Majority find homosexuality ‘morally acceptable'for first time

[KCKID]

From a good old Christian role model about the nature of "the world" and the church:

"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."

- Paul to Timothy, a Greek Christian

Things are going exactly as the Christians in the new testament showed us they would.

For crying out loud ...such dramatics! It seems that we lost sight ages ago that what is being discussed here are good people who are simply sexually attracted to one another. An increasing number of them wish to (gasp) make a solid commitment to one another. I really have no idea why this should cause the sky to fall and end all life as we know it. Am I really missing something of grave consequence here or is this actually a 'nothing' issue that is continually beaten up by Fundamentalist Christians who have nothing better to do?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Or a sign that you really are part of the lunacy but are either in denial or are a self loather?

Huh?

 

[DRD4Him]

Huh?

Isn't the opposition to gay behvaior handled by accusing the person preaching against gay behavior as being closeted and self-loathing as a common comeback?

 

[Belk]

And the argument starts once again. At least, as the OP shows, progress is being made. Fight against it as you will, people are starting to understand that the rhetoric is empty and meaningless. History circles once again and those who would use their religion as an excuse to oppress their fellows are left by the wayside.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Meaning, on one side believing that indeed homosexuality is amoral and should therefore be outlawed

You do know the difference between amoral and immoral, right?

 

[lawtonfogle]

From a good old Christian role model about the nature of "the world" and the church:

"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."

- Paul to Timothy, a Greek Christian

Things are going exactly as the Christians in the new testament showed us they would.

Yep, the church lost this fight as soon as they started to allow interracial marriage. The Bible clearly points out we should not be unequally yoked, and yet the church is willing to accept people of different races getting married.

 

[lawtonfogle]

QuakerOats,
Nathanlandon1 has outlined exactly what has been outlined by myself before.
The text does not say or indicate rape, rape is your assumption and a faulty one.

No it isn't. If they were only wanting consensual sex, when the angles say no, they mob would have left. The fact the angles had to use supernatural powers to stop the mob indicates the mob remained after being told no.


Um... you do realize that trying to force someone to have sex after they said no is rape, right...?

 

[DRD4Him]

For crying out loud ...such dramatics!

Interesting response to Paul. I'm sure he heard the same thing from the people of his day. Matter of fact, I'm sure he did.

It seems that we lost sight ages ago that what is being discussed here are good people who are simply sexually attracted to one another.

Since I have worked many, many soup kitchen lines, I have noticed that most of the prostitutes and adulterers and other sinners (including myself) were/are very good people. Do we encourage their sins as well?

An increasing number of them wish to (gasp) make a solid commitment to one another.

Good for them. Why would a Christian care about what non Christians do as long as they do not preach or teach their non-Christian behaviors in our public schools?

I really have no idea why this should cause the sky to fall and end all life as we know it.

Now you are after the rest of the new testmament people? Jesus indeed preached about the sky falling. As well as Peter of course.

Am I really missing something of grave consequence here or is this actually a 'nothing' issue that is continually beaten up by Fundamentalist Christians who have nothing better to do?

"Fundamentalist Christians" applies to ever person mentioned in or that wrote the new testament. And yes, you are missing the grave consequences of rejoicing in making sins a civil rights issue to support. That is a major theme of the writers of the new testament. Shouldn't you, "as a Christian" be heading in the opposite direction to that of the world and its ways?

 

[DRD4Him]

Yep, the church lost this fight as soon as they started to allow interracial marriage. The Bible clearly points out we should not be unequally yoked, and yet the church is willing to accept people of different races getting married.

Interracial marriage? There is only one human race.

Talk about .

 

[lawtonfogle]

Interracial marriage? There is only one human race.

Talk about .

Perhaps you should study the arguments against interracial marriage. People honestly believed it was against the Bible to allow such, just like people honestly believe that homosexual or consensual incest is wrong these days.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Isn't the opposition to gay behvaior handled by accusing the person preaching against gay behavior as being closeted and self-loathing as a common comeback?

Oh, OK.

Sure. Because it seems to explain the behaviour. That or defence of a priori beliefs. Not a lot else seems to explain it.

Ever hear of;
Ted Haggard
Alan Rekkers
Billy James Hargis
Roy Clements
Paul Barnes
Mark Soulder
Mark Foley
John Leslee Prescott
Troy King...

The list goes on... and on and on and on...

 

[marlowe007]

Even someone with a cursory knowledge of ancient history knows that sodomy was the exception and not the rule in both Rome and Greece, and overwhelmingly condemned as perversion. In the first place, it was more prevalent in Greece than Rome, but its prevalence in both societies coincided with the rise of decadence and the nearing of collapse. In the second place, there were no homosexuals as such but homosexual acts, yet even these were publicly scorned in Rome, where what homosexuality existed was mostly kept secret and usually described in texts of the time in Greek language as homosexuality was thought a Greek custom. Besides the fact that Roman life was male-centered to begin with and scorned all displays of male effimanacy, Roman males were allowed to freely consort with concubines and prostitutes without incurring social penalties or divorce actions: ie, whoring and priapism were all but officially encouraged. Further, the Lex Scantina officially made male homosexuality illegal.

 

[DRD4Him]

Oh, OK.

Sure. Because it seems to explain the behaviour. That or defence of a priori beliefs. Not a lot else seems to explain it.

Ever hear of;
Ted Haggard
Alan Rekkers
Billy James Hargis
Roy Clements
Paul Barnes
Mark Soulder
Mark Foley
John Leslee Prescott
Troy King...

The list goes on... and on and on and on...

Your list includes how many people that are liars?

Not exactly a moral crowd you got there.

 

[Phinehas2]

Again marlowe007 has repeated what has been explained here on CF before. A good and accurate appraisal

 

[DRD4Him]

My first thought about your post was "What goes around comes around."

LGBT by any other name.

Even someone with a cursory knowledge of ancient history knows that sodomy was the exception and not the rule in both Rome and Greece, and overwhelmingly condemned as perversion.

Natural response then as a sexual orientation is to be repulsed by homosexuality and therefor it is not a hate crime or a phobia to find gay behavior as repugnant.

In the first place, it was more prevalent in Greece than Rome, but its prevalence in both societies coincided with the rise of decadence and the nearing of collapse.

To right-wing and there is no freedom, and too liberal and there is decay and death to a civiliation. Too left-wing is the worst of all still.

In the second place, there were no homosexuals as such but homosexual acts, yet even these were publicly scorned in Rome, where what homosexuality existed was mostly kept secret and usually described in texts of the time in Greek language as homosexuality was thought a Greek custom.

Hadrian was regarded as one of the best emperors in Roman histiry (Hadrians wall) and he was an out and proud homosexual, building many monuments to his male lover all over the Roman empire.

Besides the fact that Roman life was male-centered to begin with and scorned all displays of male effimanacy, Roman males were allowed to freely consort with concubines and prostitutes without incurring social penalties or divorce actions: ie, whoring and priapism were all but officially encouraged. Further, the Lex Scantina officially made male homosexuality illegal.

Then it was once legal. We are doomed to repeat history by celebrating it again.

The clock began ticking with the Stonewall Riots?

 

[DRD4Him]

Again marlowe007 has repeated what has been explained here on CF before. A good and accurate appraisal

Do you think a mob listens to reason? Who and what is in the vast majority here? And now has just made "the majority" in the outside world as well.

 

[Stephen Kendall]

I'm not so much interested in polls and ratings PERIOD since they can be easily manipulated and slanted in favor of the pollsters' agenda for the reasons you state. My view has nothing to do with polls. Homosexuality will eventually be accepted as the new generation replaces the old. It will become a 'nothing' issue. Even today a huge percentage of youth have gay friends and think nothing of it. As said, it's just a matter of time before homosexuality becomes 'completely normal' ...just as it should.

The new generation must come, but so must the consequences. These aren't all favorable. If there is no Bible God, then the consequences are wonderful for homosexuals, for the God listed in the Bible isn't happy with this perversion. Forgiven and changed is saved, but forgiven and unchanged (unrepentant) have had their chance. How will those who scoff at the forgiveness, repentance and salvation have any hope through Jesus Christ? Democracy is our American way, but when it comes to God, evil ones are not found in his accepted, forgiven and repented children. Who are these children of God's? Those who don't seek the world, but seek him and love him. Another way to say this is "those who have found great happiness, joy, hope and peace outside of this world in their Father in Heaven through Christ." Who are they? Leaders of churches, maybe not. Leaders in ministry or the mission field, maybe. They may not be in the headlines or spotlights, their love & peace of God could well be their quiet, humble and life giving lives for Christ.

Why do I try to speak to people who have given themselves over to their passions? It is in case some of them seek God and can see plainly where this world is and is going.

Polarizing the general concept of Christians to the world isn't correct. The true contrast is those who obey Jesus and have a great love for their neighbors (both enemies and friends) against those so called modern minds of the world with its labeling as politically rightness and critical academic thinkers. One is at peace in the world and the other makes peace with the world. You probably wish that you could help me (really doubt that you even care), I wish that I could help you (and I really do care). If you were God (to think more on a better level of understanding) would you make your call on matters & decisions (your rulings) by the majority's opinion on earth, or would you continue as you believe and to give enough time to those few who really don't love this world and seek only your heart and face for their salvation? Selfishness may well be a majority's rule in a democracy, but it has no place in anything of real value, like what will be given to the Children of God. The Children of God are happy despite their circumstances. Some are being tortured, yet they endure, forgive and even love their torturers. True happiness doesn't come from us, but is a gift from God. The counterfeits of Christianity don't have this, but the humble loving souls who actually and quietly obey the teachings and commands of Christ Jesus do have the peace, joy and hope of God's.

Why waste my time with you, who may be like swine who trample on the words that I speak and then turn towards me to do the same? There are some among you who can hear Jesus Christ and do thirst for him. That is why I speak to this audience. The scorners will speak, but the searching ones will listen and hear God. Have a very good day.