How about asking them?

[BigBadWlf]

Does freedom from the law excuse one from sin?

Lovely example of a double standard. You want “freedom from the law” for yourself. But at the same time you want to misuse the law to attack people you are prejudiced against

This is not true either. I have accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior. I have confessed with my mouth that Jesus is Lord and I believe in my hear that God raised from the dead.
We are to judge in righteous judgement.

but what do you do when you yourself are righteously judged. You deny, you accuse, you attack, you engage in pride and hubris

 

[BigBadWlf]

Probably the same way christians rationalize the parts about animal sacrifice, cloths of two fibers, working on the sabbath, submission of women, murder in the name of god, etc etc

They pretend that they parts that they don’t like don’t apply to them…but are still happy to use verses next those inconvenient laws to justify prejudice

They are rather likely to be Jews and not Christians, as Christians dont rationalize the OT law and prophets, they follow Jesus Christ who is the fulfillment of the law and prophets.

 

[BreadAlone]

They pretend that they parts that they don’t like don’t apply to them…but are still happy to use verses next those inconvenient laws to justify prejudice

[/color]

I suppose you consider me prejudiced against murderers for calling them sinners too then, no?

SIN IS SIN!! GOD creates morality, NOT YOU!

 

[texastig]

Lovely example of a double standard. You want “freedom from the law” for yourself. But at the same time you want to misuse the law to attack people you are prejudiced against

I'm telling people that they can be free from the sin of homosexuality through Christ.

but what do you do when you yourself are righteously judged. You deny, you accuse, you attack, you engage in pride and hubris

Umm, who judged me?
Thanks,
TT

 

[OllieFranz]

My question seems to have been forgotten. I am still waiting for a response

If one person is ignoring the niddah laws, and he judges another person to be sinning because he is in a gay relationship, even if the gay person is not violating the "man-lying" law, then how is that not hypocricy?

 

[BigBadWlf]

I suppose you consider me prejudiced against murderers for calling them sinners too then, no?

SIN IS SIN!! GOD creates morality, NOT YOU!

Racists use this same tactic to justify their personal prejudices. They falsely compare people of color to criminals just as you are doing here.

 

[BreadAlone]

My question seems to have been forgotten. I am still waiting for a response

If one person is ignoring the niddah laws, and he judges another person to be sinning because he is in a gay relationship, even if the gay person is not violating the "man-lying" law, then how is that not hypocricy?

The "niddah laws" or whatever are OT regulations and rules meant as worship and disciplinary actions for the OT people of God.

Homosexuality is a SIN. It's not just some rule..it's something DETESTABLE to God and is a SIN. That's the difference.

 

[BigBadWlf]

I'm telling people that they can be free from the sin of homosexuality through Christ.
[/font]
Umm, who judged me?
Thanks,
TT

And you could be free of your sin of prejudice if you chose to.

But then, you weren’t born prejudiced

 

[BreadAlone]

Racists use this same tactic to justify their personal prejudices. They falsely compare people of color to criminals just as you are doing here.

People who would rather live in sin than follow Christ try to rationalize their sins with silly arguments and by using uncontexutaly and ridiculous interpretations of the Scriptures.

Pointing this out is not being racist; first of all, homosexuals aren't some race; they're sinners. Unless you're going to call murderers a race, theives a race, etc., etc..you can drop this silly "argument," and stop calling the brethren of Christ racists.

 

[BigBadWlf]

The "niddah laws" or whatever are OT regulations and rules meant as worship and disciplinary actions for the OT people of God.

So what are they doing being brought u in this thread?

Homosexuality is a SIN. It's not just some rule..it's something DETESTABLE to God and is a SIN. That's the difference.

Just like wearing clothing made of two different fabrics or shaving

 

[BreadAlone]

So what are they doing being brought u in this thread?

Just like wearing clothing made of two different fabrics or shaving

Those aren't "sins" in the sense that they're just plain wrong. If one living in OT times would have done it, they would have been "sinning" to the extent of not following God.

But Christ fulfilled all the OT reuglations and rules and worship ceremonies.

This does not, however, nullify the moral law! Chrsit wants us to "sin no more;" (his words, not mine alone).

Homosexuality is, always has been, and will be 'till eternity AN UGLY SIN! An untainted conscience will attest to this.

 

[BigBadWlf]

People who would rather live in sin than follow Christ try to rationalize their sins with silly arguments and by using uncontexutaly and ridiculous interpretations of the Scriptures.

Yes, that is a pretty good description of what you are doing….so when are you going to change?

Pointing this out is not being racist; first of all, homosexuals aren't some race; they're sinners. Unless you're going to call murderers a race, theives a race, etc., etc..you can drop this silly "argument," and stop calling the brethren of Christ racists.

Didn’t say you were racist at all. merely pointed out the fact that your ‘arguments’ employ the same tactics of those who are racists and that ultimately your argument is indistinguishable form those presented by racists.

Now for some reason you seem offended by this. Why? Why do you find such a simple fact so disturbing? Do you think the tactics and arguments of racists to be morally wrong?
And more to the point, if you find the tactics employed by racists to be offensive…why do you employ them yourself?

 

[BreadAlone]

Yes, that is a pretty good description of what you are doing….so when are you going to change?

I have not purposely in any way misinterpreted the Scriptures. And I can say with certainty I have not misinterpreted Romans 1. God turned homosexuals over to their sinful, shameful lusts, because they wanted to follow his ways no longer.

Didn’t say you were racist at all. merely pointed out the fact that your ‘arguments’ employ the same tactics of those who are racists and that ultimately your argument is indistinguishable form those presented by racists.

You've called numerous people, including myself, prejudiced against this "poor minority" before. That would seem to imply you believe racism is occuring.

Pardon me if I mistoke your stance.

Now for some reason you seem offended by this. Why? Why do you find such a simple fact so disturbing? Do you think the tactics and arguments of racists to be morally wrong?
And more to the point, if you find the tactics employed by racists to be offensive…why do you employ them yourself?

Because it's blatantly false and silly. Homosexuals are not a people, they are sinners, dirty, rotten and filthy LIKE YOU AND I were and still would be were it not for the sanctification that is worked through the means of Grace.

 

[BigBadWlf]

Those aren't "sins" in the sense that they're just plain wrong.

How can you claim they aren’t sins? They are right there in the bible …simply worded…plain as day.

If one living in OT times would have done it, they would have been "sinning" to the extent of not following God.

but you wish to use other laws right next to these fine laws to condemn a minority and justify your personal prejudice. you just claimed that you weren’t “picking and choosing” form among God’s laws but that is exactly what you are doing. Find a law personally inconvenient…well just declare it not a sin and ignore it. Find a law that helps you bolster prejudice…hey THAT law sure is in effect.

But Christ fulfilled all the OT reuglations and rules and worship ceremonies.

The what ceremony?

This does not, however, nullify the moral law! Chrsit wants us to "sin no more;" (his words, not mine alone).

The what law?

Homosexuality is, always has been, and will be 'till eternity AN UGLY SIN!

Just like cutting your hair will always be an ugly sin

An untainted conscience will attest to this.

Oh…do explain “tainited”

 

[BigBadWlf]

[/font]

I have not purposely in any way misinterpreted the Scriptures. And I can say with certainty I have not misinterpreted Romans 1. God turned homosexuals over to their sinful, shameful lusts, because they wanted to follow his ways no longer.

That is a pretty common misinterpretation

You've called numerous people, including myself, prejudiced against this "poor minority" before. That would seem to imply you believe racism is occuring.

You are prejudiced …but that isn’t calling you or anyone else a racist

Because it's blatantly false and silly.

No it is truth. Racists use the tactic of comparing people of color to criminals for the same purposes you are comparing homosexuals to criminals.

Again if you think it is wrong for racists to do this I have to wonder why it Is morally OK when you engage in the exact same behavior.

Homosexuals are not a people, they are sinners, dirty, rotten and filthy LIKE YOU AND I were and still would be were it not for the sanctification that is worked through the means of Grace.

Well gays and lesbaisn are people. and they are a distinct minority group just like blacks and Jews and Buddhist and Hispanics and the handicapped

 

[OllieFranz]

The "niddah laws" or whatever are OT regulations and rules meant as worship and disciplinary actions for the OT people of God.

Homosexuality is a SIN. It's not just some rule..it's something DETESTABLE to God and is a SIN. That's the difference.

Thank you for replying. But you are wrong. Let's look at Leviticus 18, and the laws about sexual morality:
[BIBLE]Leviticus 18:1-30[/BIBLE]
Verses 6-18 forbid incest. Verse 19 forbids sex with a wife during her niddah. Verse 20 forbids adultery. Verse 21 fobids child sacrifice to Molech. Verse 22 forbids "man-lying." Verse 23 forbids bestiality.

The niddah laws are smack dab in the middle of the sexual immorality laws, between incest and adultery. After the subject changes to Molech worship, "man-lying" and bestiality are added as an afterthought. But God isn't forgetful, so the order must serve a purpose.

I am not so arrogant as to be able to proclaim that purpose, but many people see these actions not as afterthoughts added to the sexual immorality laws, but as part of the idolotrous worship of Molech.

And look at Chapter 20:
[BIBLE]Leviticus 20:1-27[/BIBLE]
Sacrifice to Molech has been moved to the introductory paragraph. Just as in Romans, the "vile affections" are tied into a general failure to recognize God, and to idolatry, so here. In this chapter, the niddah laws (verse 18) and the "man-lying" (verse 13) and bestiality (verses 15-16)laws are all included in the middle of the incest laws.

Again, I do not claim this is "the" way to understand this fact, but some people claim that the other three laws are folded into the incest laws to show that all four (five if you include adultery) situations are equally sinful.

In any case, there is no basis in the Scripture itself to assume that the niddah laws are "OT ceremonial laws" while at the same time proclaiming that the "man-lying" law is a sexual immoarality law. Leviticus 18 seems to suggest that, if anything, it should be the other way 'round. Leviticus 20 seems to say that they are both equally sexually immoral.

Some peple try to make the claim that you can make the distinction because moral laws are repeated in the NT, but ceremonial laws are not. If that is true, then once again the niddah law is a moral law, not a ceremonial one. Paul references it in 1 Corinthians 7:1-5. He has said repeatedly in his letters that we are free from the Law if we are in Grace, but that does not mean that we should wallow in sin. Specifically in this passage, he says that a wife's body is her husband's and vice versa. One should not cheat one's spouse of the pleasure that body can give them, "except [it be] with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer." A period of fasting and prayer and abstaining from sex is exactly what is called for in the niddah laws.

 

[OllieFranz]

Those aren't "sins" in the sense that they're just plain wrong. If one living in OT times would have done it, they would have been "sinning" to the extent of not following God.

But the listing in Leviticus makes no distinction between bestiality, "man-lying," or having sex with a woman set apart for her niddah.

But Christ fulfilled all the OT reuglations and rules and worship ceremonies.

This does not, however, nullify the moral law! Chrsit wants us to "sin no more;" (his words, not mine alone).

Homosexuality is, always has been, and will be 'till eternity AN UGLY SIN! An untainted conscience will attest to this.

If that is so, then having sex with a woman less than two weeks after her period is also, has always been also, and will be until eternity also, AN UGLY SIN! God's Scriptures attest to this.

 

[BreadAlone]

But the listing in Leviticus makes no distinction between bestiality, "man-lying," or having sex with a woman set apart for her niddah.



If that is so, then having sex with a woman less than two weeks after her period is also, has always been also, and will be until eternity also, AN UGLY SIN! God's Scriptures attest to this.

I had a response prepared, but I just deleted it. Frankly, I'm not the font of all OT levitical law knowledge. I would suggest asking someone who has an accurate understanding of how the OT and NT fit together, how the OT rituals and ceremonies were shadows of things that came in Christ, and have studied all these Levitical laws in-depth.. (I'm going to assume these "niddah laws" were civil laws for the saftey of the Isrealites, but like I said, I don't have an extensive knowledge.)

 

[OllieFranz]

[/font]

I have not purposely in any way misinterpreted the Scriptures. And I can say with certainty I have not misinterpreted Romans 1. God turned homosexuals over to their sinful, shameful lusts, because they wanted to follow his ways no longer.

I'll grant that you have not purposely misinterpreted the scriptures. No, you simply read Romans 1:18-32 as unrelated to the very next paragraph in Romans 2. You do a surface reading of the English words in translation and think you know what it is saying, even though you know nothing about the idioms (including the "pop philosophy" of the times) or of the books that the Roman church would have been familiar with.

A paraphrase of Romans 1:18-2:3 would read:

1. God makes himself manifest in all of creation, so that any man can recognize his power and glory. But many men reject the Law He has written in their hearts. So He turns these men --and women -- over to their baser emotions and needs. They "burn" in their passions which are never fulfilled (That is He allows them to become addicts.) In the example, it is specifically an addiction to sex -- homosex if you insist -- but that is just one concrete example. Then because of their addiction, their need, their craving, they are willing to do anything for their next "fix."
2. But don't start feeling all smug an judgemental, you have no excuses, you are just as addicted to your sins. When God judges them for the mess they have made of their lives, He will find you just as guilty.

​

Because it's blatantly false and silly. Homosexuals are not a people, they are sinners, dirty, rotten and filthy LIKE YOU AND I were and still would be were it not for the sanctification that is worked through the means of Grace.

No, homosexuals are not a "people." Just as left-handers are not a "people." But both have been castigated as evil for being the persons that God has made them. Both have had to hide their real selves in the closet with varying degrees of success. Both have been subject to forms of "retraining which are nothing less than torture.

Yes they are sinners, just as all of us are sinners. And yes, most of them do not "repent" of their orientation. They did not choose it, any more than they chose their handednes, or their eye color, and they can't change it.

 

[KCKID]

Homosexuality is, always has been, and will be 'till eternity AN UGLY SIN! An untainted conscience will attest to this.

I believe that the almost hysterical tone displayed in the post above does NOT come from the Bible. It does NOT come from God. It CERTAINLY does NOT come from Jesus. It is an angry and a personal outburst from someone with an agenda that has nothing to do with the Bible. I believe that it's YOU, BreadAlone, that has a problem with homosexuality. Moreover, I find it most offensive that you would cite the scriptures elsewhere to support what is most obviously YOUR homophobic views and not those of the book you purport to preach from. I can't help but be suspicious of, and heed with caution, any of those that seem to shout the loudest.

The same is true, I believe, with others on this forum that 'protesteth too much.' One does not need a degree in Social Science to figure out what motivates them. The 'sins' of another person - a person they DON'T EVEN KNOW - would not anger them so. Who are they defending ...God? I don't think so.

Hands up all of you 'anti-gays' that have an agenda of your own? Remember that God is watching ...!