i realise it isn't valid however my point still stands. Why does the church focus on homosexuality so much and not other sins? it is a very unhealthy balance the church has. Why? The church doesn't seem to want to confront sin so selects some that are easy for most church goers to avoid rather than the ones that are causing all kinds of problems in the church.
Then that wouldn't be a very good church would it?
As for promoting what is good are you saying promoting a anti-greed view is not promoting what is good? Seems like you are suggesting greed is good. Probably wasn't your intention but that is how it comes across.
You'll have to point out where greed is coming into what I wrote. Here is the quote you were working from:
Pointing out a fault to justify not doing something isn't a valid argument. Just as not upholding the truth in those situations is wrong, so too is not upholding the truth in the other.
People will still do what they want, but you don't have to promote it. Just like you can't "legislate behavior" but you can promote behavior. Promote what is good, not what is evil.
One can easily promote anti greed legislation. It is done all the time through limitations. Even my local grocery store puts a limit on items I can buy at a sale price.
and one can easily be a light without trying to force their views on others. We are not to try to force our views on others. That is not witnessing. That is not being light. That is not being salt. As you said salt adds flavour. Adding flavour is a good thing. Forcing beliefs on others is not a good thing.
Light automatically makes darkness... retreat. Salt takes a food and makes it taste different. If your witness of Jesus does not make darkness retreat or food taste different... that isn't a witness of Jesus.
We do force our beliefs on others through laws all the time. No one would argue that we force our views on pedophiles. Or force our views on thieves. Or force our views on etc...
The point is a Christian stands for what is right. Which means what lines up with the Bible. What we do not do is take up arms and make our truth to be followed if it is rejected. I will always say abortion is murder, but I won't kill in order to enforce that truth. But I am always a light in that regard. I am always salt. By faith in Jesus.
Always stating truth and voting for truth is a good thing.
not allowing a law to be passed is not passive if the proposal has been made. passive would not be doing anything. So voting for or against is being active.
Letting it be would not be voting against it but rather not voting. of course i would not be voting on any law anyway and to the best of my knowledge neither would you. i could be wrong you may be a member of parliament.
Correct. How is that different from what I said?
Well your not allowing a law to be passed, that would be passive. You are voting for it, being active. You would have helped to place it there.
Letting it be would be voting against it and not taking up arms or not voting at all.
Voting for or against a law is active. Not doing anything is passive.
-Voting for a law that promotes/upholds sin is actively promoting/upholding sin.
-Voting against a law that promotes/upholds sin is actively against promoting/upholding sin.
As for voting for laws...pick your reps wisely.
however when read in context it requires actively encouraging the person. Reading the Amplified bible assists in giving a clearer understanding and you can always check that it is correct.
No it doesn't.
Woe to the world for such temptations to sin and influences to do wrong! It is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the person on whose account or by whom the temptation comes!
The word the Amplified Bible translates as "temptations" is skandalon. It literally means a trap. It isn't "tempting", but "something that is a temptation".
The woe is for "that man through whom the [something that is a temptation] comes!"
So it does not require "actively encouraging the person", but rather actively encouraging the temptation. The verse doesn't speak of an action against a person at all. But an action setting up a temptation/trap/stumbling block.
Example Balaam.
"But I have a few things against you, because you have there some who hold the teaching of Balaam, who kept teaching Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit acts of immorality." Rev 2:14 (see Num 25:1-9)
Balaam taught Balak to place a stumbling stone. So who caused Israel to sin?
"And Moses said to them, "Have you spared the women? Behold, these caused the sons of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, so the plague was among the congregation of the Lord." Num 31:16
The active portion was the women. But "woe to [Balaam and Balak] through whom the stumbling block [came].
Don't promote stumbling blocks, or you will be held accountable.
This passage is not talking about sexuality. it is talking of all things. Sensual pleasures. Well a giant screen tv with surround sound can give sensual pleasure. Insisting on living in a waterfront home is sensual pleasure. Lusting in and of itself is not sinful. if it was then Jesus sinned. it depends on what is being lusted after
Huh?
This passage is not talking about sexuality.
This passage is talking about all things.
How is sexuality not a part of "all things".
And no Jesus did not sin. Because He was not from the world, but from the Father. His flesh was not fallen like ours. He didn't have lustful, self centered flesh. His desires were Godly.
The whole point is, that no matter whatever you lust after, you will do it in an ungodly way. So one must live by God's word in order to make a slave of our bodies (1 Cor 9:27).
Remember the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63). And the flesh is in opposition to the Spirit (Gal 5:17). So yes that verse means exactly what is says. All these verses are in agreement. But your view on the flesh needs to change.
