If one is "born gay" how do you explain ex-gays?

eider

Well-known member
What, you mean these?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_commandments

Which set?

And of the set of your choosing, which ones were sacrificial? Which were ceremonial? Which were optional? Which can be and which cannot be followed today? Could you classify each law in each of those lists?

You keep saying "if you remove the sacrificial and ceremonial laws, there are 507 left," yet you never actually list which ones you consider to be removable, and which ones should remain.

Would you please, for the sake of all in this conversation and for those simply reading along, list the commandments and classify them as "Only for Israel," "Sacrificial," "Ceremonial," "Not able to be followed today," or any combination of those?e

Let's start there.

So it looks as if you could not do that for yourself.
You need me to print out 613 laws each with a classification such as described?

And you think that some of God's laws were 'optional' back then, a new category?

All I ask is that you or anyone who wishes to, please tell me which laws that they (or you) still follow! You either do or you don't. My opinion on what goes in to what category can't and would not help you.

By the way, many Christians that I know tell me that the Laws of Moses are not for Christians, other than those supported by Jesus. What do you say to that?
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
So it looks as if you could not do that for yourself.
You need me to print out 613 laws each with a classification such as described?

And you think that some of God's laws were 'optional' back then, a new category?

All I ask is that you or anyone who wishes to, please tell me which laws that they (or you) still follow! You either do or you don't. My opinion on what goes in to what category can't and would not help you.

By the way, many Christians that I know tell me that the Laws of Moses are not for Christians, other than those supported by Jesus. What do you say to that?


So what are you asserting then Eider? That there is no standard in the Body Of Christ? I will absolutely agree with you that we who are called children of God, saved by Grace, not by works of the law but, by the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ Himself, and are not to attempt to live by the Mosaic Law (or be judged by it, which is a rejection of Christ's work) but, there is indeed a standard of conduct that should separate us from the heathen. Paul, the apostle to the gentiles railed against conduct of believers in Corinth, & also laid out the fate of amoral behavior of non-believers in Romans 1:18-32


18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

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

28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.



We as children of God & members of the Body Of Christ are to be examples to the heathen, not to judge their eternal fate but, to preach to them redemption. That isn't keeping the law but, being an example that was laid out to believers after the death of Christ, & conveyed through the apostles to the church via the New Testament. I may not be understanding what you are trying to convey here Eider but, I would contend that no, we in the BOC are not called to keep the Law, the feasts, festivals or any other part of the Mosaic Law, nor can you with any success, that is why Christ did that in our stead, however the conduct of a believer should match his/her testimony of faith, or we are no different than the godless heathen. This little piece of scripture speaks of trading the truth for a lie...what is truth? Jesus Christ kept all of the 613 laws, was sinless, and died in your place because you cannot keep any of them....The ones you choose to, or the ones choose you omit. The truth is Christ...period.
 

eider

Well-known member
So what are you asserting then Eider? That there is no standard in the Body Of Christ?
I was asserting that some Christians that know do not answer to the Mosaic Laws.

I will absolutely agree with you that we who are called children of God, saved by Grace, not by works of the law but, by the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ Himself, and are not to attempt to live by the Mosaic Law (or be judged by it, which is a rejection of Christ's work) but, there is indeed a standard of conduct that should separate us from the heathen. Paul, the apostle to the gentiles railed against conduct of believers in Corinth, & also laid out the fate of amoral behavior of non-believers in Romans 1:18-32
So you would not like to live in Pastor Enyart's kind of American Constitution then, is that right?
And although you are above the Law you keep to Laws mostly laid down by Paul, is that right?


We as children of God & members of the Body Of Christ are to be examples to the heathen, not to judge their eternal fate but, to preach to them redemption. That isn't keeping the law but, being an example that was laid out to believers after the death of Christ, & conveyed through the apostles to the church via the New Testament. I may not be understanding what you are trying to convey here Eider but, I would contend that no, we in the BOC are not called to keep the Law, the feasts, festivals or any other part of the Mosaic Law, nor can you with any success, that is why Christ did that in our stead, however the conduct of a believer should match his/her testimony of faith, or we are no different than the godless heathen. This little piece of scripture speaks of trading the truth for a lie...what is truth? Jesus Christ kept all of the 613 laws, was sinless, and died in your place because you cannot keep any of them....The ones you choose to, or the ones choose you omit. The truth is Christ...period.
Does the above mean that it's OK for same sex couples to live in peace, and be left alone in peace?
 

Derf

Well-known member
Are you saying that you don't know the laws of the Old Testament?
that surprises me.
There are 613 Laws, but if you remove the sacrificial and ceremonial laws you are left with 507.
Now which of these if any do you follow?

I'm asking you to explain which ones you feel Christians aren't following, since you've made such an accusation. You're the one that brought it up, so you must have at least a few that you've noticed.

Or are you more like the democrats, who impeached the Pres and then tried to figure out what he did wrong?
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
I'm asking you to explain which ones you feel Christians aren't following, since you've made such an accusation. You're the one that brought it up, so you must have at least a few that you've noticed.


this is the point at which homo-supporters like eider usually refer to shrimp
 
this is the point at which homo-supporters like eider usually refer to shrimp

No kidding. The fact is, the Law of the Old Testament was never even given to the Gentile world, that is, to the whole world, only to Israel. The New Testament is very clear on what is for the entire world, and clear that what goes into the belly goes out the other end, more important that nobody is saved by religious works, at all, that we can't impress God with our legal righteousness, like even those devil Scribes and Pharisees, masters of the Law, thought they did. This is to say it's a non-starter argument to the Christian, that this or that, whatever of the Old Testament, even applies, just the mention of, well, "there are 613 laws" has nothing to do with the price of tea in China to a Christian, is an ignorant argument, to pull the "shrimp" card and such, in order to make some equivalence between shrimp and moral perversions, against very nature, in the first place? So many people fail to even consider the audience God was addressing, in this and many other cases, before jumping to out of context conclusions. This is a very common error.

In any event, as posted recently, Romans 1 is clear of the Christian stance on homosexuality, and without a word about being turned over to reprobate minds over shrimp. It also seems convenient, somebody trying to make a morally equivalency to shrimp and such, that is, minimize homosexuality so. Very convenient. (They can talk themselves into anything.)
 

eider

Well-known member
I'm asking you to explain which ones you feel Christians aren't following, since you've made such an accusation. You're the one that brought it up, so you must have at least a few that you've noticed.

Or are you more like the democrats, who impeached the Pres and then tried to figure out what he did wrong?

Many Christians do not recognise the laws of Moses unless they are supported by Jesus.

Which ones do you want to follow.?

This is about gays, not political parties.
 

God's Truth

New member
Many Christians do not recognise the laws of Moses unless they are supported by Jesus.

Which ones do you want to follow.?

This is about gays, not political parties.

Jesus says a man leaves his parents to go with a woman---not with a man.
 

eider

Well-known member
No kidding. The fact is, the Law of the Old Testament was never even given to the Gentile world, that is, to the whole world, only to Israel. The New Testament is very clear on what is for the entire world, and clear that what goes into the belly goes out the other end, more important that nobody is saved by religious works, at all, that we can't impress God with our legal righteousness, like even those devil Scribes and Pharisees, masters of the Law, thought they did. This is to say it's a non-starter argument to the Christian, that this or that, whatever of the Old Testament, even applies, just the mention of, well, "there are 613 laws" has nothing to do with the price of tea in China to a Christian, is an ignorant argument, to pull the "shrimp" card and such, in order to make some equivalence between shrimp and moral perversions, against very nature, in the first place? So many people fail to even consider the audience God was addressing, in this and many other cases, before jumping to out of context conclusions. This is a very common error.

In any event, as posted recently, Romans 1 is clear of the Christian stance on homosexuality, and without a word about being turned over to reprobate minds over shrimp. It also seems convenient, somebody trying to make a morally equivalency to shrimp and such, that is, minimize homosexuality so. Very convenient. (They can talk themselves into anything.)

Your reference to 'shrimp' is interesting. What is that?
And so it seems that Christians do not focus upon any Laws of Moses because they have the words of Jesus to follow. Is that correct?
 

eider

Well-known member
I'm asking you to explain which ones you feel Christians aren't following, since you've made such an accusation.
I asked a question.
You turned it in to an accusation, I think.

You're the one that brought it up, so you must have at least a few that you've noticed.
Yes, I brought up a question about what OT laws Christians might follow.
Some of the laws do fit with the laws of the land where I live, but that's not the same. You either follow some of these laws or you don't.
Other Christians say that they do not have to follow any OT laws unless they were re-given by Jesus.
So..... any answers?

Or are you more like the democrats, who impeached the Pres and then tried to figure out what he did wrong?
I have read (on TOL) that President Trump does not speak out against gays, or so a prominent member here claims.
So why are you talking about Democrats as if only Democrats support gays?
 
Your reference to 'shrimp' is interesting. What is that?
And so it seems that Christians do not focus upon any Laws of Moses because they have the words of Jesus to follow. Is that correct?

That was simply a reply to a common comment on Old Testament dietary laws and other Jewish laws people, primarily atheists, try to cite as Christian hypocrisies or inconsistencies, entirely false arguments.

No, that wouldn't be exactly correct, not ANY LAWS, as in all laws, negated for Christians, but only codified Jewish law to an extent, relative to the Christian. Yes, the New Testament is the ruling doctrine(s) of Christianity, but this does not wholesale negate the Old Testament, as in all law of the Old Testament Law no longer relevant. Hardly. We have the Ten Commandments, which is in the category of moral law to all, for the most part, though the New Testament reveals keeping the sabbath is not necessary for the Christian, that a man may esteem all days as unto the Lord, have no holy days, in other words. So, it can be argued, of the ten, there are nine commandments that would apply to Christians.

You'll actually find God's moral laws written on the consciences of man, generally, hence secular law against such as murder or theft, in all nations, and other traits, like being a liar or an adulterer, being greedy over somebody else's goods, or disrespecting honorable parents, anyway, are not thought of as moral. On the other hand, there's universal disobedience to loving the Lord, people having all sorts of idols, false religions or things more important than God they covet, in the unbelieving or pagan world, so not to say all moral commandments are adopted universally, in legal or societal norms. But, even on this front, God's Spirit draws all men, whether they listen, or not, this another thing. This is to say the moral law to love God is there, isn't negated, for lack of man's law. But, as to the shrimp, dietary laws, this is Jewish law never given to all mankind, only Israel, and likewise ceremonial law, and you could generally say the host of laws do not the least pertain to people that are not Jews, nor could those laws even save Jews. There is a mention in the New Testament about not eating meat of a strangled animal, that is with its blood undrained, but this was the result of a compromise with Judaism that can be argued a commandment of men, but this is a more complicated discussion.

Most importantly, it's not appropriate to relegate Christianity to adhering to the bulk of the Law given only to Israel by God, never, ever given to the entire world. Even more importantly, in a very real sense, Christianity is more strict than all the laws: the Lord Jesus taught that the hateful mind is murder, the lustful mind adultery, that we are to seek cleanliness within, as a matter of fact, not be some religious person, going through the motions, some long checklist, but with black little, unregenerate hearts. The Lord Jesus roundly condemned the most religious Jews of His day, the Scribes and Pharisees, the biggest keepers of the letter of the Law as being, even, Satanic, simply huge hypocrites, empty suits. And surprise, surprise, in their minds, they were up to murdering the Lord Jesus, the only sinless Man to ever walk the planet, hence broke a major, big, ten commandment sin, for all their legal bluster, that would "strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."

Anyway, Christianity is not simply another world religion, but a living, spiritual faith that IS Jesus Christ, based upon a repentant believer actually having the Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit, literally living in our hearts, to comfort and guide us into conforming to the image of Christ. In other words, all Godless evil or perversion, regardless whether there's a moral law attached, is sin. For instance, coin collecting or any art would be a sins, sports, whatever, though no explicit mention of such sin in scripture, if a person cherished collecting or such more than the pursuit of God, though this is covered under having idols in the New Testament, rooted in covetousness of other things, more than God. But the point is the Christian law is righteousness, as commanded by righteous, Holy God, and out of love of God and fellow man, and love of God means seeking to obey, seeking righteousness, because you agree He is holy and right, have repented of evil, turned from evil, generally. "The law" of the Christian is simpler, on the page,

Matthew 22

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.


Simpler to state, but also a taller order, than all the sundry other Jewish law, combined.

Anyway, Christianity doesn't lay the plethora of Jewish law, given only to Israel, on Christians, a much smaller subset codified, like those moral laws mentioned, and other guidelines to what is reprobate, like homosexuality, evils of murder, theft, adultery reiterated, to flee fornication, moral code such as that. But you could say, generally, lust is wrong, or things born in envy, in self will, are sin, the point is it's not what you eat in Christianity, rather what you are, not what is temporary and material, but what is eternal and spiritual that you are, that is, baptized of the Spirit of Christ. It's highly inappropriate to argue most of the Law, again, given only to Israel, as a premise that it's also Christian law, the point as to what is going back and forth here in discussion. You can only argue the whole Law against Jews, but calling out the likes of shrimp or other unclean foods, etc, is not the Christian's burden, in the first place, hence not indicative of any hypocrisy, to any Gentile or even Messianic Jew, freed of the legal monkey on their back as to, primarily, ceremonial laws, diet, whatever.

The point is, it's an empty argument to say a Christian that eats shrimp may as well be a homosexual, for the simple reason the Christian was never instructed not to eat shrimp, and never any instruction to the world to be Jews. Now, one could say, if a Christian is a liar, or a thief, or an adulterer, etc, and condemns homosexuality, that is hypocrisy, but, as mentioned, these things are addressed in Christian scripture, but not shrimp, catfish or pigs and the like, rather Christianity teaching you are not what goes in your belly, but what you are in your heart, teaches material versus spiritual mandates and pursuits, being Godless or of faith, loving or unloving, of the flesh and the material world, or of the Spirit of Christ, the spirit of such doctrine:

Matthew 15

11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
...
17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?
18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

1 Corinthians 6:13 Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. [Things of the flesh are material, temporary, pass away.] Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.


I hope this explains a few things for you, a hard subject, as best I feebly can. In any case, Christianity is not a lot of the arguments against Christianity you get from unbelievers, to be frank, many arguments based in utter ignorance, that should not be made, at all, for being invalid arguments.

The Lord Jesus, through the writings of Paul, addressed these matters in some detail, the mandates of law versus grace, and what applies and does not, what is Jewish, only. It’s all in the New Testament.
 

Derf

Well-known member
I asked a question.
You turned it in to an accusation, I think.
Let's review, shall we? Here's you bringing up the subject:

That might wash, if only the homophobes would take notice of about 500 other OT laws. :D
....which they don't seem to do.
This is an accusation, though perhaps not a strong one. It DEFINITELY was not a question. So now that you have been shown that you started by accusing "homophobes" of not taking notice of about 500 other OT laws, would you like to explain which ones you are talking about?

Here's your next post to me:
If you want to follow the OT laws as written, then follow them but don't add your own clauses. And the 106 sacrificial/ceremonial laws were removed by Jesus himself (I will have mercy and not sacrifice) and so the 507 others remain, very few of which you seem to bother about.... ?
This proceeds from a general accusation to a specific one--one focused on me in particular--where you don't think I bother about those 507 laws.

If those are so important to you, I would think that you would be able to name some of them. After asking numerous times, you haven't named any to me. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
(sorry for the poor quality)

Yet you seem to think I am not bothering about very many of them.

Yes, I brought up a question about what OT laws Christians might follow.
Some of the laws do fit with the laws of the land where I live, but that's not the same. You either follow some of these laws or you don't.
Other Christians say that they do not have to follow any OT laws unless they were re-given by Jesus.
So..... any answers?
I can't find a question in there.

I have read (on TOL) that President Trump does not speak out against gays, or so a prominent member here claims.
So why are you talking about Democrats as if only Democrats support gays?
My comment about democrats had nothing to do with gays. Are you having trouble reading my posts? You don't answer my direct questions, and you misconstrue what I'm saying to make it about gays. It seems you are hung up about gays for some reason. (And I might add that you don't seem to be able to read your own posts, thinking you've asked a question, when you have only made statements, and saying you didn't make accusations when you obviously did.)

If it matters, I think President Trump is foolish to try to get homosexuality legalized all over the world.
 

eider

Well-known member
Let's review, shall we? Here's you bringing up the subject:

This is an accusation, though perhaps not a strong one. It DEFINITELY was not a question. So now that you have been shown that you started by accusing "homophobes" of not taking notice of about 500 other OT laws, would you like to explain which ones you are talking about?
You clearly do not understand what a question-mark means.

Here's your next post to me:

This proceeds from a general accusation to a specific one--one focused on me in particular--where you don't think I bother about those 507 laws.

If those are so important to you, I would think that you would be able to name some of them. After asking numerous times, you haven't named any to me. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

Yet you seem to think I am not bothering about very many of them.

I can't find a question in there.
This is question time.,
All you have to do is read each law, selected at random, and tell me whether or not you think it still applies to Christians. Easy.
Just three laws from one book.
Here we go............ can't wait for your ansdwers.

1. Deuteronomy {15:11} For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
Yes.... or No?

2. Deuteronomy {22:5} The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so [are] abomination unto the LORD thy God.
Yes........ or No?

3. Deuteronomy {23:24} When thou comest into thy neighbour’s vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put [any] in thy vessel.
Yes...... or No?

Let's start there. Those were selected by turning to a page and placing a finger on the page. Easy.


My comment about democrats had nothing to do with gays. Are you having trouble reading my posts?
So why write jibes at a political party on a thread about Gsys? That's just obtuse, imo.


If it matters, I think President Trump is foolish to try to get homosexuality legalized all over the world
In which case, leave mention of political parties out of it, why don't you?
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
1. Deuteronomy {15:11} For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
Yes.... or No?

great!

so we can erase this from our budget?

A1We8eMHqbhQEeCNUJ8H7dIhpoACzzpH8h32fsiwJlQ.png
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
1. Deuteronomy {15:11} For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
Yes.... or No?

:think:

What the Christian reads:
Spoiler

helping.jpg



what retards like eider read:
Spoiler

money-throw-1.jpg


 

Derf

Well-known member
You clearly do not understand what a question-mark means.
Or the lack of one, apparently...

This is question time.,
All you have to do is read each law, selected at random, and tell me whether or not you think it still applies to Christians. Easy.
Just three laws from one book.
Here we go............ can't wait for your ansdwers.

1. Deuteronomy {15:11} For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
Yes.... or No?

2. Deuteronomy {22:5} The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so [are] abomination unto the LORD thy God.
Yes........ or No?

3. Deuteronomy {23:24} When thou comest into thy neighbour’s vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put [any] in thy vessel.
Yes...... or No?

Let's start there. Those were selected by turning to a page and placing a finger on the page. Easy.
I think those apply to everybody--not just Christians. So put me down for 3 "yes's". I don't see the need to do away with laws that help us know how to love our neighbors as ourselves.

Since you are now asking questions (thank you!), are you now saying you DON'T think I am neglecting these? Or at least do you admit that you don't know how well or poorly I'm fulfilling these laws?

I can tell you this. I don't have a vineyard, nor do I grow crops. I don't cross-dress, nor have I allowed my children to do so, though it is sometimes difficult to discern some types of clothing as male or female.

That first one is somewhat subjective. I have a brother that isn't very responsible with his money. I haven't seen him starving, so I haven't been very eager to open my hand to him. Same with my immediate neighbors. They all seem to have what they need. I have some friends that have been out of work, and we have tried to help them in some ways. We've given food and clothing (like jackets and gloves and blankets) to some standing on street corners, and sometimes they appreciate it, sometimes they don't.

Re. the second one: Do you think it's a concern if Christians cross-dress? Do you think it's possible for everybody either in the time of Deuteronomy or today to avoid cross-dressing? Do you think it's a good idea to avoid such? Why or why not?

So why write jibes at a political party on a thread about Gsys? That's just obtuse, imo.



In which case, leave mention of political parties out of it, why don't you?
If it's too obtuse for you, you can ignore.
 
Top