Transsexuals

[kdet]

So do I. Pharasiasm is rampant in the fundamentalist church.



By trying to apply selected bits of the Levitical law to the lives of those people you personally don't like, that's what you're doing. Christ repudiated the Levitical laws.

He didn't do away with all of the law though did He?

 

[artybloke]

He did away with the Levitical laws. What he kept was the sh'ma:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind.

And the second is like unto it, namely this:

Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

On these two laws hang all the laws and the prophets."

In other words, these two laws are the absolute bottom line for all Christian ethics. If anything you do or say breaks these commandments, whether or not you are sticking to some other set of rules, you are failing to live up to the commandments of Christ.

The letter kills. It's the spirit what gives life.

 

[ahab]

Hi artybloke,



You didn’t attempt to answer any of my questions.



As to your comments:

So do I. Pharasiasm is rampant in the fundamentalist church.

Firstly what fundamentalist church?

Secondly I am not aware what church is acting in support of what the Pharisees claimed as opposed to Jesus. Can you give me an example please? Furthermore some of the Pharisees agreed with Jesus.

By trying to apply selected bits of the Levitical law to the lives of those people you personally don't like, that's what you're doing. Christ repudiated the Levitical laws.

Sorry but you are incorrect in assuming I don’t like anyone. Do you believe I dislike people just because I disagree with their ideas? That’s hardly fair is it?

I am not aware that I am trying to apply any selective bits of Levitical law to anyone, though Jesus appears to have done. For example Jesus said ‘love your neighbour’ and it comes from Leviticus. Paul almost certainly condemns same-sex sex in his references to Leviticus from the Septuagint, in 1 Cor 6 and 1 Tim. Are you saying that to love ones neighbour is repudiated by Christ?

 

[artybloke]

Paul almost certainly condemns same-sex sex in his references

As the references to same-sex sex in Leviticus are entirely concerning ritual temple prostitution, how could his supposed references to Leviticus have any bearing on homosexual relationships today? At most, he's condemning same-sex prostitution. And Paul didn't write 1 Tim.

 

[ahab]

Artybloke my friend. Jesus said He had not come to change the law and the prophets but to fulfill them. He said the sum of the law and the prophets hung on two commandents. He did not say that these two commandemnts did not come from the law and the prophets because he acknowledges that they most certainly do.

Now you made the claim that bits of the levitcial law do not apply and then you claim the bits that do arent from the law. They are!
Sorry but as to the Spirit Jesus tells us that we show we love Jesus by obey all His commands and teachings. Now if you wish to look to all Jesus commands and teachings as written by His New Testament apostles and disciples then you will see that same-sex sex is condemned and no-where is it countenanced.

Now I cant change your opinion but I would appreciate you attempting to address the questions I raise instead of lurching from one false claim to another.

 

[ahab]

Artybloke,

Have you got any scripture that countenances same-sex sex that we can argue doesnt apply?

 

[Treasure the Questions]

I have copied a brief extract from John Bell's book, States of Bliss and Yearning http://ionabooks.com/moreinfo.asp?ID=96. I hope that everyone will read it thoughtfully.

Undoubtedly it is true that in Leviticus carnal relations are prohibited between people of the same sex. And on that basis, some would start a witch-hunt. But Leviticus also says that anyone who is going to be a priest must marry a virgin. Now it’s a long time since I have been to an Anglican ordination, but I don’t remember that issue being raised in questions to the candidate.

It is true that in Corinthians and in Romans Paul protests against homosexual relations, but he also speaks passionately about how those with authority in the church have no right to exercise that authority if they can’t control their children. But I have never found in the Evangelical Times an injunction to ordained readers to resign their ministry if their kids are telling them where to get off.

Being selective with scripture is not just a sin of one wing of the Church. Everybody tends to avoid that which is not comfortable. Any denomination will jump up and down to have a report on personal morality, but how many will be as enthusiastic about a report on the morality of church investments, the stock exchange, debt collecting and the futures market – all of which are addressed by the Holy Scriptures?

Many churches, from time to time, will have a study paper or a debate or print leaflets about the evil of alcohol. But whenever did a church decide to do an in-depth study of that activity, which, more than others, is proscribed in the Levitical law, the Psalms, the Prophets, the Gospels, and the Pauline letters? I refer, of course, to the phenomenon of malicious gossip.

John Bell is a minister of the Church of Scotland and a member of the Iona Community. He lectures and preaches throughout the English-speaking world.

Karin

 

[ahab]

Hi Treasure the questions:
I usually read articles by John Bell because I find he usually has some great points to make and brings out some good revelations from scripture. .. Comments on States of Bliss and Yearning.
I agree with John Bell, “undoubtedly same-sex sex is prohibited in Leviticus.” The New Testament is quite clear about keeping the marriage bed pure and being in faithful marriage. However some choose celibate for the Kingdom.
I agree with John Bell that it is most certainly true that in Corinthians and in Romans Paul speaks against homosexual activity. Yes I also agree that he speaks about lots of other things, so what?
Being selective with scripture is indeed rather dangerous especially where it might be out of context. As to sin, one soon discovers that picking out a sin in others only exposes sins in ourselves.
Gossip is also mentioned a number of times throughout the Bible. There are warnings against it in Leviticus and several times in the New Testament. My local church mentioned it on Sunday, I am glad to see that John Bell mentions it.
However, quite what this has to do about transsexuals and sexuality I don’t know except that we can also see that from all the scriptures that same-sex sex is condemned.

Here is an alternative link http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/wright.htm
As it says “Bishop N.T. (Tom) Wright of Durham, England, is one of the world's leading scholars on the New Testament, and especially on the letters of Paul.
Exracts:
I have to say that when I read Plato's Symposium, or when I read the accounts from the early Roman empire of the practice of homosexuality, then it seems to me they knew just as much about it as we do. In particular, a point which is often missed, they knew a great deal about what people today would regard as longer-term, reasonably stable relations between two people of the same gender. This is not a modern invention,

So a Christian morality faithful to scripture cannot approve of homosexual conduct?
Correct. That is consonant with what I've said and written elsewhere.

Here is an even more specific study; Boswell's "Same-Sex Unions" - Rewriting History
Marian Therese Horvat, Ph.D. http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/article10.asphttp://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2002May/may23tru.htm
Welcoming but not Affirming” by Stanley Grenz http://www.stanleyjgrenz.com/Books/welcoming.html Supported by Peter Ould. (so it has homosexual backing) www.peter-ould.net/homosex1.htm
Can I particularly recommend that you read these carefully prayerfully and thoughtfully Karin, as they do include views which come from both sides of the debate. For me, both sides of the debate are necessary to illustrate why I am convinced that same-sex sex is not under any circumstances what God wants for us and certainly not what disciples are to encourage. Your links seem to suggest that you have made your mind up about the issue, and reject and are unwilling to discuss all arguments opposed to what you believe.

I also have increasing concerns about Jeffrey John, one of his quotes being mentioned in the articles I linked. “Enforced celibacy for homosexuals is widely conducive to personal disintegration and loneliness, punctuated by more or less frequent lapses into promiscuous and furtive sex with all the spiritual damage and degradation it entails” Christian Same-Sex Partnerships, Dr Jeffrey John
I would like to know what his advice is for heterosexuals who are unable to get married for whatever reason but who long to. Are they supposed not to get lonely and disintegrate, to grin and bear or go and get a prostitute or something? What about the help of the Holy Spirit?

 

[artybloke]

Now you made the claim that bits of the levitcial law do not apply and then you claim the bits that do arent from the law. They are!

The bits that do came from Jesus' mouth. I obey Christ. He still broke the Sabbath law and the law concerning the stoning of adulterers. His law of love is not so much a new law as the fullfillment of everything that the old law was supposed to bring about but didn't, mainly because it was created by human beings to regulate the Jewish people.

Like I say, I obey Christ, not some ancient ritual code that nobody I know keeps in its entirety. The law of love is written in the hearts of all those who love God and love their neighbours. It is even written on yours, however much you choose to ignore it.

 

[Treasure the Questions]

I note your selective comments on the John Bell article, ahab.

I shall try to read some of what you suggest, but there is rather a lot. I suspect that there is very little in all those words that is new.

I think it boils down to whether you emphasise God's justice and requirement for us to be holy or whether you see Jesus coming to emphasise God's love and grace, and his understanding of the human condition.

I see Jesus willing to come alongside us where ever we are, helping us to be more like God intended us to be and leading us gently towards that goal. I see my role in that as supporting what Jesus is doing in the lives of the people I have any contact with. I certainly don't think I should use the internet to tell people I don't know, or hardly know, that they are sinners and should change the way they live.

I also consider that I should be concerned with my own personal morality, and do my best to improve in that department by buying Fairtrade products and getting involved in Trade Justice issues. I could boast that I have been married for 20 years bar a few days, and have never cheated on my husband, I don't drink to excess, in fact drink very little alcohol, and don't use strong language, but I think there is always room for improvement. I also think social morality (concern for the poor, disadvantaged and marginalised) is as improtant as private sexual morality, perhaps more so as it impacts on so many more people. So if two people of the same sex are living as a maried couple and care for the less advantaged members of their community and do their bit to improve conditions for workers in the developing world I cannot say that God will be more pleased with me because I have been married to a person of the opposite sex. I certainly don't think God is more pleased with the ruthless businessman or the head of global corporations who exploit third world workers if they have been faithfully married to someone of the opposite sex either.

Jesus had a lot more to say about how we treat the poor and the marginalised than he did about personal sexual morality.

We are all imperfect and are prone to different sins. If it is a sin for two people of the same sex to live as married, why do we need to make more of a fuss about that than about the scandal of world trade rules that disadvantage developing nations, of rules in this country that make it legal for loan sharks to charge exhorbitant interest rates on loans to the poorest people? There are so many greater scandals that impact so many more people than the possibility that people of the same sex who live together may be committing a "sin". It seems to me that the people who shout the loudest about homosexual relations have precious little to say about far greater iniquities in this world, and seem quite unconcerned by them.

I am far more convinced than you by the arguments that sex between two people who are in a loving stable relationship is probably not a sin, but at the end of the day, I think it matters very little. Our focus should be elsewhere, not prying into the private lives of others.

This is my understanding of the gospel message. I am aware that you understand things very differently from me, ahab. Sometimes we can't see something until a "switch" of some kind has been turned on. You seem to have different switches turned on from me, but I am convinced that the Holy Spirit has been very much at work in helping me see things differently from the way I used to see things after years of teaching by conservative evangelical Christians.

Karin

 

[Treasure the Questions]

.
Welcoming but not Affirming” by Stanley Grenz http://www.stanleyjgrenz.com/Books/welcoming.html Supported by Peter Ould. (so it has homosexual backing) www.peter-ould.net/homosex1.htm

Can you please explain how Stanley Grenz thinks he can "welcome homosexuals without affirming same-sex unions". I couldn't find an explanation. If you could put it in a nutshell I'd be grateful.

Have you tested this link recently www.peter-ould.net/homosex1.htm ? It doesn't work for me.

I'd also be interested in artybloke's opinion (as I trust him in these matters) in how mainstream http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/article10.asp is. I've got a feeling they were the lot that have been suggesting withholding some payment or other to bishops who don't agree with their point of view and I've a feeling they are extremists and not mainstream at all.

Karin

 

[ahab]

Artybloke, Good morning!



Absolutely, I agree. But you said that Jesus ended the levitical law, rather than fulfilled it as you now clarify, I agree with you.

mainly because it was created by human beings to regulate the Jewish people.

Once again that isn’t necessarily true. God wrote on the tablets commands given to Moses and Jesus said (Matt 15:4, “For God said 'Honor your father and mother' referring to the scripture Exodus 20:12; Deut. 5:16. That’s only one of many examples Artybloke where Jesus indicates the scriptures are from God by revelation to man, not created by human beings. (Matt 22:31) “But about the resurrection of the dead–have you not read what God said to you,” Of course Moses allowed divorce for some reasons (Deut 24)

Like I say, I obey Christ, not some ancient ritual code that nobody I know keeps in its entirety. The law of love is written in the hearts of all those who love God and love their neighbours. It is even written on yours, however much you choose to ignore it.

You seem to be making sweeping contradictions. Jesus Himself says that He didn’t come to do away with the law and the prophets but to fulfil them and He does so in various ways. However the laws are now written on our hearts and we live by faith and according to the Holy Spirit. I am not sure what you mean about the law of love, God is love. To love ones neighbour is to love them as Jesus loved us and to love God is to honour Him in all aspects of our lives as well as to adore and praise Him. As Jesus is the ‘gateway’ to God the Father we follow Jesus and we show we love Jesus by obeying all He commands. So what exactly do you mean by the ‘law of love’ and what exactly am I ignoring?

 

[artybloke]

Absolutely, I agree. But you said that Jesus ended the levitical law, rather than fulfilled it as you now clarify, I agree with you.

By fullfilling the law in his body on the cross, he effectively ended it. We now no longer need to worry about whether we eat shellfish, wear mixed fibres, have long hair or are homosexual.

I am not sure what you mean about the law of love, God is love.

Love God, love your neighbour. All the rest is casuistry.

wrote on the tablets commands given to Moses and Jesus said (Matt 15:4, “For God said 'Honor your father and mother' referring to the scripture Exodus 20:12; Deut. 5:16.

Moses didn't write the Penteteuch. The Torah was written many years after; even supposing that the story isn't purely legendary (which it probably is.)

Jesus Himself says that He didn’t come to do away with the law and the prophets but to fulfil them and He does so in various ways.

Including breaking the Sabbath laws and letting a woman caught in adultery off a stoning. Now that's what I call fullfilling - fullfilling by effectively breaking them! His greatest act of "fullfilling the law" was to show his love for all regardless of who they were - by eating and drinking with sinners and the impure, by talking to and accepting Samaritans (impure and heretical! Gosh! how irreligious can you get!), by extending the love of God to Gentiles, by healing the sick, by talking to tax-gatherers.

Jesus was as offense to the religious and moral policemen of his day (Pharisees) as he is to the religious and moral policemen of today (fundamentalists.) That's why they take away the Gospel of love and replace it with law.

 

[ahab]

Treasure the Questions, Good morning!



My comments were on the paragraphs you quoted, not on the full article as I haven’t bought the book. Though there is also nothing new in what John Bell speaks about either.

I think it boils down to whether you emphasise God's justice and requirement for us to be holy or whether you see Jesus coming to emphasise God's love and grace, and his understanding of the human condition.

Well absolutely 100% both. What you seem to be doing is playing one off against the other. I would say that the love and grace is freely given for all to chose to accept and receive or not. The justice is just the consequence of choosing to reject this. Jesus is quite specific that we are to love Him as His disciples, so as He commands us to love our neighbour as he has loved us we love our neighbour in the same way He loved, not as we think fit to love, because there are different understandings of love.

I certainly don't think I should use the internet to tell people I don't know, or hardly know, that they are sinners and should change the way they live.

This is a Christian only forum and we also don’t need to be telling people its ok to sin!

We are, as disciples, to preach the gospel given to us. Jesus warned the people many times about sin, He chose to tell them even if they didn’t like it. I am sorry to say this Treasure the Questions, but we are discussing what is sin on a Christian forum. You equally should not be telling people its alright to do same-sex sex. I would rather risk upsetting people than upsetting God.



I absolutely give praise and thanks for you Fair Trade work. I am trying to buy Fair Trade product at every opportunity. What has that got to do with the thread?

I also think social morality (concern for the poor, disadvantaged and marginalised) is as important as private sexual morality,

Me too. I love God and so I see that I am commanded to. What has that got to do with same-sex sex, gender disorder and transsexualism?

So if two people of the same sex are living as a married couple and care for the less advantaged members of their community and do their bit to improve conditions for workers in the developing world I cannot say that God will be more pleased with me because I have been married to a person of the opposite sex.

Two people living together don’t have to be married to serve God do they? Two same-sex people in a sexual relationship are not married in God’s eyes and you should know that God is more pleased with you to be married to a member of the opposite sex because the scriptures say so Gen 2, Jesus confirms its God’s very purpose in creating you female and your husband male Matt 19, Mark 10, and the Holy Spirit which reminds us of all Jesus said John 14:26, convicts you of it. Is that not what is written, for if you reject that how can you be sure it is the Holy Spirit? If you reject that how can you be sure that we are to love our neighbour? Matt 19:19, Lev. 19:18?



Sorry Treasure the Questions but God is Love. and 'God is all we need' not 'love is all we need'



I certainly don't think God is more or less pleased with things that are not of the Kingdom. You give all kinds of examples that seem to be designed to make me say ‘oh well as there are other sins same-sex sex cant be that bad so lets celebrate it.! Treasure the Questions I am interested in all God stands for not an emotionally emaciated part of it.



It also seems to me that if people didn’t go around promoting sins there wouldn’t be any need to shout out the truth.

I am far more convinced than you by the arguments that sex between two people who are in a loving stable relationship is probably not a sin, but at the end of the day, I think it matters very little. Our focus should be elsewhere, not prying into the private lives of others.

Sorry but I ahve been discussing what is God's true and perfect way and you have been prying into others private lives, sorry I wasnt with you there. I am convinced that same-sex sex is a perversion to God. You it appears don’t think it matters and feel it should be OK. I disagree there too. Humanists are very concerned about the poor and marginalised but they dont necessarliy believe in Jesus.

I used to see things after years of teaching by conservative evangelical Christians.

Happily I have had the experience of orthodox, evangelical, and liberal theology. It only when one holds them up to the light together than one can see the truth expose the false in the liberal teaching on this issue. That is why I try and give links which give both sides of the debate.

 

[Treasure the Questions]

...Sorry but I ahve been discussing what is God's true and perfect way and you have been prying into others private lives, sorry I wasnt with you there. I am convinced that same-sex sex is a perversion to God. You it appears don’t think it matters and feel it should be OK. I disagree there too. Humanists are very concerned about the poor and marginalised but they dont necessarliy believe in Jesus.


Happily I have had the experience of orthodox, evangelical, and liberal theology. It only when one holds them up to the light together than one can see the truth expose the false in the liberal teaching on this issue. That is why I try and give links which give both sides of the debate.

Sorry, but you have been discussing your understanding of God's true and perfect way. You seem extremely concerned with what people do in private, between the bedsheets!

I'm afraid I find a lot of holes in the more fundamentalist teachings when I hold them up to the light, although I probably don't agree with more extreme liberal teachings either. Extremists or fundamentalists of any description should always be mistrusted in my book.

I have noticed you giving links giving both sides of the debate, perhaps I've missed something.

I think artybloke has summed it up beautifully:

Love God, love your neighbour. All the rest is casuistry.

Ahab, I think you and I must agree to differ. I have a feeling it is a sin to spend too much time in futile internet discussions, and I'm sure you wouldn't want to be guilty of leading me astray.

Karin

 

[ahab]

Treasure the Questions,

As to how Stanley Grenz thinks he can "welcome homosexuals without affirming same-sex unions". In a nutshell as you ask I would say that Jesus welcomed all to come to Him, the prostitute, the adulterer etc. Now adultery and prostitution are described as sins and Jesus told them to go and sin no more, they were still welcomed, forgiven and accepted. It’s the same with all of us. We are accepted and forgiven and we repent.



The Peter Ould link doesnt work Perhaps the site has had to shut down because of all the hate and prejudice directed at it.



The issue of the Anglican church would be better discussed on the Congregation Anglican thread. But briefly, the Anglican Communion worldwide is overwhelmingly not in favour of same-sex sex so the objection to the appointment of those bishops and deans etc who support it would be mainstream. Witholding quotas is something that can be considered by any of these mainstream churches as to its merits.



As to your continued comments..

Sorry but we are discussing same-sex sex not prying onto other peoples private lives. I don’t see the relevance of your comment. What people do between the bedsheets is something Jesus talks about too. You seem extremely concerned to stop people looking at what God’s purpose is for us between the bedsheets.



Some may see that an extremist fundamental Christian is one who devotes all their lives to serving God. Mother Teresa was fairly fundamental and extreme compared with the average Christian would you not say.



You know we can say love God and love ones neighbour to everything and not debate anything.Your idea of loving God and ones neighbour seems to include same-sex sex and mine seems to exclude it. Just repeating it doesn’t do much for the discussion.



Anyway I know you are going to Greenbelt so I wish you a great time and be blessed! I considered a day trip but at £25 its considerably more expensive than all the other Christain festivals.



However, of course we differ but you haven’t really addressed most of my questions. So I would appreciate a consideration on this one at least before your weekend.


Two people living together don’t have to be married to serve God do they? Two same-sex people in a sexual relationship are not married in God’s eyes and you should know that God is more pleased with you to be married to a member of the opposite sex because the scriptures say so Gen 2, Jesus confirms its God’s very purpose in creating you female and your husband male Matt 19, Mark 10, and the Holy Spirit which reminds us of all Jesus said John 14:26, convicts you of it. Is that not what is written, for if you reject that how can you be sure it is the Holy Spirit? If you reject these scriptures how can you be sure about the literal validity of the scripture that says we are to love our neighbour? Matt 19:19, Lev. 19:18?

 

[ahab]

Artybloke,



Well there must be a difference between ending and fulfilling. Jesus cant have ended the law to love ones neighbour, He must have fulfilled it, by grace.

Love God, love your neighbour. All the rest is casuistry.

Well it may or may not be. That statement means nothing because the sum of the law and the prophets hangs on those two commands. It depends on what we understand is involved in loving God and loving ones neighbour. If you are trying to suggest that loving God is disobeying His commands then I would disagree. If you are saying that same-sex sex is not condemned then I would disagree. If you are saying the loving ones neighbour is taking revenge on them when they do things we don’t like, then I would disagree.



That the law is man made is just your opinion. You may be right, but I gave you the scriptures where Jesus says that God had spoken through the scripture so its scripture against your word.



Again you talk about fulfilling the law with the Sabbath as breaking it. In what way do you see Jesus breaking the law to love ones neighbour?

Jesus was as offence to the religious and moral policemen of his day (Pharisees) as he is to the religious and moral policemen of today (fundamentalists.) That's why they take away the Gospel of love and replace it with law.

How about that the fundamentalists are those that try and obey all the Jesus commanded in loving God and ones neighbour and so obeying the gospel of love.

Had you got an example of what you meant by this statement?

 

[artybloke]

It depends on what we understand is involved in loving God and loving ones neighbour. If you are trying to suggest that loving God is disobeying His commands then I would disagree. If you are saying that same-sex sex is not condemned then I would disagree.

What other commands are there? That you don't eat shellfish? That you don't wear mixed fibres? There are no other commands.

How about that the fundamentalists are those that try and obey all the Jesus commanded in loving God and ones neighbour and so obeying the gospel of love.

Fundamentalists put the interpretation of ancient texts above the love of people. They are no better than the fundamentalists who ran Afghanistan, or the Stalinists who ran Russia. In fact, that's what defines fundamentalism: ideology, the putting of abstract principles above people. The letter that killeth: and it does kill. Fundamentalist ideology is responsible for the suicides of those gay people who can't live with themselves because some fundamentalist preacher has told them they are condemned.

Jesus came to give good news to the poor and to set the captives free. He didn't come to enslave them in another set of laws, interpreted from on high by self-righteous preachers and hypocrites.

If you are saying that same-sex sex is not condemned then I would disagree.

It isn't condemned. There is nowhere in scripture that condemns all forms of gay sexual practice. Jesus never mentions it. If Jesus never mentions it, that's good enough for me; if he obviously didn't think it was a problem I don't see why I should.

 

[Treasure the Questions]

you should know that God is more pleased with you to be married to a member of the opposite sex

Firstly, I don't think God operates a league table of sins, or things to be obeyed. I think first and foremost God is pleased with those who love his Son enough to change their lives around and follow his Way. As I said, I don't think he is more pleased by those who are legally married with no concern for the poor than he is for those in a same sex relationship who care for the poor and marginalised as best they can.

Secondly, I know how people can distort scripture, because I have been told that God was not pleased that I have married whom I have married. I have first hand experience of being told my choice of life-partner was sinful and I now know I was told a bunch of lies by over zealous fundamentalists.

because the scriptures say so Gen 2, Jesus confirms its God’s very purpose in creating you female and your husband male Matt 19, Mark 10, and the Holy Spirit which reminds us of all Jesus said John 14:26, convicts you of it.

God made human beings male and female,true. However, that says nothing either way on the sinfulness or otherwise of homosexual sex. Heterosexual relations are necessary for the procreation of the species, but sexual relations don't have to result in procreation.

Is that not what is written, for if you reject that how can you be sure it is the Holy Spirit? If you reject these scriptures how can you be sure about the literal validity of the scripture that says we are to love our neighbour? Matt 19:19, Lev. 19:18?

Please note, disagreeing with your interpretation of scripture is not rejecting it.

Jesus taught that we should love our neighbour as we love ourselves and said that was the second greatest commandment. Of course part of that is to learn to love ourselves, and we can't do that without understanding that God's grace means he loves us unconditionally and forgives us our sins: he accepts us just as we are, warts and all.

Yes I am off to Greenbelt this weekend. I may listen to what Jeffrey John has to say if I think it sounds interesting. I shall certainly hope to hear John Bell. Greenbelt has helped me to define what I believe being a Christian means to me, and I hope to be encouraged and challenged there some more this year.

Here ends my discussion with you, ahab. You believe what you believe, very firmly and if your beliefs cause you to sin you must answer to God for that one day.

I have investigated these matters pretty thoroughly, originally considering the arguments on both sides of the discussion. The arguments that took God's grace most into consideration seemed the most likely to reflect the truth of the matter to me. In real life this issue is of minor cosequence to me personally, however, I do feel the need to speak out against injustice from time to time and so I feel the need to speak out when I see my homosexual brothers and sisters in Christ being treated without grace and understanding on these boards. I hold my beliefs firmly, but I also believe I should be concerned with living a more Christ-like life in real life, as I too must answer to God for how I lived my life, and used my time, one day.

I hope to continue to use CF to learn from people who have something worthwhile to teach me and to debate with people who have open minds. I don't want to spend inordinate amounts of time on here going over old ground with people who seem to have shut their minds to the possibility that they could be even slightly wrong.

Goodbye, ahab.

 

[ahab]

Treasure the Questions,



I am so disappointed that you are unable or unwilling to answer so few of my questions.

I think we agreed that God doesn’t operate a ‘league table of sins’. I personally confirmed I believe that before in our discussions, by what Jesus indicated in Mark 7 about evil thoughts being slander or murder in the same sentence. Why mention this again? I also agree that we can distort scripture and furthermore we may get different revelations from it anyway. We have been through all this over and over again we are agreed, despite it being fundamental or liberal. Why mention it again?



You point was that you cant be sure God approves more of a man/woman marriage than a same-sex one if the same sex one does more good works. I don’t think this has anything to do with good works, nor did I ask about good works. But you can be sure that God approves of a faithful man/woman marriage because scripture says it is God’s purpose in creation. It is countenanced. What you are doing is saying that you are just as sure same-sex relationship is as good, even though you have no scriptural countenance and only scripture to condemn same-sex activity. Now that may well be our difference of opinion but from scripture one can only be sure of the relationship that is countenanced is approved and that was my point.



Also the scripture says that God made them male and female which you acknowledge but it also says that for this reason man will be united to his wife and the two shall become one flesh. Now you then talk about ‘it not being sinfulness or otherwise of homosexual sex’ Absolutely true, it doesn’t say anything about that so why mention that? That’s what I meant by getting revelation from what scripture actually says not what it doesn’t say. However the verse from Gen 2 is repeated by Jesus and Paul and has that word reason or purpose in it. Whatever the purpose or reason was it was for man and woman. Maybe as you say purely for procreation but that wouldn’t stop divorce as Jesus says in Matt 19. If God’s purpose in creation was for man and woman then it was for man and woman. It says what it says. You don’t want to deal with the words in the scriptures that compromise your position.



Yes I agree with you that "Jesus taught that we should love our neighbour as we love ourselves and said that was the second greatest commandment." Yes we agree on that everytime. Why mention it. Are you still saying if we love our homsoexual brother we love hsi homosexual practice? What about the burglar do we love his stealing? What we disagree on is that meaning always mean tell them to do what they feel is best for them. Jesus did not do this and nor does He command us to.

Yes we are agreed that God forgives our sins. We agree this every time. why mention this?

Here ends my discussion with you, ahab. You believe what you believe, very firmly and if your beliefs cause you to sin you must answer to God for that one day.

True, likewise and thank you.



Your arguments continue on your experience and feelings as if they somehow count more than my experience and feelings However as you feel the need to speak out for same-sex sex because of injustice, and feel that some like me have shut their minds, may I point out to you once again that there are celibate homosexuals and ex-gay Christians who feel injustice from pro-gay groups that attack them and even deny the glory to God of the transforming work of the power of the Holy Spirit. So when you talk about injustice against homosexual brothers please try not to be so blinkered and prejudice yourself while you accuse others of prejudice.



Even so I repeat that I am sure God will bless you at Greenbelt because you are precious to Him.