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.
Let them be silenced. The truth can always be preached without promoting sin.
I just don't agree with that I'm sorry. You start saying its ok to silence the opposition (in anything) and before long you will find yourself silenced.
The Church silences the promotion of sin all the time. Do you feel that's wrong as well? Should the Church start endorsing sinful behavior for the sake of teaching against it? That logic makes no sense whatsoever.
The Church silences the promotion of sin all the time. Do you feel that's wrong as well? Should the Church start endorsing sinful behavior for the sake of teaching against it? That logic makes no sense whatsoever.
But CF is not a church but a public forum and is ment for Christians of all stripes and also for atheists, agnostics as well as people of other faiths.
Also what to do about groups like the UCC. They have their own congregational forum and their doctrine promotes homosexuality. In other words they arn't allowed to promote their own doctrine in their own forum?
And the ELCA people arn't allowed to promote their doctrine in their ELCA sub-forum on here?
Okay, but how does the Church silence promotion of sin? By hearing the sin being promoted and teaching against it from Scripture. That's not being allowed here. We can no longer present proper teaching on same-sex sexual relations because the other side can't put forth anything contrary to what the Scriptures teach, without CF jumping on them for "promotion of homosexuality."
I personally think we need to move away from the word "homosexuality" and use same-sex sex or same-gender sex, so we make it clear that it is the act we are against and not the orientation of the person.
I didn't mean to say that it can ONLY be taught by first being promoted as okay. What I'm saying is that by silencing the other side, you're gonna have really short threads on this proper Biblical teaching. If we start a thread that says "same-sex sex is wrong" and provide Scriptural support for our assertion, we'll get nothing but agreement, since right now no one is allowed to disagree without being accused of "promotion of homosexuality." That's why I think CF needs to define what they consider to be "promotion." Because right now it looks like CF is saying:There is nothing in the guidelines which prohibits proclaiming the Biblical teaching on the matter. To say it can only be taught by first being promoted is simply wrong. No one has to say "Homosexuality is true and right and God pleasing" for us to say that the word of God teaches that same-gender relations are sinful.
Well homosexuality as an orientation is no more inherently sinful than heterosexuality because both orientations can commit the same sinful acts. We just do those sins with partners of different genders.The Greek word "malakos" in 1 Corinthians 6:9 speaks to the nature of the man, and has been argued to speak of the orientation. The arguments on both sides of this particular interpretation are compelling. I'm personally not so certain that the orientation is always a non-issue when regarding the sinfulness of homosexuality. There are various causes of the orientation, including one's personal preference and not necessarily a physical or hormonal condition.
Why would we want them to promote an abominable sin? The matter can be discussed within the guidelines of the site, so the proper Biblical teaching against it can be proclaimed without having to first promote it.
I also think that the last thing liberals ever wanna find is that there is a gene that makes a person a homosexual. Because then science is going to see if that gene is normal or not. If it's not a normal gene, if it's defective somehow then I think medicine will try and fix it and conservative Christians will get blamed for all of it, when it's the liberals who have been looking for this gene for years as a defense for homosexuality
Yes Luther, simply finding a gene does not determine if it's normal or not. I never said that it did. That statement was made to address an argument put forth by homosexuals which basically says that there is a "gay gene" out there, they just haven't found it yet. Then I went on to give my opinion as to why they don't want to find that gene as desperately as they think they do.Finding a gene would not determine if a gene is normal or not because there arn't really any normal genes or abnormal genes.
Just because the psychiatric community does not regard homosexuality as a disorder anymore, does not mean the gene itself, if ever found, could not be found to be defective in some way.We have genetic defects and they are labeled defects by society only based on societies definition of what a defect is. In this case a homosexuality gene would not likely be regarded as a defect because the psychologists stopped considering it a disorder in the 70's.
Right now, the homosexuals are looking for a gene as proof as to why they're gay. If found, they're going to say "God made me this way," with even more emphasis than they do now.What I do agree with is that the last thing the liberals want is for any sort of treatment for homosexuality to be found. Treatment would imply abormality.
That's interesting, because when I was mis-diagnosed as having Epilepsy, I wasn't told by society, I was told by a neurologist.But the problem is that abnormality is society defined. Epilepsy and Essential tremors (two conditions I have) are considered abnormal because society says they are. Mainly because most people don't have them and they can restrict your life somewhat. (The level of this depends on how bad they are. My epilepsy isn't bad so it doesn't affect my life as much as it may for others.)
We don't want them to promote it, but we want them to have the right to do so.
And the reason we want that is because when you start restricting one minority's right to freedom of speech, then before long you are in the minority on something else and your right to free speech is taken.
Before long you can't promote the sacraments as a means of grace because thats offensive to others. And I know you well enough Rev that you would just say "fine" and leave because of that rule. Either that or you would do it anyways and get banned.
But my point is that it shouldn't have to come to that. If someone else is told that they can't promote their beliefs on here. . . how long is it before they start telling me, you, us as confessional Lutherans in general that we can't promote some of our beliefs?
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?