexual men. But where does the belief come from that the Greek word refers to all homosexual men? Paul invented the word. He chose not to use the other Greek words that already referred to homosexuality and his audience was well aware of. Why is that? And why has the word changed meaning numerous times through the last 2000 years? During the Reformation, Protestants universally translated that word as masturbators. At one point in history, it meant kidnappers. And in classical literature following Paul's invention of the word, we find it always used to refer to economic sins/vices. Never is it found among sexual sins.

So why should I accept the modern day viewpoint, when none of the evidence supports that and people have viewed it differently for 2000 years? What makes conservatives today right, but Martin Luther, Protestants, and those in the first few centuries of Christianity wrong?

If you are communicating well, then I guess you are. Keep on keeping on. It wasn't meant as an insult as I stated earlier.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Well, one thing that we know is that Jesus forgives sin. Homosexuality and/or sexual sin iS NOT an unforgivable sin.

So, it is up to each individual in sin to seek forgiveness from God. Homosexuality in itself will NOT send one to hell.

Looking at the title of the thread, "Do you think homosexuals go to hell?" is not a group thing (ie.. all homosexuals) but is based on each individual and there relationship with God and what they seek forgiveness for and what they do in each of their lives.

'Sexual sin' is not all that different as a general topic. Yes, homosexuality is sin, but it is not unforgivable and we all sin and need forgiveness.

 

[miamited]

I don't think anyone goes to Heaven or Hell. It's lights out. This isn't a casting call for a part in the big movie. This is the big movie.

Hi humanist,

Yes, and as a humanist, that's what you're supposed to believe. The question that has to be answered by each of us is: is what I believe the truth?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted