Maybe it's because the liberal position is owned and operated by ideologues that have a hidden agenda to destroy the Church? It sure looks that way. Most positions of liberalism are no different from that of garden-variety atheism.
Liberalism is designed to side track the debate. As in to take the believer off the true path of Jesus and onto a wide path to destruction. In many instances interaction with liberalism shows a very nasty and worldly side that truly defines the goals.
I think your missing the point of my post. It is not to stop addressing or representing the Lord. The point was the way that most of us choose to do so, does not work. So why not stop and regroup.
Their arguments only focus is to cast doubt. With out a faith, doubt will always be present. So at that point, to continue in that specific direction can only be considered a foolish endeavor. That is, if your intention is to represent God's word on homosexuality. rather than defending the validity of scripture in general.
It is the only sin I have ever heard about where it is demanded that it is NOT a sin and that the practitioners of this sin are not guilty of anything. In that very aspect, homosexuality is the most threatening force that has ever attacked the Church. It is dismantling truth to invent whole cloth another Gospel.
This is why I am suggesting to stop looking to pronounce it a sin in a manner that they have learned to refute. Pressing on where they are the strongest only serves one's pride. Especially if there is another way.
Are yo not reading what the adherents of liberalism are writing? Homosexual behavior is not a sin. Their minds are no longer open to any other reality than the one they created.
They are saying it is not a sin in the manner you are addressing. So as i suggested set that aside, even though you are correct in your exegesis of scripture when you speak of the verses that directly confront this life style. Again their arguments are constructed to simply cast doubt. If they can do this they have already won the argument. So restart from a position that all believers even semi believers can agree upon and rebuild your argument from there.
Liberalism demands that homosexuality is not a sin. That means it is outside of the reach of forgiveness. Bottom line.
Then find a way to identify it as a sin, do not segregate yourself from it or elevate your sins above it. Address it as you would any other.
I have to disagree. We are labeled by the lost and that is what should be expected. They either mock us or charge us with hypocrisy they invented.
Our segregation of our sins of choice, from theirs is proof of this hypocrisy. Jesus point this out when the Pharisees were going to stone the woman caught in adultery. They were trying to segregate their sins against the adulterous woman. He put all sin on the same level when he said
he without sin cast the first stone...
Jesus argued with adversaries often.
I am not saying arguing is wrong it is the motivations that drive our side of these arguments that can be considered prideful. Can you give one example of Christ arguing from a position of personal pride?
It's not that it's a greater sin, it's that homosexuality has been relabeled by liberalism as nothing at all but normal and healthy. There is no forgiveness offered to an idea that demands that it is not sin.
Which if you read my OP is indeed the point to this thread. My argument is that we simply address their argument in a more productive manner, rather than arguing the positions they are prepared for.
That doesn't work with ideologues that demand that scripture is either wrong or has to be changed for a new paradigm. I see no way to work with liberalism other than to label it as something to put in the pagan or tax collector category. Per Jesus.
Then once you have identified these particular people shake the dust from your feet and move on. If you me or any one else continues to argue with someone for the sake of doing so it is hard for anyone to believe that it is not for the sake of our pride.
is done on a routine basis only to have the adherents of liberalism just ridicule the stupidity of the person holding scripture as important forever. Or at least until the end of the age.
If the person you are speaking with wants to completely disregard scripture then truthfully what authority do you have when speaking to this person anyway? Because if they eliminate scripture from the equation, then they are trying to eliminate God from the conversation, if they do that then again, who is it your representing?
Not true. That is saying that evangelism is prideful. There is no way that is correct.
Evangelism in of itself is to the glory of God, but as I have demonstrated if God has been removed by one or both engaged in the conversation then what you are doing by definition ceases to be evangelism. You Can not bring God Glory, if one or both of you is arguing for themselves. So learn when it is time to shake the dust from your feet and move on to someone who is actually seeking God. we are here only to broadcast seed, not force it into the ground and make it grow. I am suggesting cast the seed of God's word in the direction of more fertile soil.
He honored Jesus and the Apostles full force.
This honor was done in the absents of pride, and or personal righteousness. Just so there is no confusion I am not saying defending God's position is wrong. What I am saying is alot of what i see and read goes well beyond defending the bible. There is a way to stab at the heart of this issue that most pro gay people don't know how to react to, but first one has to humble himself before God and let go of the efforts done in God's name only, but have their roots deep in out pride. that only further serve to segregate the unrepentant sinners from those who have found redemption.
We Ask through prayer, we Seek, in scripture and from those who show Spiritual Fruit, We knock by repeating this process till we get what it is our hearts truly seek.
In our Hearts first, and then in places like this.
I have seen no movement from liberalism that homosexuality is even a sin at all.
..And I bet they have seen little to no movement in whom your arguments actually represent. Your statement is exactly why we must change our approach. There is a way for the meek and humble at heart. I have seen results first hand. That's why I ask that we first seek the Spirit before we seek a way to "win" arguments.