• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

How Homophobic Are You?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Technocrat2010

Relax - it's the Cross of St. Peter
Dec 18, 2007
1,270
72
✟24,298.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Apostolic testimony is reality. There is not one place anywhere in scripture where gay sex is promoted, encouraged or supported. Where it is mentioned, it is opposed. Being correct and consistent is not a hate crime.

Here's what I'm thinking, Polycarp_fan:

I'm also of the opinion that gay sex is not supported as inherently good in the Bible. The Catholic Church teaches against performing gay sex, and has done so for quite some time. The Church has not taught that being gay is inherently immoral any more than being straight is. As I have stated earlier, there is a difference between having an interest, and acting on that interest.

Anyhow, back to my point...

I have two important questions that must be addressed.

1) From your perspective, if a person seeks a marriage license from the state, is the license proof that God sanctioned the marriage, or that the state sanctioned the marriage?

2) If a homosexual chooses to sin by participating in gay sex, who are we to stop him/her and diminish that person's free will?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HaloHope

Senior Member
May 25, 2007
506
165
✟17,438.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Asking people not to promote gay sex in the Church is not even close to persecution. It is rather, pure love to oppose gay sex being promoted in the Church. The Apostles opposed gay sex (as we have come to define it).

There is no evidence this only your interpretation of scripture


I'm standing firm on my statement. From humanism to gay sex in our schools and politics in less than a century.

And I stand firm on mine


Gay, straight, arose from the promoting of homosexuality.

Gays trying to get equal rights arose form us not having them in the first place.


I created a new thread proving my position was based on facts, and I was treated incredibly unfair. The driving away of any dissenting voices of gay sex is alarming, but not unexpected. I'm a Bible-believing Christian. I knew what was coming.

Playing the "Oh noes the end times are coming" card dosent really work. I firmly believe God approves of increasing acceptance and equality for all his creations.


No fault divorce. Now it is common.

Not entirely sure what your saying here.


The STD epidemic may disagree with you on that. I can't post facts on that as it is a reason to ban people here.

That would be probably as they are slander as opposed to facts.



OK. But I demand to oppose you on Biblical grounds every time you attempt to homosexualize the Church. Tolerance (as you know) does not mean support.

It depends on whether you can challenge on Biblical grounds wihout getting personal. I mean I see plenty of people here who do manage that and also plenty who seem unable too.


Gay social power was acheived when the Church was silenced and altered in Britain. Although I do see that there are brothers and sisters in Britain that do still value scriptural truth. This issue will come and go as it has many times before.

The more society become more accepting and caring of all the less likely these things will come up.



Jesus said it is a fact that not everyone that calls themself a Christian is a follower of His. We are to watch out for wolves in sheeps clothing. They will not spare the flock. Gay culture is antithetical to the witness and testimomy of the Apostles. I can only go by truth and reality.

Clinging to some Bible verses which are easily challenged and debated to not show what they claim to its not going by truth and reality.


If they want to keep thier property. Gays have created laws to silence any oppostion to gay sex in England. check out this website in the UK: http://www.lgcm.org.uk/

I would rather suffer persecution and gather in someones house as a Church.

I'm not aware of these laws, ive heard people condemn homosexuality in certain churches here. If they are inciting hatred against gay people thats a different matter, but saying gay-sex is a sin isnt against the law here.


Those days are coming to an end. Apostates will come into the Church before he believers have to leave.

I dont think those days have even begun yet.



There must be still, the Gospel preached in that Church. In a "normal Church" everyone is welcome, but their anti-Christian ideologies are not.

Theres nothing anti-Christian about treating a gay couple as a legitimate relationship and accepting them as a couple into the congregation.




That is 100% true. But your views on promoting gay culture in the Church has no support from the biblical witness. All you have is your feelings guiding you. Good luck with that. It never helps error to feel good about it. Whether you believe that or not.

My personal relationship with God guides me.


I questioned your walk with Christ once, and I will not do it ever again, but you are very wrong in promoting gay culture in the Church.

I still dont really understand what this "gay culture" is. What is it you assume I get up to which makes my life part of "Gay culture". I get up in the morning, I go to work, I work for 8 hours, I come home, I relax. The only difference to most relationships is the person I love and come home too is the same gender as me. Thats the soul difference.



No Church should shun anyone according to the Apostolic witness. But not supporting sin is also a very Christian thing to do.

If the church dosent see it as a sin, its a non issue.



I am not intent on driving anyone out of the Church, I am though, going to oppose the promoting of gay sex and gay culture in the Church every day I am alive. There are so many Christians that feel that they are bad people for opposing gay activism and they are not.

Im still not entirely sure what gay activism or gay culture are.



That is your right to think as you want to, but it appears, that you will not allow others to dissent of your personal opinions on gay sex in the Church.

As I say a church is more than welcome to not allow gay members etc..., but they shouldnt make a fuss if other churches do.



This the need for a gay denomination or new religion altogether.

Why? Because I find women attractive and men not?


They have written their positions in the New Testament. I just agree with them.

I agree with them too, and reach a different conclusion to you



Christians are a very tolerant lot. But you may have missed the hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide that stand with the Apostolic witness that gay sex and gay activism has no place in the Church.

And there are millions who disagree with this standpoint too.


That is an unfait statement. I prove that gay theology is really just liberal and progressive thought, and has no support from scripture. I another place on this website, I listed every place where gay theolgy claims to have texts promoting gay sex and gay partnerships, and I have shown the error of their views WITH the scriptures they presented. I did a bit of that here with the David and Jonathan as gay lovers myth.

There is no proof when it comes to interpretation. I think its blindgly obvious that David and Johnathan had an extremely close relationship and they may have been gay (although its of my opinion only David was)


And shows that not only schism is the result of gay fruit in the Church, but that a gay denomination is called for in all honesty.

What will be will be. In my opinion schism isnt needed

I firmly disagree with you. (And of course this is what gives rise to new and/or other denominations.)

Im anti-denominational

Mormonism as an example, has no place in the Church based on the scriptures they use to promote the religiosity of Joseph Smith. The same is true for what Mel White and Gene Robinson have done. All gay activists have to go on is outside biblical beliefs, liberal and progressive social ideology and mangled and twisted scripture, or just plain discarding of Biblical reality altogether. Or arguing from silence or the ubiquitous "two wrongs" comparisons for allowing gay activism into the Church.

Just like any Bible-affirming Christian Pastor, theologian, apologist, parent and friend, would not allow Latter Day Saints theology to go unchallenged, neither should we allow gay activists to homosexualize the Church without an apologia presented to them and at their agenda.

We shall see what happens
 
Upvote 0

Polycarp_fan

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2008
5,069
100
✟6,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Um... yeah... quoting Corinthians doesn't really make your case... I want an explanation of what, precisely, about consentual homosexuality is inherently sinful... you are working from the assumption that it already has been shown so.

Corinthians tells us the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God. Adulterers, murderers, thieves, fraudsters... them I all see why they are considered unrighteous. Their actions can clearly be shown to harm other, non consenting people who have a reasonable expectation not to be harmed by them.

Homosexuality, on the other hand, is different. It does not cause harm to other, non consenting individuals, so, where is the harm?

And if there is no harm, what's unrighteous about it?

(This is me working of the theory that ALL of God's laws are about helping people to get alon and love one another, and live in harmony. Just saying "The Bible SEZ!" does not, in itself, constitute a complete argument. Now, as always, I am open to persuasion and reasoned discussion. It is more than possible that you can explain to me a completely secular, logical reason to consider homosexuality "wrong", in which case, I shall renounce it at once. Uncomentated, misapplied Bible quotes aren't going to do it though)

You have made your declaration and chosen your path. You have chosen the secular, "the world" over the Church. A Christian standing with the Apostles will never be able to convince a person that has chosen the world over the faith delivered only once to the saints, to alter their path by using the secular anything goes reasoning.

What "kind" of people persecute the Church?

When they went across the lake, the disciples forgot to take bread. "Be careful," Jesus said to them. "Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees."



They discussed this among themselves and said, "It is because we didn't bring any bread."
8Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked, "You of little faith, why are you talking among yourselves about having no bread? Do you still not understand? Don't you remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered?

Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? How is it you don't understand that I was not talking to you about bread? But be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees."

Then they understood that he was not telling them to guard against the yeast used in bread, but against the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!

But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed! Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division.

From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

EnemyPartyII

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2006
11,524
893
39
✟20,084.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
In Relationship
You have made your declaration and chosen your path. You have chosen the secular, "the world" over the Church. A Christian standing with the Apostles will never be able to convince a person that has chosen the world over the faith delivered only once to the saints, to alter their path.
I stand with the apostles AND Christ... I ALSO believe that God's and Christ's commandments MAKE SENSE. That means, they make sense outside the Bible, using purely secular logic, and in the Bible, because the Bible is our guide book to living in the real world.

so your copypasta is irrelevant.

So... is the copypasta a tacit admission that you CAN'T explain whats wrong with homosexuality without mindless Bible quotes?

(copypasta is a neologism. It means "copying material that is only tangetially relevant, and did not require any genuine thought or originality on the part of the paster")
 
Upvote 0

Polycarp_fan

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2008
5,069
100
✟6,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Here's what I'm thinking, Polycarp_fan:

I'm also of the opinion that gay sex is not supported as inherently good in the Bible. The Catholic Church teaches against performing gay sex, and has done so for quite some time. The Church has not taught that being gay is inherently immoral any more than being straight is. As I have stated earlier, there is a difference between having an interest, and acting on that interest.

But "gay" Christians desire to teach gay culture in the Church. Gay adherants do not wish to repent and sin no more, in fact, as we have seen with groups like Soulforce, they encourage the act of gay sex.

Anyhow, back to my point...

I have two important questions that must be addressed.

1) From your perspective, if a person seeks a marriage license from the state, is the license proof that God sanctioned the marriage, or that the state sanctioned the marriage?

100% secular. It is clear from the Bible what God sanctions as a marriage. Immutably so in fact.

2) If a homosexual chooses to sin by participating in gay sex, who are we to stop him/her and diminish that person's free will?

If they desire to come into the Church then it is the right thing to do to oppose gay sex in the Church. That is consistent with the New Testament witness. I have stated over and over again, non believers can believe and do what they want to. Another immutable teaching in the Gospel. I do not understand why Christians even comment on gay marriage outside of the Church. It does not apply to the Church, or the faith delivered only once to the Saints. I am and have always been consistent in contending for the faith with the Apostolic and Gospel position. There is no promoting of gay sex and its practice in the New Testament witness. Arguing in circles what non Christians believe is a worthless endeavor. As we can prove, "anything goes," is not the way of the faith.

Let me ask you a question. Why are Christians yoking themselves to unbelievers and supporting gay sex and gay culture?
 
Upvote 0

Polycarp_fan

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2008
5,069
100
✟6,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I stand with the apostles AND Christ... I ALSO believe that God's and Christ's commandments MAKE SENSE. That means, they make sense outside the Bible, using purely secular logic, and in the Bible, because the Bible is our guide book to living in the real world.

Using pure logic, same-gender sexuality does not exist. It is at best pseudo sexuality. An alteration or a mimicking of the real thing.

so your copypasta is irrelevant.

So... is the copypasta a tacit admission that you CAN'T explain whats wrong with homosexuality without mindless Bible quotes?

(copypasta is a neologism. It means "copying material that is only tangetially relevant, and did not require any genuine thought or originality on the part of the paster")

I will not respond to your baiting except the way Jesus did to those that baited Him: "Is it not written?"
 
Upvote 0

Andreusz

Newbie
Aug 10, 2008
1,177
92
South Africa
✟17,051.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I do not understand why Christians even comment on gay marriage outside of the Church. It does not apply to the Church, or the faith delivered only once to the Saints....

i also don't understand this. But a lot of Christians, particularly in America, do get very upset about this.

Let me ask you a question. Why are Christians yoking themselves to unbelievers and supporting gay sex and gay culture?

You may not believe this, Polycarp_fan, but I actually agree with your earlier postings: I don't believe that homosexuality is Biblically acceptable if the Bible is read literally.
However, not all churches read the Bible literally. You may choose to say that such churches are not really Chrisitan, but I think they would disagree.
 
Upvote 0

Technocrat2010

Relax - it's the Cross of St. Peter
Dec 18, 2007
1,270
72
✟24,298.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
But "gay" Christians desire to teach gay culture in the Church.

Do you mean like some of my closest friends who are homosexuals and believe that gay sex is a sin and that they are called to a life of chastity? :confused:

Gay adherants do not wish to repent and sin no more, in fact, as we have seen with groups like Soulforce, they encourage the act of gay sex.

Can you demonstrate that all homosexuals share these sentiments?

100% secular. It is clear from the Bible what God sanctions as a marriage. Immutably so in fact.

Excellent! Now, you have pointed out that seeking a marriage license from the state is 100% secular. If so, that means that if a gay couple were to seek a marriage license from the state, it would not change the fact that they are committing sin... but, as you stated in the following:

I have stated over and over again, non believers can believe and do what they want to.

And since nonbelievers are free to commit sin, as they can believe and do what they want to, there should be no objection on your part to gay marriage licenses - am I correct?

If they desire to come into the Church then it is the right thing to do to oppose gay sex in the Church. That is consistent with the New Testament witness. I have stated over and over again, non believers can believe and do what they want to. Another immutable teaching in the Gospel. I do not understand why Christians even comment on gay marriage outside of the Church. It does not apply to the Church, or the faith delivered only once to the Saints. I am and have always been consistent in contending for the faith with the Apostolic and Gospel position. There is no promoting of gay sex and its practice in the New Testament witness. Arguing in circles what non Christians believe is a worthless endeavor. As we can prove, "anything goes," is not the way of the faith.
(Emphasis mine)
I re-emphasized that statement to highlight an important point. I would further argue that even believers can believe and do what they want to do. They must obviously bear the consequences, but just because they believe does not justify diminishing their free will. The reason I say that is because your statement is implying that while we should allow the nonbelievers to do what they want, we should restrict the freedoms of the believers. This is inconsistent at best, since regardless of whether a person is a believer or a nonbeliever, that person has the quality of free will.

I do not understand why Christians even comment on gay marriage outside of the Church. It does not apply to the Church, or the faith delivered only once to the Saints.

Why can't Christians comment on issues that are out of the Church's purview?

Let me ask you a question. Why are Christians yoking themselves to unbelievers and supporting gay sex and gay culture?

Allowing the co-existence is not the same as supporting their activities. You said earlier:

I have stated over and over again, non believers can believe and do what they want to.

If that is the case, do you agree with the Qu'ran because you allow Muslims to believe and do what they want to do? No. If you let a neo-druid hand out flyers in public inviting people to join him/her at a neo-druidic sermon, does that mean you are now a follower of Neo-druidism because you are letting a non-believing Neo-druid believe and do what he/she wants to do? Not at all.

What it means is that you agree to disagree on your perspectives, but you allow them the same rights they allow you in expressing freedom of religion and speech. You can co-exist with another group without having to adopt their perspectives as your own.
 
Upvote 0

Polycarp_fan

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2008
5,069
100
✟6,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
We shall see what happens

Indeed we shall.


Im still not entirely sure what gay activism or gay culture are.

I have been put through a type of persecution here because you and the gay side supporters without doubt understand what I mean about gay culture. Gay culture is approving of gay sex and gay activism among other lifestyle choices.

I have been attacked and judged and sentenced far too harshly, because you know exactly what I mean. You just don't like it and have the means to silence any dissent of the gay agenda. It is almost impossible to respond to your gay cultural perspective without violating the rules that have been put into place to affirm gay culture. I am going to go to scripture far more often than I already do. This subject was dealt with by the Apostles and prophetically so.

Paul lived and worked in the Greek/Roman world and worldview. And here we are today living the advice that Paul gave to a young pastor having to face the same issues:

In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge:

Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction.

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.




Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
That is your right to think as you want to, but it appears, that you will not allow others to dissent of your personal opinions on gay sex in the Church.
As I say a church is more than welcome to not allow gay members etc..., but they shouldnt make a fuss if other churches do.

Actually making a fuss about this gives people a choice to follow the faith delivered only once to the saints. There is right and there is wrong.




Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
This is why the need for a gay denomination or new religion altogether.


H-H: Why? Because I find women attractive and men not?

You demand to teach youth in the Church to engage in the gay sex do you not? If that is the case, then without doubt you are in another altogether different place than what the Apostles defined.



Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
They have written their positions in the New Testament. I just agree with them.
H-H: I agree with them too, and reach a different conclusion to you

Nothing new in that. Mormons come to mind.


Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
Christians are a very tolerant lot. But you may have missed the hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide that stand with the Apostolic witness that gay sex and gay activism has no place in the Church.
H-H: And there are millions who disagree with this standpoint too.

And why the need for a gay denomination. It's happening anyway.



Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
That is an unfair statement. I prove that gay theology is really just liberal and progressive thought, and has no support from scripture. In another place on this website, I listed every place where gay theolgy claims to have texts promoting gay sex and gay partnerships, and I have shown the error of their views WITH the scriptures they presented. I did a bit of that here with the David and Jonathan as gay lovers myth.​
There is no proof when it comes to interpretation. I think its blindgly obvious that David and Johnathan had an extremely close relationship and they may have been gay (although its of my opinion only David was)

Post a thread about this and I will challenge every position you come up with. It is easy to see what the contaxt of the relationship was. Jonathan recognized the annoiting of David and acted accordingly. Homosexualizing the text there is not warranted.



Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
And shows that not only schism is the result of gay fruit in the Church, but that a gay denomination is called for in all honesty.
H-H: What will be will be. In my opinion schism isnt needed

It is mandated literally from the Gospel and Apostolic testimony.


Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
I firmly disagree with you. (And of course this is what gives rise to new and/or other denominations.)
H-H: Im anti-denominational

I know that. And I know why.


Originally Posted by Polycarp_fan
Mormonism as an example, has no place in the Church based on the scriptures they use to promote the religiosity of Joseph Smith. The same is true for what Mel White and Gene Robinson have done. All gay activists have to go on is outside biblical beliefs, liberal and progressive social ideology and mangled and twisted scripture, or just plain discarding of Biblical reality altogether. Or arguing from silence or the ubiquitous "two wrongs" comparisons for allowing gay activism into the Church.

Just like any Bible-affirming Christian Pastor, theologian, apologist, parent and friend, would not allow Latter Day Saints theology to go unchallenged, neither should we allow gay activists to homosexualize the Church without an apologia presented to them and at their agenda.
H-H: We shall see what happens

You in your denomination and I in mine. Fair enough, and very consistent to the Apostolic message I have not deviated from since entering this site.

We ARE living this now:

In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge:

Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction.

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Polycarp_fan

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2008
5,069
100
✟6,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Do you mean like some of my closest friends who are homosexuals and believe that gay sex is a sin and that they are called to a life of chastity?

Their voices are not leading the gay activist movement.

Can you demonstrate that all homosexuals share these sentiments?

I can only judge the fruit. Gay activism = gay sex.


Excellent! Now, you have pointed out that seeking a marriage license from the state is 100% secular. If so, that means that if a gay couple were to seek a marriage license from the state, it would not change the fact that they are committing sin... but, as you stated in the following:

And since nonbelievers are free to commit sin, as they can believe and do what they want to, there should be no objection on your part to gay marriage licenses - am I correct?

I am going to try hard to no longer comment on what unbeleivers do.


(Emphasis mine)
I re-emphasized that statement to highlight an important point. I would further argue that even believers can believe and do what they want to do. They must obviously bear the consequences, but just because they believe does not justify diminishing their free will. The reason I say that is because your statement is implying that while we should allow the nonbelievers to do what they want, we should restrict the freedoms of the believers. This is inconsistent at best, since regardless of whether a person is a believer or a nonbeliever, that person has the quality of free will.

Jesus and the Apostles opposed false teacher and false teachings. We are to do the same otherwise you have what you have in the liberal-progressive Church, which is "anything goes," except for truth that is.

Why can't Christians comment on issues that are out of the Church's purview?[/quote]

We do. It's called evnagelizing the lost. Now, these people are demanding to be called Christian and rule us in our Churches.

Allowing the co-existence is not the same as supporting their activities.

The wheat and the weeds. Jesus saw gay activism in the Church coming.

If that is the case, do you agree with the Qu'ran because you allow Muslims to believe and do what they want to do? No. If you let a neo-druid hand out flyers in public inviting people to join him/her at a neo-druidic sermon, does that mean you are now a follower of Neo-druidism because you are letting a non-believing Neo-druid believe and do what he/she wants to do? Not at all.

If a Muslim thinks that Islam is Christian truth and desires to preach Islam in a Church, OUT he goes, or opposed he will be. Actually I see Islam and Gay Rights spread in very similar ways.

What it means is that you agree to disagree on your perspectives, but you allow them the same rights they allow you in expressing freedom of religion and speech. You can co-exist with another group without having to adopt their perspectives as your own.

You do realize that Gays and Muslims demand to silence Christians that hold to the Apostolic teachings don't you?
 
Upvote 0
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
To EnemyPartyII

a. Homosexuality serves perfectly appropriate physical biological functions
No t doesn’t.

b. Yes, Christians DO follow Christ... however, Christ never said anything about homosexuality, and all his teachings about accepting one another and loving our neighbours suggests to me that he's OK with homosexuality.
Yes He did and I have cited where.

No. Believing the Bible is the literal word of God or inerrant, or any of that mumbo jumbo is NOT a prerequisite of Christianity. Check your Nicene Creed. Biblical inerrancy is never mentioned
I reject that, if the Bible is never the literal word of God then Christ never literally said anything.


You have claimed you follow the teachings of Christ and yet you have also claimed Christ never said anything about homosexuality. So unlike me who can how what I follow your view of homosexuality is simply your view. My view is you are in major error and denial based on the passages I have cited. I would say if God made them male and female and is was for this reason a man shall be united with his wife God did not make man to be united with man. I would also suggest that as Jesus offers only celibacy as an alternative your views do not follow Christ in this way, therefore I say your views are not Christian based on the evidence.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
To Chalice_Thunder,
That does not follow.
It follows as much as the comment it was responding to.

I am often moved to pity for people who have so elevated scripture to the point of idolatry. All of its beauty and power frozen in literal impotence. Sad.
Fair enough, thanks for your opinion but is it on topic?
:)

If someone said they stole, lied, gave false testimony, comitted homosexual acts and slandered people because they followed the teachings of Jesus, I think I would have to say they didnt follow the teachings of Jesus because Jesus Christ teaches not to do these things as in Mark 7, 1 Cornthians 6 etc. Of course they may say that they just don't take the Bible that literally.
 
Upvote 0
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
To catlover,
Some Christians, in the name of Jesus, discriminate and spread vicious propaganda, against homosexuals and homophobia is a myth...
That means nothing, some Christians think they are gay Christians.
The question is not about judging other Christians but what Christ teaches that one should follow if one is a Christian.
 
Upvote 0
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
To catlover,
Some Christians, in the name of Jesus, discriminate and spread vicious propaganda, against homosexuals and homophobia is a myth...
That means nothing, some Christians think they are gay Christians.
The question is not about judging other Christians but what Christ teaches that one should follow if one is a Christian.
 
Upvote 0
C

catlover

Guest
To catlover,
That means nothing, some Christians think they are gay Christians. [/SIZE][/FONT]
The question is not about judging other Christians but what Christ teaches that one should follow if one is a Christian.

To you it may not matter that other people are oppressed by so called "upright Christians", to Jesus I would state it certainly matters. He gave the most stern rebuke to Pharisees and Sadducees..
 
Upvote 0
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
To catlover,
To you it may not matter that other people are oppressed by so called "upright Christians",
Christians are to follow Jesus Christ’s teaching as in the NT, they don’t oppress other people, other people feel oppressed by Jesus Christ’s NT teaching. Christians don’t live by the law they live by faith and love, Jesus said if we love Him we will obey His commands. Everything Jesus said was commanded, He didn’t suggest anything.

to Jesus I would state it certainly matters.
So would I
He gave the most stern rebuke to Pharisees and Sadducees..
Exactly, the Pharisees disputed what Jesus said.

I think you are trying to judge those who point to Jesus teaching as oppressing whilst on the other hand claiming Jesus is somehow on then side of those who dispute what He taught. Again lets see some evidence of where Christ countenance any unions other than faithful man/woman marriage
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.