PDA

View Full Version : Is calling Beanieboy a . . .



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

On Fire
April 27th, 2005, 11:45 AM
Beanieboy continues to complain that the so-called Christians here are not very Christ-like when they call him names like "faggot". I think he's right. I also think he asks for it by continuing to claim that homosexuality is not a sin. Maybe if we agree with him about the name calling we could get him to stop complaingin about the SYMPTOMS and look at the CAUSE.

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 11:47 AM
I thought it was nothing other than accurate to call a homo a faggot. :confused:

On Fire
April 27th, 2005, 11:49 AM
Yes, there are lots of synonyms for homo but we're talking about name-calling in general.

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 11:52 AM
Oh, I have no problem with name-calling.

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 11:53 AM
It depends on whether he is a faggot or not.

Clete
April 27th, 2005, 11:54 AM
Beanieboy continues to complain that the so-called Christians here are not very Christ-like when they call him names like "faggot". I think he's right. I also think he asks for it by continuing to claim that homosexuality is not a sin. Maybe if we agree with him about the name calling we could get him to stop complaingin about the SYMPTOMS and look at the CAUSE.

A Christian attitude toward homoism should be focused in three areas...

Christians should press for the recriminalization of homos; they should be executed upon conviction.
There should be a very staunch social stigma attached to being a homo.
Homos should repent of their preversion.

It should be in that order as they effect fewer individual people as you go down the list.

The point being that there is a lot more at stake than having some pervert like me. The very fabric of our society is at stake. The homo's feelings be damned becuase if they do not repent, not only will their souls will be damned but so will this nation be also.

Resting in Him,
Clete

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 11:55 AM
It depends on whether he is a faggot or not.


:darwinsm:

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 11:57 AM
Depnds on if you want to bring him to Christ or drive him further?

Aimiel
April 27th, 2005, 11:58 AM
I don't think we ought to call people who act queerly names, but I also don't think that we need to acquiesce to politically 'correct' names or catch-phrases. Pro-choice is another name for murder. Calling a queer a gay or a homosexual is winking at their sin. We don't need to do that, any more than we need to call stealing, "extreme discounting." Those who sin, no matter what the sin is, have consequences for that sin, and, except they repent, will be judged for it. Too many Christians look for ways to 'fit in' with the world, and have their morals compromised, whether or not they realize it.

JoyfulRook
April 27th, 2005, 12:00 PM
It depends on whether he is a faggot or not. That's what I was going to say.

And he is a :flamer: .

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 12:02 PM
Depnds on if you want to bring him to Christ or drive him further?


Those penguins are mesmerizing. :dizzy:

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 12:05 PM
Depnds on if you want to bring him to Christ or drive him further?

Why wouldn't he want to come to Christ? Then he could call faggots, faggots, too.

Poly
April 27th, 2005, 12:08 PM
A Christian attitude toward homoism should be focused in three areas...

Christians should press for the recriminalization of homos; they should be executed upon conviction.
There should be a very staunch social stigma attached to being a homo.
Homos should repent of their preversion.

It should be in that order as they effect fewer individual people as you go down the list.

The point being that there is a lot more at stake than having some pervert like me. The very fabric of our society is at stake. The homo's feelings be damned becuase if they do not repent, not only will their souls will be damned but so will this nation be also.

Resting in Him,
Clete

:up:

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 12:09 PM
Why wouldn't he want to come to Christ? Then he could call faggots, faggots, too.
In my opion thats not the right approach..

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 12:11 PM
In my opion thats not the right approach..

So what do you call faggots?

Clete
April 27th, 2005, 12:11 PM
Depnds on if you want to bring him to Christ or drive him further?

Exactly! It also depends on how many homos you want in your society as well as how many child molesters and serial murderers, etc.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 12:12 PM
So what do you call faggots?

Gay,but in the context of this thread it seems calling someone faggot is more than just a term its a insult.Wouldnt you agree?

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 12:16 PM
Gay,but in the context of this thread it seems calling someone faggot is more than just a term its a insult.Wouldnt you agree?

Calling them gay is an insult to all truly happy people, wouldn't you agree? (Actually, I prefer calling faggots disgusting perverts.) How gay are they going to be in Hell?

JoyfulRook
April 27th, 2005, 12:19 PM
It seems calling someone faggot is more than just a term its a insult.Wouldnt you agree? Yes.
It's a term and an insult. Is it wrong to insult the wicked? I'd say blithering idiot is a term and an insult also.

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 12:21 PM
Calling them gay is an insult to all truly happy people, wouldn't you agree? (Actually, I prefer calling faggots disgusting perverts.)

I see what your saying now we are getting into english lessons,Gay as a noun means "A person whose sexual orientation is to persons of the same sex." So i couldnt agree with you there.Another point is for example white people being called honkies or the same for a black person though i wont use the "N" word.I think you can see my point.

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 12:21 PM
Yes.
It's a term and an insult. Is it wrong to insult the wicked? I'd say blithering idiot is a term and an insult also.

Did Jesus come for sinners or saints?

Crow
April 27th, 2005, 12:23 PM
Jesus came for all people ( to the Jews first, though,) and He also called people names.

Clete
April 27th, 2005, 12:24 PM
I see what your saying now we are getting into english lessons,Gay as a noun means "A person whose sexual orientation is to persons of the same sex." So i couldnt agree with you there.Another point is for example white people being called honkies or the same for a black person though i wont use the "N" word.I think you can see my point.
Except that homos aren't born they're made. Nearly all of them were molested as a child.

Homos reproduce by molesting children.

Resting in Him,
Clete

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 12:26 PM
Did Jesus come for sinners or saints?

He came for faggots and straights alike.

Aimiel
April 27th, 2005, 12:27 PM
Homos reproduce by molesting children.:darwinsm:

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 12:27 PM
I see what your saying now we are getting into english lessons,Gay as a noun means "A person whose sexual orientation is to persons of the same sex." So i couldnt agree with you there.Another point is for example white people being called honkies or the same for a black person though i wont use the "N" word.I think you can see my point.

You think wrong. I have no idea what you are attempting to convey.

Poly
April 27th, 2005, 12:45 PM
The poll so far....


9 smart people
4 dumb people

Crow
April 27th, 2005, 12:47 PM
The poll so far....


9 smart people
4 dumb people

Now, was that nice? :chuckle:

(wish I could borrow Philo's current avatar for just this one post.)

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 12:56 PM
The poll so far....


9 smart people
4 dumb people

Whoops, I posted without voting. What a bonehead. (Jesus came for boneheads, too!) Anyway, now there are...

10 smart people
5 dumb people

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 12:59 PM
Beanieboy continues to complain that the so-called Christians here are not very Christ-like when they call him names like "faggot". I think he's right. I also think he asks for it by continuing to claim that homosexuality is not a sin. Maybe if we agree with him about the name calling we could get him to stop complaingin about the SYMPTOMS and look at the CAUSE.

You can choose what you wish to do.
But your implication is that I am causing you to do so.

That is simply not true. If you have made a choice to use the term faggot, then it is of your own decision of how to speak. I you call someone faggot and call yourself Christian, you represent yourself and the body of believers and Christ - one who is antagonistic to the unsaved - you have made that choice, and you need to stand accountable to that.

It is my understanding that all have fallen short of the glory of God, yet God does not call us derogatory names, but reaches out in love. In following that, I, too, must look to such instances of being cursed, and only bless, to see those who attack, and express only love, to see anger and lack of mercy towards me, and try to find understanding and compassion for one who chooses to live that kind of life.

I see this as little more than group bullying, which has little effect on me, and baiting, which I won't be a part of. Feel free to discuss this issue amongst yourselves, and critique your own followings of Jesus, and whether or not this is loving God with all your soul, heart and mind, and loving your neighbor as yourself.

I wish you peace, and God's blessings, and that you grow closer to God and understand what is truly in his keeping for how we are to love.



Namaste.

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 01:02 PM
You can choose what you wish to do.
But your implication is that I am causing you to do so.

That is simply not true. If you have made a choice to use the term faggot, then it is of your own decision of how to speak. I you call someone faggot and call yourself Christian, you represent yourself and the body of believers and Christ - one who is antagonistic to the unsaved - you have made that choice, and you need to stand accountable to that.

It is my understanding that all have fallen short of the glory of God, yet God does not call us derogatory names, but reaches out in love. In following that, I, too, must look to such instances of being cursed, and only bless, to see those who attack, and express only love, to see anger and lack of mercy towards me, and try to find understanding and compassion for one who chooses to live that kind of life.

I wish you peace, and God's blessings, and that you grow closer to God and understand what is truly in his keeping for how we are to love.

Namaste.

In Christian love, I wish you repentence before death, at which time it will be too late for you and all other dead, unrepentent faggots.

Aimiel
April 27th, 2005, 01:02 PM
Bean,

We are to love everyone, but we don't have to accept their sin as righteousness. Jesus didn't reach out to the hypocrites of His Day with warm fuzzies. He didn't say, "Aw, you guys, you're so cute, with your long sideburns," He called them a brood of vipers. He called them what they were hypocrites. That's what you are, a hypocrite.

Poly
April 27th, 2005, 01:02 PM
:flamer:

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 01:04 PM
Hey Beanie, be honest, have you ever used the word 'faggot'.

I'm trusting you to be honest.....

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 01:04 PM
In Christian love, I wish you repentence before death, at which time it will be too late for you and all other dead, unrepentent faggots.

Thank you.
I wish the same to you.

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 01:05 PM
Thank you.
I wish the same to you.

Already done, but thanks anyway.

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 01:09 PM
.Another point is for example white people being called honkies

That is one of the stupidest insults i have ever heard. I don't mind being called a honkie because I can easily come back with a much more derogatory insult.


or the same for a black person though i wont use the "N" word.

Yeah, that's the one. But now that you mention it, there must be a difference of intensity between '******' and 'faggot. You were afraid to even spell that word out so you must also agree that they are not on par with each other as far as rudeness and codecension, correct?


I think you can see my point.

I think I just messed up your point, sorry.

Wamba
April 27th, 2005, 01:12 PM
Gay,but in the context of this thread it seems calling someone faggot is more than just a term its a insult.Wouldnt you agree?


No, the first meaning of "gay" was:

1 a : happily excited :MERRY b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits
2 a : BRIGHY, LIVELY <gay sunny meadows> b : brilliant in color


Then the homos stole it. Just like the rainbow. They stole that too.

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 01:14 PM
Then the homos stole it. Just like the rainbow. They stole that too.

That's because Leprechauns are gay........

Poly
April 27th, 2005, 01:16 PM
That's because Leprechauns are gay........

And they're faggots, too. :)

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 01:17 PM
:darwinsm:

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 01:18 PM
And they're faggots, too. :)

You're just saying that 'cause it's true!

Poly
April 27th, 2005, 01:21 PM
You're just saying that 'cause it's true!

Ok, you got me there.

Lucky
April 27th, 2005, 01:27 PM
That's because Leprechauns are gay........
:noid:

Clete
April 27th, 2005, 01:31 PM
I'll bet On Fire is just soooo glad he started this thread! :chuckle:

On Fire
April 27th, 2005, 01:41 PM
Sorry I thought I was being clear.

On Fire
April 27th, 2005, 01:55 PM
You can choose what you wish to do.
But your implication is that I am causing you to do so.

That is simply not true. If you have made a choice to use the term faggot, then it is of your own decision of how to speak. I you call someone faggot and call yourself Christian, you represent yourself and the body of believers and Christ - one who is antagonistic to the unsaved - you have made that choice, and you need to stand accountable to that.

It is my understanding that all have fallen short of the glory of God, yet God does not call us derogatory names, but reaches out in love. In following that, I, too, must look to such instances of being cursed, and only bless, to see those who attack, and express only love, to see anger and lack of mercy towards me, and try to find understanding and compassion for one who chooses to live that kind of life.

I see this as little more than group bullying, which has little effect on me, and baiting, which I won't be a part of. Feel free to discuss this issue amongst yourselves, and critique your own followings of Jesus, and whether or not this is loving God with all your soul, heart and mind, and loving your neighbor as yourself.

I wish you peace, and God's blessings, and that you grow closer to God and understand what is truly in his keeping for how we are to love.



Namaste.

Thanks for overlooking the part where I said I think you're right. Pretty much sums up your whole existence here.

Nineveh
April 27th, 2005, 02:13 PM
Hey Beanie, be honest, have you ever used the word 'faggot'.

I'm trusting you to be honest.....


That's a good question. I see a lot of derogatory names used by homo's themselves. IE "Queer Nation", "Dykes on Bikes", etc. I'm not sure why "faggot" is being singled out.

But to the point of the thread, OnFire, I don't think beanieboy would quit whining if no one ever used the term "faggot" again. He has a lot to complain about, not just one word he finds offensive. I think he is a generally unhappy person.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 02:25 PM
Already done, but thanks anyway.
Then I am happy for you.
I am still on my journey.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 02:50 PM
That's a good question. I see a lot of derogatory names used by homo's themselves. IE "Queer Nation", "Dykes on Bikes", etc. I'm not sure why "faggot" is being singled out.

But to the point of the thread, OnFire, I don't think beanieboy would quit whining if no one ever used the term "faggot" again. He has a lot to complain about, not just one word he finds offensive. I think he is a generally unhappy person.

I'm actually a very happy person.

I will repeat, you can choose to call me whatever you wish. I've been called worse.
And I will continue to try my best to return curse with blessing, as is my beliefs.
I encourage you to call me on this when ever I stumble, and thank you in advance.

I'm unclear why "faggot" is singled out as well, but it is usually said to indicate that you are saying that someone is beneath you. I still hold to the truth that all have fallen short of the glory of God, and whenever I think myself better, I repeat that to myself, and then know to pray, rather to only condemn and put others beneath me.

However, the bible uses "homosexual", and does not use faggot. Faggot is a relatively new word, and used to sound more derogatory, and is meant to demean the person. I imagine that is why people choose to single out that word and use it in place of homosexual - because it exhalts themself, and makes them seem better than the other.

The Pharisees (while they were sinners) referred to the prostitutes and tax collectors as "sinners."
The said to the disciples, "why does your master eat with the sinners?" They weren't including themselves.

Even in this thread, someone quotes that Jesus called the sinners Vipers.
He did call the sinners vipers - the Vipers who referred to the prostitutes and tax collectors "sinners."

He who exhalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exhalted.

Namaste.

May God's Peace be with you.

Delmar
April 27th, 2005, 02:55 PM
That's a good question. I see a lot of derogatory names used by homo's themselves. IE "Queer Nation", "Dykes on Bikes", etc. I'm not sure why "faggot" is being singled out.

But to the point of the thread, OnFire, I don't think beanieboy would quit whining if no one ever used the term "faggot" again. He has a lot to complain about, not just one word he finds offensive. I think he is a generally unhappy person.
Does it really matter what term you use for homosexuality? There was a time when the words idiot and moron were technical terms describing different levels of mental retardation. Problem is since no one wants to be thought of a less than intelligent the words took on a derogatory meaning.
By the same token any name given to people who commit acts of perversion will always take on a derogatory meaning. At least until the time when society becomes so rebellious that evil and righteousness are fully accepted as interchangeable.

Servo
April 27th, 2005, 03:05 PM
Just like the rainbow. They stole that too.

But we WILL take it back!

Revelation 4
...and there was a rainbow around the throne...

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 03:06 PM
Hey Beanie, be honest, have you ever used the word 'faggot'.
I'm trusting you to be honest.....

Hm.
There was a time when I was younger, I suppose.
I wasn't very mindful of words, and would say that to someone, because I knew if was like getting in a cheap shot. It was said to question one's manhood. (You can also insult a man by calling him a "girl" or a "woman").

I've grown more mindful of my words.
I try to be more careful with them, because they hold a lot of power.

I believe that is why the bible says:
James 3:4-6

Public Domain

4Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.
5Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!

6And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.

So, yes. I've used foul language.
I've even called someone ****** in anger, and did it with the intent to harm, and that small word hurt that person very much and damaged our relationship, and it took a long time to gain his forgiveness.
I don't believe that calling someone a ****** is that same as calling someone an idiot.
****** has a long history of negativity that comes with it, and to ignore that is not to be honest with yourself.

However, even name calling I find questionable. It's the argument of children, when your statements can't speak for themselves.

But that is my philosophy, my choice that I have made.

Generally, those who call me faggot have no more to say than, "it is not, you faggot!" or a cheap shot and not much to respond to.

Delmar
April 27th, 2005, 03:10 PM
Generally, those who call me faggot have no more to say than, "it is not, you faggot!" or a cheap shot and not much to respond to.Still it's better to be called one than to be one!

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 03:19 PM
It's better to speak when you have something to say, rather than cast stones for entertainment.

Agape4Robin
April 27th, 2005, 03:21 PM
I consider the term faggot to be demeaning and derogatory.
How can we as christians hope to reach someone when we resort to name calling? :confused:

Not only that, but it's completely juvenile! :baby:

IMHO it has no place in the christian vocabulary.

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 03:32 PM
Beanieboy continues to complain that the so-called Christians here are not very Christ-like when they call him names like "faggot". I think he's right. I also think he asks for it by continuing to claim that homosexuality is not a sin. Maybe if we agree with him about the name calling we could get him to stop complaingin about the SYMPTOMS and look at the CAUSE.

Jesus Christ used some very harsh words and I believe there are times when it is appropriate. I think calling homosexuals "faggots" "queers" "fags" etc is entirely appropriate when encountering a homosexual that is in rebellion. If you come across a homosexual who is struggling and perhaps looking for some answers (and even on the verge of repentance) then it would be wise not to use this kind of language. Bring them to repentance as God's Word tells us..

"Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?"

Furthermore, I believe we as followers of Jesus need to utilize harsh language in addressing sin. The Lord did, as did the early disciples.

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 03:34 PM
I agree, commie.

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 03:36 PM
These are not only my beliefs but I have actually called homosexuals "queers" in public meetings, on the streets, in front of the gay discos, (a friend of mine was worried for my life) like I did when I was in Mardi Gras earlier this year. Wanna talk about some angry faggots!!!

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 03:38 PM
One of the things I was thinking about was The Laramie Project. Fred Phelps was expressing "Tough Love" with his usual "God hates fags" chants at the funeral of Shephard. He was so full of self righteousness, that he didn't care how cruel it was to the parents that were going to the funeral of their young son that died so brutally. One of those who attended the funeral, surely an outcast in Laramie, WY with his spiked hair and leather coat, because singing, "Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound..." and everyone began to join in.

I thought about what that must have been like - how you can almost see it snowing from above, and the wicked witch saying, "CURSES! Someone always helps that girl!" and imagine that Fred must have been livid. And I think that is how God is - not smiting them down in force, but drowning them out in love about a song that talks about the Mercy of God, and choosing a Joan of Arc, the most unlikely suspect, because he was brave enough to stand up, even if he would have been singing alone.

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 03:40 PM
Beanieboy, God's love for you is incredible. My wife and I love you too. We have seen homosexuals change by the power of Jesus Christ. He's wanting you to repent before entering a fiery eternal hell. Will you repent?

Gerald
April 27th, 2005, 03:41 PM
Christians should press for the recriminalization of homos; they should be executed upon conviction.You can't convict who you can't catch, and you can't catch unless you go hunting.

How do you propose to solve this problem?

Ecumenicist
April 27th, 2005, 03:41 PM
Thus dieth the golden rule. Christ died for nothing, apparently. How sad.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 03:43 PM
Jesus Christ used some very harsh words and I believe there are times when it is appropriate. I think calling homosexuals "faggots" "queers" "fags" etc is entirely appropriate when encountering a homosexual that is in rebellion. If you come across a homosexual who is struggling and perhaps looking for some answers (and even on the verge of repentance) then it would be wise not to use this kind of language. Bring them to repentance as God's Word tells us..

"Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?"

Furthermore, I believe we as followers of Jesus need to utilize harsh language in addressing sin. The Lord did, as did the early disciples.

Can you show me where he did this to anyone other than the Pharisees?

Delmar
April 27th, 2005, 03:46 PM
You can't convict who you can't catch, and you can't catch unless you go hunting.

How do you propose to solve this problem? Just round em up at the sodomy pride parade.

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 03:49 PM
Can you show me where he did this to anyone other than the Pharisees?

The Pharisees and homosexuals are all in the same boat. You're going to eternal hell with the demons that inhabit you liked the Pharisees . :vomit:

But the good news is you're still alive thus the opportunity to renounce your homosexuality.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 03:51 PM
Beanieboy, God's love for you is incredible. My wife and I love you too. We have seen homosexuals change by the power of Jesus Christ. He's wanting you to repent before entering a fiery eternal hell. Will you repent?

Thank you for your expression of love, Freak.
I have the same for you.

I'm unclear how I feel about the whole Christian version of God, and especially the idea of a vendictive, cruel God, because I have seen what it does to it's followers, and it isn't pretty.
But keep me in your prayers.

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 03:52 PM
The poll so far....


9 smart people
4 dumb people
Iam geussing iam a dumb person.

God_Is_Truth
April 27th, 2005, 03:54 PM
Thank you for your expression of love, Freak.
I have the same for you.

I'm unclear how I feel about the whole Christian version of God, and especially the idea of a vendictive, cruel God, because I have seen what it does to it's followers, and it isn't pretty.
But keep me in your prayers.

are you saying that the christian version of God is cruel? i haven't followed any of your posts beanieboy, so i am curious to know what you think the christian version of God is.

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 03:54 PM
Thank you for your expression of love, Freak.
I have the same for you.

I'm unclear how I feel about the whole Christian version of God, and especially the idea of a vendictive, cruel God, because I have seen what it does to it's followers, and it isn't pretty.
But keep me in your prayers. Beanieboy, the God I speak of cares for YOU! He wants to bless you. He does not hate you. But He will send you to hell.

Look, Jay Bartlett, deserves eternal hell and punishment because I blasphemed Christ at one time but God was gracious and allowed me the opportunity to repent. I did and now enjoy the love of Jesus in my heart.

I'm serious we do love you.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 03:56 PM
The Pharisees and homosexuals are all in the same boat. You're going to eternal hell with the demons that inhabit you liked the Pharisees . :vomit:

But the good news is you're still alive thus the opportunity to renounce your homosexuality.

How are homosexuals like Pharisees?
Pharissees went to temple, taught at temple, etc.

I don't call myself Christian, I don't teach the Gospel, I don't claim to be better than others...

If anything, I would be put in the same boat as the tax collectors. (Yes, I know he told the woman they were about to stone to "go and sin no more." Save your breath. BUT did he call her anything derogatory? Did he call prostitutes names?

Did he spend much time scheming about ways to put the sinners to death?

Or are we all sinners, and did he simply come to save us?

(From what I can tell, I'm with Dave - it seems like it was all for nothing. :( )

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 03:57 PM
Iam geussing iam a dumb person. Jabez, you have a tender heart for people whom Jesus bleed for. We need more people like you!

Beanieboy needs to be told he will go to hell, he needs to be warned, because we do LOVE him.

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 03:58 PM
I geuss hurling insults is how some think they can help others.Iam really confused.I know i havent been gone that long..sheesh

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 04:00 PM
How are homosexuals like Pharisees? Both of these groups have blasphemed Christ by their lives.


Did he spend much time scheming about ways to put the sinners to death? Holy God will not waste anytime sending you to hell when you die.


Or are we all sinners, and did he simply come to save us?

) He came for the sinners like YOU! He desires to place His love into your intermost being. That is why you're important to HIM! However, you must repent of homosexuality.

Jabez
April 27th, 2005, 04:00 PM
Jabez, you have a tender heart for people whom Jesus bleed for. We need more people like you!

Beanieboy needs to be told he will go to hell, he needs to be warned, because we do LOVE him.

Thank you Freak.I agree with what your saying.Just as i began reading this thread it seemed insults were the popular way to go.

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 04:01 PM
Here Beanie, try some of this (http://wickedmoon.com/e/sendcard.php?image=www.123lovepoems.com/media/video/crackspackle.wmv). Maybe it will help you change your wicked ways....

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 04:02 PM
I geuss hurling insults is how some think they can help others.Iam really confused.I know i havent been gone that long..sheesh Usually, it's not a good idea to call people names, however, there were times Jesus did. It calls sinners to attention.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 04:03 PM
are you saying that the christian version of God is cruel? i haven't followed any of your posts beanieboy, so i am curious to know what you think the christian version of God is.

I would suggest reading Is God a Lie thread.

There are those who believe that one should fear (ie be afraid of) God.
There are those that believe who have posted that the Tsunami was God's wrath.
There are those who want to get OT and kill on the homosexuals.

Everyone has a different version of God, even Christians, but some enjoy the murderous, wrathful, unmerciless God, because it gives them a reason to act in the same manner.

My version is closer to WW's, I guess.
God is much more concerned with how loving we are than anything else.
If we don't have love, we have nothing.

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 04:06 PM
Beanieboy, you can change. This is a fact, don't believe the lie that somehow you're stuck as a homosexual. God does and can change the hearts of homosexuals. You need to renounce your lifestyle and repent of your ugly sin.

God_Is_Truth
April 27th, 2005, 04:07 PM
I would suggest reading Is God a Lie thread.

ok.



There are those who believe that one should fear (ie be afraid of) God.
There are those that believe who have posted that the Tsunami was God's wrath.
There are those who want to get OT and kill on the homosexuals.

i don't believe any of those.



Everyone has a different version of God, even Christians, but some enjoy the murderous, wrathful, unmerciless God, because it gives them a reason to act in the same manner.

that's not necessarily a just reason to do so.



My version is closer to WW's, I guess.
God is much more concerned with how loving we are than anything else.
If we don't have love, we have nothing.

would you say he's concerned with sin (which is everything not-loving) at all?

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 04:09 PM
Jabez, you have a tender heart for people whom Jesus bleed for. We need more people like you!

Beanieboy needs to be told he will go to hell, he needs to be warned, because we do LOVE him.

What I find curious is that it really comes down to my sexuality.

I don't believe in the bible. I don't accept JC as my PL&S.

But that's kind of a back burner kind of thing, apparently.

Heterosexuality, and not accepting Jesus, will get me into heaven.

who knew?

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 04:09 PM
Beanieboy, you can change. This is a fact, don't believe the lie that somehow you're stuck as a homosexual. God does and can change the hearts of homosexuals. You need to renounce your lifestyle and repent of your ugly sin.

This has been said many times.
Thank you Freak.
I have to agree to disagree.

Aimiel
April 27th, 2005, 04:13 PM
If we don't have love, we have nothing.Someone walking in love toward someone else doesn't call that other person that they claim to love a liar, unless they have a track-record of lying. There has yet to be One Word that God has spoken proven to be a lie. Taking out the parts you don't like causes Him to have to take out your part from His Book of Life. He said so, and since He doesn't lie, that is what will happen. You need to put some of The Bible back in your version, before it is eternally too late.

God_Is_Truth
April 27th, 2005, 04:15 PM
What I find curious is that it really comes down to my sexuality.

I don't believe in the bible. I don't accept JC as my PL&S.

frankly, if you don't accept Jesus, i don't care what your sexuality is. only those who choose Christ have a standard to live by. if you reject him then i say you are free to live as you please, to the degree you please.



But that's kind of a back burner kind of thing, apparently.

Heterosexuality, and not accepting Jesus, will get me into heaven.

who knew?

let me make this clear

heterosexuality and not accepting Jesus will NOT get you into heaven.

Freak
April 27th, 2005, 04:20 PM
What I find curious is that it really comes down to my sexuality.

? It actually comes down to this:

Will you surrender your life to the Lord Jesus Christ or reject Him?

Homosexuals=reject God.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 04:35 PM
would you say he's concerned with sin (which is everything not-loving) at all?

My understanding of sin is that which separates us from God and others.
But, no, I've discussed all of this with God over more than 20 years. And all God does, more or less, and shows me the importance of love - in treating each other with kindness, gentleness, returning curses with blessings, to lend an ear, a shoulder, or a hand.

That seems to be the main focus of what God has to say, and to learn to love myself, which is hard, because most people will extend an insult without a second thought, but hold back a complement.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 04:42 PM
It actually comes down to this:

Will you surrender your life to the Lord Jesus Christ or reject Him?

Homosexuals=reject God.

As of yet, I have found no reason to.
I pray for God to reveal himself, and yet, I have been led to Buddhism.
And I suppose this board. I have been forced to back up my statements with the bible more than any other, and show contradictions of behavior from those who call themselves Christians.

But I see the whole of life a journey to better understand God. It always has been, even as a child, and is always where I am led back to.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 04:53 PM
There was a post from a christian here who said, "You need to repent." I said, "I will do some self reflection on that. Thank you. And I would suggest the same for you." Their response was, "Why would I??? need self reflection??? What do I need to self reflect and repent from????"

The person was under the idea that they were saved, and therefore, made whole or perfect. Yet, I'm sure that they still sin, still have areas of improvement. But they seemed offended that I even suggest such a thing.

Who is more lost?

Turbo
April 27th, 2005, 04:53 PM
As of yet, I have found no reason to.Exactly. Which is one of the reasons people here point out to your worst sins that you take pride in. Only sinners need a Savior.
I pray for God to reveal himself, and yet, I have been led to Buddhism.

"A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign..." Matthew 16:4a

"Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' And he said, 'No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' But he said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.'" Luke 16:29-31

Turbo
April 27th, 2005, 04:55 PM
There was a post from a christian here who said, "You need to repent." I said, "I will do some self reflection on that. Thank you. And I would suggest the same for you." Their response was, "Why would I??? need self reflection??? What do I need to self reflect and repent from????"

The person was under the idea that they were saved, and therefore, made whole or perfect. Yet, I'm sure that they still sin, still have areas of improvement. But they seemed offended that I even suggest such a thing.

Who is more lost?You.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 05:04 PM
Exactly. Which is one of the reasons people here point out to your worst sins that you take pride in. Only sinners need a Savior.
"A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign..." Matthew 16:4a

"Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' And he said, 'No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' But he said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.'" Luke 16:29-31

Do we need to see someone from the dead?

No. Just people walking the talk.

Again, I have seen those who offer doom instead of hope.
I have seem those who can show no mercy.
I see those who are unable to feel compassion.
I've seen people exhalt themselves and condemn others.
I have not seen much in the area of kindness, gentleness, slowness of anger, loving your enemy, etc.
I have seen harshness called love, and gentle love called "powder puff".
There is a thread of Iraqi Kids that is part of a joke about Michael Jackson and molestation. It mocks children of war, the vets, and molestation itself. Yet, no one saw a problem with this. They had a problem that I had a problem with it.

In short, I can't enroll because I don't want to act this way.

Namaste.

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 05:06 PM
You.

And if I became a christian, and thought that there is nothing that I could possible self reflect on, or repent from, I would be found?

beanieboy
April 27th, 2005, 05:10 PM
Calling a queer a gay or a homosexual is winking at their sin. .

Doesn't the bible use the word homosexual?
By your statement, the bible is then winking at their sin, which I doubt.

Chileice
April 27th, 2005, 05:11 PM
Name calling serves no earthly good. It is done by small people unable to express themselves in an intelligent way.

Nineveh
April 27th, 2005, 05:46 PM
Does it really matter what term you use for homosexuality? There was a time when the words idiot and moron were technical terms describing different levels of mental retardation. Problem is since no one wants to be thought of a less than intelligent the words took on a derogatory meaning.
By the same token any name given to people who commit acts of perversion will always take on a derogatory meaning. At least until the time when society becomes so rebellious that evil and righteousness are fully accepted as interchangeable.

Exactly!
It's not the word but the action it describes that is offensive! Rep points for you:)

God_Is_Truth
April 27th, 2005, 05:54 PM
My understanding of sin is that which separates us from God and others.

sin is that which is contrary to the character of God. thus, since God is love, sin would be anything not loving. if heterosexuality is good (which the bible says it is, adam and eve were told to multiply), then homosexuality is not good because it is a perversion of that which God said is good. since it is not good, it is not loving towards God to follow it. since it's not loving, it's a sin.



But, no, I've discussed all of this with God over more than 20 years. And all God does, more or less, and shows me the importance of love - in treating each other with kindness, gentleness, returning curses with blessings, to lend an ear, a shoulder, or a hand.

how can God be concerned with only that which is loving and not be concerned at all with that which is not loving (sin) ?



That seems to be the main focus of what God has to say, and to learn to love myself, which is hard, because most people will extend an insult without a second thought, but hold back a complement.

and the more you grow to love yourself, the harder it is to love your neigbhor as yourself.

Nineveh
April 27th, 2005, 06:00 PM
I'm actually a very happy person.

I will repeat, you can choose to call me whatever you wish.

Oh please.

What have I called you? A homo? A sodomite? You define yourself.

Now, let's sit through yet one more "*~*LOOKIT ME!!*~*" post:


I've been called worse.
And I will continue to try my best to return curse with blessing, as is my beliefs.
I encourage you to call me on this when ever I stumble, and thank you in advance.

I'm unclear why "faggot" is singled out as well, but it is usually said to indicate that you are saying that someone is beneath you. I still hold to the truth that all have fallen short of the glory of God, and whenever I think myself better, I repeat that to myself, and then know to pray, rather to only condemn and put others beneath me.

However, the bible uses "homosexual", and does not use faggot. Faggot is a relatively new word, and used to sound more derogatory, and is meant to demean the person. I imagine that is why people choose to single out that word and use it in place of homosexual - because it exhalts themself, and makes them seem better than the other.

The Pharisees (while they were sinners) referred to the prostitutes and tax collectors as "sinners."
The said to the disciples, "why does your master eat with the sinners?" They weren't including themselves.

Even in this thread, someone quotes that Jesus called the sinners Vipers.
He did call the sinners vipers - the Vipers who referred to the prostitutes and tax collectors "sinners."

He who exhalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exhalted.

Namaste.

May God's Peace be with you.

You don't have God's peace, you have what you love most, you.

jeremiah
April 27th, 2005, 06:09 PM
I don't think we should call him faggot..... I think beanieboy is bad enough. ;)

BillyBob
April 27th, 2005, 06:29 PM
Is Beanie still a faggot?

SOTK
April 27th, 2005, 06:52 PM
Beanieboy continues to complain that the so-called Christians here are not very Christ-like when they call him names like "faggot". I think he's right. I also think he asks for it by continuing to claim that homosexuality is not a sin. Maybe if we agree with him about the name calling we could get him to stop complaingin about the SYMPTOMS and look at the CAUSE.

While I agree that the term, faggot, is definitely a derogatory remark, I say, "So what". Homos need to get thicker skin! As a Christian, I've been called the Moral Police, a Goodie Goodie, a pew groveler, a Jesus Freak, a weirdo, etc. I've heard Beanieboy use such terms before. Hell, most of the homos that post on the board throw those types of remarks around. As far as I'm concerned, the homos have nothing on persecution. Jews and Christians (especially Jews) know quite a bit about persecution and derogatory names. Jesus Himself was labeled a heretic, a demon possessed person, a blasphemer, etc!

I don't feel a bit sorry for a homo being called a "faggot"!

Delmar
April 27th, 2005, 08:44 PM
What I find curious is that it really comes down to my sexuality.

I don't believe in the bible. I don't accept JC as my PL&S.

But that's kind of a back burner kind of thing, apparently.

Heterosexuality, and not accepting Jesus, will get me into heaven.

who knew?
No Christian has suggested to you that becoming straight will save you! You knew it was a lie when you said it!

Lighthouse
April 27th, 2005, 08:58 PM
Why wouldn't he want to come to Christ? Then he could call faggots, faggots, too.
:crackup:

Lighthouse
April 27th, 2005, 09:33 PM
I see what your saying now we are getting into english lessons,Gay as a noun means "A person whose sexual orientation is to persons of the same sex." So i couldnt agree with you there.Another point is for example white people being called honkies or the same for a black person though i wont use the "N" word.I think you can see my point.
Fags are not born that way, Jabez.

Lighthouse
April 27th, 2005, 10:08 PM
I'm actually a very happy person.
Do you actually expect us to beleive that?


I will repeat, you can choose to call me whatever you wish. I've been called worse.
And I will continue to try my best to return curse with blessing, as is my beliefs.
I encourage you to call me on this when ever I stumble, and thank you in advance.
Well, I honestly think damned is the worst thing anyone could ever be called, and God will surely call you such on judgment day, if you have never submited to Him.


I'm unclear why "faggot" is singled out as well, but it is usually said to indicate that you are saying that someone is beneath you. I still hold to the truth that all have fallen short of the glory of God, and whenever I think myself better, I repeat that to myself, and then know to pray, rather to only condemn and put others beneath me.
So you're that "catcher" then?


However, the bible uses "homosexual", and does not use faggot. Faggot is a relatively new word, and used to sound more derogatory, and is meant to demean the person. I imagine that is why people choose to single out that word and use it in place of homosexual - because it exhalts themself, and makes them seem better than the other.
Now this is funny. Usually the queers are telling us how the original language doesn't mean the same as hiomosexual, but here, in an effort to discount our usage of faggot, that doesn't matter...:ha:


The Pharisees (while they were sinners) referred to the prostitutes and tax collectors as "sinners."
The said to the disciples, "why does your master eat with the sinners?" They weren't including themselves.
Because they beleived themselves to be righteous. Of course, they were self-righteous, as Jesus clearly showed many times. And those who Christ has made righteous are not sinners anymore. They have been freed from sin. Read Romans 5-8 sometime.


Even in this thread, someone quotes that Jesus called the sinners Vipers.
He did call the sinners vipers - the Vipers who referred to the prostitutes and tax collectors "sinners."
The vipers were the self-righteous ones who were telling Him He was wrong for attempting to convert the whores and thieves.


He who exhalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exhalted.
Looks like you should prepare yourself to be humbled.

Lighthouse
April 27th, 2005, 10:12 PM
I consider the term faggot to be demeaning and derogatory.
How can we as christians hope to reach someone when we resort to name calling? :confused:

Not only that, but it's completely juvenile! :baby:

IMHO it has no place in the christian vocabulary.
If one is not demeaned, then how do they know they need Christ?

Emo
April 27th, 2005, 10:36 PM
I consider the term faggot to be demeaning and derogatory.
How can we as christians hope to reach someone when we resort to name calling? :confused:

Not only that, but it's completely juvenile! :baby:


Does this sound better...........

You're a perverted homo & you desperately need God to make you new again.
If you accept Christ & repent, you will be saved.
If you don't repent, you will burn in hell for eternity.

Redfin
April 27th, 2005, 10:42 PM
Is calling Beanieboy a faggot a Christ-like?

Christlike? - No.
Childlike? - Still no.
Childish? - Yup.

wholearmor
April 27th, 2005, 10:43 PM
Name calling serves no earthly good. It is done by small people unable to express themselves in an intelligent way.

Saying someone is "small" in this context isn't name calling?

One Eyed Jack
April 28th, 2005, 12:26 AM
Then the homos stole it. Just like the rainbow. They stole that too.

No they didn't. A real rainbow is red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet. They left out indigo for some reason or another.

One Eyed Jack
April 28th, 2005, 12:30 AM
In short, I can't enroll because I don't want to act this way.

I always figured it was because you didn't want to stop being gay.

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 06:58 AM
I'm actually a very happy person.
I'm unclear why "faggot" is singled out as well,
Because YOU single it out as an example of un-Christ like behavior. YOU beanie boy. YOU!!!

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 07:01 AM
If you come across a homosexual who is struggling and perhaps looking for some answers (and even on the verge of repentance) then it would be wise not to use this kind of language. Bring them to repentance as God's Word tells us..

Beanie says he is happy and not struggling but how do we know for sure?

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 07:04 AM
Beanieboy needs to be told he will go to hell,
I think he gets this part of Christianity.

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 07:06 AM
This has been said many times.
Thank you Freak.
I have to agree to disagree.
It happens all the time. Ignoring facts will get you nowhere fast.

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 07:08 AM
If one is not demeaned, then how do they know they need Christ?
Wow. How sad is this statement?

Agape4Robin
April 28th, 2005, 07:10 AM
Does this sound better...........

You're a perverted homo & you desperately need God to make you new again.
If you accept Christ & repent, you will be saved.
If you don't repent, you will burn in hell for eternity.
:thumb:
Can't disagree with that!
Like my grandma used to say, "you get more flies with honey than you do with vinegar." Metaphorically speaking of course!

Mr. 5020
April 28th, 2005, 07:15 AM
Is Beanie still a faggot?
Is he [straight] yet?

Mr. 5020
April 28th, 2005, 07:16 AM
The score is 15-15 right now.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 07:17 AM
and the more you grow to love yourself, the harder it is to love your neigbhor as yourself.

But Jesus said, "love your neighbor as yourself."

If you hate yourself, you will probably not love your neighbor either.

Agape4Robin
April 28th, 2005, 07:17 AM
If one is not demeaned, then how do they know they need Christ?

Where in scripture has Christ demeaned any one to repentance?
You are a bully! :box:

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 07:22 AM
A Christian attitude toward homoism should be focused in three areas...

[list=1]Christians should press for the recriminalization of homos; they should be executed upon conviction.

I know Gerald already asked something along these lines, but I didn't see any satisfactory answers. How exactly does one enforce such a "policy"? Door to door searches, maybe? Should a man be executed for going out to dinner with another man? For living with him? Or only for having sex with him? What will be the crime, and how will it be enforced?

Gerald
April 28th, 2005, 07:30 AM
Just round em up at the sodomy pride parade.If such a law were passed, such public displays would evaporate; it wouldn't be out there for all to see, but that still doesn't solve the problem the law was enacted to solve.

Unless you're one of those "If I didn't see it, it didn't happen" kind of folks...

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 07:32 AM
While I agree that the term, faggot, is definitely a derogatory remark, I say, "So what". Homos need to get thicker skin! As a Christian, I've been called the Moral Police, a Goodie Goodie, a pew groveler, a Jesus Freak, a weirdo, etc. I've heard Beanieboy use such terms before. Hell, most of the homos that post on the board throw those types of remarks around. As far as I'm concerned, the homos have nothing on persecution. Jews and Christians (especially Jews) know quite a bit about persecution and derogatory names. Jesus Himself was labeled a heretic, a demon possessed person, a blasphemer, etc!

I don't feel a bit sorry for a homo being called a "faggot"!

You make a good point that there are those who call christians derogatory names, so you understand how it feels to be. It hurts. Its meant to. It mock you, makes a fool of you, and its meant to.

My belief is that one should return cursing with blessing. The reason is that if someone curses you, you curse them, and it doesn't stop. So, you return blessing. You turn the other cheek. You break the chain.

Food for thought.

Peace.

Agape4Robin
April 28th, 2005, 07:36 AM
You make a good point that there are those who call christians derogatory names, so you understand how it feels to be. It hurts. Its meant to. It mock you, makes a fool of you, and its meant to.

My belief is that one should return cursing with blessing. The reason is that if someone curses you, you curse them, and it doesn't stop. So, you return blessing. You turn the other cheek. You break the chain.

Food for thought.

Peace.
Beanie, perhaps I'm a little slow but, is what they are saying about you true? Are you a homosexual?

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 07:36 AM
Does this sound better...........

You're a perverted homo & you desperately need God to make you new again.
If you accept Christ & repent, you will be saved.
If you don't repent, you will burn in hell for eternity.

Let me chime in, if I may.

This is what you are telling people - God will save your from eternal torment after you die.

Are you talking about the love of Christ, and what he will do for you now?
Are you talking about the joy of God in people's heart?
Are you talking about the peace that passes all understanding?
Are you talking about ANYTHING that has to do with a relationship with God now?

Not that I can see. It's all about the eternal after-death that you are focusing on.

Gerald
April 28th, 2005, 07:42 AM
I know Gerald already asked something along these lines, but I didn't see any satisfactory answers. How exactly does one enforce such a "policy"?
These folks aren't going to give a satisfactory answer, because they know what such enforcement would require :cough:spying on your neighbors:cough: and they lack the courage to advocate it...

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 07:48 AM
These folks aren't going to give a satisfactory answer, because they know what such enforcement would require :cough:spying on your neighbors:cough: and they lack the courage to advocate it...
Because it's mindless despotism! Did you all hear that? Old Testement Law is mindless despotism!

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 07:51 AM
Beanie, perhaps I'm a little slow but, is what they are saying about you true? Are you a homosexual?

Yes, I am homosexual.

I understand that some people believe that it is against Christian doctrine, and that I will go to hell.
Other people do not, and theologians are divided on the issue.

The point of the thread is whether it is in keeping with the instructions of Jesus how to behave if you are using harmful words. Well, actually, this thread is talking about the word faggot, but in the big picture, is it okay, for example, to say to someone "You are a big fat cow! Repent from your gluttony, you disgusting mass of fat!"

Will that have any positive results, other than to make yourself feel superior?

But I'm willing to keep this to the one word, faggot, if that is preferred.

I've already stated that I've heard people say that, and I don't really care. I was just surprised to hear sailor talk coming from the "saved", but I suppose the saved are not all that different from the unsaved - we all fall short of the glory of God. .

In psychology, we learned about words and their psychological impact. During WWII, Japanese were called Japs or Gooks, because it dehumanizes them, and is then easier to kill something you don't see as human. The same is said with ****** - it's easier to enslave someone who you don't see as human (in fact, some wondered if the negroes had souls.)

So, the more you use negative, derogatory words, the less compassion you have, the less you are able to love.

The bible says that one is to love their enemy, but how can you love the enemy if you can't even act respectable to them? How can you truly try to win the heart of someone to Christ if you are screaming at them, or threatening them?

Some believe that is the only approach that works. I disagree. Fred Phelps isn't having much effect, except for showing the coldness of his heart.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 07:57 AM
Because YOU single it out as an example of un-Christ like behavior. YOU beanie boy. YOU!!!

:) ME

That's because that is what you call me.

You call WW, among others, names.

I just question it.

I don't think that Jesus walked up to Mary Mag. and said, "you are like a total skank. Well, y'are! Y'ARE!!!"
I think he went up and spoke to her with kindness, and gentleness, and she had never had anyone do that before, and that made a huge effect on her.

But, do what you wish.
15 people disagree with you, and 15 agree.
Make a choice which side to agree with, and live your life accordingly.

May God shine his face upon you, and give you peace.

Agape4Robin
April 28th, 2005, 08:01 AM
Yes, I am homosexual.

I understand that some people believe that it is against Christian doctrine, and that I will go to hell.
Other people do not, and theologians are divided on the issue.

The point of the thread is whether it is in keeping with the instructions of Jesus how to behave if you are using harmful words. Well, actually, this thread is talking about the word faggot, but in the big picture, is it okay, for example, to say to someone "You are a big fat cow! Repent from your gluttony, you disgusting mass of fat!"

Will that have any positive results, other than to make yourself feel superior?

But I'm willing to keep this to the one word, faggot, if that is preferred.

I've already stated that I've heard people say that, and I don't really care. I was just surprised to hear sailor talk coming from the "saved", but I suppose the saved are not all that different from the unsaved - we all fall short of the glory of God. .

In psychology, we learned about words and their psychological impact. During WWII, Japanese were called Japs or Gooks, because it dehumanizes them, and is then easier to kill something you don't see as human. The same is said with ****** - it's easier to enslave someone who you don't see as human (in fact, some wondered if the negroes had souls.)

So, the more you use negative, derogatory words, the less compassion you have, the less you are able to love.

The bible says that one is to love their enemy, but how can you love the enemy if you can't even act respectable to them? How can you truly try to win the heart of someone to Christ if you are screaming at them, or threatening them?

Some believe that is the only approach that works. I disagree. Fred Phelps isn't having much effect, except for showing the coldness of his heart.
I wholly agree with you.
But then I'm sure you read my original post about this subject.

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 08:02 AM
Where in scripture has Christ demeaned any one to repentance?
You are a bully! :box:

Those that didn't accept Christ, thinking that they didn't need Him and disrespected Him were called names by Him. This fits beanieboy to a T. He has been told in all sincerity many many times by various people on here that he needs Christ. He claims that He doesn't believe in the bible yet continually uses it against the people of God. This is some big time hypocrisy. If you remember right, Christ didn't think very highly of hypocrites. beanieboy has also said to those that are harsh, "well, if you were just a little nicer and more considerate, maybe it would help me but I don't want to have anything to do with mean people". So what happens? People are nice and throw their precious pearls to him. They have time and again and does this change anything? No. He still says, just as he did to Freak earlier that he'll agree to disagree. God, as well as Godly men in the bible, sometimes mocked people as well as called them names. Christ didn't pull any punches when it came to telling it like it is. When he offended those that were self-righteous, not seeing their need for him, His disciples said..."hey don't you know you offended them?" Christ didn't say...."oh man, guys, we need to go apologize. Hurry, go catch them." No He said..." Leave them alone. They're blind leaders of the blind and they'll both end up falling in the ditch." Matthew 15:12-14.

We need to make sure we are patterning our behavior after Christs toward those who refuse to accept Him.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 08:12 AM
Beanie says he is happy and not struggling but how do we know for sure?

I think I have indicated it in my posts.

Happy people act, well, happy!
They say positive things rather than are highly critical.
They try to correct through edifying and gentle suggestion, instead of humilation or threat.
They offer hope, instead of doom.
The offer encouragement, instead of being dismal.
The go forward with positive confidence, rather than live in fear.
They feel self confident and are complementary to others, rather than self loathing and critical of others.
They rejoice in others accomplishments, and are not full of envy.
They smile, they are pleasant to be around, etc.
They stand up for what they believe is right, and don't worry what others think.

I would encourage you to look at my posts, and make your own conclusions.

Agape4Robin
April 28th, 2005, 08:13 AM
Those that didn't accept Christ, thinking that they didn't need Him and disrespected Him were called names by Him. This fits beanieboy to a T. He has been told in all sincerity many many times by various people on here that he needs Christ. He claims that He doesn't believe in the bible yet continually uses it against the people of God. This is some big time hypocricy. He claims to those that are harsh, "well, if you were just a little nicer and more considerate, maybe it would help me but I don't want to have anything to do with mean people". So what happens? People are nice and throw their precious pearls to him. They have time and again and does change anything? No. He still says, just as he did to Freak earlier that he'll agree to disagree. God, as well as Godly men in the bible, sometimes mocked people as well as called them names. Christ didn't pull any punches when it came to telling it like it is. When he offended those that were self-righteous, not seeing their need for him, His disciples said..."hey don't you know you offended them?" Christ didn't say...."oh man, guys, we need to go apologize. Hurry, go catch them." No He said..." Leave them alone. They're blind leaders of the blind and they'll both end up falling in the ditch." Matthew 15:12-14.

We need to make sure we are patterning our behavior after Christs toward those who refuse to accept Him.
So if I called you a self righteous bit**, that would be ok?
No, I don't think so.
Jesus didn't call people names to be derogatory.
You can offend others with the truth as Jesus did, or just be offensive.
Know the difference.

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 08:14 AM
So if I called you a self righteous bit**, that would be ok?
No, I don't think so.
Jesus didn't call people names to be derogatory.
You can offend others with the truth as Jesus did, or just be offensive.
Know the difference.
:BRAVO:

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 08:24 AM
I wholly agree with you.
But then I'm sure you read my original post about this subject.

Yeah, and in advance, may God bless you for anyone who persecutes you for following what the approach that Christ led, especially the criticism from other christians, who will claim that "the sinners" liking you as to do with you condoning their sin, and they should instead hate you.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It is easy to be rude to people, to be condesending, etc., and yes, people will hate you for it. It's just that trying to justify it using the bible is truly lost, in my opinion. The majority of what christ taught was forgiveness, feeding the poor, caring for the sick...In short, simply loving one another, and in this world, it is hard to find. But you will find a lot of rudeness, a lot of judgement, a lot of apathy for compassion, a lot of insensitivity, racism called "humor", lewd jokes called "funny"...

In short, light called darkness, and darkness called light.

May God smile down own you, and keep you near.

Namaste

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 08:29 AM
Those that didn't accept Christ, thinking that they didn't need Him and disrespected Him were called names by Him. This fits beanieboy to a T. He has been told in all sincerity many many times by various people on here that he needs Christ. He claims that He doesn't believe in the bible yet continually uses it against the people of God. This is some big time hypocrisy. If you remember right, Christ didn't think very highly of hypocrites. beanieboy has also said to those that are harsh, "well, if you were just a little nicer and more considerate, maybe it would help me but I don't want to have anything to do with mean people". So what happens? People are nice and throw their precious pearls to him. They have time and again and does this change anything? No. He still says, just as he did to Freak earlier that he'll agree to disagree. God, as well as Godly men in the bible, sometimes mocked people as well as called them names. Christ didn't pull any punches when it came to telling it like it is. When he offended those that were self-righteous, not seeing their need for him, His disciples said..."hey don't you know you offended them?" Christ didn't say...."oh man, guys, we need to go apologize. Hurry, go catch them." No He said..." Leave them alone. They're blind leaders of the blind and they'll both end up falling in the ditch." Matthew 15:12-14.

We need to make sure we are patterning our behavior after Christs toward those who refuse to accept Him.

How is this hypocracy?

I come here because I'm unsure of what I think about Christianity.
So I come and speak to Christians.

I see something that goes agaisnt what the bible says, and point it out, and they ignore it, and turn it to me, saying that I need to repent.

Isn't hypocracy saying that you believe the bible, yet ignore it? That you think that you are exempt from following it, while another should?


Matthew 27
1Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 08:39 AM
So if I called you a self righteous bit**, that would be ok?
No, I don't think so.
No it sure wouldn't since I have accepted Christ as my righteousness and the perfect Son of God, realizing that He is my only hope in salvation since there is nothing good in me that could save me.


Jesus didn't call people names to be derogatory.

I suppose He said the following in order be buddies with people.

Matthew 23:17
Ye fools and blind...

Luke 11:39
And the Lord said to him, "Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness.

Luke 11:40 "But God said to him "Thou fool..."

Matthew 15:14.."They are blind leaders of the blind....."

Matthew 12:34 "O generation of vipers....."

Matthew 15:7 "Ye hypocrites..."

Luke 13:32 "Go tell that fox...."



You can offend others with the truth as Jesus did, or just be offensive.
Know the difference?

Yes, do you? The gospel in and of itself is offensive to the unbeliever even without namecalling but still, Christ called people names.

God doesn't put up with the wicked. I'm not talking the unsaved who are genuinely asking questions and seeking answers. If this is the case then of course we should earnestly be willing to give them those answers just as Christ did. I'm talking those who blatently disprespect God, slapping Him in the face by thinking they have no need of Him. This is offensive. This is what God does not tolerate. This is beanieboy.

Psalm 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight. Thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

Psalm 139:21-22 Do not I hate them that hate thee Oh Lord? I hate them with a perfect hatred.

Psalm 53:1 The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God.

Proverbs 1:26 I also laugh at your calamity. I will mock you when your terror comes.

Proverbs 11:20 Those who are of a perverse heart are an abomination to the Lord.

2 Chronicles 19:2 ...Should you help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord? Therefore is wrath upon thee from the Lord.

Romans 12:9 Let your love be without hypocrisy. Abhor that which is evil, cling to that which is good.

Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather expose them.

Caille
April 28th, 2005, 08:43 AM
A Christian attitude toward homoism should be focused in three areas...

Christians should press for the recriminalization of homos; they should be executed upon conviction.
There should be a very staunch social stigma attached to being a homo.
Homos should repent of their preversion.

It should be in that order as they effect fewer individual people as you go down the list.

The point being that there is a lot more at stake than having some pervert like me. The very fabric of our society is at stake. The homo's feelings be damned becuase if they do not repent, not only will their souls will be damned but so will this nation be also.

Resting in Him,
Clete




Hey Clete - any reason you couldn't substitute any other sin for homoism in your list above ?

Caille
April 28th, 2005, 08:45 AM
So what do you call faggots?


gee, I dunno - fellow human beings ?

potential future brothers in Christ ?

Nineveh
April 28th, 2005, 08:52 AM
But Jesus said, "love your neighbor as yourself."

And the rest of the story goes:

He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' ; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' " "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."


If you hate yourself, you will probably not love your neighbor either.

Worldly love would have you use your neighbor for vile reasons, and be used in return. Godly Love would have better for you.

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 08:54 AM
Worldly love would have you use your neighbor for vile reasons, and be used in return. Godly Love would have better for you.
Yeah, like putting all homosexuals in the gas chamber?

Caille
April 28th, 2005, 08:54 AM
Yes.
It's a term and an insult. Is it wrong to insult the wicked? I'd say blithering idiot is a term and an insult also.



I see - so you're without sin ?

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:01 AM
No it sure wouldn't since I have accepted Christ as my righteousness and the perfect Son of God, realizing that He is my only hope in salvation since there is nothing good in me that could save me.



I suppose He said the following in order be buddies with people.

Matthew 23:17
Ye fools and blind...

Luke 11:39
And the Lord said to him, "Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness.
.

Jesus is addressing the Pharissees - those called rabbi - those who are believers. He's talking to Pastor Bob, Father O'Malley, not the commoners, or those the Pharisees refer to as "sinners."


Luke 11:40 "But God said to him "Thou fool..."

Jesus is addressing the Pharissees - those called rabbi - those who are believers.



Matthew 15:14.."They are blind leaders of the blind....."

ohhhh, look. Again, talking about the holy ones, the Pharissees.



Matthew 12:34 "O generation of vipers....."
24But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, "It is only by Beelzebub,[d] the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons."

Oh, look. Again, the pharisees. Hmm. It seems that you are pointing out that there is more evil within the church, that Christ was more critical of leaders of the church who were holy on the outside, and rotten on the inside - those who talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.



Matthew 15:7 "Ye hypocrites..."

Anyone? Guess who he was talking to.


Luke 13:32 "Go tell that fox...."

31At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, "Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you."

32He replied, "Go tell that fox (, 'I will drive out demons and heal people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.' 33In any case, I must keep going today and tomorrow and the next day—for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem!

Wow. Now he's talking about Herod, not the taxcollectors, not the prostitutes... He's talking about King Herod.


So why misrepresent the bible, unless you don't actually believe in it, and misuse it only to harm others and burden them, rather than free them?

If anything, you have shown me that a) Jesus was highly critical of the teachers of the law and name calling them, and not the sinners, and b) you misuse the bible at will to support your position or have never actually read the verses in context.

Caille
April 28th, 2005, 09:03 AM
The Pharisees and homosexuals are all in the same boat. You're going to eternal hell with the demons that inhabit you liked the Pharisees . :vomit:

But the good news is you're still alive thus the opportunity to renounce your homosexuality.


Aren't all sinners in the same boat ?

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 09:06 AM
Beanie claims that I misrepresent the bible cause I use verses that were only applied to Pharisees.

Now who around here would compare to a Pharisee? Well, what was it that the pharisees believed that caused Christ to get really irritated? That they didn't need Him or believe in Him and were good enough in themselves to be saved.

Anybody know of somebody who fits this description? I'll give you a hint.

His name starts with a "b" and ends in hell!! :flamer:

Nineveh
April 28th, 2005, 09:11 AM
Yeah, like putting all homosexuals in the gas chamber?


Like quit using each other.

Ecumenicist
April 28th, 2005, 09:13 AM
Beanie claims that I misrepresent the bible cause I use verses that were only applied to Pharisees.

Now who around here would compare to a Pharisee. What did the pharisees believe? That they didn't need Christ and were good in themselves to be saved.

Anybody know of anybody who fits this description? I'll give you a hint.

His name starts with a "b" and ends in hell!! :flamer:

Pharisees were the ones who were busy interpreting scripture in ways that shackled
God, and forced others to their interpretation. Christ came to put a stop to that. But
in the end, Christ was shackled and murdered, just like they had done with
Scripture. Christ was and is the Word, in many many ways.

Dave

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:18 AM
God doesn't put up with the wicked. I'm not talking the unsaved who are genuinely asking questions and seeking answers. If this is the case then of course we should earnestly be willing to give them those answers just as Christ did. I'm talking those who blatently disprespect God, slapping Him in the face by thinking they have no need of Him. This is offensive. This is what God does not tolerate. This is beanieboy.

Thomas walked with Jesus, talked with Jesus, asked questions to Jesus, ate and slept with Jesus, yet, when Jesus rose from the grave, Thomas needed to not only see Jesus, but also touch the wound in the side and hands.

Why would God not show me at least the mercy and patience that he showed his own diciples that often questioned?

I am not one who is blown by the wind, agreeing with whatever someone tells me. I am a critical thinker. I weigh what I believe carefully, and consider it with seriousness.

But I think it is you who won't tolerate that. You want instant gratification, and I'm not sure why. You want me to convert for whatever reason, and I think it is more selfish reasoning than anything else.

Do you, for example, go to work, and say to your Hindu, or Muslim or Jewish coworker "when will you turn to Jesus? Now? Now?? How about nnnnow? "
And just repeat it over and over, growing increasingly more and more angry?

I would rather walk a bit of the walk - the "love your neighbor" part, and see if that leads me to God.
I pray often that I be led to the truth of God. Your bible says, "Seek and ye shall find."
Can you really ask any more of me? And if your God is Truth, that is where the path will lead, right?

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 09:20 AM
Pharisees were the ones who were busy interpreting scripture in ways that shackled
God, and forced others to their interpretation.
Yep, that's beanieboy alright.


Christ came to put a stop to that.
And one day he's going to shut beanieboy up once and for all for rejecting Him.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:20 AM
And the rest of the story goes:

He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' ; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' " "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."



Worldly love would have you use your neighbor for vile reasons, and be used in return. Godly Love would have better for you.

Not my point.

Someone said that if you love yourself, you cannot love others.
Jesus said to love your neighbor as yourself (love your neighbor as much as you do yourself.)

Answer this: Can you love others if you do not love yourself?
That was my point.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:24 AM
Beanie claims that I misrepresent the bible cause I use verses that were only applied to Pharisees.

Now who around here would compare to a Pharisee? Well, what was it that the pharisees believed that caused Christ to get really irritated? That they didn't need Him or believe in Him and were good enough in themselves to be saved.

Anybody know of somebody who fits this description? I'll give you a hint.

His name starts with a "b" and ends in hell!! :flamer:

On the contrary - they preached the Law of Moses. They were Jewish. They were considered holy, as a preacher is. They were not looked down upon, yet, looked down on the "sinners." They exhalted themselves, and thought lowly of others. They enjoyed being called "rabbi" by others, being looked up to for being of the faith. They held places of power and status.

And Jesus told them they were way off base.

Kind of like TOL, in my opinion. Anyone who even suggests that christians should be humble, gentle, kind, etc, gets their head bit off.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:25 AM
Pharisees were the ones who were busy interpreting scripture in ways that shackled
God, and forced others to their interpretation. Christ came to put a stop to that. But
in the end, Christ was shackled and murdered, just like they had done with
Scripture. Christ was and is the Word, in many many ways.

Dave

!!!

Dude!!, that is really deep!
I've never looked at it that way.
Thanks.

Nineveh
April 28th, 2005, 09:26 AM
Not my point.

Right, you want to leave off the first part about Loving God first. He defines love, and without Him, you are free to define love as you see fit.


Someone said that if you love yourself, you cannot love others.
Jesus said to love your neighbor as yourself (love your neighbor as much as you do yourself.)

It wasn't Jesus that said it, but let's not bother with the facts. The man was aksed what the Law meant, and that was his answer to which Christ agreed. Love God with your whole being, and love your neighbor as yourself. Without the former the latter becomes self serving.


Answer this: Can you love others if you do not love yourself?
That was my point.

I can't love others without loving God. When I tried, I wound up using people, not in the same way you do, but to the same degree.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:26 AM
Yep, that's beanieboy alright.
And one day he's going to shut beanieboy up once and for all for rejecting Him.

Wow. I thought we were still playing the game, but Poly's already decided my fate.

Thank Buddha you aren't God.

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 09:32 AM
I would rather walk a bit of the walk - the "love your neighbor" part, and see if that leads me to God.
I pray often that I be led to the truth of God. Your bible says, "Seek and ye shall find."
Can you really ask any more of me? And if your God is Truth, that is where the path will lead, right?

You're such a fool. You say over and over, "I'm looking for answers". Your so full of it! You're not looking for answers, you're looking for excuses to keep doing the disgusting things you do. You have no intention whatsoever of accepting Christ, the only one good enough to cleanse you from your filth as He has those who've asked Him to forgive them. You're a hypocrite....





Beanieboy, you can change. This is a fact, don't believe the lie that somehow you're stuck as a homosexual. God does and can change the hearts of homosexuals. You need to renounce your lifestyle and repent of your ugly sin.

This has been said many times.
Thank you Freak.
I have to agree to disagree.

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 09:37 AM
You know what makes me sick? This thread. Would you primates grow up and leave the man alone? I've never read anything that leads me to believe that Beanieboy is anything less than honest, well-meaning and well-studied.

Nineveh
April 28th, 2005, 09:39 AM
Caledvwlch,

Really now... that's the last thing beanieboy wants is to be "left alone". He even turned Justin (Wiccan)'s thread into a thread about himself :)

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:43 AM
I can't love others without loving God. When I tried, I wound up using people, not in the same way you do, but to the same degree.

I believe that loving God IS loving your neighbor. That is why Jesus says, "when you have done this for the lowliest of people, you have done so for me."

But you seem to suggest that no one but christians can love.
I find it hard to believe. I know very loving Hindus and Muslims, and they have showed me pictures of their children. They are not "using each other", despite the fact that are not Christian.

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 09:44 AM
Caledvwlch,

Really now... that's the last thing beanieboy wants is to be "left alone". He even turned Justin (Wiccan)'s thread into a thread about himself :)
Well, of course he doesn't want to be left alone. We all come here to argue. Maybe learn something new, maybe not. But I think that perhaps treating him with respect regardless of his beliefs would be a courtesy easily imparted by the rest of us.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:47 AM
You're such a fool. You say over and over, "I'm looking for answers". Your so full of it! You're not looking for answers, you're looking for excuses to keep doing the disgusting things you do. You have no intention whatsoever of accepting Christ, the only one good enough to cleanse you from your filth as He has those who've asked Him to forgive them. You're a hypocrite....

I'm sorry you feel that way.

May God shine his face upon you, and may you feel his mercy.

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 09:48 AM
Caledvwlch,

Really now... that's the last thing beanieboy wants is to be "left alone". He even turned Justin (Wiccan)'s thread into a thread about himself :)

Perhaps because he knows that, unlike some (not all) Christians, Wiccans don't tend to shoot the wounded.

Justin

Edited to add: Mods, if this has to be moved or deleted, I understand. But this has got to be the most un-Christian thread I have seen since "Wasted Pearls"--especially in the light of Col 4:6.

J

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 09:52 AM
Caledvwlch,

Really now... that's the last thing beanieboy wants is to be "left alone". He even turned Justin (Wiccan)'s thread into a thread about himself :)

I did?
Which thread?

If so, I'll go change that. I'm a leo. oops.

Nineveh
April 28th, 2005, 10:06 AM
Perhaps because he knows that, unlike some (not all) Christians, Wiccans don't tend to shoot the wounded.

Justin

:) You can believe that, no harm. But the longer you are here, the more threads you will see beanieboy turn to himself. He likes talking about his favorite thing.


Edited to add: Mods, if this has to be moved or deleted, I understand. But this has got to be the most un-Christian thread I have seen since "Wasted Pearls"--especially in the light of Col 4:6.

J

I think Poly covered this a page back or so...

Nineveh
April 28th, 2005, 10:10 AM
Well, of course he doesn't want to be left alone. We all come here to argue. Maybe learn something new, maybe not. But I think that perhaps treating him with respect regardless of his beliefs would be a courtesy easily imparted by the rest of us.


beanieboy isn't willing to give respect. Please don't assume this is the first time I've talked to him. There are a few of us that still try, but it usually ends the same way, as Poly pointed out. I won't sit by while he tries to butcher the Bible to justify himself, however. I guess this is a case of getting as you give.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 10:25 AM
:) You can believe that, no harm. But the longer you are here, the more threads you will see beanieboy turn to himself. He likes talking about his favorite thing.
.

If I start discussing something, even if I debate homosexuality, and then someone says, "when will YOU accept Jesus and turn", then, yes, I will talk about me. But I don't purposefully turn something to me.

I will try to be more mindful to not do so in the future. Thank you for point this out.

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 10:31 AM
fag·got1 http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/JPG/pron.jpg (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fsearch%3 Fr%3D2%26q%3Dfaggot) ( P ) [b]Pronunciation Key (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html) (fhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/abreve.gifghttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gifhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gift)
n. Slang

Used as a disparaging term for a homosexual man.

fag·ot also fag·got http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/JPG/pron.jpg (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fsearch%3 Fr%3D2%26q%3Dfaggot) ( P ) Pronunciation Key (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html) (fhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/abreve.gifghttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gifhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gift)
n.

A bundle of twigs, sticks, or branches bound together.
A bundle of pieces of iron or steel to be welded or hammered into bars.
From Dictionary.com.

Since beanieboy fits the description of definition 2, I'd say it's perfectly applicable. I believe disparaging terms to the wicked are perfectly fine when used correctly.

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 10:36 AM
From Dictionary.com.

Since beanieboy fits the description of definition 2, I'd say it's perfectly applicable.


Used as a disparaging term for a homosexual man

In omitting the word, you demonstrate dishonesty. Or is honesty no longer required for Christians...?

Justin

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 10:36 AM
Stats so far: we have 17 smart people and 17 stupid people.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 10:36 AM
beanieboy isn't willing to give respect. Please don't assume this is the first time I've talked to him. There are a few of us that still try, but it usually ends the same way, as Poly pointed out. I won't sit by while he tries to butcher the Bible to justify himself, however. I guess this is a case of getting as you give.

You are making this about me.
You have asked not to make it about me, so I will open it up to the big picture.

The topic is the behavior of christians towards the unsaved.
Is name calling appropriate, when it is meant to be derogatory?

Why are the majority of the terms that Poly referred to addressed to the Pharisees and not the "sinners"?
Why aren't there passages in the bible where Jesus mocks the tax collectors, etc., while the diciples look on and say, "yeah" and make :kookoo: gestures, and walk away in a huff.

There is one passage where the disciples rebuke a women for anointing his head with oil and washing his feet, saying that her efforts were wasted, and Jesus rebuked his own disciples.

There is a passage where Jesus says to a Gentile that the master does not take food from the table and give it to the dogs (her), and she responded, "yes, but even the dogs eat the crumbs." He then exhalted her over those who were following him, showing that she even be pushed away from Jesus, even when he himself discouraged her, and showed that this was an example of faith.

When calling someone "faggot", is it truly done in the name of love, or in the name of hatred?
Is Fred Phelp in the right when he uses such terms? Are his intentions to edify? Are his ways appropriate? Is he truly helping anyone in protesting churches and funerals? Has he made any converts?

And of those who reject Jesus, should they be allowed to post?
If it is truly that much of a burden on posters that they can't see the growth of the seeds they plant, should there be a rejection limit - a number of postings, length of time, etc?

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 10:38 AM
Is Fred Phelp in the right when he uses such terms? Are his intentions to edify? Are his ways appropriate? Is he truly helping anyone in protesting churches and funerals? Has he made any converts?

Fred Phelps is a blithering idiot.

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 10:39 AM
*Note to the reader*

beanieboy uses the bible to back up his arguments but does not believe in it.

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 10:39 AM
In omitting the word, you demonstrate dishonesty. Or is honesty no longer required for Christians...?

Justin
Nice call. He went back and fixed it.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 10:40 AM
Fred Phelps is a blithering idiot.

Some posters say that they are "loving people by mocking them."
They claim that they are warning homosexuals of hell.
They are using the word "faggot" not to dehumanize, but to love.

How is this different?

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 10:42 AM
*Note to the reader*

beanieboy uses the bible to back up his arguments but does not believe in it.

You are making this thread about me.

I will answer this, and then ask that you stay on topic.

I use the bible, and then say, "if you say you believe, why do you not observe this passage?"
That's all.

Agape4Robin
April 28th, 2005, 10:42 AM
*Note to the reader*

beanieboy uses the bible to back up his arguments but does not believe in it.
Sometimes God works on the heart when we are least aware.
I trust God that, if beanieboy uses scripture to argue.....that God's Word will not come back void.

Don't be so haughty... :nono:

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 10:42 AM
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/images/as/reputation/reputation_neg.gifIs calling Beanieboy a ... (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=739652#post739652)April 28th, 2005 10:37 AMCaledvwlch (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=2533)Grow up, primate.

:darwinsm: Haha! I think Caledvwlch took a good 5 points from me! :crackup:

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 10:42 AM
Nice call. He went back and fixed it.

Once a man has started down a lying path, further dishonesty on his part does not suprise me.

Justin

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 10:44 AM
:darwinsm: Haha! I think Caledvwlch took a good 5 points from me! :crackup:
Hehehe. It was the least and the most I could do. Watch out, or I'll slap you for five more in a few days! :chuckle:

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 10:46 AM
Nice call. He went back and fixed it.I believe disparaging terms to the wicked are perfectly fine when used correctly.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 10:47 AM
From www.godhatesfags.com


The word "fag" is a contraction of the word "faggot" (or, "fagot"). When traced through its etymological history, the word "faggot" simply means "a bundle of sticks used as fuel." See dictionary.com and thesaurus.com (where such words as "fuel" and "brimstone" are used as synonyms). "Scholars" can't decide when such a word began to be used in reference to homosexuals, so we'll give the answer here: "I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the Lord." Amos 4:11. The word translated "firebrand" is the Hebrew word "uwd," which comes from a Hebrew verb meaning "to rake together" (or, "to gather together"). In short, the Hebrew word "uwd" is talking about burning sticks of wood that are gathered together. That is what the English word "faggot" means. Amos 4:11 could just as easily be translated "...ye were as a faggot plucked out of the burning..."

For those geniuses out there who are asking, "are you saying that God hates burning pieces of wood?", the answer is "no, we're using it as a figure of speech, just like the Bible uses it." It is an excellent metaphor to describe sodomites because they fuel God's wrath, they burn in lust, and they will burn in hell. In Amos 4:11, the "fag" is the person who is sinning after the manner of Sodom and Gomorrah, has seen other "fags" overthrown by God, and still refuses to repent. So, the word "fag" refers to people who sin like the Sodomites did. It not only refers to homosexuals, but also refers to people who support homosexuals (see Romans 1:32), and people who engage in all other relatively "lesser" perversions (like impenitent premarital sex and adultery, including the adultery of all of you divorced-and-remarried "born again Christians"). On this web site, we use the word "fag" in accordance with Amos 4:11.

For those of you who have deluded yourselves into thinking that the story of Sodom isn't really talking about homosexuals, read the following: the people of Sodom and Gomorrah had completely turned away from God, and whenever that happens, homosexuality abounds. Paul described this in Romans 1, and you can read the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19. Conditions in Sodom were so bad that it had become acceptable for men to surround Lot's house and ask to have sex with the men inside. Anybody who thinks that today is any different than those days needs to attend San Francisco's annual gay rights parade, stand along the parade route, and hold a sign that says "GOD HATES FAGS." You'll see and hear evidence of all of the sins of Sodom in just a few short hours (sodomy, violence, fornication, adultery, pride, sinful treatment of the servants of God, etc.) The same mob mentality that ruled the unlawful fags in the days of Sodom rules the unlawful fags today.

Is Fred acting Christ-like?

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 10:49 AM
I believe disparaging terms to the wicked are perfectly fine when used correctly.
That's nice.

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 10:51 AM
Thank you. :cool:

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 10:53 AM
Sometimes God works on the heart when we are least aware.
I trust God that, if beanieboy uses scripture to argue.....that God's Word will not come back void.

Don't be so haughty... :nono:

Did you even bother to read post #137?

cattyfan
April 28th, 2005, 10:53 AM
beanieboy will continue to be unhappy as long as anyone dares to point out that homosexuality is wrong...it doesn't matter if you spit the most vile of words and if you couch it in the prettiest of terms. His problem is he wants us to all give a stamp of approval to his perversion...as long as he is unable to acknowledge that his sleeping with men is a sin, we will continue to see his endless posts misrepresenting Christ's Words.

And here is the difference between him and most of the rest of us: when someone points out my sin, or when I silently consider my own sin, I am ashamed...embarrassed...and I repent and pray for God's mercy. I don't puff up and pretend that God approves of my transgressions. beanie is unable to do this because if he did, he would have to confront the need to alter his lifestyle.

It's actually very sad.

Agape4Robin
April 28th, 2005, 10:54 AM
I believe disparaging terms to the wicked are perfectly fine when used correctly.
:blabla:

Caledvwlch
April 28th, 2005, 10:56 AM
:blabla:
This is starting to get creepy, Robin. I've agreed with you and Nineveh on the same day. :noid:
Should I be worried?

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 10:56 AM
I believe disparaging terms to the wicked are perfectly fine when used correctly.

Then why did you go through the effort of removing the word "disparaging" when you first posted it? You had it all there, cut-and-pasted, yet went back and removed the word.

Why did you edit your post to add the word "Disparaging" back in when I called you on it?

If it was "perfectly fine," why bother with the dishonesty?

Justin

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 11:03 AM
Why did you edit your post to add the word "Disparaging" back in when I called you on it? Because it obviously made a difference to you and was relevant in our conversation. To me it is irrelevant.
The transitive verb form was "edited" too, and yet that wasn't relevant to you so I didn't change it. You want me to change it?

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 11:04 AM
:blabla: :confused: :kookoo:

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:05 AM
How is this hypocracy?

I come here because I'm unsure of what I think about Christianity.
So I come and speak to Christians.

I see something that goes agaisnt what the bible says, and point it out, and they ignore it, and turn it to me, saying that I need to repent.

Isn't hypocracy saying that you believe the bible, yet ignore it? That you think that you are exempt from following it, while another should?


Matthew 27
1Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.

This is saying that there are those that ask you to do as they say, and not as they do.l
This is true hypocracy.

If you choose to act unchrist-like, then don't claim to be a christian.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:05 AM
beanieboy will continue to be unhappy as long as anyone dares to point out that homosexuality is wrong...it doesn't matter if you spit the most vile of words and if you couch it in the prettiest of terms. His problem is he wants us to all give a stamp of approval to his perversion...as long as he is unable to acknowledge that his sleeping with men is a sin, we will continue to see his endless posts misrepresenting Christ's Words.

And here is the difference between him and most of the rest of us: when someone points out my sin, or when I silently consider my own sin, I am ashamed...embarrassed...and I repent and pray for God's mercy. I don't puff up and pretend that God approves of my transgressions. beanie is unable to do this because if he did, he would have to confront the need to alter his lifestyle.

It's actually very sad.

When someone points out that you are not acting in accordance with the bible that you claim to believe in, you don't puff up? You don't get angry and snide? You act ashamed?

With all due respect, that's not what I've seen.

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 11:06 AM
Because it obviously made a difference to you and was relevant in our conversation. To me it is irrelevant.

Oh ... so if I quote one of your statements in the future, remove a single word (a word that changes the meaning of the sentence), and post it as your words, would that also be irrelevant?

And you did not answer why you removed the word in the first place.

Justin

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 11:09 AM
Because it's irrelevant. The term faggot is a term for a homosexual man. Do you doubt that definition?

It is irrelevant, it doen't matter if it is disparaging.

cattyfan
April 28th, 2005, 11:12 AM
you are making this thread about me

At the heart of this discussion is why people use a "derogatory" term to refer to gays and why do gays react badly when they are cited for what they are.

And the discussion is, in part, about you in particular, as you are the on on TOL who whines, cries, and misrepresents portions of the Bible in an effort to excuse or deny your sin.

Now that the glare of the spotlight is on your hypocrisy, you're uncomfortable...but, as always, you're revelling in the attention. Your desire to focus all discussions on you by steering threads to discussions of your personal habits belies your discomfiture with this thread.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:13 AM
Because it's irrelevant. The term faggot is a term for a homosexual man. Do you doubt that claim?

It is irrelevant, it doen't matter if it is disparaging.

How does this not sound like Fred Phelps?
Is Fred Phelps acting Christ-like?

Or is no one going to answer?

God_Is_Truth
April 28th, 2005, 11:13 AM
But Jesus said, "love your neighbor as yourself."

If you hate yourself, you will probably not love your neighbor either.

if you hate yourself, you won't live long enough to have it be an issue.

God_Is_Truth
April 28th, 2005, 11:16 AM
beanieboy, any thoughts on post #96?

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:16 AM
At the heart of this discussion is why people use a "derogatory" term to refer to gays and why do gays react badly when they are cited for what they are.

And the discussion is, in part, about you in particular, as you are the on on TOL who whines, cries, and misrepresents portions of the Bible in an effort to excuse or deny your sin.

Now that the glare of the spotlight is on your hypocrisy, you're uncomfortable...but, as always, you're revelling in the attention. Your desire to focus all discussions on you by steering threads to discussions of your personal habits belies your discomfiture with this thread.

How am I hypocritical.

I am Buddhist. I believe in Buddhist writings and philosophy.

You are christian, you claim to believe in the bible.

Feel free to use Buddhist writings to show where I am not living as a Buddhist.

btw, please do not say that I am whining. I think that is unfair, and on par with name calling, when one is simply not in agreement with you.

I will say now, and repeat, that I am not looking for an excuse or your permission. I am living my life based on my choice. Please stop putting words in my mouth that were never there. Thank you.

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 11:21 AM
I am living my life based on my choice. And you will live forever with that choice (hell) unless you change your mind while here on earth.

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 11:25 AM
Because it's irrelevant. The term faggot is a term for a homosexual man. Do you doubt that definition?

It is irrelevant, it doen't matter if it is disparaging.

Ah, so, as I asked before, if I quote one of your statements in the future, remove a single word (a word that changes the meaning of the sentence), and post it as your words, would that also be irrelevant?

Justin

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 11:28 AM
How am I hypocritical.

I am Buddhist. I believe in Buddhist writings and philosophy.


I believe in taking naps on the weekend. So what?! Do you believe that Buddha is God? Or the Christ? Or do you just like the idea that there are no consequences in Buddhism?

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:30 AM
sin is that which is contrary to the character of God. thus, since God is love, sin would be anything not loving. if heterosexuality is good (which the bible says it is, adam and eve were told to multiply), then homosexuality is not good because it is a perversion of that which God said is good. since it is not good, it is not loving towards God to follow it. since it's not loving, it's a sin.

That would mean that priests live in sin, because they do not produce. That would mean that people who have sex when they are not reproducing are not loving.
Sex is more complicated than that. Old people have sex. People have sex who do not love each other. People have sex to reproduce, and at other times, to sexually satisfy one another with no intention for children.

And coupling has more to do with sex. It's about supporting another, comforting another, inspiring another, encouraging another... sex is a tiny, tiny part of a relationship.

Even male/female is more complicated. (There are those who are born with both sex organs - it happens...So, before modern medicine, which would that person be with to be "heterosexual"?


how can God be concerned with only that which is loving and not be concerned at all with that which is not loving (sin) ?

I never said that.
Does God care about someone who commits adultery? Sure. But if God is weighing on the heart of that person to love their spouse, the love will lead them away from adultery, which harms the spouse.



and the more you grow to love yourself, the harder it is to love your neigbhor as yourself.

I am not saying to be self serving, nor conceited.

Often, people who are suicidal, or abusing drugs, or prostitutes, are so convinced that they are not worthy of love that they don't love themselves, or care for themselves. The suicide person, therefore, truly believes that the world is better without them, but the truth is, they hurt everyone that loved them.

I don't see homosexuality as the same thing.
I see no negative repercussions that can't be said of heterosexuals.

But as for loving oneself, I must wholey disagree. Those who are happy, love themselves, and because they love themselves, they love other people. Their loves comes genuinely from within.

Those who harm others are generally unhappy. They delight in mocking others, bullying others, harming others, have no compassion or sympathy for their vicitims... That's why I question so many users here. I feel depressed when I'm here. No, not because I am looking for approval, but becasue I see people who are supposed to be the light of the world, as I as taught, acting like poisinous snakes, ready to bite and devour anyone that dare disagree, and anyone that dare knock them off of the pedastal that they have exhalted themselves to.

That's how I imagine the end days.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:31 AM
And you will live forever with that choice (hell) unless you change your mind while here on earth.

You've made your point. I understand that.

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 11:34 AM
Ok then.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:34 AM
I believe in taking naps on the weekend. So what?! Do you believe that Buddha is God? Or the Christ? Or do you just like the idea that there are no consequences in Buddhism?

You are talking semantics.

I'm unsure what I think of Christ. I don't understand the blood, death stuff.

Do I believe that Buddha is God? Of course not. Buddha didn't claim to be anything other than a man.

I have taken the time to learn of your religion, you may want to take time to understand mine.

There are consequences in Buddhism, which are pretty self evident.
If you lie to others, your karma is that others will not trust you.
If you are abusive to others, your will find yourself alone.
Of the kindness you give out, so shall you be rewarded.

I believe that your Christ said, "Cast your bread upon the water, and it will come back to you." He also said that you will get back 3 times what you give.

Same idea.

Buddhism doesn't believe in a hell/heaven. You reach Nirvana, or you remain in illusion.

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 11:38 AM
That would mean that priests live in sin, because they do not produce. That would mean that people who have sex when they are not reproducing are not loving.
Sex is more .......aught, acting like poisinous snakes, ready to bite and devour anyone that dare disagree, and anyone that dare knock them off of the pedastal that they have exhalted themselves to.

That's how I imagine the end days.
Good Lord! You go on and on about sexual sins as if homosexuality is justified because of adultery.

God created man and woman to be together, to become one flesh, period.

What do you tell the police officer when he stops you for speeding? "Sorry, officer, I don't believe in the traffic laws."

Nineveh
April 28th, 2005, 11:39 AM
You are making this about me.

Um... reread the thread title :)

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 11:42 AM
You are talking semantics.

I'm unsure what I think of Christ. I don't understand the blood, death stuff.

Do I believe that Buddha is God? Of course not. Buddha didn't claim to be anything other than a man.

I have taken the time to learn of your religion, you may want to take time to understand mine.
You don't understand the blood, death stuff or you don't want to because it's too close for comfort?

So Buddhism is a religion without a God? Ben Franklin had a lot of good sayings and ideas....why not worship him?

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 11:42 AM
What do you tell the police officer when he stops you for speeding? "Sorry, officer, I don't believe in the traffic laws."

The actual disagreement here is not whether or not laws should be followed, but whether or not your particular set of laws have jurisdiction.

Justin

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 11:45 AM
The actual disagreement here is not whether or not laws should be followed, but whether or not your particular set of laws have jurisdiction.

Justin
Exactly. God claims jurisdiction, Buddha doesn't.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:46 AM
Good Lord! You go on and on about sexual sins as if homosexuality is justified because of adultery.

God created man and woman to be together, to become one flesh, period.

What do you tell the police officer when he stops you for speeding? "Sorry, officer, I don't believe in the traffic laws."

I'm not saying that homosexuality is justified because of adultery.
Adultery involves lying, and hurts the person you are cheating on.

Homosexuality doesn't have that effect.

I would liken it more to premarital sex. A lot of people have premarital sex, but that isn't talked about, and rarely questioned, because most people don't see it as harmful to anyone, and their own business.

I don't believe that men and women were created to procreate.

Otherwise, why would the priests, nuns, and Pope, who are all very religious, forgo sex?

But if it was only for procreation, everyone would have hundreds of children.

I think it is much more complicated, and a relationship can't be built on sex alone.

Emo
April 28th, 2005, 11:48 AM
Those that didn't accept Christ, thinking that they didn't need Him and disrespected Him were called names by Him. This fits beanieboy to a T. He has been told in all sincerity many many times by various people on here that he needs Christ. He claims that He doesn't believe in the bible yet continually uses it against the people of God. This is some big time hypocrisy. If you remember right, Christ didn't think very highly of hypocrites. beanieboy has also said to those that are harsh, "well, if you were just a little nicer and more considerate, maybe it would help me but I don't want to have anything to do with mean people". So what happens? People are nice and throw their precious pearls to him. They have time and again and does this change anything? No. He still says, just as he did to Freak earlier that he'll agree to disagree. God, as well as Godly men in the bible, sometimes mocked people as well as called them names. Christ didn't pull any punches when it came to telling it like it is. When he offended those that were self-righteous, not seeing their need for him, His disciples said..."hey don't you know you offended them?" Christ didn't say...."oh man, guys, we need to go apologize. Hurry, go catch them." No He said..." Leave them alone. They're blind leaders of the blind and they'll both end up falling in the ditch." Matthew 15:12-14.

We need to make sure we are patterning our behavior after Christs toward those who refuse to accept Him.

POTD! (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=739757#post739757) :first:

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:48 AM
You don't understand the blood, death stuff or you don't want to because it's too close for comfort?

So Buddhism is a religion without a God? Ben Franklin had a lot of good sayings and ideas....why not worship him?

Do you ignore what Ben Franklin said, simply because they aren't in the bible?
Or do you believe that they are an extension of the Creator?

Does Buddhism have a God? Not really. It follows the same Golden Rule, and if you choose to believe in a higher power, that is your choice, your path.

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 11:49 AM
Exactly. God claims jurisdiction, Buddha doesn't.

That's the actual question that brings it back to the actual topic of the thread. Does God claim jurisdiction, or are people trying to sell me a bill of goods in His name?

If a Christian states that God claims jurisdiction over sexual sin (citing Romans 1), yet that same Christian has forgotten that God also claims jurisdiction over their speech (Col 4:6), then why should I, as a non-Christian, believe the first claim?

Justin

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:51 AM
Exactly. God claims jurisdiction, Buddha doesn't.

Buddha (the figure) doesn't.
But yes, you are accountable for your own actions.
If you are unhappy, you look at your life and figure out why.
If you are lonely, you can't blame other people, and have to self reflect on how you have managed to push people away.

A friend of mine is a Zen Buddhist, and said that living a Zen Buddhist life is far harder than the Catholic life that he was brought up in. You don't store up your sins for a week, then get them erased at confession. You live each moment being conscious not only of your actions and words, but even your very thoughts. Am I edifying another? If not, take it out of your head, out of your mouth, refrain from the action.

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 11:53 AM
That's the actual question that brings it back to the actual topic of the thread. Does God claim jurisdiction, or are people trying to sell me a bill of goods in His name?

If a Christian states that God claims jurisdiction over sexual sin (citing Romans 1), yet that same Christian has forgotten that God also claims jurisdiction over their speech (Col 4:6), then why should I, as a non-Christian, believe the first claim?

Justin
Why are you willing to bet eternity on a person's forgetfulness?

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:53 AM
POTD! (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=739757#post739757) :first:

Ironically, a good post.

Maybe I, too, should leave alone ones who claim to be blind guides.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 11:54 AM
Why are you willing to bet eternity on a person's forgetfulness?

You dodged the question.

Why should he believe that what you say is true, if you refuse to adhere to it yourself.

Clete
April 28th, 2005, 12:02 PM
That's the actual question that brings it back to the actual topic of the thread. Does God claim jurisdiction, or are people trying to sell me a bill of goods in His name?

If a Christian states that God claims jurisdiction over sexual sin (citing Romans 1), yet that same Christian has forgotten that God also claims jurisdiction over their speech (Col 4:6), then why should I, as a non-Christian, believe the first claim?

Justin
This post barely makes any sense. What do you mean by God claiming jurisdiction? God has jurisdiction over the whole shooting match you silly fool. He has authority to end this whole little drama we call life and send you and your homo buddies right straight to Hell any time He wants. The only reason you're alive is because of the patience and mercy of God. Every breath you draw is drawn because God has delayed His judgement upon you.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

You presume upon the patience and mercy of the living God and thereby store up judgment for yourself.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 12:02 PM
Why are you willing to bet eternity on a person's forgetfulness?

Look around you, On Fire. Read the posts in this thread. This is not "forgetfullness": this is either willful disobedience to an actual standard, or touting a false standard to others that those who proclaim the standard do not even recognize.

Willful disobedience or false standards ... either way, I have to wonder who the "white-washed sepulchers" are.

Justin

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 12:04 PM
This post barely makes any sense. What do you mean by God claiming jurisdiction? God has jurisdiction over the whole shooting match you silly fool.

That is the claim that some Christians make. Yet I see some of those self-same Christians who proclaim the standard, yet do not follow it. How am I to know if such a standard is true when those who proclaim it do not even follow it?


He has authority to end this whole little drama we call life and send you and your homo buddies right straight to Hell any time He wants. The only reason you're alive is because of the patience and mercy of God. Every breath you draw is drawn because God has delayed His judgement upon you.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

You presume upon the patience and mercy of the living God and thereby store up judgment for yourself.

And your source that I presume upon His patience?

Justin

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 12:08 PM
That's the actual question that brings it back to the actual topic of the thread. Does God claim jurisdiction, or are people trying to sell me a bill of goods in His name?

If a Christian states that God claims jurisdiction over sexual sin (citing Romans 1), yet that same Christian has forgotten that God also claims jurisdiction over their speech (Col 4:6), then why should I, as a non-Christian, believe the first claim?

Justin
You used the word forgotten. They haven't forgotten, they are sinners. We are all sinners.

Clete
April 28th, 2005, 12:15 PM
That is the claim that some Christians make. Yet I see some of those self-same Christians who proclaim the standard, yet do not follow it. How am I to know if such a standard is true when those who proclaim it do not even follow it?
You already know it's true, you just choose to ignore the truth becaue you love darkness rather than light.

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.


And your source that I presume upon His patience?

Justin
You own words betray you Justine. You are trying to accuse Christians of hypocricy while playing the hypocrite yourself! Even if every Christian on the planet is a hypocrite, that doesn't change the fact that God is holy and He is the standard of righteousness not Christians, not the BIble, and certainly not whatever convoluted Wiccan nonsense you've managed to come up with on your own.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 12:23 PM
You used the word forgotten.

Why, so I did.


They haven't forgotten, they are sinners.

According to your text, then, these people who are doing wrong (ie, these people who are violating Col 4:6) are not born again?

So let's look at 1 John 3:6....


6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.

If disobedience to Col 4:6 is a sin, then those who willfully continue to engage in such behavior are willfully continuing in sin. Yet the author of 1 John says that those who continue to sin does not live in Him [God].


We are all sinners.

And once again: how do I believe your claim for this, much less your claim for the "cure" for the condition? Looking around me, I see several people who look like the cure didn't work for them.

1 John 4: 7-11

7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son[b] into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for[c] our sins. 11 Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.

On Fire, this is the love whereby I know those who know God. Yes, I've borrowed your scriptures to establish the point, but my experience teaches me the same. 1 John is not speaking of love between Christians, but the love Christians are supposed to have for the unsaved: the image of that love is the love God had for us--the love that, according to your scriptures, was the reason God sent His Son.

As Christians, you are supposed to love non-Christians as much as God loved them. Yet for all I see, most Christians don't even love other Christians that much.

No, On Fire, I will not follow your advice and become Christian. By the example of several of the Christians in this thread, I would be forced to love my neighbors far less. And to do so would dishonor God, who Created us all.

Justin

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 12:29 PM
You already know it's true, you just choose to ignore the truth becaue you love darkness rather than light.

This is where you are incorrect, Clete. I once followed the Christian path ... to use your terminology, God could not deliver me from the darkness that I loved. Once I became Wiccan, I realized that the actual problem was not with God, but with the rules, traditions, and dogma of man.


Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

You assert, by this verse, that I do not "glorify Him as God." You will probably never discover just how wrong you are.


John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

And is there not every bit as much evil--by your standards--in disobeying Col 4:6 as there is in disobeying Rom 1?

Justin

Granite
April 28th, 2005, 01:03 PM
For a while I really hoped the title of this thread was ironic.

Guess that was wishful thinking...:nono:

Poly
April 28th, 2005, 01:13 PM
beanieboy will continue to be unhappy as long as anyone dares to point out that homosexuality is wrong...it doesn't matter if you spit the most vile of words and if you couch it in the prettiest of terms. His problem is he wants us to all give a stamp of approval to his perversion...as long as he is unable to acknowledge that his sleeping with men is a sin, we will continue to see his endless posts misrepresenting Christ's Words.

And here is the difference between him and most of the rest of us: when someone points out my sin, or when I silently consider my own sin, I am ashamed...embarrassed...and I repent and pray for God's mercy. I don't puff up and pretend that God approves of my transgressions. beanie is unable to do this because if he did, he would have to confront the need to alter his lifestyle.

It's actually very sad.

POTD (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=739854#post739854) :up:

God_Is_Truth
April 28th, 2005, 01:14 PM
That would mean that priests live in sin, because they do not produce. That would mean that people who have sex when they are not reproducing are not loving.
Sex is more complicated than that. Old people have sex. People have sex who do not love each other. People have sex to reproduce, and at other times, to sexually satisfy one another with no intention for children.



not doing the act is not the same as doing a peversion of it. i am not suggesting that sex is only allowed when reproducting.


And coupling has more to do with sex. It's about supporting another, comforting another, inspiring another, encouraging another... sex is a tiny, tiny part of a relationship.

i would not say it's a tiny aspect, but i agree that it's not the only aspect.



Even male/female is more complicated. (There are those who are born with both sex organs - it happens...So, before modern medicine, which would that person be with to be "heterosexual"?

irrelevent to our discussion.



I am not saying to be self serving, nor conceited.

Often, people who are suicidal, or abusing drugs, or prostitutes, are so convinced that they are not worthy of love that they don't love themselves, or care for themselves. The suicide person, therefore, truly believes that the world is better without them, but the truth is, they hurt everyone that loved them.

but still, as one grows to love ones self, it becomes harder and harder to love others the same way.



I don't see homosexuality as the same thing.
I see no negative repercussions that can't be said of heterosexuals.

it is still a perversion of that which God declared to be good. it is therefore dishonoring to him to engage in such acts.



But as for loving oneself, I must wholey disagree. Those who are happy, love themselves, and because they love themselves, they love other people. Their loves comes genuinely from within.

most people love themselves but do not love others. love for oneself breeds more love for oneself, not love for others.



Those who harm others are generally unhappy. They delight in mocking others, bullying others, harming others, have no compassion or sympathy for their vicitims... That's why I question so many users here. I feel depressed when I'm here. No, not because I am looking for approval, but becasue I see people who are supposed to be the light of the world, as I as taught, acting like poisinous snakes, ready to bite and devour anyone that dare disagree, and anyone that dare knock them off of the pedastal that they have exhalted themselves to.

That's how I imagine the end days.

that's how it is today.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 01:20 PM
but still, as one grows to love ones self, it becomes harder and harder to love others the same way..

I guess we will have to agree not to agree.
If one does not love oneself, then how can he love his neighbor as himself, if he doesn't love himself?

A bully isn't one who loves himself and not others. They are usually buliled, and take out their anger and sadness on others.

One who is conceited is usually fully of insecurity, and so, over compensates, and is highly critical of others whom they think are better than they are.

Those who kill themselves are convinced everyone hates them, and that they aren't loveable.

These are very disabling things.

But those who are happy with themselves show that happiness to others. Someone who has true love for themself will be humble, will encourage others, will delight in helping others.

God_Is_Truth
April 28th, 2005, 01:25 PM
I guess we will have to agree not to agree.
If one does not love oneself, then how can he love his neighbor as himself, if he doesn't love himself?

i agree that one can't love others unless one first loves himself, but i deny that loving oneself leads to loving others.



A bully isn't one who loves himself and not others. They are usually buliled, and take out their anger and sadness on others.

yes i agree.



But those who are happy with themselves show that happiness to others. Someone who has true love for themself will be humble, will encourage others, will delight in helping others.

they ought to, but they don't necessarily.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 01:29 PM
it is still a perversion of that which God declared to be good. it is therefore dishonoring to him to engage in such acts.


www.whosoever.org would disagree.

But I respect your opinion. I personally can't find any negative repercussion to it, nor do i believe that anyone can change from homosexual to heterosexual. You can live a life as a celebate homosexual, but trying to live a life as a heterosexual, as some of my friends have done, usually ends in divorce, and splitting the family apart.

I think that is much more detrimental, as well as dishonest.

On Fire
April 28th, 2005, 01:31 PM
According to your text, then, these people who are doing wrong (ie, these people who are violating Col 4:6) are not born again?

So let's look at 1 John 3:6....

If disobedience to Col 4:6 is a sin, then those who willfully continue to engage in such behavior are willfully continuing in sin. Yet the author of 1 John says that those who continue to sin does not live in Him [God].


KEEPS ON SINNING = 3d Per Sing Pres Act Ind meaning "continually/habitually sinning" (continuous action [linear], rather than an occasional sin or mistake [punctiliar]). Compare with 1 John 3:9 and 1 John 5:18.

Nice try. Since your premise is faulty, I'll assume the rest of your post is equally garbage.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 01:32 PM
i agree that one can't love others unless one first loves himself, but i deny that loving oneself leads to loving others.
yes i agree.
they ought to, but they don't necessarily.

My African Dance teacher says, "I love being me. I am exceedingly glad that I am who I am. Do you thank God for who you are? You should. It is your gift from the Creator, and a gift to us."

He makes me only feel loved, and want to love myself.

I don't see it as arrogance at all, but something that I want to aspire to.

In turn, I also want to reach out to others, especially those convinced that they are worthless. That's what the world does. We degrade each other, tell others they are idiot, or morons, are stupid, are pansies/sissies/girly men faggots, are fat cows, are lie-berals, are conservative with no soul...

We spend some much time cutting each other down, and very little building each other up.

When I'm angry, or down on myself, I easily tell people off, am harsh, am inpatient, slip in cheap shots, but when I am feeling good, I can give complements away easily. I don't want to criticize, but will critique in a Food for Thought way and leave it at that.

I think it is imparitve to love yourself in order to love others.
As a Christian, if Jesus is in your heart, then, yes, the love for others will come internally (from your heart, from Jesus.)

As a Buddhist, you are to treat all people as if they are your close family member - with honor and respect.
It's tough, but it is what is right.

God_Is_Truth
April 28th, 2005, 01:34 PM
www.whosoever.org would disagree.

But I respect your opinion. I personally can't find any negative repercussion to it

the strong possibility of aids isn't a negative reprecussion?



nor do i believe that anyone can change from homosexual to heterosexual.

why not?



You can live a life as a celebate homosexual, but trying to live a life as a heterosexual, as some of my friends have done, usually ends in divorce, and splitting the family apart.

I think that is much more detrimental, as well as dishonest.

to try to live as something you're not would be a lie and as you said, it usually doesn't work very well. i agree.

God_Is_Truth
April 28th, 2005, 01:37 PM
My African Dance teacher says, "I love being me. I am exceedingly glad that I am who I am. Do you thank God for who you are? You should. It is your gift from the Creator, and a gift to us."

He makes me only feel loved, and want to love myself.

I don't see it as arrogance at all, but something that I want to aspire to.

i didn't say anything about arrogance. arrogance deals with making yourself more than you are. it's not about how much you love yourself.

but you still haven't shown how loving oneself leads to loving others. why would the command to love others as ourselves be stated so many times in the NT if it wasn't very hard to follow?

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 01:39 PM
KEEPS ON SINNING = 3d Per Sing Pres Act Ind meaning "continually/habitually sinning" (continuous action [linear], rather than an occasional sin or mistake [punctiliar]). Compare with 1 John 3:9 and 1 John 5:18.

First and foremost, credit your source. (http://www.christiancommunitychurch.us/clevelandcommentary/1John03.html) Secondly, I am quite aware of the Greek verb parsing ... look at the behavior in this thread. The behavior demonstrated here is "continual/habitual" (not to mention wilful) violations of Col 4:6, thereby fully qualifying under 1 John 3:6.


Nice try. Since your premise is faulty, I'll assume the rest of your post is equally garbage.

Care to try again?

Justin

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 01:51 PM
the strong possibility of aids isn't a negative reprecussion?

Yes, the possibility of AIDS is a strong reprecussion.
World wide, there are more heterosexual cases than homosexual.
Having sex (even when married, if the other person cheats) opens you up to that possibility.


why not?

I have yet to see it. When I was dealing with it in my late teens, I read a lot of literature. Exodus was started by 2 reformed homosexuals. They fell in love with each other, denounced the organization altogether.

I think there are gay, bi, and straight people.
I suppose bi people can choose one over the other, but men attracted to men don't become attracted to women. People argue that you can be conditioned to find women attractive. Should it be a struggle to find women attractive when heterosexual men do with no conditioning? They simply go from hating girls at 10 to thinking only about sex at 15. They don't go into a training program.


to try to live as something you're not would be a lie and as you said, it usually doesn't work very well. i agree.

Yeah. I know at least 3 guys who tried to live as heterosexuals. He had to admit to his wife that his attractions were to men, they cried, they divorced, they take turns caring for their kids, etc.

Very sad.

Jefferson
April 28th, 2005, 01:55 PM
I'm a little confused about Bob Enyart's take on this issue. For example Bob used to sell products on his show called "Gay-Away" and "Dyke-Off" The word "dyke" is the female equivalent to the word "fag." Yet the following exchange took place this week on Bob's talk-show:


Bob Enyart (quoting "reporter" Keith Swain"): And they shouted, "God hates fags."

Jo Scott: No one did that.

Bob: You guys didn't do that?

Jo: Nope.

Bob: Was it just on that occassion? Do you guy normally shout, "God hates fags?"

Jo: No.

Bob: No. Who does shout that?

Jo: Oh, that Phelps (http://www.godhatesfags.com/sermons/sermons.html) from Kansas.

Bob: So Phelps says things like that and it's dispicable. There is a line that God draws and we need to honor Him in everything we do and say.

Jo: Right.

Bob: And it seems to me that just shouting, "God hates fags," it's just their desire to be vulgar because they use 4 letter words. Dispicable. The most filthy mouthed things Fred Phelps and his 20 year old daughters say in public.

Maybe I'll call Bob's show to get him to clarify his position on this but I'm not sure I've got the time so if someone else wants to... But be sure to mention this thread that way TOL will get a nice plug! :)

Zakath
April 28th, 2005, 01:55 PM
First and foremost, credit your source. (http://www.christiancommunitychurch.us/clevelandcommentary/1John03.html)As you are witnessing, many of these people have little regard for intellectual property rights... :rolleyes:

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 01:58 PM
i didn't say anything about arrogance. arrogance deals with making yourself more than you are. it's not about how much you love yourself.

but you still haven't shown how loving oneself leads to loving others. why would the command to love others as ourselves be stated so many times in the NT if it wasn't very hard to follow?

It is hard to follow.

And I'm not saying one should love themself over others.

They should love themselves and others on a equal terms.

If someone is called ugly and stupid, and then internalizes that, will they easily reach out to others? They have enough to try and reach out to themselves.
But if one feels good about themself, they will see another calling themself ugly and stupid, and offer words of comfort and encouragement. So, it comes internally.

As I said, for a Christian, who has Christ in his heart, is not the source of that love, then internal, from feeling love from God, and loving God, and going externally from that point?

The well can care for the sick, but they must take care of themselves to be well enough to offer care.

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 02:17 PM
I'm a little confused about Bob Enyart's take on this issue. For example Bob used to sell products on his show called "Gay-Away" and "Dyke-Off" The word "dyke" is the female equivalent to the word "fag." Yet the following exchange took place this week on Bob's talk-show:



Maybe I'll call Bob's show to get him to clarify his position on this but I'm not sure I've got the time so if someone else wants to... But be sure to mention this thread that way TOL will get a nice plug! :)

I'm kind of curious what his position is on the tone of the thread.
As I see it, I think many have the same opinion as Fred, only they don't want to be associated with him, who is now in the habit of saying God Hates Pope, God Hates California... It's become his trademark. Instead of God's love, he preaches God's hatred.

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 02:17 PM
Uh oh, the 'No's outnumber the 'Yes's.

Does that mean we can't call Beanie a faggot now?

Are Christian standards of right and wrong decided by majority vote now?

What does Col 4:6 say?

Justin

BillyBob
April 28th, 2005, 02:20 PM
Uh oh, the 'No's outnumber the 'Yes's.

Does that mean we can't call Beanie a faggot now?

:angel:

BillyBob
April 28th, 2005, 02:25 PM
Hey Justin, where'd you get the Time Machine?

Justin (Wiccan)
April 28th, 2005, 02:28 PM
Hey Justin, where'd you get the Time Machine?

Good question! :confused:

J

beanieboy
April 28th, 2005, 02:28 PM
Uh oh, the 'No's outnumber the 'Yes's.

Does that mean we can't call Beanie a faggot now?

:angel:

If you are a christian, you should base it on the bible, I suppose, and not the vote.
That is Justin's point.

I Col 4:
6Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.

As a Christian, ignore it or don't.

This is also Buddhist belief - that you speech be pure.

Ecumenicist
April 28th, 2005, 02:36 PM
I'm a little confused about Bob Enyart's take on this issue. For example Bob used to sell products on his show called "Gay-Away" and "Dyke-Off" The word "dyke" is the female equivalent to the word "fag." Yet the following exchange took place this week on Bob's talk-show:



Maybe I'll call Bob's show to get him to clarify his position on this but I'm not sure I've got the time so if someone else wants to... But be sure to mention this thread that way TOL will get a nice plug! :)

Maybe Enyart's finally envisioning what hate talk can lead to, hate actions. Like Clete
wanting to have Beanie arrested and murdered. Now that's Christian...

JoyfulRook
April 28th, 2005, 04:47 PM
You can throw me in there with Clete. Except we want him executed by the Government, not murdered.

Ecumenicist
April 28th, 2005, 06:24 PM
You can throw me in there with Clete. Except we want him executed by the Government, not murdered.

May the love of Christ embrace you.

Dave

BillyBob
April 28th, 2005, 06:38 PM
Well, it looks like 'Faggot' isn't going to fly. [Sorry for ever calling you that, Beanie.]


So what do you guys think of 'Rump Ranger'?

'Queer'?

'Homo Erectus'?

'Fairy'?

'Freddy Mercury'?