So, can we be free from hate?

[Texas Lynn]

I do not think you and I are talking about the same thing. Your concern is groups and agendas, where as mine is in the Lord and him alone. I don't know what you think of the Lord, but he isn't a "monster" for calling sin what it is.

I do not believe The Lord (the real one) condemns his LGBT children. The assertion he does is based primarily on wishful thinking.

If your concern is truly "The Lord" you should show kindness toward those you have denigrated here.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Amen Ishida. I fully agree I dont think Texas Lynn can be talking about the same thing, what God has done through Jesus Christ to pay the price for sin is quite the opposite of monsterous, rather the ultimate sacrifical love.

A "god" who would condemn his LGBT children would be a being devoid of love, unworthy of anything except well-deserved contempt.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Texas Lynn,

I do not believe The Lord (the real one) condemns his LGBT children. The assertion he does is based primarily on wishful thinking.

It looks like you do. You have responded to the word of the Lord in the Bible with a comment which looked like you felt God was evil because of it, thats what I would like to clarify. My point is there are no LGBT children of God, there are just children of God some of whom may have different sexual attractions. What scriptural evidence have you got for any LGBT children?
Furthermore, as God created man and woman and 'in Christ' there is no distinction of male and female, (1 Cor 6) where did you get the idea of GLBT? from your feelings?

If your concern is truly "The Lord" you should show kindness toward those you have denigrated here.

Well the kindness depends on the truth. if the truth is adultery, sexual immorality and homosexual practice is a barrier to the Kingdom it hardly kind to condone it in the name of kindness. The kindness is God's, Jesus Christ makes the way to eternal life in the Kingdom.

A "god" who would condemn his LGBT children would be a being devoid of love, unworthy of anything except well-deserved contempt.

Again, God doesnt condemn anyone He saves us from the sin and condemnation we have brough on ourselves. But you keep talking about GLBT children, where does God see childen according to their sexual desires, 1 Cor 6 and Col 3 shows us he doesnt.

 

[Texas Lynn]

It looks like you do.

Wrong.

You have responded to the word of the Lord in the Bible with a comment which looked like you felt God was evil because of it, thats what I would like to clarify.

I do not believe God (the real God) is evil,as some who claim to follow Him wish he was.

My point is there are no LGBT children of God, there are just children of God some of whom may have different sexual attractions.

Your point is a very obscure effort to seek to exclude some. It is not supported by anything other than your own biases.

What scriptural evidence have you got for any LGBT children?

As I am not a fundamentalist the question is meaningless. What scriptural evidence do you have for Airlines? For computers? For Aspirin? For the sextant? For eyeglasses?

Furthermore, as God created man and woman and 'in Christ' there is no distinction of male and female, (1 Cor 6) where did you get the idea of GLBT? from your feelings?

This makes no sense. I know LGBTs exist. I know all are Children of God as much as some wish to exclude some. Your comment is patently ridiculous.

Well the kindness depends on the truth. if the truth is adultery, sexual immorality and homosexual practice is a barrier to the Kingdom it hardly kind to condone it in the name of kindness. The kindness is God's, Jesus Christ makes the way to eternal life in the Kingdom.

Again, God doesnt condemn anyone He saves us from the sin and condemnation we have brough on ourselves. But you keep talking about GLBT children, where does God see childen according to their sexual desires, 1 Cor 6 and Col 3 shows us he doesnt.

A god which excludes his LGBT children is no god and certainly not worth worshipping.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

I do not believe The Lord (the real one) condemns his LGBT children. The assertion he does is based primarily on wishful thinking.

If your concern is truly "The Lord" you should show kindness toward those you have denigrated here.

Um, what constitutes a "LGBT" child? I don't think I've denigrated anyone, and the reason I oppose homosexual acts is because of the scriptures, which mean what they say. If someone can prove otherwise, I'll accept that. There is nothing more.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Um, what constitutes a "LGBT" child?

Do you know what sexual orientation is?

I don't think I've denigrated anyone

About that you are mistaken.

and the reason I oppose homosexual acts is because of the scriptures, which mean what they say. If someone can prove otherwise, I'll accept that. There is nothing more.

The scriptures in that regard reflect the culture from which they emerged and nothing else. They say nothing of loving same gender relationships of today. If you believe to be LGBT is wrong-don't. But stop seeking to harm your LGBT brothers and sisters if you believe in Christ's great commandment (Love one another, which is conveniently forgotten by the religious right).

 

[Apollo Celestio]

Do you know what sexual orientation is?

I do. I myself am asexual.

About that you are mistaken.

I don't think I've done anything wrong.

The scriptures in that regard reflect the culture from which they emerged and nothing else. They say nothing of loving same gender relationships of today. If you believe to be LGBT is wrong-don't. But stop seeking to harm your LGBT brothers and sisters if you believe in Christ's great commandment (Love one another, which is conveniently forgotten by the religious right).

Better than trying to rewrite the bible at least. I'm not trying to harm anyone, I just believe the scriptures. And what constitutes the religious right? Am I supposed to be a part of that? That's the second greatest commandment and you're tossing out a whole lot of judgment on a group you dislike seemingly based on your own allegiances..

 

[Texas Lynn]

Better than trying to rewrite the bible at least. I'm not trying to harm anyone, I just believe the scriptures. And what constitutes the religious right? Am I supposed to be a part of that? That's the second greatest commandment and you're tossing out a whole lot of judgment on a group you dislike seemingly based on your own allegiances..

Do you think we should then be tolerant of intolerance?

 

[Apollo Celestio]

Do you think we should then be tolerant of intolerance?

As Christians, we should not tolerate sin in the church.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Texas Lynn,

I do not believe God (the real God) is evil,as some who claim to follow Him wish he was.

Firstly no one who follows God can wish He was evil and He has made the way from evil and God is good. Secondly you have responded to the word of the Lord in the Bible with a comment which looked like you felt God was evil and now you are talking about the real god. The real God has His testimony in the Bible from which I quoted.

Your point is a very obscure effort to seek to exclude some. It is not supported by anything other than your own biases.

How can ‘children’ exclude some children? How can what the Bible says be my bias? My point is there are no LGBT children of God, there are just children of God some of whom may have different sexual attractions.

As I am not a fundamentalist the question is meaningless.

As I am not a fundamentalist either, the question is meaningful. Have you got any scriptural evidence? If not I have scriptural evidence to show that Goid created male and female/man and woman and in Christ there is neither. There is no scriptural evidence of God creating any GLBT indeed same-sex unions which some of these labels promote are scripturally error ( 1 Cor 6, Rom 1, 1 Tim 1)

What scriptural evidence do you have for Airlines? For computers? For Aspirin? For the sextant? For eyeglasses?

You may open another thread if you wish to discuss these issues.

This makes no sense.

I didn’t ask your opinion, I asked where you got your idea. Again I cite scripture which you say makes no sense. Here is it in its entirety
Galatians 3:26 “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

I know LGBTs exist.

You might well do but I am pointing you to the Bible and what god sees.

I know all are Children of God

They might all be ‘children of God’ but they aren’t ‘GBLT children’ of God. Why do you judge them all children of God and how do you judge them? See 1 John 1, 3 and 5.

A god which excludes his LGBT children is no god

Ok well I don’t know of the god your are referring to. As I said God doesn’t see His children according to their sexual desires, 1 Cor 6 and Col 3 shows us.

 

[Texas Lynn]

As Christians, we should not tolerate sin in the church.

The thing is Christians disagree on what is sin and the cruelty of the religious right toward LGBTs is itself a sin.

 

[KCKID]

As Christians, we should not tolerate sin in the church.

Really?

It was always my understanding that church was supposed to be 'a hospital for sinners'. Apparently I was mistaken.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Firstly no one who follows God can wish He was evil and He has made the way from evil and God is good. Secondly you have responded to the word of the Lord in the Bible with a comment which looked like you felt God was evil and now you are talking about the real god. The real God has His testimony in the Bible from which I quoted.

Okay, whatever, but it is not "God" the Real God attacking LGBTs.

How can ‘children’ exclude some children? How can what the Bible says be my bias? My point is there are no LGBT children of God, there are just children of God some of whom may have different sexual attractions.

That's an unnecessary parse and exclusion which serves no good purpose. Your point is obtuse.

As I am not a fundamentalist either, the question is meaningful.

A lot of fundamentalists do not claim the title but if you believe the vague scriptural injunctions on sane gender love is valid toward loving relationships of today then you are a fundamentalist. It is nothing to be ashamed of.

Have you got any scriptural evidence?

I don't do that, not being fundamentalist myself.

If not I have scriptural evidence to show that Goid created male and female/man and woman and in Christ there is neither.

Precisely why you should stand down. Thank you.

There is no scriptural evidence of God creating any GLBT

So where did they come from according to your mythology?

indeed same-sex unions which some of these labels promote are scripturally error ( 1 Cor 6, Rom 1, 1 Tim 1)

Precisely why these passages (that heterosexuals memorize them certainly opens up questions about them) are invalid. Thank you.

Galatians

3:26 “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

Which supports my point entirely. Thank you.

They might all be ‘children of God’ but they aren’t ‘GBLT children’ of God.

If they say they are, they are. You are not the arbiter of such things. FYI I am a 'Dodge Caravan-driving Child of God' and you are in no position and have no authority to dispute that.

God doesn’t see His children according to their sexual desires, 1 Cor 6 and Col 3 shows us.

Were that true "God" would not be very bright; the scripture does not support your conclusion.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Really?

It was always my understanding that church was supposed to be 'a hospital for sinners'. Apparently I was mistaken.

In the minds of some others' "sins" are worse than theirs thus their churches are able to become refuges for those better than you or I or anyone else of whom they disapprove.

 

[Tissue]

The church as a hospital is a very poor idea. The church is supposed to be a community; hospitals are not community. You can't have all the "sick" people rubbing up against each other.

My personal view is that the church service is for "believers" (though "the sick" are welcome as well). The real hospital effort should come through community work by the church, though many have neglected this particular idea.

 

[onemessiah]

The church as a hospital is a very poor idea. The church is supposed to be a community; hospitals are not community. You can't have all the "sick" people rubbing up against each other.

My personal view is that the church service is for "believers" (though "the sick" are welcome as well). The real hospital effort should come through community work by the church, though many have neglected this particular idea.

Take it up with Jesus then. He came here to "cure the sick", as the bible says.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Texas Lynn,

Okay, whatever, but it is not "God" the Real God attacking LGBTs.

No its not ‘whatever’ God is good. and it is the real God because I quoted form from His word and testimony, the Bible.
3 John 1:11 “Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is from God. Anyone who does what is evil has not seen God.”
Genesis 3:5 “"For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
But who are these GBLT’s God hasn’t created any such people and He doesn’t attack anyone He has made the way for eternal life through Jesus to whom He has given all authority to judge. .Show me where God’s word attacks LGBT’s?

That's an unnecessary parse and exclusion which serves no good purpose. Your point is obtuse.

It is your point which I am questioning you on. I repeat, how can ‘children’ exclude some children. In Christ we are God’s children, apart from Christ we aren’t,
Luke 20:36 “and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.”
John 1:12 “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—“

who are these GBLT children you keep talking about?
.

A lot of fundamentalists do not claim the title but if you believe the vague scriptural injunctions on sane gender love is valid toward loving relationships of today then you are a fundamentalist.

Ok thats just your opinion, try and concentrate on the issue.

I don't do that, not being fundamentalist myself.

Ok well if you haven’t got anything from the word of God, which is the truth, to back up what you are saying, and I have as presented I have presented the truth.

[quote] So where did they come from according to your mythology? [/quote] As God didn’t create them the mythology is yours, you tell me where they came from, that’s the question I keep asking you, who are they?

Precisely why these passages (that heterosexuals memorize them certainly opens up questions about them) are invalid. Thank you.

God didnt create heterosexual and homosexual,.

Which supports my point entirely. Thank you.

It destroys your point as in Christ there isnt even male and female which God did create, let alone GLBTwhich God didn’t create.

If they say they are, they are.

No, Jesys Christ is the truth not people who claim they are GLBT

You are not the arbiter of such things. FYI I am a 'Dodge Caravan-driving Child of God' and you are in no position and have no authority to dispute that.

As I have said Jesus Christ has all authority so I have quoted him.

Were that true "God" would not be very bright; the scripture does not support your conclusion.

My conclusion is the scripture is right and says what it says, you need to give some scripture instead of disbelieving it. The scripture says God’s foolishness is greater than man’s wisdom. I have already given you the passage, the scripture says the sexually immoral, adulterers and homosexual offenders shall not inherit the Kingdom. That’s a warning for us all to repent.

 

[Tissue]

Take it up with Jesus then. He came here to "cure the sick", as the bible says.

Jesus wasn't and isn't the church.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

The thing is Christians disagree on what is sin and the cruelty of the religious right toward LGBTs is itself a sin.

I'll admit there are some fools who do horrible things to people, but let's not try and lump people in there who to not belong. I can't even get it into some heads that I don't get sexual attractions..
We do disagree, but it's hard to find honesty when we're worried more about social allegiances rather than loyalty to God.

Really?

It was always my understanding that church was supposed to be 'a hospital for sinners'. Apparently I was mistaken.

Why do people go to a hospital? Because they enjoy their ailments? No. Professing Christians who live in unrepentant sin are to be cast out until they repent. So it is still a hospital and spiritual therapy center for those seeking the Lord. In the sense of services, anyway. The "church" consists of redeemed sinners, people.

In the minds of some others' "sins" are worse than theirs thus their churches are able to become refuges for those better than you or I or anyone else of whom they disapprove.

Truly a plague, your false assumptions and generalizations.

 

[Texas Lynn]

The church as a hospital is a very poor idea. The church is supposed to be a community; hospitals are not community. You can't have all the "sick" people rubbing up against each other.

My personal view is that the church service is for "believers" (though "the sick" are welcome as well). The real hospital effort should come through community work by the church, though many have neglected this particular idea.

The nuances are what matter. Some churches make a spectacular show of excluding LGBTs, others of including them. The "community work" of the former mostly consists of amassing political power.