PDA

View Full Version : Is calling Beanieboy a . . .



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

BillyBob
May 3rd, 2005, 09:38 AM
1001! :banana:

JoyfulRook
May 3rd, 2005, 09:40 AM
1000! :banana: That's What I was going to do!

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 09:41 AM
1000! :banana:



Ha!

edged you out !

beanieboy
May 3rd, 2005, 09:41 AM
Do actually think this is what we're doing?


Luke 18
9Then Jesus told this story to some who had great self-confidence and scorned everyone else: 10"Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a dishonest tax collector. 11The proud Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer: `I thank you, God, that I am not a sinner like everyone else, especially like that tax collector over there! For I never cheat, I don't sin, I don't commit adultery, 12I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.'

13"But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, `O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.' 14I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For the proud will be humbled, but the humble will be honored."

This is what some do.

Why wasn't the Pharisee justified?
He didn't cheat, didn't sin, didn't commit adultery, fasted twice a week, gave 10%...
Why wasn't he forgiven?
Why did Jesus not find favor on the Pharisee who thanked God for not making him like the tax collector?

beanieboy
May 3rd, 2005, 09:45 AM
You are misrepresenting God's love, thinking Christians should "love" you the way you think love is.

So, using 1st Corinthians 13 is "misrepresenting God's love" by your standards?
Quoting all of Romans 12, and not just part of verse 9, is misrepresenting the whole passage?

You are calling Night Day, and day night.
You are a liar.

BillyBob
May 3rd, 2005, 09:46 AM
Ha!

edged you out !


:sozo2:

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 09:46 AM
Hey - great language for a "family oriented website."




OK - I'll make it easy for you :loser: , try to pay closer attention next time
"Thou hast well said, I have no husband: for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly."

What isn't confrontational about that? What isn't insulting about it?

Granite
May 3rd, 2005, 09:48 AM
"Thou hast well said, I have no husband: for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly."

What isn't confrontational about that? What isn't insulting about it?

Justifying being an unpleasant SOB just because you're a "Christian" is the biggest joke you people try to pull. :hammer:

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 09:54 AM
A fine retort, I must say. You sure showed me. Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you!

How is that a load of crap? Isn't Christ the one that removes sin? We are not able to remove the beam from our own eye, and as long as we are here on earth, we will be daily dealing with our own sin, which is why I said we could never remove the beam, therefore, leave the judging to God.
God has removed the beam from many eyes.

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 10:06 AM
granite-
What's your excuse?

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 10:09 AM
granite-
What's your excuse?



I know you are but what am I?




grow up, :loser:

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 10:25 AM
When did I ever say I wasn't unpleasant?

Caledvwlch
May 3rd, 2005, 10:48 AM
God has removed the beam from many eyes.
That's a matter of opinion.

beanieboy
May 3rd, 2005, 11:20 AM
Luke 18
9Then Jesus told this story to some who had great self-confidence and scorned everyone else: 10"Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a dishonest tax collector. 11The proud Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer: `I thank you, God, that I am not a sinner like everyone else, especially like that tax collector over there! For I never cheat, I don't sin, I don't commit adultery, 12I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.'

13"But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, `O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.' 14I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For the proud will be humbled, but the humble will be honored."

This is what some do.

Why wasn't the Pharisee justified?
He didn't cheat, didn't sin, didn't commit adultery, fasted twice a week, gave 10%...
Why wasn't he forgiven?
Why did Jesus not find favor on the Pharisee who thanked God for not making him like the tax collector?


No one replied to this, I noticed.

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 11:37 AM
No one is thanking God they're not like you, or any other sinner. They are penitent before God, as the tax collector was, because they know they don't deserve God's forgiveness.

beanieboy
May 3rd, 2005, 11:40 AM
Please answer the questions.

Why did Jesus not find favor in the Pharisee?
He wasn't being dishonest. He wasn't committing several sins.
He obeyed the laws.
He even thanked God he wasn't like other sinners.
Why did he not find favor in God?

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 11:41 AM
Remember, please.....when you point fingers, there are three pointing back at you. Nineveh, it sounds like from this thread you need to re-evaluate the Christian image you are trying to portray. It's not making you look too good right now. I for one don't see much Christ in you from what I've seen on the board. It's my prayer that you repent if necessary and try to be a mirror for Christ in this dark world.
Check it out...Ninny hit me with a red box for this point.

Ninny, why can't you ever take blame or rebuke? You can never admit you're wrong can you?

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 11:41 AM
I didn't know Dave Miller endorsed homosexuality. On that point, I do disagree with him.

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 11:43 AM
Please answer the questions.

Why did Jesus not find favor in the Pharisee?
He wasn't being dishonest. He wasn't committing several sins.
He obeyed the laws.
He even thanked God he wasn't like other sinners.
Why did he not find favor in God?
His pride was sinful.

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 11:44 AM
I didn't know Dave Miller endorsed homosexuality. On that point, I do disagree with him.
Dave is misunderstood.

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 11:46 AM
Please answer the questions.

Why did Jesus not find favor in the Pharisee?
He wasn't being dishonest. He wasn't committing several sins.
He obeyed the laws.
He even thanked God he wasn't like other sinners.
Why did he not find favor in God?
Because he was judging a repentant man, and was full of pride, which are both sins. He was being very dishonest.

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 11:46 AM
What do you mean he's misunderstood? Does he thing homosexuality is a sin or not? If he does not think it's a sin, then he is making a grave mistake in scriptural interpretation.

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 11:47 AM
Then there must be some standard to go by.


And God told us to judge rightly.

Christ gave us the standard, know a tree by the fruit it bears.

And a good tree bears the fruits of peace, love, kindness, gentleness, and
self control.

Wjy is it that the "good trees" at this site are teh wiccans, the buddhists,
the athiests, and only a couple of us Christians?

Dave

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 11:48 AM
What do you mean he's misunderstood? Does he thing homosexuality is a sin or not? If he does not think it's a sin, then he is making a grave mistake in scriptural interpretation.
I believe he considers homosexuality a sin.

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 11:48 AM
Speak of the devil..... :)

Granite
May 3rd, 2005, 11:49 AM
granite-
What's your excuse?

Hmmmm...well, being sarcastic is more fun. On the other hand I don't pretend to be conversing with an almighty deity who gives me a free pass to act like an inhumane degrading jerk. You do. Hence, the difference.

How's the job searching going?

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 11:49 AM
Dave is misunderstood.
No, he's not. I have seen him post exactly what he believes on the subject of homosexuality. Apparently, he's even performed some "marriages."

beanieboy
May 3rd, 2005, 11:51 AM
Christ gave us the standard, know a tree by the fruit it bears.

And a good tree bears the fruits of peace, love, kindness, gentleness, and
self control.

Wjy is it that the "good trees" at this site are teh wiccans, the buddhists,
the athiests, and only a couple of us Christians?

Dave

Why was Jesus persecuted by the very teachers of the law?
Why were they always trying to entrap their own Savior?
Why were Pharisees, those called rabbi, so rejecting of God made flesh?

same idea :(

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 11:53 AM
What do you mean he's misunderstood? Does he thing homosexuality is a sin or not? If he does not think it's a sin, then he is making a grave mistake in scriptural interpretation.

"He" thinks that the real enemy is promiscuity, and that's the context
Paul had in mind.

"He" also thinks that H is a behavioral anomally in the modern context but
one that harms no one, unlike a presdisposition for children or animals.

"He" also thinks that in the OT, eating shrimp was called an abomination,
so the use of that word is greatly over rated.

"He" also thinks that we are called to love one another, and share God's love
with others, and trust that the Holy Spirit will convict and uplift whom the
Holy Spirit chooses, its not our job to condemn others.

Dave

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 11:53 AM
No, he's not. I have seen him post exactly what he believes on the subject of homosexuality. Apparently, he's even performed some "marriages."
You say your father was a homosexual. Is he going to hell? Should he have been sent directly to hell when he was a practicing homosexual?

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 11:54 AM
Christ gave us the standard, know a tree by the fruit it bears.

And a good tree bears the fruits of peace, love, kindness, gentleness, and
self control.

Wjy is it that the "good trees" at this site are teh wiccans, the buddhists,
the athiests, and only a couple of us Christians?

Dave
What do you think of me, Dave? Just curious?

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 11:54 AM
No, he's not. I have seen him post exactly what he believes on the subject of homosexuality. Apparently, he's even performed some "marriages."

Haven't done that. Sorry.

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 11:55 AM
"He" thinks that the real enemy is promiscuity, and that's the context
Paul had in mind.

"He" also thinks that H is a behavioral anomally in the modern context but
one that harms no one, unlike a presdisposition for children or animals.

"He" also thinks that in the OT, eating shrimp was called an abomination,
so the use of that word is greatly over rated.

"He" also thinks that we are called to love one another, and share God's love
with others, and trust that the Holy Spirit will convict and uplift whom the
Holy Spirit chooses, its not our job to condemn others.

Dave
Would you expect or at least hope that a homosexual that you bring to Christ would repent of the behavior?

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 11:58 AM
What do you think of me, Dave? Just curious?

Your alright, Edge...

God Bless,

Dave

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 12:00 PM
You say your father was a homosexual. Is he going to hell? Should he have been sent directly to hell when he was a practicing homosexual?
No, he is not going to hell. He has been set free by the Lord, our God. And he should have been prosecuted, if he were found out. But that wouldn't have happened in this country, in the eighties. Thank God he found God, and turned from his wicked ways!

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 12:07 PM
Haven't done that. Sorry.
I wasn't sure about that one. That's why I said, "apparently."

Caledvwlch
May 3rd, 2005, 12:08 PM
I wasn't sure about that one. That's why I said, "apparently."
Is that supposed to be an excuse for a false accusation?

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 12:11 PM
Would you expect or at least hope that a homosexual that you bring to Christ would repent of the behavior?

I just witness to my own experience. The Holy Spirit does the leading.

I would hope that first, this person accepts who she or he is, for their strengths and
weakness, because repentence and healing is possible only from a position
of acceptance and truth.

I would hope that second, they realize they have infinite worth in the eyes of
God, no matter what their sexual orientation is.

I would hope that third, they would turn away from any destructive or hurtful
behaviors in which they are used to participating, be it promiscuity, alcohol,
overeating, abuse, whatever.

And finally, I would hope that they pray and follow the lead of the Holy Spirit,
whichever direction that may take them. If that leads them to remain faithful to
a lifetime partner, or leads them to change and to give up the people they've
been associated with, either way.

Ultimately, I hope for them an eternity of joy in fellowship with God through
Christ.

Dave

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 12:15 PM
Lighthouse, just curious....do you follow Bob Enyart?

How about you, Ninny?

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 12:15 PM
Is that supposed to be an excuse for a false accusation?
It wasn't an accusation. That was why I used that word, because I did not want to falsely accuse him. And he confronted it, and it is taken care of. Get over yourself.

Caledvwlch
May 3rd, 2005, 12:18 PM
It wasn't an accusation. That was why I used that word, because I did not want to falsely accuse him. And he confronted it, and it is taken care of. Get over yourself.
No way dude, I am un-get-over-able. Better men have tried and failed. I, unfortunately am doomed to forever be under myself.

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 12:18 PM
Lighthouse, just curious....do you follow Bob Enyart?
To an extent. Why?

When I first came to TOL, I thought Bob was nothing more than a hateful bigot, and full of himself, and full of other things, as well. After getting to know him, and read his material, and seeing what the Bible actually says, I changed my attitude.

I came to TOL, made my first post, in August of 2003.

Caledvwlch
May 3rd, 2005, 12:19 PM
It wasn't an accusation. That was why I used that word, because I did not want to falsely accuse him. And he confronted it, and it is taken care of. Get over yourself.
And, if that's the case, then why did you say it in the first place?

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 12:23 PM
Because somebody had said it about him before, and I thought it was because he had said it. But since I hadn't seen him say it, I didn't say it was a fact.

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 12:23 PM
Dave, I have a short memory so forgive me....

You said that H is a behavioral anomally. Do you think it is a sin?

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 12:25 PM
Because somebody had said it about him before, and I thought it was because he had said it. But since I hadn't seen him say it, I didn't say it was a fact.
Come on, Lighthouse, "apparently" is not a disclaimer. Admit it and move on.

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 12:26 PM
I don't understand why Dave can't just say "homosexuality." Or "Holy Spirit."

Lighthouse
May 3rd, 2005, 12:27 PM
No, it wasn't a disclaimer. But I honestly wasn't sure if Dave had ever done that or not. And that was the only thing I could think of.

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 12:30 PM
To an extent. Why?

When I first came to TOL, I thought Bob was nothing more than a hateful bigot, and full of himself, and full of other things, as well. After getting to know him, and read his material, and seeing what the Bible actually says, I changed my attitude.

I came to TOL, made my first post, in August of 2003.
Because, I think that Bob Enyart is very smart, and has some good ideas, but I still think he's full of himself. I agree with a lot of what he says though. However, I have never seen any of his followers be humble or admit they are wrong or be willing to accept correction or deal with their own sin (I'm not saying this of you, don't get me wrong here). And that disturbs me.

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 01:59 PM
Dave, I have a short memory so forgive me....

You said that H is a behavioral anomally. Do you think it is a sin?

I'm going to answer your question
honestly (for me), "I can't judge." I've said it many times, there are so
many OT laws, and Christ upheld some and dismissed
others as "ritual purity," and the only fair metric I've
found for determining which laws have teeth and which
apply more to ritual purity are dependent on whether a person is hurting
self or others.

In some cases, yes, homosexuality is very harmful to
self and others. In other cases, like committed
relationships that are loving and not destructive or
harmful in any way, no one is harmed.

Like I said, promiscuity is the enemy, it spreads disease,
destroys families. and diminishes human dignity.

Dave

On Fire
May 3rd, 2005, 02:13 PM
I'm going to answer your question
honestly (for me), "I can't judge." I've said it many times, there are so
many OT laws, and Christ upheld some and dismissed
others as "ritual purity," and the only fair metric I've
found for determining which laws have teeth and which
apply more to ritual purity are dependent on whether a person is hurting
self or others.

In some cases, yes, homosexuality is very harmful to
self and others. In other cases, like committed
relationships that are loving and not destructive or
harmful in any way, no one is harmed.

Like I said, promiscuity is the enemy, it spreads disease,
destroys families. and diminishes human dignity.

Dave

So the only things you are willing to call outright sins are those things that hurt self or others? But that implies that you are able to rightly "judge" what things are or are not harmful.

How much credence do you give to God's creation and what it seems to imply about relationships and sexuality?

SUTG
May 3rd, 2005, 02:28 PM
Poll: Is calling Beanieboy a faggot a Christ-like thing to do?


That is a tough one. Since no-one agrees on whether christ existed, who he was, or what he was like, the phrase "christ-like" doesn't seem to have that much meaning.

To me, a more interesting question would be to ask how many of those calling Beanieboy names for tolerating homosexuals are Roman Catholic. In light of the recent happenings in the church, these people could use a lesson in consistency.

BillyBob
May 3rd, 2005, 03:03 PM
Do you have any doubts that Jesus existed?

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 03:04 PM
I'm going to answer your question
honestly (for me), "I can't judge." I've said it many times, there are so
many OT laws, and Christ upheld some and dismissed
others as "ritual purity," and the only fair metric I've
found for determining which laws have teeth and which
apply more to ritual purity are dependent on whether a person is hurting
self or others.

In some cases, yes, homosexuality is very harmful to
self and others. In other cases, like committed
relationships that are loving and not destructive or
harmful in any way, no one is harmed.

Like I said, promiscuity is the enemy, it spreads disease,
destroys families. and diminishes human dignity.

Dave
Dave,

Romans chapter 1 clearly states in the NT that homosexuality is a sin. Plain and simple.

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 03:31 PM
So the only things you are willing to call outright sins are those things that hurt self or others? But that implies that you are able to rightly "judge" what things are or are not harmful.


In a way, I agree with what you're saying here, I cannot judge, and that's
one reason why I say, again, I cannot judge, and not judging means not
saying its either sin or not sin.

However, on the other hand,
I know people in loving, committed homosexual relationships who do no harm
to themselves or others. They're just sweet people trying to get along in a
world that hates them, and they're told every day of the week that God hates
them as well.

Whe I apply the golden rule, and wonder how I would feel if our roles were
reversed, teh only reference I have is my relationship with my wife. If someone
told me they hated me and God hated me because of my committed relationship
with my wife, I would not be a happy camper, in fact I would reject whatever
god they tried to sell me based on those criteria.

Now, when you talk about a gay lifestyle which includes promiscuous
behavior, absolutely, sin, evil.



How much credence do you give to God's creation and what it seems to imply about relationships and sexuality?

Alot, and that's why I agree that its an anomolly.

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 03:34 PM
In a way, I agree with what you're saying here, I cannot judge, and that's
one reason why I say, again, I cannot judge, and not judging means not
saying its either sin or not sin.

However, on the other hand,
I know people in loving, committed homosexual relationships who do no harm
to themselves or others. They're just sweet people trying to get along in a
world that hates them, and they're told every day of the week that God hates
them as well.

Whe I apply the golden rule, and wonder how I would feel if our roles were
reversed, teh only reference I have is my relationship with my wife. If someone
told me they hated me and God hated me because of my committed relationship
with my wife, I would not be a happy camper, in fact I would reject whatever
god they tried to sell me based on those criteria.

Now, when you talk about a gay lifestyle which includes promiscuous
behavior, absolutely, sin, evil.



Alot, and that's why I agree that its an anomolly.

Dave, how can you make the statement that a gay lifestyle which includes promiscuous behavior is sinful and evil if you cannot judge?

One Eyed Jack
May 3rd, 2005, 03:46 PM
Dave, how can you make the statement that a gay lifestyle which includes promiscuous behavior is sinful and evil if you cannot judge?

I was wondering about that one, myself.

SUTG
May 3rd, 2005, 03:47 PM
Do you have any doubts that Jesus existed?

Yes.

aikido7
May 3rd, 2005, 03:47 PM
Dave, how can you make the statement that a gay lifestyle which includes promiscuous behavior is sinful and evil if you cannot judge?
Now you're getting the idea of what "sinful behavior" really IS. And, by the way, all of us humans have judging, evaluating minds. That's our sin. Jesus was aware of that.

Agape4Robin
May 3rd, 2005, 03:49 PM
Homosexuality is sinful and "evil" because God says so. He's already made the judgement. Not me.

It's my responsibility to tell of the hope that I have in Christ, not damn someone to hell for their behavior.

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 03:53 PM
Homosexuality is sinful and "evil" because God says so. He's already made the judgement. Not me.

It's my responsibility to tell of the hope that I have in Christ, not damn someone to hell for their behavior.
Robin, people basically damn themselves, and it's not by their behavior. It's because they do not accept Christ as savior.

God has given us the knowledge that engaging in homosexual sex is evil. This is why I am wondering that Dave can discern that promiscuous sex is evil, but cannot discern whether homosexual sex is evil or not.

Frank Ernest
May 3rd, 2005, 03:54 PM
Poll: Is calling Beanieboy a faggot a Christ-like thing to do?


That is a tough one. Since no-one agrees on whether christ existed, who he was, or what he was like, the phrase "christ-like" doesn't seem to have that much meaning.
The only people who question the existence of Jesus are a few wacko atheists who think they can change the world if they run their mouths long enough.


To me, a more interesting question would be to ask how many of those calling Beanieboy names for tolerating homosexuals are Roman Catholic. In light of the recent happenings in the church, these people could use a lesson in consistency.
To imply that, somehow and in some way, the RCs approve of homosexual behavior as a matter of church policy is simply insane.

By the way, Beanieboy sure would like some social approval for homosexual behavior since he happens to be homosexual. Funny how that works.

Carver
May 3rd, 2005, 03:55 PM
The real definition for a faggot is a bundle, either of sticks - for burning - or of pieces of metal for welding. It seems 30 some people think that Jesus would say that Beanieboy is either wooden, or metallic. Me, I think Jesus knows better.

Agape4Robin
May 3rd, 2005, 03:55 PM
Robin, people basically damn themselves, and it's not by their behavior. It's because they do not accept Christ as savior.

God has given us the knowledge that engaging in homosexual sex is evil. This is why I am wondering that Dave can discern that promiscuous sex is evil, but cannot discern whether homosexual sex is evil or not.
Oh...gotcha!!! :thumb:

True.... :1Way:

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 03:56 PM
The real definition for a faggot is a bundle, either of sticks - for burning - or of pieces of metal for welding. It seems 30 some people think that Jesus would say that Beanieboy is either wooden, or metallic. Me, I think Jesus knows better.
Yup. I'm pretty sure that He understands all connotations of the word.

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 03:59 PM
Dave,

Romans chapter 1 clearly states in the NT that homosexuality is a sin. Plain and simple.

Romans 1:


26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

+++ Lusts, promiscuity, Roman orgies. Nothing here about committed
relationships. This is about people inflamed with lust just going at it, not
about people with similar interests getting to know each other and growing
a loving, committed relationship.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Romans 2:

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

+++ Doink! There it is again!!! I've gossipped and disobeyed my parents,
so I have no right to judge homosexual people for their behavior. Who is
perfect? No one. No one is good enough, no not one...

SUTG
May 3rd, 2005, 04:06 PM
The only people who question the existence of Jesus are a few wacko atheists who think they can change the world if they run their mouths long enough.[QUOTE]


If by "Jesus", you mean Jessus as the Son of God, there are millions that do not believe he existed.

[QUOTE=Frank Ernest]To imply that, somehow and in some way, the RCs approve of homosexual behavior as a matter of church policy is simply insane.

Looking at it more de facto than de jure there are some tough questions for anti-gay RCs to answer. Do you fall into that group?

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 04:06 PM
Romans 2:

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

We can't judge someone if we do the same thing that they do. Paul also tells us to judge correctly. That means that an adulterer cannot judge another adulterer.

Unless you are committing the sin of homosexuality, you can judge it to be good or wicked. That one is pre-judged for us, in fact, by God.

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 04:07 PM
Dave, how can you make the statement that a gay lifestyle which includes promiscuous behavior is sinful and evil if you cannot judge?

I've seen the harm done from promiscuous behavior, broken families,
broken hearts. I can recognize hurt. I can do that.

I can also recognize the hurt suffered by gay teens who commit suicide. God
hates 'em, the world hates 'em, they try the "accept Christ, be baptized, get
a miracle" route and that doesn't work. What's left? Nothing, no hope,
and that's the biggest part of what I'm fighting here. Hopelessness, driven
by a vision of an unmerciful, unsympathetic, beast of a god that just isn't true.

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 04:09 PM
I've seen the harm done from promiscuous behavior, broken families,
broken hearts. I can recognize hurt. I can do that.

I can also recognize the hurt suffered by gay teens who commit suicide. God
hates 'em, the world hates 'em, they try the "accept Christ, be baptized, get
a miracle" route and that doesn't work. What's left? Nothing, no hope,
and that's the biggest part of what I'm fighting here. Hopelessness, driven
by a vision of an unmerciful, unsympathetic, beast of a god that just isn't true.
I can recognize hurts and broken hearts too. But that is not what makes something a sin or not.

aikido7
May 3rd, 2005, 04:09 PM
Romans 1:


26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

+++ Lusts, promiscuity, Roman orgies. Nothing here about committed
relationships. This is about people inflamed with lust just going at it, not
about people with similar interests getting to know each other and growing
a loving, committed relationship.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Romans 2:

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

+++ Doink! There it is again!!! I've gossipped and disobeyed my parents,
so I have no right to judge homosexual people for their behavior. Who is
perfect? No one. No one is good enough, no not one...

If you expect that focused and common-sense study brought to bear on factual interpretations of Scripture is in the interest of the average church-goer, you have another thing coming....


Hopelessness, driven
by a vision of an unmerciful, unsympathetic, beast of a god that just isn't true.
That's why I believe the vision of God revealed by Jesus was so much like a lovely Spring rain to some and like a perverted heresy to others....

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 04:11 PM
Romans 2:

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

We can't judge someone if we do the same thing that they do. Paul also tells us to judge correctly. That means that an adulterer cannot judge another adulterer.

Unless you are committing the sin of homosexuality, you can judge it to be good or wicked. That one is pre-judged for us, in fact, by God.


That doesn't even make sense. That's like saying I'm supposed to judge a
parakeet contest even though I know nothing about parakeets.

If I were a homosexual person, yes, I'd be in a better position to understand
what they are going through. But I'm not, so I can't.

And either way, your missing the most important part, its God's KINDNESS,
TOLERANCE, AND PATIENCE that leads to repentence, not vile poisonous
degradations like "God hates fags."

Ecumenicist
May 3rd, 2005, 04:18 PM
I can recognize hurts and broken hearts too. But that is not what makes something a sin or not.

Then what does? The word of God? Like eating shrimp and pork? Like
washing before meals? Like doing nothing on Sabbath, not even helping
a person in need? Like tithing while ignoring your starving parents? Like
going to the temple even though you have an ongoing fight with your
sibling? Like praying "thank God I'm righteous, and not like that fag over
there?"

Carver
May 3rd, 2005, 04:21 PM
Now for a more serious reply. I highly doubt that Jesus would call Beanieboy a 'faggot'. It seems much more likely to me that Jesus would have been more tactful. There are many ways to tell someone that they are living in sin. Using obscene words to do so is certainly one option, but it will probably just offend the person being told, and once you offend someone, they don't often listen to what you're saying. I think Jesus was smart enough to know all that, so, I doubt He would have called Beanie a faggot. Apparently, many of you dissagree.

aikido7
May 3rd, 2005, 04:23 PM
And either way, your missing the most important part, its God's KINDNESS,
TOLERANCE, AND PATIENCE that leads to repentence, not vile poisonous
degradations like "God hates fags."
Now we come to the crucial question: what is the character of your god?

--The stern patriarch of an ancient tribe or the nurturing parent of the human heart?

--The one that counsels to do good to others--even to one's enemies--or the one who will destroy the wicked in a apocalyptic divine "ethnic cleansing"?

--The one who reveals the Kingdom of God to be present in the everyday activities of the poor or the one who reveals the Kingdom of God from a throne of awe-full power--terrible to contemplate and behold?

--The one who turned his attention to the earthly toils and struggles of common men and women or the one who was focused on heaven: how to get there for oneself?

--The one who offers grace or the one who talks about satisfying a set of religious requirements?

--The one who tore down the temple or the one who profits by it?

We have a choice--and thanks be to the Lord that we do!

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 04:23 PM
That doesn't even make sense. That's like saying I'm supposed to judge a
parakeet contest even though I know nothing about parakeets.

If I were a homosexual person, yes, I'd be in a better position to understand
what they are going through. But I'm not, so I can't.

And either way, your missing the most important part, its God's KINDNESS,
TOLERANCE, AND PATIENCE that leads to repentence, not vile poisonous
degradations like "God hates fags."
No, Dave, it makes perfect sense. God does not want us to be hypocritical in our judgements. If we condemn someone who is doing the same things we do, we condemn ourselves.

Also, one who is themselves caught up in a particular form of wickedness cannot clearly recognize the same act in others as evil. A child molester often not see what he is doing as wrong. He often believes that he is doing something loving, and that the child is benefiting from his attentions.

In the same way, someone who is sexually promiscuous does not see that they are harming anyone else, so how can they make a judgement? They have already judged their own behavior to be tolerable, so they will not see others doing the same thing as transgressing.

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 04:27 PM
Now for a more serious reply. I highly doubt that Jesus would call Beanieboy a 'faggot'. It seems much more likely to me that Jesus would have been more tactful. There are many ways to tell someone that they are living in sin. Using obscene words to do so is certainly one option, but it will probably just offend the person being told, and once you offend someone, they don't often listen to what you're saying. I think Jesus was smart enough to know all that, so, I doubt He would have called Beanie a faggot. Apparently, many of you dissagree.

Jesus was not always harsh. He reserved that quality for those who persistantly ignored His teachings. But when they did so, He did not pull punches. He compared the Pharisees to tombs, white on the outside and rotten on the inside. That's about as unclean as you can get in Jewish culture, and one heck of an insult. He also called people snakes--vipers to be precise.

Emo
May 3rd, 2005, 04:29 PM
When I apply the golden rule, and wonder how I would feel if our roles were reversed, the only reference I have is my relationship with my wife. If someone
told me they hated me and God hated me because of my committed relationship
with my wife,
........then that person would have to be an unbeliever & out-of-their-mind crazy!

Gen. 2:24
Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Emo
May 3rd, 2005, 04:31 PM
Romans 2:

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

We can't judge someone if we do the same thing that they do. Paul also tells us to judge correctly. That means that an adulterer cannot judge another adulterer.

Unless you are committing the sin of homosexuality, you can judge it to be good or wicked. That one is pre-judged for us, in fact, by God.

:BRAVO:

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 04:33 PM
Then what does? The word of God? Like eating shrimp and pork? Like
washing before meals? Like doing nothing on Sabbath, not even helping
a person in need? Like tithing while ignoring your starving parents? Like
going to the temple even though you have an ongoing fight with your
sibling? Like praying "thank God I'm righteous, and not like that fag over
there?"
I doubt that many people pray to God and tell Him how righteous they are. If they have come to Christ, they recognize that they are not righteous of their own works, and that they need Him as savior for that very fact.

The dietary laws applied to the dispensation of the Law. As did the hygenic laws. Paul clearly points out that in the dispensation of Grace that sexual immorality is not permissible. That's heterosexual and homosexual immorality. Paul tells us to flee from sexual immorality, don't even eat with a brother who practices it. Hand him over to Satan.

Nineveh
May 3rd, 2005, 04:39 PM
I'm confused. Is "-Protestant Christian" supposed to be a dig ?

No.


man you are confused - try to pay attention. I was referring to your claim that you are free to judge others of sins you consider yourself to be free of. Not sure I'm going to respond to you again, Ninny, it's too hard to keep track of your confusion and try to bring clarity to you. Besides, your mind's made up.

Promise :)

How ever could I get so lucky ? :jump:

Nineveh
May 3rd, 2005, 04:41 PM
Check it out...Ninny hit me with a red box for this point.
That's because you are being a hypocrite. Notice I was quoting callie? Ohhhh, that's right, you have double standards :)


Ninny, why can't you ever take blame or rebuke? You can never admit you're wrong can you?

Hypocrite, when you have a charge to level against me do so.

Nineveh
May 3rd, 2005, 04:44 PM
Dave is misunderstood.


No, not really, he believes God will look favorably on homosexuals who go through a "homosexual commitment ceremony".

Nineveh
May 3rd, 2005, 04:46 PM
Christ gave us the standard, know a tree by the fruit it bears.

And a good tree bears the fruits of peace, love, kindness, gentleness, and
self control.

To which you admit asking repentance when you don't bear these fruits.


Wjy is it that the "good trees" at this site are teh wiccans, the buddhists,
the athiests, and only a couple of us Christians?

Mostly because you don't understand law and grace. Most evil is fine by you while you charge God with committing sin.

Nineveh
May 3rd, 2005, 04:47 PM
Lighthouse, just curious....do you follow Bob Enyart?

How about you, Ninny?

No, edge, I follow Christ.

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 04:48 PM
Darn it, Knight, why won't you let me rep Nineveh two posts in a row? :mad:

Nineveh
May 3rd, 2005, 04:53 PM
That's ok Crow, I tried 4 or 5 times on your posts to dave :) May the Spirit give root to your wisdom in dave's heart :)

Poly
May 3rd, 2005, 05:15 PM
Darn it, Knight, why won't you let me rep Nineveh two posts in a row? :mad:

I feel your pain, Crow! I got the ol' "spread it around" message today after trying to rep Nineveh and you, several times today. :noid:

temple2006
May 3rd, 2005, 05:35 PM
Actually, the whole point of this argument wiht you was to see if you would eventually call me a name. I aws being much more annoying than usual, on purpose. And you did. Which shows that you aren't as against it as you would like us to believe. Thus, you are a hypocrite, and need to re-assess something. It seems that maybe you have, but that doesn't mean you're right. Jesus called names, and we can too.

Litehouse....Are you admitting to baiting?

Lovejoy
May 3rd, 2005, 05:40 PM
This is why they really should have left the formats alone. Verse six is a seperate paragraph from verses 1-5, and from verses 7-12. It's similar to Proverbs, where each point didn't always have anything to do with the point before, or after it.
Very good! I quite agree with that, and find your phrasing of it very apt.

ShadowMaid
May 3rd, 2005, 06:25 PM
I feel your pain, Crow! I got the ol' "spread it around" message today after trying to rep Nineveh and you, several times today. :noid:

I gave one (to bad I couldn't give more) to Nineveh for you ladies. :)

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 08:19 PM
Check it out...Ninny hit me with a red box for this point.

Ninny, why can't you ever take blame or rebuke? You can never admit you're wrong can you?




She could if she ever was, but she isn't ever so she never will

:hammer: :dizzy:

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 08:22 PM
"He" also thinks that in the OT, eating shrimp was called an abomination....




would it be OK if we call Beanie a shrimp eater ?

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 08:40 PM
That doesn't even make sense. That's like saying I'm supposed to judge a
parakeet contest even though I know nothing about parakeets.

If I were a homosexual person, yes, I'd be in a better position to understand
what they are going through. But I'm not, so I can't.

And either way, your missing the most important part, its God's KINDNESS,
TOLERANCE, AND PATIENCE that leads to repentence, not vile poisonous
degradations like "God hates fags."



I wonder, Dave, if the reason certain "Christians" judge homosexuality so severely might be that it's the only sin they're "allowed" to judge.... :think:

BillyBob
May 3rd, 2005, 08:50 PM
I, for one am so tired of seeing this thread at or near the top of the active list everytime I check out TOL.

*Bump*


[I don't know why this seems so funny to me....] :chuckle:

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 08:51 PM
"Thou hast well said, I have no husband: for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly."

What isn't confrontational about that? What isn't insulting about it?




Brandon, if you really don't see the difference between that and" Hey Beanie - you're a faggot and you're going to hell !!", then there's little point in conversing with you. One can only hope that some day in ten or twenty years you will have the grace to look back on this period of your life and realize :idea: :sigh: "gee- I really was a jerk."

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 08:54 PM
No, edge, I follow Christ.
But are you a follower of Enyart as well? I see Enyartian fruit in you. :Patrol:

The Edge
May 3rd, 2005, 08:55 PM
ninny, my charge against you is that you and your friends refuse to accept correction, and that you are so quick to point out problems in others rather than deal with your own sin. You come on here and are so quick to point fingers, and you post these articles about horrible things that are happening and we all cry "boo hoo isn't that horrible" and then just move on. You rarely offer anything of substance; you're just pointing out the bad in the world. At least Bob Enyart offers some solutions. I don't like some of what he has to say but at least he has come up with some plans and some ideas to make things better "in his own way" You're just a complainer, which is part of what Erin accused me of being. But then you stand by her when she tries her little attack on me, and point fingers at me for calling her out on her sin. And notice when I called her out I reached out incontinued friendship and tried to help her. I don't see that Christlikeness coming from you, and think you need to think about that. A lot of people agree that you need to change your attitude. I'm telling you this to help, not to point fingers. And don't give me any more red bars with the word "hypocrite" attached to them if you don't like what I'm telling you. I'll try to help you if I can.

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 09:01 PM
No.


then why use it in your posts ?



Promise :)

that's the other thing - too often you go for the easy cheap shot instead on contributing anything of substance




How ever could I get so lucky ? :jump:



Easy - just keep being yourself, :loser:

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 09:10 PM
*Bump*


[I don't know why this seems so funny to me....] :chuckle:



do you make sure Jeremiah is active before you bump ?

Now that would be funny - I wonder if you could set it up to bump automatically when he comes on line ? :D :D

Jujubee
May 3rd, 2005, 09:18 PM
I can't believe we are still debating this...faggot is obviously not a verynice word... can't you just he is gay if it is a true known fact?

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 09:38 PM
WHO WAS THIS REFERRING TO?



Hey, great, you agree he was referring to them !



Why are you mentally ill?


weak Jay - getting tired ?




Callie, Jesus was considered rude and was killed.


Now there's a twisted theology - "Jesus was killed because he was considered rude" :chuckle:





You hate Jesus and blaspheme Him.



No Jay, I'm making fun of you. Unless you're the second coming ? :chuckle:





Paul referred to people, like you, whom pervert the gospel, as "dogs." Case close. You lose!


Bzzzt !! Wrong guess, :loser:

I expected more from you, Jay. You're off your game.

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 09:42 PM
WHO WAS THIS REFERRING TO? Why are you mentally ill?

Callie, Jesus was considered rude and was killed. You hate Jesus and blaspheme Him.

Paul referred to people, like you, whom pervert the gospel, as "dogs." Case close. You lose!




Oops, almost forgot this:


Did Christ directly and confrontationally insult any sinners besides those that were misrepresenting scripture ?


I notice you side-stepped it before.

Freak
May 3rd, 2005, 09:47 PM
Hey, great, you agree he was referring to them ! Yeah, dogs!!!

The apostle Paul would probably call you one too for you pervert the gospel.


weak Jay - getting tired ? :yawn: Tired of your nonesense, yes!

Callie=:loser:

onchiki
May 3rd, 2005, 09:49 PM
Wanna read further?

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, 'Let me pull the mote out of thine eye;' and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite first cast out the out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

-Matthew 7:1-5



lighthouse :baby sorry I missed you! I was busy de MOTING my eye thanks for the advice. Now that I can see clearly I still say......YE SHALL NOT JUDGE LEST YE BE JUDGED THYSELF!!! :ha:

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 09:55 PM
Yeah, dogs!!!

The apostle Paul would probably call you one too for you pervert the gospel.

:yawn: Tired of your nonesense, yes!

Callie=:loser:





OOOh - side-stepped again, nice move !!

Too hard to answer ?


Did Christ directly and confrontationally insult any sinners besides those that were misrepresenting scripture ?

Carver
May 3rd, 2005, 09:56 PM
Jesus was not always harsh. He reserved that quality for those who persistantly ignored His teachings. But when they did so, He did not pull punches. He compared the Pharisees to tombs, white on the outside and rotten on the inside. That's about as unclean as you can get in Jewish culture, and one heck of an insult. He also called people snakes--vipers to be precise.
My point was not that Jesus would be all hunkey-dorey, and just give them a big hug. He most certainly would not have. My point was simply that He wouldn't have been obscene in how He told them. Calling Beanie a homosexual is being accurate. Calling Beanie a faggot is being obscene. Homosexuality is sinful, however, bigotry, which many here seem to enjoy, is just as sinful.

onchiki
May 3rd, 2005, 10:18 PM
My point was not that Jesus would be all hunkey-dorey, and just give them a big hug. He most certainly would not have. My point was simply that He wouldn't have been obscene in how He told them. Calling Beanie a homosexual is being accurate. Calling Beanie a faggot is being obscene. Homosexuality is sinful, however, bigotry, which many here seem to enjoy, is just as sinful.


If you believe in a soul homosexuality cannot be a sin. but on everything else....two thumbs way way up. :BRAVO:

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 10:20 PM
My point was not that Jesus would be all hunkey-dorey, and just give them a big hug. He most certainly would not have. My point was simply that He wouldn't have been obscene in how He told them. Calling Beanie a homosexual is being accurate. Calling Beanie a faggot is being obscene. Homosexuality is sinful, however, bigotry, which many here seem to enjoy, is just as sinful.
Faggot is not an obscenity. It is certainly insulting, but not obscene.

Lucky
May 3rd, 2005, 10:27 PM
Faggot is not an obscenity. It is certainly insulting, but not obscene.
Some people think it is, though, apparently. Now if one Christian views the word as an obscenity, shouldn't that Christian refrain from saying it for conscience's sake?

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 10:32 PM
Their conscience, their choice.

onchiki
May 3rd, 2005, 10:33 PM
Faggot is not an obscenity. It is certainly insulting, but not obscene.


CROW.. do me a favor and scream FAGGOT!!!!!!! at mass sometime and see how many people are OFFENDED by your OBSCENITY.....Thanx. :grave:

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 10:35 PM
CROW.. do me a favor and scream FAGGOT!!!!!!! at mass sometime and see how many people are OFFENDED by your OBSCENITY.....Thanx. :grave:

I'm sure just as many as if I screamed "You're all a bunch of idiots."

That doesn't make it an obscenity.

Poly
May 3rd, 2005, 10:37 PM
I'm sure just as many as if I screamed "You're all a bunch of idiots."

That doesn't make it an obscenity.

Ok, it must be my bedtime. I read this and nearly lost it, picturing Crow doing this. :crackup:

onchiki
May 3rd, 2005, 10:40 PM
I'm sure just as many as if I screamed "You're all a bunch of idiots."

That doesn't make it an obscenity.


CROW... To point out the shortcommings of others is indeed an obscene. doesn't the teachings of your lord say LOVE THY BROTHER...

Caille
May 3rd, 2005, 10:40 PM
Ok, it must be my bedtime. I read this and nearly lost it, picturing Crow doing this. :crackup:



How about Sozo ? :D

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 10:44 PM
CROW... To point out the shortcommings of others is indeed an obscene. doesn't the teachings of your lord say LOVE THY BROTHER...

Yup, He loved us all enough to die for us. And He also was insulting to people.

Sorry, kid. You're not the first one to try that tactic. It just doesn't hold water.

onchiki
May 3rd, 2005, 10:49 PM
Yup, He loved us all enough to die for us. And He also was insulting to people.

Sorry, kid. You're not the first one to try that tactic. It just doesn't hold water.


CROW... yup he was also insulting to people correct. However... he did not die for us all he was SMOTE for being a rude SON OF GOD....

Crow
May 3rd, 2005, 11:17 PM
CROW... yup he was also insulting to people correct. However... he did not die for us all he was SMOTE for being a rude SON OF GOD....

Oh dear. You are being intentionally blasphemous, aren't you?

Here (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=56916&postcount=1) are the rules of this forum.

So while I would just insult you back and do a far better job at it if you were to have leveled that one at me, I'll ban you the next time you insult God the Father or God the Son.

Nineveh
May 4th, 2005, 08:20 AM
But are you a follower of Enyart as well? I see Enyartian fruit in you. :Patrol:


I listen to quite a few good teachers. Nice try at pressing more sour grapes though :)

Nineveh
May 4th, 2005, 08:40 AM
Reply (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=746696#post746696) to The Edge's whine :)

Nineveh
May 4th, 2005, 08:41 AM
then why use it in your posts ?

that's the other thing - too often you go for the easy cheap shot instead on contributing anything of substance

Easy - just keep being yourself, :loser:

Shoot, you fibbed again about not talking to me didn't you? You are such a tease. You keep making promises then....

Nineveh
May 4th, 2005, 08:43 AM
Their conscience, their choice.


Right! It's not the word that offends. If it is, perhaps it's time to quit being whatever it is the word is describing.

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 08:54 AM
Robin, people basically damn themselves, and it's not by their behavior. It's because they do not accept Christ as savior.

God has given us the knowledge that engaging in homosexual sex is evil. This is why I am wondering that Dave can discern that promiscuous sex is evil, but cannot discern whether homosexual sex is evil or not.

Is promiscuous heterosexual sex evil?
Does that make heterosexual sex evil?

Why is it that so many heteroesexual men brag about how many women they've been with? Isn't that "evil"?
Does that make heterosexuality evil?

Most towns have (and always have had) stripper bars. Men go watch women strip.
Does that make heterosexuality evil?

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 10:20 AM
No, Dave, it makes perfect sense. God does not want us to be hypocritical in our judgements. If we condemn someone who is doing the same things we do, we condemn ourselves.

Also, one who is themselves caught up in a particular form of wickedness cannot clearly recognize the same act in others as evil. A child molester often not see what he is doing as wrong. He often believes that he is doing something loving, and that the child is benefiting from his attentions.

In the same way, someone who is sexually promiscuous does not see that they are harming anyone else, so how can they make a judgement? They have already judged their own behavior to be tolerable, so they will not see others doing the same thing as transgressing.


Someone who has experienced the damage of promiscuity is in the best
position to describe its risks.

Someone who has experienced the trauma of abortion is in the best position
to describe the trauma.

LH is in a great position for describing how homosexuality affects a family,
and I appreciate his witness in this regard.

Dave

Nineveh
May 4th, 2005, 10:26 AM
Dave,
Really now, you would have to be a homosexual or rapist before you could judge these as wrong? Why not just listen to what God has to say to begin with on the subject of sin? He tells us not to do certain things so we won't destroy our lives with them. Yet, you seem to be advocating doing these things before you can tell others God says not to.

Crow
May 4th, 2005, 10:42 AM
Someone who has experienced the damage of promiscuity is in the best
position to describe its risks.

Someone who has experienced the trauma of abortion is in the best position
to describe the trauma.

LH is in a great position for describing how homosexuality affects a family,
and I appreciate his witness in this regard.

Dave
Now how do you reconcile this with the manner in which God tells us that we should judge?

And Dave, what does abortion trauma have to do with whether or not it is wrong to take the life of an unborn human being? Whether it traumatizes the mother or feels good, murder is wrong. If someone is traumatized in the process of killing an innocent human being, it shouldn't even enter in to the judging process. You aren't supposed to murder the innocent!

lighthouse is a great witness regarding the effect of homosexuality on his family. He'd be a heck of a judge too. And do you know why? Because he doesn't engage in homosexual sex. And he can judge wisely because his judgement would not be clouded by guilt.

Hypocrites should not judge. We are to judge wisely. This stuff is so basic.

Caille
May 4th, 2005, 10:46 AM
Someone who has experienced the damage of promiscuity is in the best
position to describe its risks.

Someone who has experienced the trauma of abortion is in the best position
to describe the trauma.

LH is in a great position for describing how homosexuality affects a family,
and I appreciate his witness in this regard.

Dave



Good points Dave - walk a mile in my shoes, right ?

I'm sure some idiot will twist this to make it look like you're supporting sin...

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 10:47 AM
The only people who question the existence of Jesus are a few wacko atheists who think they can change the world if they run their mouths long enough.

To imply that, somehow and in some way, the RCs approve of homosexual behavior as a matter of church policy is simply insane.

By the way, Beanieboy sure would like some social approval for homosexual behavior since he happens to be homosexual. Funny how that works.

I don't need approval.

And approval from the RC church?
I wasn't aware that the RC church was God incarnate.

Crow
May 4th, 2005, 10:51 AM
Is promiscuous heterosexual sex evil?
Does that make heterosexual sex evil?

Why is it that so many heteroesexual men brag about how many women they've been with? Isn't that "evil"?
Does that make heterosexuality evil?

Most towns have (and always have had) stripper bars. Men go watch women strip.
Does that make heterosexuality evil?

Homosexual sex is condemned by God in and of itself. I'm sure you have read that. It doesn't need to be promiscuous to be wicked.

Heterosexual sex is condemned if it occurs outside of marriage. Heterosexual promiscuity is not OK. It is evil too.

The animal kingdom is off-limits too. That also is in and of itself wrong, whether one is faithful to Lassie or cheats with Fifi and Spot. Promiscuity isn't what makes it an issue, any more so than promiscuity makes homosexual sex wrong. It's already wicked to begin with.

Aimiel
May 4th, 2005, 10:53 AM
I don't need approval.

And approval from the RC church?
I wasn't aware that the RC church was God incarnate.You're seeking approval, all the time. That's why you're so polite and seek to 'justify' your sin, by making appeals aimed at Christians who don't understand The Word of God as well as they ought to. No church needs to approve you te enter Heaven, but God does. He does not approve of sin. He gave us The Way (Jesus) out of sin, and if you don't avail yourself of His Help, that is not God's fault. It is no one's but your own.

JoyfulRook
May 4th, 2005, 10:56 AM
CROW... yup he was also insulting to people correct. However... he did not die for us all he was SMOTE for being a rude SON OF GOD.... Lay off the weed.

Is it just me or is there an upsurge in Wiccans lately?

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 10:57 AM
Homosexual sex is condemned by God in and of itself. I'm sure you have read that. It doesn't need to be promiscuous to be wicked.

Heterosexual sex is condemned if it occurs outside of marriage. Heterosexual promiscuity is not OK. It is evil too.

The animal kingdom is off-limits too. That also is in and of itself wrong, whether one is faithful to Lassie or cheats with Fifi and Spot. Promiscuity isn't what makes it an issue.

And that is the point.

If you are going to say: Homosexuality is wrong because of promiscuity, I can point out the same is true of heterosexuality.

So, you have to argue that homosexuality, itself, even in a committed relationship, is wrong. Using promiscuity as a point is something that heterosexuals do as well. (Girls Gone Wild, anyone?)

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 10:58 AM
You're seeking approval, all the time. That's why you're so polite and seek to 'justify' your sin, by making appeals aimed at Christians who don't understand The Word of God as well as they ought to. No church needs to approve you te enter Heaven, but God does. He does not approve of sin. He gave us The Way (Jesus) out of sin, and if you don't avail yourself of His Help, that is not God's fault. It is no one's but your own.

I understand that that is your view.
You have stated that already.
Why is it that you continue to repeat it?

Crow
May 4th, 2005, 11:00 AM
And that is the point.

If you are going to say: Homosexuality is wrong because of promiscuity, I can point out the same is true of heterosexuality.

So, you have to argue that homosexuality, itself, even in a committed relationship, is wrong. Using promiscuity as a point is something that heterosexuals do as well. (Girls Gone Wild, anyone?)

Homosexuality is wrong. In and of itself. And? You have no argument with me there.

Dave might argue with you--he seems to think that if it isn't promiscuous it's acceptable.

Jefferson
May 4th, 2005, 11:24 AM
lighthouse :baby sorry I missed you! I was busy de MOTING my eye thanks for the advice. Now that I can see clearly I still say......YE SHALL NOT JUDGE LEST YE BE JUDGED THYSELF!!! :ha:onchiki, a simple yes or no answer is all I want here. When a Christian has first removed the plank from his own eye and therefore is no longer a hypocrite, is he then allowed to judge his brother according to Matthew 7:1-5? Yes, or no?

Also, aren't you judging us? And doesn't that make you a hypocrite since you don't think people should judge?

Jefferson
May 4th, 2005, 11:26 AM
beanieboy, out of all the avatars you could have chosen, why did you choose a little boy? Does he look cute to you? Just asking.

Caille
May 4th, 2005, 11:31 AM
onchiki, a simple yes or no answer is all I want here. When a Christian has first removed the plank from his own eye and therefore is no longer a hypocrite, is he then allowed to judge his brother according to Matthew 7:1-5? Yes, or no?


Can one remove sin from one's self ? :noway:



Also, aren't you judging us? And doesn't that make you a hypocrite since you don't think people should judge?



More semantic Onanism.. :yawn:

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 11:56 AM
Homosexuality is wrong. In and of itself. And? You have no argument with me there.

Dave might argue with you--he seems to think that if it isn't promiscuous it's acceptable.

I'm simply saying, don't complicate it with issues that can be said of heterosexuals (STD's, child molestation, promiscuity).

JoyfulRook
May 4th, 2005, 12:03 PM
beanieboy, out of all the avatars you could have chosen, why did you choose a little boy? Does he look cute to you? Just asking. :shocked:

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 12:13 PM
onchiki, a simple yes or no answer is all I want here. When a Christian has first removed the plank from his own eye and therefore is no longer a hypocrite, is he then allowed to judge his brother according to Matthew 7:1-5? Yes, or no?

Also, aren't you judging us? And doesn't that make you a hypocrite since you don't think people should judge?

If a christian has removed the mote from his eye, shouldn't he show love, compassion, humility,etc.?
Lack of all of these is a likened to a tree growing out of your eye, and it is much harder to judge rightly, or even, in a loving manner.

It is easy to judge to tear down. It is much harder to judge to edify.

Aimiel
May 4th, 2005, 12:18 PM
I understand that that is your view.
You have stated that already.
Why is it that you continue to repeat it?Simply because you refuse to see, acknowledge or adhere to what is right. It will be repeated over and over, until you get it. It's like the horrible personality that rubs you exactly the wrong way. You will continue to meet people with the same personality, until you allow The Lord to teach you how to deal with those types of people. Until you do, you will encounter them, over and over. If you never grow, then expect to be reminded, constantly, of your stagnation.

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 12:24 PM
beanieboy, out of all the avatars you could have chosen, why did you choose a little boy? Does he look cute to you? Just asking.

I chose beanieboy, because i'm 41, and my favorite cartoon when I was one called Beanie and Cecil.

I use small letters to remind myself of humility.

I chose a boy from the avatars, because Cary Grant seemed weird for a name like beanieboy, as did Superman or Wonderwoman.

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 12:28 PM
Simply because you refuse to see, acknowledge or adhere to what is right. It will be repeated over and over, until you get it. It's like the horrible personality that rubs you exactly the wrong way. You will continue to meet people with the same personality, until you allow The Lord to teach you how to deal with those types of people. Until you do, you will encounter them, over and over. If you never grow, then expect to be reminded, constantly, of your stagnation.

You can repeat it, and I will repeat that you have already said that, I suppose.

Granite
May 4th, 2005, 12:29 PM
Beanie, at this point your critics will go on assuming you were abused, are a potential abuser, or just are lying.

It's impossible for them to think otherwise.

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 12:36 PM
Beanie, at this point your critics will go on assuming you were abused, are a potential abuser, or just are lying.

It's impossible for them to think otherwise.

It's not really that important.
The thread is about christian behavior, actually, not the life and times of beanie. :)
People can say whatever they wish. I know what is true.

I was watching the GLBT Pride parade one year, and there were a couple of guys with big signs of John 3:16 and Leviticus, protesting. Many of the crowd got angry, and people had to hold them back. However, when the Gay Mens Chorus came by, they stopped singing, and instead sang, "Jesus Loves Me, this I know..."

It made the protesters furious.

I guess some people don't want to accept that Jesus loves the whole world, not just the chosen, and that they haven't somehow earned God's love on their own, but because God is kind, and merciful.

Some people want to share the Gospel, but not the love of their God.

JoyfulRook
May 4th, 2005, 12:40 PM
Someone call the Waaaaaaaaaaambulance. :taoist: Quit boohooing :beanboy:

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 12:58 PM
Someone call the Waaaaaaaaaaambulance. :taoist: Quit boohooing :beanboy:

I will weigh your words and consider them for what they are worth.

Namaste

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 01:23 PM
Litehouse....Are you admitting to baiting?
Yes.

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 01:33 PM
lighthouse :baby sorry I missed you! I was busy de MOTING my eye thanks for the advice. Now that I can see clearly I still say......YE SHALL NOT JUDGE LEST YE BE JUDGED THYSELF!!! :ha:
This is just sad.:cry:

You are taking the first verse out of context. And are forgetting that we have all already been judged by God, and found to have fallen short of His glory. And that we all will stand at the seat of judgment one day. And you're missing the clarification that Christ gave in the next verse, that what we use to judge is what we will be judged by. Verse 1 is clarified in verses 1-5. It is not a stand alone verse. If it were, Jesus would not have clarified. Are you really that dense?

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 01:47 PM
Is promiscuous heterosexual sex evil?
Yes.


Does that make heterosexual sex evil?
No.


Why is it that so many heteroesexual men brag about how many women they've been with? Isn't that "evil"?
Yes.


Does that make heterosexuality evil?
No.


Most towns have (and always have had) stripper bars. Men go watch women strip.
Lust=adultery


Does that make heterosexuality evil?
No.

Granite
May 4th, 2005, 01:49 PM
Brandon, where is it specifically written that sex between two unmarried adults is a sin?

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 02:05 PM
What, granite?

Jefferson
May 4th, 2005, 02:58 PM
If a christian has removed the mote from his eye, shouldn't he show love, compassion, humility,etc.?
Lack of all of these is a likened to a tree growing out of your eye, and it is much harder to judge rightly, or even, in a loving manner.

It is easy to judge to tear down. It is much harder to judge to edify.Was that a "yes" or a "no"?

werewolffan98
May 4th, 2005, 03:09 PM
because that would be the same as calling someone a Dago,spick,gook,wop,kike,or the n word so i think that no one should be called a fag.

allsmiles
May 4th, 2005, 03:16 PM
Brandon, where is it specifically written that sex between two unmarried adults is a sin?

That's a good question. I'm assuming Brandon and Lighthouse are one in the same?

Freak
May 4th, 2005, 03:23 PM
Lay off the weed.

Is it just me or is there an upsurge in Wiccans lately?
:shocked:

Granite
May 4th, 2005, 03:25 PM
That's a good question. I'm assuming Brandon and Lighthouse are one in the same?

Yes. I find calling him by his actual name is better than referring to him as

Lighthouse
Lightweight
Dimshack
Dimbulb
Pew groveling Bible thumping Philistine

You get the idea.

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 03:27 PM
Was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Wow. You are a lawyer.

If the person takes the plank (large piece of wood) out of their own eye, then yes, they can then try to remove the mite (dust speck) from another.

If they still have a plank in their eye, but insist that they don't, then the person with the speck in their eye is safer looking for someone else to remove it. Yes or No?

There is a HUGE difference between a plank and a speck: Yes or no?

People claim that if they don't do X, they can judge X (which are the same). But it clearly points out a plank and a speck that are not the same. Yes or no?

This is my understanding of it:
Does it really make sense for Bill, a man who is so overweight that he waddles and takes up two seats on an airplane, to tell an acquaintance, "I don't smoke. You do! That's bad! That's really bad for your lungs!"

Bill is probably going to give himself a heart attack, but he's so worried about smokers, that he doesn't have time to take the plank (being grossly overweight) out of his own eye.
Or closer to the point, he spends time telling smokers not to smoke or that they are harming their health, because he refuses to realize that he has problems of his own, and critisizing the specks of others distracts him from the planks of his own.

Yes or no?

werewolffan98
May 4th, 2005, 03:31 PM
is calling someone a faggot a christ-like thing to do? No because that would be the same as calling someone a Dago,spick,gook,wop,kike,or the n word so i think that no one should be called a fag.

Frank Ernest
May 4th, 2005, 03:34 PM
is calling someone a faggot a christ-like thing to do? No because that would be the same as calling someone a Dago,spick,gook,wop,kike,or the n word so i think that no one should be called a fag.
Please tell me to which ethnic grouping a "faggot" would belong.

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 03:37 PM
werewolffan-
We heard you the first time.:rolleyes:

Agape4Robin
May 4th, 2005, 03:52 PM
Maybe we should all be asking a different question. :think: Like, beanieboy, do you know that homosexual conduct is a sin? I would think that the answer would be yes because you have heard it said over and over that it is, but do you know that it is?

werewolffan98
May 4th, 2005, 03:57 PM
Of course i read somewhere that during the Spanish inquisition that the church burned jews,homosexuals,and protestants at the stake by divine order of the catholic church.

Agape4Robin
May 4th, 2005, 03:58 PM
Of course i read somewhere that during the Spanish inquisition that the church burned jews,homosexuals,and protestants at the stake by divine order of the catholic church.
:rolleyes:

Redfin
May 4th, 2005, 04:09 PM
Please tell me to which ethnic grouping a "faggot" would belong.

Well, the etymology of the word is Old French, so let's pin it on them!

Somehow, it seems appropriate! :chuckle:

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 04:29 PM
Please tell me to which ethnic grouping a "faggot" would belong.

If some one is Italian, there are a Dago, right?
It's just a way to refer to the person as less human.
Why can't you call an Italian an Italian? Because Dago makes you feel superior.

It's pretty simple.

Agape4Robin
May 4th, 2005, 04:33 PM
If some one is Italian, there are a Dago, right?
It's just a way to refer to the person as less human.
Why can't you call an Italian an Italian? Because Dago makes you feel superior.

It's pretty simple.
Beanie, do you know that homosexuality is a sin?

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 04:39 PM
Maybe we should all be asking a different question. :think: Like, beanieboy, do you know that homosexual conduct is a sin? I would think that the answer would be yes because you have heard it said over and over that it is, but do you know that it is?

This is making the thread about me.
You can start a new thread to ask people what they think, but I and everyone else have stated their beliefs about it.

I have said that theologians are torn on the subject (it's isn't black and white).
Some people refuse to even believe that fact.

But the thread is about how christians should behave, even to those who they believe are commiting a sin.

Agape4Robin
May 4th, 2005, 04:40 PM
This is making the thread about me.
You can start a new thread to ask people what they think, but I and everyone else have stated their beliefs about it.

I have said that theologians are torn on the subject (it's isn't black and white).
Some people refuse to even believe that fact.

But the thread is about how christians should behave, even to those who they believe are commiting a sin.
I understand that, but I am asking you a question.

Do you know it is a sin?

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 04:52 PM
I understand that, but I am asking you a question.

Do you know it is a sin?

Do I personally think that it is a sin?
No.

Do I think that it is a sin according to the bible?
Knowing that the word "homosexual" wasn't coined until the 18th century, I have to question that.
Knowing the history of the Greeks, having studied Greek, I would question it again.

I don't think of what we think of as "homosexual" is the same thing as they thought when Leviticus or Romans or whatever was written.

Believe me, as a christian, this was a hard issue to deal with, and I researched it a lot.
I actually moved away from christianity because of the initial callousness people had towards those with AIDS, claiming it was God's punishment, or of telling gay people they couldn't attend their services, but everyone else (people who got drunk, people who had premarital sex - basically ANYONE but homosexuals) could attend.

And I realized that Modern Christianity is so far removed from what Jesus taught, that I asked for God to guide me, and he pointed me towards Buddhism.

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 04:54 PM
btw - now that the poll is up to 37:22, does that make any of the christians who voted Yes, think that maybe, just maybe, I should think about this, and take it in prayer to God?

Agape4Robin
May 4th, 2005, 05:04 PM
Do I personally think that it is a sin?
No.

Do I think that it is a sin according to the bible?
Knowing that the word "homosexual" wasn't coined until the 18th century, I have to question that.
Knowing the history of the Greeks, having studied Greek, I would question it again.

I don't think of what we think of as "homosexual" is the same thing as they thought when Leviticus or Romans or whatever was written.

Believe me, as a christian, this was a hard issue to deal with, and I researched it a lot.
I actually moved away from christianity because of the initial callousness people had towards those with AIDS, claiming it was God's punishment, or of telling gay people they couldn't attend their services, but everyone else (people who got drunk, people who had premarital sex - basically ANYONE but homosexuals) could attend.

And I realized that Modern Christianity is so far removed from what Jesus taught, that I asked for God to guide me, and he pointed me towards Buddhism.
Let me see if I have this right.
You don't think that being "gay" is a sin. Is that because you are?
You don't believe the bible says what it says because you don't agree with it?

I don't agree with those so called christians ostracising AIDS stricken homosexuals. And to call it a punishment from God is hypocrisy. You obviously witnessed the wrong attitudes of some self righteous christians.....pity, but they don't represent all of us.

God pointed you to Buddhism? I don't think so. The 1st commandment says that there are no other gods but Him, christians may change their minds and be contradictory, but not God. Not then, not now, not ever!

beanieboy
May 4th, 2005, 05:23 PM
Let me see if I have this right.
You don't think that being "gay" is a sin. Is that because you are?
You don't believe the bible says what it says because you don't agree with it?

I don't agree with those so called christians ostracising AIDS stricken homosexuals. And to call it a punishment from God is hypocrisy. You obviously witnessed the wrong attitudes of some self righteous christians.....pity, but they don't represent all of us.

God pointed you to Buddhism? I don't think so. The 1st commandment says that there are no other gods but Him, christians may change their minds and be contradictory, but not God. Not then, not now, not ever!

Buddhism doesn't worship Buddha.
Read about it. The majority of it is similar to what Christ taught.

Do I think that being gay isn't a sin because I am? No. Sometimes I smoke. That's bad for my body. I know that. I just do sometimes any way. Sometimes I get angry and use bad language out of anger. Do I think it isn't a sin because I do it? No. I know that it is wrong, and it is bad to let my emotions get the better of me.

But I can't find any negative consequence on being homosexual. None.

Do I believe the bible says it's wrong? From what I've researched, some of it was talking about male protitutes used in temple worship. (Those who want to believe that it is black and white won't admit that, even though it has been researched.)

Do you believe homosexuality as we understand it today is the same way that it was understood then?

Have you ever spent time on a site like www.whosoever.org and read what the other side has to say?

It's more complicated than people are willing to admit.

Delmar
May 4th, 2005, 06:31 PM
Do you believe homosexuality as we understand it today is the same way that it was understood then?
.
There is nothing new under the Sun.

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 06:53 PM
btw - now that the poll is up to 37:22, does that make any of the christians who voted Yes, think that maybe, just maybe, I should think about this, and take it in prayer to God?
No.

If you take out all the non-Christians, the scale would tip the other way. And I think On Fire wanted only Christians to vote on the poll, but that's blown.

God_Is_Truth
May 4th, 2005, 07:31 PM
No.

If you take out all the non-Christians, the scale would tip the other way. And I think On Fire wanted only Christians to vote on the poll, but that's blown.

which of the "no's" aren't christians?

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 07:34 PM
I doubt that many people pray to God and tell Him how righteous they are. If they have come to Christ, they recognize that they are not righteous of their own works, and that they need Him as savior for that very fact.


You need to share this with Nin. She believes that she has no need to ask God
for forgiveness, not ever. If that's not the case, then what's left to pray for? Thanking
God that we're not like those other sinners, that's all...



The dietary laws applied to the dispensation of the Law. As did the hygenic laws. Paul clearly points out that in the dispensation of Grace that sexual immorality is not permissible. That's heterosexual and homosexual immorality. Paul tells us to flee from sexual immorality, don't even eat with a brother who practices it. Hand him over to Satan.

No arguments here. Sexual immorality, hetero or homo, is promiscuous in nature.

Hey Crow, I agree 100% with your post! Halelujia!

Edited: Except for the dispensation stuff. I don't believe God's relationship with humanity
has changed, I don't believe that God has changed. I believe Jesus CHrist came to
help us understand better how God meant for us to understand GOd's Laws and
Scripture. Christ Himself said He came to fulfill the law, not overthrow it. That means
putting it in the right perspective.

Dave

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 07:36 PM
To which you admit asking repentance when you don't bear these fruits.



Yes. Well, forgiveness, actually. Repentence is a much bigger subject.



Mostly because you don't understand law and grace. Most evil is fine by you while you charge God with committing sin.

I don't charge God, I acknowledge God's power and trust that God knows best, in all
things.

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 07:41 PM
Dave,
Really now, you would have to be a homosexual or rapist before you could judge these as wrong? Why not just listen to what God has to say to begin with on the subject of sin? He tells us not to do certain things so we won't destroy our lives with them. Yet, you seem to be advocating doing these things before you can tell others God says not to.


No, I can recognize hurt, God gave me that gift. Rape is a terrible, violent act.

You've never heard the "walk a mile in my shoes?" proverb? ITs completely foreign to you?

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 07:44 PM
There is nothing new under the Sun.

Try drinking milk right from the cow and cold pastuerized milk. Quite a difference...

Delmar
May 4th, 2005, 07:46 PM
Try drinking milk right from the cow and cold pastuerized milk. Quite a difference...
What does that have to do with human behaviour?

BillyBob
May 4th, 2005, 07:46 PM
This thread is a runaway train! :chuckle:

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 07:49 PM
which of the "no's" aren't christians?
Quite a few don't even profess Christianity. Dread Helm listed all the voters, at one point. Some more people have voted since then, though.

Crow
May 4th, 2005, 07:56 PM
No arguments here. Sexual immorality, hetero or homo, is promiscuous in nature.

Hey Crow, I agree 100% with your post! Halelujia!

Edited: Except for the dispensation stuff. I don't believe God's relationship with humanity
has changed, I don't believe that God has changed. I believe Jesus CHrist came to
help us understand better how God meant for us to understand GOd's Laws and
Scripture. Christ Himself said He came to fulfill the law, not overthrow it. That means
putting it in the right perspective.

Dave

I'm glad we can agree on some things. But yikes, look at the one's we don't agree on.

Homosexuality in and of itself is wrong.

God's relationship with us does change when we are saved. Before, we are cut off, outside of His will. Once we are saved, we are His. And Christ came to provide the sacrifice that makes our salvation possible, not to help us understand the Law. That's backwards--the Law was our tutor to understand our need for Christ.

The Law doesn't apply to us as Christians. It has served it's purpose for those who are saved, and still is there for those who are not and need it's lesson.

I know, it's off topic, but I'm getting flashbacks to how methodism inspired me to become an atheist.

God_Is_Truth
May 4th, 2005, 07:58 PM
Quite a few don't even profess Christianity. Dread Helm listed all the voters, at one point. Some more people have voted since then, though.

click the number up by the votes and you can see who voted what. i was asking which people of those specifically were not christian to see if your statement that it would "balance the other way" was true.

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 08:11 PM
Buddhism doesn't worship Buddha.
Read about it. The majority of it is similar to what Christ taught.


And its not necessarily incompatible with being a Christian. Balder has
demonstrated over and over how certain Buddhist teachings strive for the
heart of Christ.



Do I think that being gay isn't a sin because I am? No. Sometimes I smoke. That's bad for my body. I know that. I just do sometimes any way. Sometimes I get angry and use bad language out of anger. Do I think it isn't a sin because I do it? No. I know that it is wrong, and it is bad to let my emotions get the better of me.

But I can't find any negative consequence on being homosexual. None.


I won't agree with you totally here. The concensus among homosexual people that
I know of is that no one in their right mind would choose to become homosexual.
There's alot of pain and seperation experienced by homosexual people and their
families. Granted, this is mostly due to societal prejudice, but not completely.
Homosexuality is an anomally compared to the general population, and this
can cause identity crises not only for homosexual people, but for their families as
well, even the most understanding and accepting families.

God loves gay people, but God bless people with homosexual dispositions who choose
not to act on them, not for themselves and "fear of damnation," but for the people they
love. Denying one's self on behalf of others is a truely Christian sacrifice.

Dave

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 08:15 PM
What does that have to do with human behaviour?

Who pasteurizes milk???? Humans!!!!

Let me ask you this, is there a difference between hiring a prostitute and having
conjugal relations with one's wife? Both hetero sex, sex hasn't changed since
the beginning of time.

Ecumenicist
May 4th, 2005, 08:26 PM
I'm glad we can agree on some things. But yikes, look at the one's we don't agree on.

Homosexuality in and of itself is wrong.

God's relationship with us does change when we are saved. Before, we are cut off, outside of His will.


Then why would the good shephard bother to leave his flock of 99 to find the lost
one? If Christ is to be believed, God loves the lost as much or more than the saved.



Once we are saved, we are His. And Christ came to provide the sacrifice that makes our salvation possible, not to help us understand the Law. That's backwards--the Law was our tutor to understand our need for Christ.


Goes both ways, that's the beauty of it. Yes, teh law informs us of how much we need
Christ. But Christ also came to fulfill the law, He preached the Law, He helped us
understand how we should interpret the law. You may call it a new dispensation, I
call it breathing new life into old laws, Christ called it fulfilling the law.

We commonly understand "eye for an eye" bringing justice to a victim. Christ taught
us that we are convicted so that we may know the hurt we cause others. Eye for an
eye is for the good of the sinner as well. Christ took the physical punishment
on our behalf, but we are still left with teh conviction of the Holy Spirit, which has the
same effect, even more profound. A person struck by the Holy Spirit feels true
contrition, a person who is punished physically may be left with just empty bitterness...
Christ came to fulfill the intent of the law...




The Law doesn't apply to us as Christians. It has served it's purpose for those who are saved, and still is there for those who are not and need it's lesson.

I know, it's off topic, but I'm getting flashbacks to how methodism inspired me to become an atheist.

Oh bunk. THe law applies, what's changed is our motivation, that's what Paul was
trying to say, same as Christ tried to say. We used to obey the law out of fear and duty,
now we obey out of gratitude and love of God. Either way, we're not free to rape and
pillage and murder.

Dave

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 09:00 PM
click the number up by the votes and you can see who voted what. i was asking which people of those specifically were not christian to see if your statement that it would "balance the other way" was true.
No:
Agape4Robin (member.php?u=185), Aimiel (member.php?u=883), allsmiles (member.php?u=4475), avatar382 (member.php?u=2506), beanieboy (member.php?u=85), beefalobilly (member.php?u=4025), Berean Todd (member.php?u=2534), Caille (member.php?u=4457), Caledvwlch (member.php?u=2533), Carver (member.php?u=4489), cattyfan (member.php?u=3121), Chileice (member.php?u=2970), Dave Miller (member.php?u=2781), freelight (member.php?u=1746), God_Is_Truth (member.php?u=2597), granite1010 (member.php?u=2497), Holly (member.php?u=4455), ilyatur (member.php?u=2353), Jabez (member.php?u=3067), jeremiah (member.php?u=76), Jujubee (member.php?u=3284), julie21 (member.php?u=4079), karstkid (member.php?u=2329), ktjo (member.php?u=3815), logos_x (member.php?u=3820), Lovejoy (member.php?u=3214), lulu (member.php?u=4127), On Fire (member.php?u=3856), Redfin (member.php?u=3593), seagull (member.php?u=4541), Sold Out (member.php?u=4346), SUTG (member.php?u=4556), temple 2000 (member.php?u=20), The Edge (member.php?u=51), Thia (member.php?u=4313), wickwoman (member.php?u=466), Ya'nar#1 (member.php?u=781)

Yes:
aikido7 (member.php?u=1883), BillyBob (member.php?u=1299), Christine (member.php?u=2800), Clete (member.php?u=2589), Crow (member.php?u=224), deardelmar (member.php?u=1209), docrob57 (member.php?u=4169), Dread Helm (member.php?u=3644), Emo (member.php?u=4271), Freak (member.php?u=40), Free-Agent Smith (member.php?u=2834), Lighthouse (member.php?u=2492), Lucky (member.php?u=2818), Mr. 5020 (member.php?u=1584), Poly (member.php?u=1559), ShadowMaid (member.php?u=2399), Shimei (member.php?u=112), SOTK (member.php?u=2509), the Sibbie (member.php?u=2714), Turbo (member.php?u=800), Wamba the Fool (member.php?u=3807), wholearmor (member.php?u=1842)

Everybody who voted yes professes to be a Christian. Although, I'm surprised aikido voted yes.:confused::liberals:

Anyway, that's 22.

Out of the people who voted no, there are eight people I know, for certain, that do not profess Christianity. Some I don't know where they stand. And out of the people who actually stand for the word of God, as far as I've seen, there are only fourteen of them that voted no, including you. And out of the others who profess Christ, that I know of, there are four whose views of God have been questioned by quite a few. There are 24 that I believe profess Christianity. So I guess it wouldn't tip the other way, but it would be closer. And if you removed professing Christians who didn't think homosexuality was a sin, there would be less.

Crow
May 4th, 2005, 09:45 PM
Then why would the good shephard bother to leave his flock of 99 to find the lost
one? If Christ is to be believed, God loves the lost as much or more than the saved.

God desires that all come to Him. But the lost are still not saved.


Goes both ways, that's the beauty of it. Yes, teh law informs us of how much we need
Christ. But Christ also came to fulfill the law, He preached the Law, He helped us
understand how we should interpret the law. You may call it a new dispensation, I
call it breathing new life into old laws, Christ called it fulfilling the law.

Matt 5
17"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

The Law is fulfilled and the Law will not pass until heaven and earth pass away.
The Law is fulfilled for those who accept Christ as Savior.
All else are still under the Law.



Christ came to fulfill the intent of the law...


Galatians 3:23-25
before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Christ came so that mankind could be saved by grace through faith. His perfect sacrifice was the only one which could accomplish this. Christ is the only one who can save anyone. The Law was there to as a tool, a tutor to accomplish this, not the other way around. The Law is fulfilled when a person accepts Christ. He is the whole reason for the Law, not the other way around.


Oh bunk. THe law applies, what's changed is our motivation, that's what Paul was
trying to say, same as Christ tried to say. We used to obey the law out of fear and duty,
now we obey out of gratitude and love of God. Either way, we're not free to rape and
pillage and murder.

Dave
Romans 6:14
14For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

Romans 11:6
And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace.

We are not free to rape, pillage, and murder, or to be immoral. These things are wicked and were wicked before the Law was given. The wickedness for which God destroyed the majority of mankind in the flood occurred prior to the Law being given. It was wrong for Cain to slay Abel prior to the Law being given.

Dave, if y'all want to discuss this stuff, I'll be happy to start a thread. Just let me know. I don't want to hijack this one.

BillyBob
May 4th, 2005, 09:51 PM
Although, I'm surprised aikido voted yes.:confused::liberals:


Yeah, he must have hit the wrong button, he thought it said 'Hillary for President'.


Crack does that to ya.....:dizzy:

Lighthouse
May 4th, 2005, 11:50 PM
God desires that all come to Him. But the lost are still not saved.



Matt 5
17"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

The Law is fulfilled and the Law will not pass until heaven and earth pass away.
The Law is fulfilled for those who accept Christ as Savior.
All else are still under the Law.



Galatians 3:23-25
before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Christ came so that mankind could be saved by grace through faith. His perfect sacrifice was the only one which could accomplish this. Christ is the only one who can save anyone. The Law was there to as a tool, a tutor to accomplish this, not the other way around. The Law is fulfilled when a person accepts Christ. He is the whole reason for the Law, not the other way around.


Romans 6:14
14For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

Romans 11:6
And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace.

We are not free to rape, pillage, and murder, or to be immoral. These things are wicked and were wicked before the Law was given. The wickedness for which God destroyed the majority of mankind in the flood occurred prior to the Law being given. It was wrong for Cain to slay Abel prior to the Law being given.

:first:SPOTD (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=747564&postcount=1)

Ninjashadow
May 5th, 2005, 12:59 AM
I voted yes. The reason I voted yes is because of the words Jesus spoke in Matthew 23:33: "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"

Calling someone a snake or a viper was just as bad back then as calling a homosexual a "faggot" is today. Reading that verse in context, you can tell that Jesus wasn't being lovey dovey. Had he been, he would been saying something like, "You silly guys! You crazy people! You might not go to Heaven."

But He didn't. He called them what they were. I sure can't think of anything more Christ like than basically repeating His words.

Lighthouse
May 5th, 2005, 01:10 AM
I voted yes. The reason I voted yes is because of the words Jesus spoke in Matthew 23:33: "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"

Calling someone a snake or a viper was just as bad back then as calling a homosexual a "faggot" is today. Reading that verse in context, you can tell that Jesus wasn't being lovey dovey. Had he been, he would been saying something like, "You silly guys! You crazy people! You might not go to Heaven."

But He didn't. He called them what they were. I sure can't think of anything more Christ like than basically repeating His words.
:BRAVO:

Ninjashadow
May 5th, 2005, 01:16 AM
That last part of His words is a very good question. "How will you escape being condemned to hell?" Let's ask a homosexual that and see what the reply would be.

Lighthouse
May 5th, 2005, 01:29 AM
:chuckle:

Frank Ernest
May 5th, 2005, 04:51 AM
I voted yes. The reason I voted yes is because of the words Jesus spoke in Matthew 23:33: "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"

Calling someone a snake or a viper was just as bad back then as calling a homosexual a "faggot" is today. Reading that verse in context, you can tell that Jesus wasn't being lovey dovey. Had he been, he would been saying something like, "You silly guys! You crazy people! You might not go to Heaven."

But He didn't. He called them what they were. I sure can't think of anything more Christ like than basically repeating His words.
I've followed the conversations and arguments. Now I vote.

Frank Ernest
May 5th, 2005, 04:58 AM
Oh, I have no problem with name-calling.
:darwinsm: You and me both, Bro' :BillyBob:!

There would be no flavor in a world where "colorful metaphors" (See Spock, Star Trk IV) are prohibited.

Come to think of it, that's the world of the lie-berals who push the pansyfied version of Jesus. Colorless, odorless, tasteless, a bland sameness about anything and everything. :vomit:

julie21
May 5th, 2005, 06:03 AM
I voted yes. The reason I voted yes is because of the words Jesus spoke in Matthew 23:33: "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"

Calling someone a snake or a viper was just as bad back then as calling a homosexual a "faggot" is today. Reading that verse in context, you can tell that Jesus wasn't being lovey dovey. Had he been, he would been saying something like, "You silly guys! You crazy people! You might not go to Heaven."

But He didn't. He called them what they were. I sure can't think of anything more Christ like than basically repeating His words.

That is interesting that you say back then, calling someone a 'snake' or 'viper' was just as bad as calling someone a 'faggot'' nowadays. Have you evidence for that Ninja?
Sincerely interested in your arrival at that conclusion and the evidence for it.
Hey, if you'd like to be Christ-like, and basically repeat His words, then call homosexuals snakes or vipers.;)



Good to see that the 'yes' camp have employed people on the campaign trail.

On Fire
May 5th, 2005, 06:54 AM
Do I personally think that it is a sin?
No.

Do I think that it is a sin according to the bible?
Knowing that the word "homosexual" wasn't coined until the 18th century, I have to question that. Knowing the history of the Greeks, having studied Greek, I would question it again.

I don't think of what we think of as "homosexual" is the same thing as they thought when Leviticus or Romans or whatever was written.
I think we've learned that it doesn't matter what you call it - men who prefer sexual relations with other men is an abomination.



Believe me, as a christian, this was a hard issue to deal with, and I researched it a lot.
I actually moved away from christianity because of the initial callousness people had towards those with AIDS, claiming it was God's punishment, or of telling gay people they couldn't attend their services, but everyone else (people who got drunk, people who had premarital sex - basically ANYONE but homosexuals) could attend.

And I realized that Modern Christianity is so far removed from what Jesus taught, that I asked for God to guide me, and he pointed me towards Buddhism.

That is a lie. God would never push you away.

When are you going to stop blaming PEOPLE and start considering your personal relationship with JESUS?

beanieboy
May 5th, 2005, 07:02 AM
No.

If you take out all the non-Christians, the scale would tip the other way. And I think On Fire wanted only Christians to vote on the poll, but that's blown.

Yeah.
I thought about that, and thought that I should remove my vote.
Is there anyway to make it a Christian poll only?

But still, I think that No's almost double the yes's, and I find it hard to believe that there are that many non-christians coming to TOL.

On Fire
May 5th, 2005, 07:05 AM
I assure you that the YES and NO votes are not split by Christian and Non-Christian.

beanieboy
May 5th, 2005, 07:11 AM
The Law doesn't apply to us as Christians. It has served it's purpose for those who are saved, and still is there for those who are not and need it's lesson.


Yeah, you are getting off topic, but I personally think we have talked homosexuality to death.

That said, how can the law be for the unsaved? In other words, how can the law be for those that don't believe it, and not be for those who believe it?
And doesn't that, in some sense, mean that christians, then, have a liscence to do whatever they want, because they are saved, because they are above the law?

(Yes, I know, we can start a new thread. :) )

beanieboy
May 5th, 2005, 07:41 AM
I voted yes. The reason I voted yes is because of the words Jesus spoke in Matthew 23:33: "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"

Calling someone a snake or a viper was just as bad back then as calling a homosexual a "faggot" is today. Reading that verse in context, you can tell that Jesus wasn't being lovey dovey. Had he been, he would been saying something like, "You silly guys! You crazy people! You might not go to Heaven."

But He didn't. He called them what they were. I sure can't think of anything more Christ like than basically repeating His words.

Again, you take it out of context. Why am I surprised.
He was yelling at the leaders of the Temple who were blind guides, and therefore, claiming to teach people the law and the way of God, but doing the opposite.

He wasn't saying this to the prostitutes, or tax collectors, or any of those referred to as "sinners."

beanieboy
May 5th, 2005, 07:50 AM
That last part of His words is a very good question. "How will you escape being condemned to hell?" Let's ask a homosexual that and see what the reply would be.

(Sigh).

How will I "escape hell" as in that verse?
Let's "twist the scriptures" and look at who Jesus is speaking to, and why:



28Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
29Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
32Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
33Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?


It says that he is talking to the Pharisees and scribes, people who claim to worship God, who on the outside, study the law, worship God, go to temple, but inside, are evil.

So, I would answer, he isn't talking about me, dude. He's talking to those that are hypocrites, specifically, those who say one thing, and do another, those who claim to love God, but act malicious against their neighbor, those, those who say they believe in the bible, then twist it, and pretend that a Pharisee and a Scribe in the times of Jesus, who had seats of honor, were not thought of as sinners, and respected, is the same as a homosexual today.

In other words, how can you escape the blame for your blatant attempt at misrepresenting scripture, and misportraying God willfully?

Servo
May 5th, 2005, 08:32 AM
It seems this thread is going to have a longer life than most homos.

Granite
May 5th, 2005, 08:54 AM
It seems this thread is going to have a longer life than most homos.

:yawn:

How many of you homophobes even KNOW a homosexual? Talk to one? Are FRIENDS with one?

What a joke.

On Fire
May 5th, 2005, 11:32 AM
:yawn:

How many of you homophobes even KNOW a homosexual? Talk to one? Are FRIENDS with one?

What a joke.
I lived next door to one. He was married at the time, got a divorce, lived the deathstyle and died of AIDS.

I know several guys who struggle with the temptation (sexual addiction) but refuse to bow down to it. The number of men walking around in bondage to various sexual sins would probably blow your mind. Like the drunkard who thinks he doesn't have a problem, sexual sins are even easier to hide and therefore deny.

wickwoman
May 5th, 2005, 11:39 AM
I think it's pretty obvious that Dave was merely pointing out that acts have consequences. I don't believe in sin as a concept but karma is perfectly reasonable. It shows us that what we do comes back to us. This is Biblical and there is no need of eternal hellfire for people to reap what they sow. It comes back to them in this life.

Homosexuality is nothing more than a genetic abberance which requires no penalty or punishment. The idea that being born a certain way is sinful is ridiculous.

On Fire
May 5th, 2005, 11:46 AM
The idea that being born a certain way is sinful is ridiculous.
Everyone is born a certain way. Has nothing to do with it.

God tells us what is sinful. Homosexuality is a sinful abomination.

Granite
May 5th, 2005, 12:03 PM
I lived next door to one. He was married at the time, got a divorce, lived the deathstyle and died of AIDS.

I know several guys who struggle with the temptation (sexual addiction) but refuse to bow down to it. The number of men walking around in bondage to various sexual sins would probably blow your mind. Like the drunkard who thinks he doesn't have a problem, sexual sins are even easier to hide and therefore deny.

But sexual addiction doesn't equal homosexuality. And I agree, most guys probably have more issues than you'd think. Our nature, man.

On Fire
May 5th, 2005, 12:09 PM
Homosexuality is a sexual addiction.

One Eyed Jack
May 5th, 2005, 12:55 PM
:yawn:

How many of you homophobes even KNOW a homosexual?

I wouldn't call myself a homophobe, but I know quite a few.


Talk to one?

Often.


Are FRIENDS with one?

My best friend struggles with bisexuality -- does that count?


What a joke.

What's the punchline?

Granite
May 5th, 2005, 12:56 PM
Homosexuality is a sexual addiction.

I'd say preference. Maybe hair splitting.

JoyfulRook
May 5th, 2005, 01:01 PM
Let me see if I have this right.
You don't think that being "gay" is a sin. Is that because you are? A4R: He's a faggot and he loves himself for it.

Aimiel
May 5th, 2005, 01:05 PM
Queers are todays hypocrite, because they want 'tolerance' from law-abiding people who don't approve of queer behavior, who believe that allowing queers to be tolerated is tantamount to complete rebellion against God, nature and every living soul under the current rule-of-law in our society. The hypocrite is the one who is violating himself, his victims, being violated by his 'lover' and wants to vomit his lack of morals onto us, and make us partakers of his sin. He wants society's approval, because he knows, in his heart, that what he is doing is wrong. He is worse than a hypocrite, he wants to make hypocrites out of everyone else on the earth.

Aimiel
May 5th, 2005, 01:07 PM
Put me in the 'heteronorm' column. A 'heteronorm' is someone who believes that someone who acts queer is a queer person.

Lighthouse
May 5th, 2005, 03:41 PM
I assure you that the YES and NO votes are not split by Christian and Non-Christian.
If we removed all those who do not profess Christianity, what do you think the margin would be?

Agape4Robin
May 5th, 2005, 04:20 PM
I think it's pretty obvious that Dave was merely pointing out that acts have consequences. I don't believe in sin as a concept but karma is perfectly reasonable. It shows us that what we do comes back to us. This is Biblical and there is no need of eternal hellfire for people to reap what they sow. It comes back to them in this life.

Homosexuality is nothing more than a genetic abberance which requires no penalty or punishment. The idea that being born a certain way is sinful is ridiculous.
Oh please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Being born that way? No one is born gay!

We are all born with a sinful nature, and that nature takes hold of people differently depending on their weaknesses. We have the ability to chose wether to turn from it or embrace it, but the only thing we are born with is the propensity be tempted and to sin.
Check out www.exodus-international.org and you will see that homosexuality is a sin that can be changed, through Christ.

Agape4Robin
May 5th, 2005, 04:27 PM
Buddhism doesn't worship Buddha.
Read about it. The majority of it is similar to what Christ taught.

Do I think that being gay isn't a sin because I am? No. Sometimes I smoke. That's bad for my body. I know that. I just do sometimes any way. Sometimes I get angry and use bad language out of anger. Do I think it isn't a sin because I do it? No. I know that it is wrong, and it is bad to let my emotions get the better of me.

But I can't find any negative consequence on being homosexual. None.

Do I believe the bible says it's wrong? From what I've researched, some of it was talking about male protitutes used in temple worship. (Those who want to believe that it is black and white won't admit that, even though it has been researched.)

Do you believe homosexuality as we understand it today is the same way that it was understood then?

Have you ever spent time on a site like www.whosoever.org and read what the other side has to say?

It's more complicated than people are willing to admit.
Similarity to what Christianity teaches, is another word for counterfeit. The Jews were given the word of God first, then the gentiles through Christ were grafted onto the tree. Buddhism is a false religion that teaches false hope that you will go on after death, but the only thing that will await you after death is hell if you cling to this false religion all because you want to justify your pet sin and make it ok for you in your head.

Temple prostitutes? Yeah, ok.....go with that. I guess it satisfies your conscience so that you don't have to face God in your defiance. Keep in mind that you will face Him, and when you do, you will be without excuse.

I feel sorry for you and I will pray for you.

Lighthouse
May 5th, 2005, 04:41 PM
So, A4R, what do you think of rebellious people who deny, and defy God, and His rule, constantly, in the face of the witness of all types of Christians, and refuse the truth?

Ninjashadow
May 5th, 2005, 05:04 PM
That is interesting that you say back then, calling someone a 'snake' or 'viper' was just as bad as calling someone a 'faggot'' nowadays. Have you evidence for that Ninja?

Calling someone a viper was the same as calling them evil. To a pharisee that would be very derogatory seeing as how the pharisees saw themselves as being "holier than thou."


Sincerely interested in your arrival at that conclusion and the evidence for it.
Hey, if you'd like to be Christ-like, and basically repeat His words, then call homosexuals snakes or vipers.;)

It's common sense, J21. Jesus called an evil person evil and if I want to be Christ like, I'll call a homosexual faggot.




Good to see that the 'yes' camp have employed people on the campaign trail.

Perhaps that's because we aren't antiquated in our beliefs.

Ninjashadow
May 5th, 2005, 05:08 PM
Again, you take it out of context. Why am I surprised.
He was yelling at the leaders of the Temple who were blind guides, and therefore, claiming to teach people the law and the way of God, but doing the opposite.

He wasn't saying this to the prostitutes, or tax collectors, or any of those referred to as "sinners."

I'm not surprised that you are trying to exuse your lifestyle. Ok, Jesus was calling the pharisees vipers, I agree with that. However, the prostitutes and whatnots changed their ways and began following Jesus. Homosexuals do not. Not the same thing.

Agape4Robin
May 5th, 2005, 06:21 PM
So, A4R, what do you think of rebellious people who deny, and defy God, and His rule, constantly, in the face of the witness of all types of Christians, and refuse the truth?
Like I said at the end of my last post.......You will have to face God one day and when you do, you will be without excuse.

What I think about the people themselves is irrelevant. I can't save them and I can't condemn them, but Jesus Christ can.

Caille
May 6th, 2005, 09:28 AM
Yes. I find calling him by his actual name is better than referring to him as

Lighthouse
Lightweight
Dimshack
Dimbulb
Pew groveling Bible thumping Philistine

You get the idea.


:chuckle:

Didja ever see the Monty Python skit about the game show where they were trying to come up with derogatory names for people from Belgium ?
Offered were:

the Phlegms
the Sprouts
I can't think of anything more derogatory than "people from Belgium"
and the winner was...
miserable fat Belgian bastards

Caille
May 6th, 2005, 09:39 AM
Believe me, as a christian, this was a hard issue to deal with, and I researched it a lot.
I actually moved away from christianity because of the initial callousness people had towards those with AIDS, claiming it was God's punishment, or of telling gay people they couldn't attend their services, but everyone else (people who got drunk, people who had premarital sex - basically ANYONE but homosexuals) could attend.

And I realized that Modern Christianity is so far removed from what Jesus taught, that I asked for God to guide me, and he pointed me towards Buddhism.



Beanie - not the majority, just the noisy ones - you know, clanging gongs and all that....




BTW - I liked the old avatar

beanieboy
May 6th, 2005, 09:55 AM
Similarity to what Christianity teaches, is another word for counterfeit. The Jews were given the word of God first, then the gentiles through Christ were grafted onto the tree. Buddhism is a false religion that teaches false hope that you will go on after death, but the only thing that will await you after death is hell if you cling to this false religion all because you want to justify your pet sin and make it ok for you in your head.

Temple prostitutes? Yeah, ok.....go with that. I guess it satisfies your conscience so that you don't have to face God in your defiance. Keep in mind that you will face Him, and when you do, you will be without excuse.

I feel sorry for you and I will pray for you.

I appreciate your prayers.
If I am wrong, I assume that your God will lead me in the error of my ways.

I don't think, however, that similarity is the same thing as conterfeit.

For example, Buddhism teaches that you are to return curse with blessing.
Is that counterfeit, simply because it agrees with christianity?

Ecumenicist
May 6th, 2005, 09:55 AM
Beanie - not the majority, just the noisy ones - you know, clanging gongs and all that....

BTW - I liked the old avatar

I like this one "so long and thanx for all the fish!"

Agape4Robin
May 6th, 2005, 01:20 PM
I appreciate your prayers.
If I am wrong, I assume that your God will lead me in the error of my ways.

I don't think, however, that similarity is the same thing as conterfeit.

For example, Buddhism teaches that you are to return curse with blessing.
Is that counterfeit, simply because it agrees with christianity?
Christ taught nothing new except the fact that He came to be the long awaited Jewish messiah. Buddah was not ignorant of the old testament prophets and teachings. Which is spiritual truth. God has placed within every human the desire to know God and to worship Him, but satan twists and turns this desire to please the flesh. Every human being worships someone or something.
Faith requires that we trust in God and His goodness. Not ourselves or others. Jesus said that we should put on the mind of a child. That is trusting God unconditionally. It's not easy to do. And it can seem complicated, but trust in Jesus. Let Him guide you and heal you. Be aware that there is an enemy of your soul who's ultimate goal is to defy God and destroy His creation.....you! But be encouraged, Christ has already defeated him, and when you trust Jesus, you will be better equipped to resist satan's attacks.

Beanieboy, I will continue to pray for you. You seem like a great guy and I would like to see you in heaven one day and rejoice with you over what Christ did for us!

Lighthouse
May 7th, 2005, 07:07 AM
Like I said at the end of my last post.......You will have to face God one day and when you do, you will be without excuse.

What I think about the people themselves is irrelevant. I can't save them and I can't condemn them, but Jesus Christ can.
:yawn:

1] If they don't know why they need Jesus, shouldn't you tell them?
2] Without excuse for what?
3] People condemn themselves, by denying Christ.

Agape4Robin
May 7th, 2005, 08:37 AM
:yawn:

1] If they don't know why they need Jesus, shouldn't you tell them?
2] Without excuse for what?
3] People condemn themselves, by denying Christ.
I think maybe you should wake up :Brandon: and actually read what I said. :readthis:

For what? :bang: Denying Christ..... :duh:

People may condemn themselves,( that's true see John 3:18) but like I said, What I think about them is irrelevant. I can't save them nor condemn them, but Christ can.

Me being abrasive or condescending is not going to reach them. It's not like their going to say, "Hmmm......she's being a jerk. :think: Maybe I am going to hell!! :noway: Wow, I should change my ways and get right with God!" :thumb:
:nono: :rolleyes:

P. S. Why are you so against me? :confused:

Caledvwlch
May 7th, 2005, 08:59 AM
I think maybe you should wake up :Brandon: and actually read what I said. :readthis:

For what? :bang: Denying Christ..... :duh:

People may condemn themselves,( that's true see John 3:18) but like I said, What I think about them is irrelevant. I can't save them nor condemn them, but Christ can.

Me being abrasive or condescending is not going to reach them. It's not like their going to say, "Hmmm......she's being a jerk. :think: Maybe I am going to hell!! :noway: Wow, I should change my ways and get right with God!" :thumb:
:nono: :rolleyes:

P. S. Why are you so against me? :confused:
He needs someone to pick on...

Agape4Robin
May 7th, 2005, 09:01 AM
He needs someone to pick on...
well then he should change his avatar to like.....Dracula or something.....he just sucks the life out...... :bang:

Caledvwlch
May 7th, 2005, 09:12 AM
well then he should change his avatar to like.....Dracula or something.....he just sucks the life out...... :bang:
He sucks at life?

Agape4Robin
May 7th, 2005, 09:15 AM
He sucks at life?
no....................... :bang:

Oy.....nevermind! :doh:

Caledvwlch
May 7th, 2005, 09:20 AM
I know what you're saying, Robin. He's not a terribly nice guy on the forum. He may be great in person, but we wouldn't know, would we?

Agape4Robin
May 7th, 2005, 09:49 AM
I know what you're saying, Robin. He's not a terribly nice guy on the forum. He may be great in person, but we wouldn't know, would we?
:think: I guess not!

Lighthouse
May 7th, 2005, 04:43 PM
I think maybe you should wake up :Brandon: and actually read what I said. :readthis:

For what? :bang: Denying Christ..... :duh:

People may condemn themselves,( that's true see John 3:18) but like I said, What I think about them is irrelevant. I can't save them nor condemn them, but Christ can.

Me being abrasive or condescending is not going to reach them. It's not like their going to say, "Hmmm......she's being a jerk. :think: Maybe I am going to hell!! :noway: Wow, I should change my ways and get right with God!" :thumb:
:nono: :rolleyes:

P. S. Why are you so against me? :confused:
I have not denied Christ. So what exactly is it that I do not have an excuse for?

I was agreeing that we can not condemn anyone. And Christ doesn't condemn people either. They condemn themselves!

So, um, why was Jesus abrasive? And why did Nicodemus, one of the people He was abrasive to, come to Him?:think:

I'm not against you. I disagree with you, and I will continue to, unless one of us changes our mind. Seeing as how I changed mine about a year ago, I don't think it'll be me.:nono:

Lighthouse
May 7th, 2005, 04:47 PM
I know what you're saying, Robin. He's not a terribly nice guy on the forum. He may be great in person, but we wouldn't know, would we?
You could ask Jefferson.

Agape4Robin
May 7th, 2005, 04:59 PM
QUOTE=Lighthouse I have not denied Christ. So what exactly is it that I do not have an excuse for?
NOT YOU! Those who deny Christ! Sheesh! :rolleyes:

I was agreeing that we can not condemn anyone. And Christ doesn't condemn people either. They condemn themselves!

And I agreed, I think you misunderstand me. I am not always the most eloquent writer!

So, um, why was Jesus abrasive? And why did Nicodemus, one of the people He was abrasive to, come to Him?:think:
Jesus is Jesus, and I am who I am. I wasn't talking about Jesus in that context, I was talking about my views.


I'm not against you. I disagree with you, and I will continue to, unless one of us changes our mind. Seeing as how I changed mine about a year ago, I don't think it'll be me.:nono:
:think:

Lighthouse
May 7th, 2005, 05:13 PM
Do you want to be Christ-like, Robin?

Agape4Robin
May 7th, 2005, 05:14 PM
Do you want to be Christ-like, Robin?
It is my heart's desire!
Are you saying that I'm not?

Lighthouse
May 7th, 2005, 05:31 PM
If Jesus being abrasive, and condescending reached people, and you don't want to be abrasive or condescending, what am I supposed to think that means?

drbrumley
May 7th, 2005, 05:33 PM
I think maybe you should wake up :Brandon: and actually read what I said. :readthis:

For what? :bang: Denying Christ..... :duh:

People may condemn themselves,( that's true see John 3:18) but like I said, What I think about them is irrelevant. I can't save them nor condemn them, but Christ can.

Me being abrasive or condescending is not going to reach them. It's not like their going to say, "Hmmm......she's being a jerk. :think: Maybe I am going to hell!! :noway: Wow, I should change my ways and get right with God!" :thumb:
:nono: :rolleyes:

P. S. Why are you so against me? :confused:


Lighthouse is one of the better posters concerning truth on this board.

Like I have mentioned many a time Agape, being NICE to these folks who flaunt thier rebellion and sin in our face, is just plain wrong. It is wrong, cause these people are wanting acceptance. They want us to accept thier sin so they can continue in it. This is the problem. You CANNOT take the sin away from a sinner. It just can't be done. I will leave you this quote from a famous pastor.


An absolute law that ignorant people use to determine all the dealings with other people. We cannot criticize, judge, condemn Therefore, those people will never repent.

God does not act like that. Love is patient, but aren't there many times in the bible where God says he has exhausted his patience and he will judge. When He opens the earth and sends someone down to hell, he is not being patient and loving to that person. He wants us to conform to his image and he tells us we have to judge.

drbrumley
May 7th, 2005, 05:35 PM
Hate The Sin But Love The Sinner


Technically, this saying makes a distinction that one cannot make because it is the heart of the person who is doing the sin. Proverbs 23:7, "For as a man thinks in his heart, so is he." The kidnapper is the problem, not the skin on his hands that picks up the kids. Romans 12:9, "Let love be without hypocrisy, abhor what is evil." You can love hypocritically and we shouldn't do that. If you go to homos and just "love them," your love is hypocritical and your love is destroying them.

Agape4Robin
May 7th, 2005, 05:38 PM
If Jesus being abrasive, and condescending reached people, and you don't want to be abrasive or condescending, what am I supposed to think that means?
I don't think we see Jesus the same way. While He was not tolerant of sin, he wasn't a jerk either. But being God in the flesh, He had divine authority and could see the very heart of a man. We see the outer shell of the man, and his actions,but not the heart.....big difference.

Lovejoy
May 7th, 2005, 05:40 PM
Maybe being nice is wrong, but merciful isn't. Robin never said she accepted the sin, she just wanted to handle the individual a little different. Some of us are called to be the disciplinarians, and some of us are called to nurture. I have seen mercy be just as (if not more) convicting than criticism, as long as the person knows that the mercy is in spite of the sin, not because of it. Paul was clear that our gifts differ as our body parts differ. We should not repress one gift in favor of another.

drbrumley
May 7th, 2005, 05:41 PM
We see the outer shell of the man, and his actions,but not the heart.....big difference.

I think the above quations disprove this theory.

Lighthouse
May 7th, 2005, 05:41 PM
Hate The Sin But Love The Sinner
:thumb:


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to drbrumley again.
:sozo2: