Weaponized Gospel

[redleghunter]

Sexuality isn’t repentance awa

Makes no sense as no one said such.

One can be forgiven and sincere... but sexuality is deep, complex and hardwired into being

Don't know where you are going with this.

Unless you want to dispute that and offer that male parts could satisfy you?... but you “choose” girls...

Incoherent.

Maybe that’s why Christ chose sex as a symbol of our union to Him through faith..

No He chose the relationship of marriage. Unless you buy into the whole Mormon sex thing, again don't know where you are going with this.

 

[redleghunter]

I know of no one but God that even can convict anyone of their sin other than if they do something against the law here on earth and are convicted and go to jail, but as far as eternal conviction...only God can do it.

Now if by conviction, some of you are saying for example, if a Homosexual says I can live a life as a homosexual and still go to heaven, and someone disagrees because the Bible simply says otherwise, what could possibly be the problem with that?

Of course, in that case, the Homosexual who wants to do as they want are going to accuse the messenger of some thing like judging, convicting, whatever it takes to shift blame...we've all seen it happen, but all they are doing is filling them in on the biblical truth that they apparently have wrong...wake up call.

Is that what you mean by convicting/judging? They have already been convicted by God, nothing I can do to make that worse or better unless I get through to them they are wrong.

Kenny you got it 100%.

 

[redleghunter]

What did Jesus do for the Adulterous at His feet?

He said don't do this anymore. Go and sin no more .

 

[redleghunter]

They had alot of Biblical support too.

No they did not.

 

[redleghunter]

OIC...

First it’s convict the Unbelievers... now it’s convict the believer...

Wow... Thank goodness Jesus has you and others that are ready to do His Job for Him...

The poster quoted the apostle Paul. What beef do you have with Paul warning believers about sin?

 

[Shempster]

@FireDragon76 articulated these words and they hit home to me. I literally battle against Weaponized gospels when the chance presents itself.

What was intended to be the Foundation of Unconditional Love can get twisted into emotional stones.

This is the core of my indignation towards theological twisting of Jesus’ words, ministry and Book... (John 5:39)

A thank you to @FireDragon76 for helping me express something I’ve been trying to express for years and a call for anyone to give deeper body to those simple but accurate words...

“Weaponized Gospel”

How is the gospel Weaponized and why does this do harm to the True Good News of our Lord, God Jesus Christ?

This view comes from non-believers I know of:

The weaponized gospel is gaining political control of the Gov't to ban or suppress activities that are against the christian religion. This approach is seen by them as aggressive forcing of religion upon those who don't agree with it. To me, the biggest problem is that is exactly what radical Muslims do....and they resent it and fight against it. This is because Christians disagree with Islam and think it is wrong for them to try and force Christians to obey Islamic law (which is happening on the other side of earth)
Well what's the difference? Non-Christians don't want "Christian law" forced upon them. Can you blame them? The big question is: should we try and force Jesus on someone? Did he force himself on anyone?

 

[PeaceByJesus]

PB and J...

Master Reprover...

At peace with helping others not feel at peace...

It must be hard for the one who boasted he literally battled against Weaponized gospels when the chance presents itself to have his duplicity exposed and armaments as fallacious and reproved by Scripture, and adamantly refuse to give straight answers to a couple plain questions, and thus has to resort to vain spitwads as replies. Which also are reproved by Scripture.

Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. (Proverbs 26:5)

Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him. (Proverbs 26:12)

He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him: But to them that rebuke him shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them. (Proverbs 24:24-25)

 

[PeaceByJesus]

This view comes from non-believers I know of:

The weaponized gospel is gaining political control of the Gov't to ban or suppress activities that are against the christian religion. This approach is seen by them as aggressive forcing of religion upon those who don't agree with it. To me, the biggest problem is that is exactly what radical Muslims do....and they resent it and fight against it. This is because Christians disagree with Islam and think it is wrong for them to try and force Christians to obey Islamic law (which is happening on the other side of earth)
Well what's the difference? Non-Christians don't want "Christian law" forced upon them. Can you blame them? The big question is: should we try and force Jesus on someone? Did he force himself on anyone?

Which is a strawman, for it was Christians which were behind the 2nd Amendment, and evangelicals preach conversion must be volitional, and typically do not even baptism infants, and allow others to change their faith. And know that the state is not to punish theological dissent (though now it effectively does).

In clear contrast to Islam, which has no new covenant, and thus the weapons of Muhammads warfare included the direct use of sword of men to enlarge his rule.

But the 2nd Amendment does not and cannot mean that the government cannot reflect the beliefs of its Founders, nor those of the people who directly or indirectly elect the interpreters of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. And thus the work by all sides is to persuade voters.

Time to sleep, except for the Lord.

 

[redleghunter]

Where does he argue for that? I missed it.

bugkiller

Keep reading Apparently you missed quite a lot .

 

[FireDragon76]

It's not. However I don't post here teaching sins I face as non sins. There's the difference.

We all struggle or must address sin in our lives. The more we walk in the Spirit and not the flesh the more we are pruned. We can't be pruned if don't recognize sin for what it is---sin .

Who here says we do not struggle with sin? Just because we do not agree on necessarily what that means doesn't mean we have no concept of sin.

I tell you what is a sin, it's when people like Shane Boyle can't afford insulin, so they have to start a crowdfunding campaign and they die from diabetic shock because they are $50 dollars short. That is a sin. And it doesn't seem right to me in a world of Shane Boyle's that people choose to focus on gay people as the sign of what is wrong in the world, of what needs fixing.

 

[FireDragon76]

No they did not.

Geocentrism was the traditional belief among Protestants and Catholics until astronomical observations became commonplace and the mountain of evidence overwhelming. And they based their belief on their interpretation of the Scriptures.

 

[Grip Docility]

It must be hard for the one who boasted he literally battled against Weaponized gospels when the chance presents itself to have his duplicity exposed and armaments as fallacious and reproved by Scripture, and adamantly refuse to give straight answers to a couple plain questions, and thus has to resort to vain spitwads as replies. Which also are reproved by Scripture.

Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. (Proverbs 26:5)

Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him. (Proverbs 26:12)

He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him: But to them that rebuke him shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them. (Proverbs 24:24-25)

Zero Duplicity here...

Jesus came for the sick... not the well... Jesus died for us, while we were yet sinners...

I admit that apart from Christ’s gift of Slavic Covering... I fail.

I think it’s wrong to lie to people and project that Christians don’t fail... and that being a Christian is about your own flesh... when James makes it clear... along with others... that’s it’s about Loving Others as they are and ensuring they have Love, and support...

No preference!

You are ranking sin and crying that Jesus didn’t save people (While they were yet sinners).

Duplicity?

How about the fact that you have Sin (Or you make Him a liar)... and you ask for sinlessness from others...?

Now that’s a fat bowel of Duplicity Soup!

We are all “hypocrites” in one way or another... but you’ve gone full blown self righteous!

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Who here says we do not struggle with sin? Just because we do not agree on necessarily what that means doesn't mean we have no concept of sin.

I tell you what is a sin, it's when people like Shane Boyle can't afford insulin, so they have to start a crowdfunding campaign and they die from diabetic shock because they are $50 dollars short. That is a sin. And it doesn't seem right to me in a world of Shane Boyle's that people choose to focus on gay people as the sign of what is wrong in the world, of what needs fixing.

Actually the reason people choose to focus on gay people, or actually what they promote, is because of they - their activists - are the ones who make it an issue, unlike in the past, and thus it attracts lightening. Few people are going to contend against crowdfunding to supply someone with insulin, but if a consensual activity was continually responsible for over 80% of new cases of a ultimately deadly disease among men - at great medical cost and after many decades - and acceptance of it was promoted and demanded, then we would expect to see much contention. And if it was a consensual religious activity we can be sure it would be banned or at least see only negative press.

Thus because the association of homosexuality with negative consequences then a aggressive marketing strategy was advocated, and which has been basically followed by activists and its media bed-fellows, employing psychological tactics, to the point of labeling anyone who opposes it as "homophobic," a loaded psychological term designed to intimidate into silence any and all who oppose - not matter how conscientiously - the promotion of homosexuality by inferring this is due to an irrational fear of them or of being one. ("One idea is that a homophobic attitude is part of a defense mechanism that helps these people control, hide from, or mask their own sexuality" - WordWeb)

Thus the book,

After the Ball, is widely regarded as the handbook for the gay agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, [54] Marshall Kirk (1957 - 2005) - researcher in neuropsychiatry - and Hunter Madsen (pen name Erastes Pill) - who was schooled in social marketing - advocated avoiding portraying gays as aggressive challengers, but as victims instead, while making all those who opposed them to be evil persecutors. As a means of the latter, they promoted jamming, in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable."[55] [56]

"Jamming" homo-hatred (disagreement with homosexual behaviors) was to be done by linking it to Nazi horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."[57] " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."[58]

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”[64]
More. ​

 

[Grip Docility]

Keep reading Apparently you missed quite a lot .

FD and I made it clear your reference here is false.

You are employing a debate tactic where you imply something was said... that the people you are debating with didn’t say!

@FireDragon76 even confirmed that Sin is Sin... Gay and Straight deviation... and all other of the 613 that are anchored in the Decalogue ... per Deuteronomy 31:26.

We are saying Grace... Not “Saccrifice” or (Condemnation)...

You are misrepresenting matters to cover your self righteousness and focus on Homosexuality as the “Unforgivable Sin”.., as if you aren’t guilty and on your knees every day like all others that claim Christ!

 

[Grip Docility]

Actually the reason people choose to focus on gay people, or actually what they promote, is because of they - their activists - are the ones who make it an issue, unlike in the past, and thus it attracts lightening. Few people are going to contend against crowdfunding to supply someone with insulin, but if a consensual activity was continually responsible for over 80% of new cases of a ultimately deadly disease among men - at great medical cost and after many decades - and acceptance of it was promoted and demanded, then we would expect to see much contention. And if it was a consensual religious activity we can be sure it would be banned or at least see only negative press.

Thus because the association of homosexuality with negative consequences then a aggressive marketing strategy was advocated, and which has been basically followed by activists and its media bed-fellows, employing psychological tactics, to the point of labeling anyone who opposes it as "homophobic," a loaded psychological term designed to intimidate into silence any and all who oppose - not matter how conscientiously - the promotion of homosexuality by inferring this is due to an irrational fear of them or of being one. ("One idea is that a homophobic attitude is part of a defense mechanism that helps these people control, hide from, or mask their own sexuality" - WordWeb)

Thus the book,

After the Ball, is widely regarded as the handbook for the gay agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, [54] Marshall Kirk (1957 - 2005) - researcher in neuropsychiatry - and Hunter Madsen (pen name Erastes Pill) - who was schooled in social marketing - advocated avoiding portraying gays as aggressive challengers, but as victims instead, while making all those who opposed them to be evil persecutors. As a means of the latter, they promoted jamming, in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable."[55] [56]

"Jamming" homo-hatred (disagreement with homosexual behaviors) was to be done by linking it to Nazi horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."[57] " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."[58]

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”[64]
More. ​

Nope...

People that are Athiests and skinheads ... and long before such... along with Islam... and so forth have made the tiny population suffer emotional and physical pain for many years.

Christians have failed to extend grace to gays for over a millennium!

Some do! Many Don’t!

You don’t like that you are as filthy as all of humanity if not for HIS free GIFT... thus you erase the FREE GIFT PART!

Lies and shenanigans from you!

 

[Grip Docility]

Act now! Salvation is free... with only a life debt of perfection demanded, once you “Buy in”...

Act NOW!

What RUBBISH that blasphemes HIS precious BLOOD!

Grace is being erased by people teaching that actual Grace is a lie and a “license to sin”...

When it’s actually because of Sin and Failure that God gives it!

None sin that grace should abound... but all need it constantly!!!

 

[RDKirk]

This discussion has nothing to do with Christians identifying sin in their lives or struggling with such sin.


This discussion is about ignoring sins clearly stated as sin by both Christ and His apostles in Holy Scriptures.

And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just. (Romans 3:5)

No, that's not what this thread is about. If that's what you're talking about, that's off topic.

 

[RDKirk]

The liberal pro-homosexual feminist Fonda can hardly be considered to be "on board" in the Biblical sense.

Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. (Ephesians 5:10-11)

Jane Fonda hasn't been a Christian nearly as long as we've a bunch of womanizing preachers have been over the years. I think we all know of folks who have claimed Christianity for half a century and still act like the devil.

 

[RDKirk]

Which is a strawman, for it was Christians which were behind the 2nd Amendment, and evangelicals preach conversion must be volitional, and typically do not even baptism infants, and allow others to change their faith. And know that the state is not to punish theological dissent (though now it effectively does).

In clear contrast to Islam, which has no new covenant, and thus the weapons of Muhammads warfare included the direct use of sword of men to enlarge his rule.

But the 2nd Amendment does not and cannot mean that the government cannot reflect the beliefs of its Founders, nor those of the people who directly or indirectly elect the interpreters of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. And thus the work by all sides is to persuade voters.

Time to sleep, except for the Lord.

Did you mean the First Amendment?

Freudian slip, methinks.

 

[RDKirk]

Geocentrism was the traditional belief among Protestants and Catholics until astronomical observations became commonplace and the mountain of evidence overwhelming. And they based their belief on their interpretation of the Scriptures.

Well, not quite. Actually all the top mainstream scientists of the day believed in geocentrism. Heliocentrism was correct, but at the time it was still a theory with some very significant questions left unanswered that the geocentrism theory answered handily. The church sided with the mainstream scientists, who actually had a tighter theory at the time.

Galieo got into trouble over it because he directly and personally insulted the Pope.