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.
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.
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.
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?I do not believe The Lord (the real one) condemns his LGBT children. The assertion he does is based primarily on wishful thinking.
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.If your concern is truly "The Lord" you should show kindness toward those you have denigrated here.
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" who would condemn his LGBT children would be a being devoid of love, unworthy of anything except well-deserved contempt.
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?
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.
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.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.
I do. I myself am asexual.Do you know what sexual orientation is?
I don't think I've done anything wrong.About that you are mistaken.
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..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..
As Christians, we should not tolerate sin in the church.Do you think we should then be tolerant of intolerance?
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.I do not believe God (the real God) is evil,as some who claim to follow Him wish he was.
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.Your point is a very obscure effort to seek to exclude some. It is not supported by anything other than your own biases.
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)As I am not a fundamentalist the question is meaningless.
You may open another thread if you wish to discuss these issues.What scriptural evidence do you have for Airlines? For computers? For Aspirin? For the sextant? For eyeglasses?
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 entiretyThis makes no sense.
You might well do but I am pointing you to the Bible and what god sees.I know LGBTs exist.
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.I know all are Children of 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.A god which excludes his LGBT children is no god
As Christians, we should not tolerate sin in the church.
As Christians, we should not tolerate sin in the church.
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.
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 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)
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.
They might all be children of God but they arent GBLT children of God.
God doesnt see His children according to their sexual desires, 1 Cor 6 and Col 3 shows us.
Really?
It was always my understanding that church was supposed to be 'a hospital for sinners'. Apparently I was mistaken.
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.
No its not ‘whatever’ God is good. and it is the real God because I quoted form from His word and testimony, the Bible.Okay, whatever, but it is not "God" the Real God attacking LGBTs.
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,That's an unnecessary parse and exclusion which serves no good purpose. Your point is obtuse.
Ok thats just your opinion, try and concentrate on the issue.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 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.I don't do that, not being fundamentalist myself.
God didnt create heterosexual and homosexual,.Precisely why these passages (that heterosexuals memorize them certainly opens up questions about them) are invalid. 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.Which supports my point entirely. Thank you.
No, Jesys Christ is the truth not people who claim they are GLBTIf they say they are, they are.
As I have said Jesus Christ has all authority so I have quoted him.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.
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.Were that true "God" would not be very bright; the scripture does not support your conclusion.
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..The thing is Christians disagree on what is sin and the cruelty of the religious right toward LGBTs is itself a sin.
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.KCKID said:Really?
It was always my understanding that church was supposed to be 'a hospital for sinners'. Apparently I was mistaken.
Truly a plague, your false assumptions and generalizations.TexasLynn said: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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?