Can Anyone Explain 'Why gay marriage?'

[ok doser]

You just keep shouting about perversion ...

Ephesians 5:3-17


not sure why you think i'm shouting :idunno:

 

[glassjester]

Lifestyle is a nasty little word that is tossed out to trivialize gays and lesbians. When you yammer of about "lifestyle" you are saying that it isn't an intrinsic part of a person’s identity but it's just a habit. So why would anyone want to demean others like this? Hate.

No. I meant lifestyle when I said lifestyle. I didn't say orientation. You assumed. An orientation cannot be sinful.

 

[glassjester]

i wonder what other sexual perversions he doesn't think are sinful

Possibly homosexual, incestuous marriage.

Or incestuous marriage of infertile or sterilized spouses.

 

[Lon]

Ephesians 5:3-17


not sure why you think i'm shouting :idunno:

He accused me of the same. Next thing will be "Fornication is here to stay." Of course it is. Nobody said differently. Sin is sin. Rather, as Christians, we don't condone any of it. Lest anyone call us bigots, we can't stand our own sin either lain:

No. I meant lifestyle when I said lifestyle. I didn't say orientation. You assumed. An orientation cannot be sinful.

Not true. It can be part of that nature that sins. Some of our desires are not healthy. -Lon

 

[glassjester]

It can be part of that nature that sins. Some of our desires are not healthy. -Lon

True. And actively cultivating or purposely harboring a sinful desire is, itself, sinful. I do not know that merely experiencing a desire can be sinful. It can be involuntary, no?

 

[glassjester]

Wrong! It WAS forbidden, way back in the day, with all those other laws which you ignore.

And by Christ, through His Apostle.

 

[Lon]

True. And actively cultivating or purposely harboring a sinful desire is, itself, sinful. I do not know that merely experiencing a desire can be sinful. It can be involuntary, no?

But comes from a nature that imho, is infected by the sin we are born with. For instance: A desire for chocolate (1) learned) not inherently sinful.
2) A desire for something that doesn't belong to you is inherently sinful as far as a desire. We aren't supposed to 'want' to do so.

If I remember, it is a Protestant/Catholic disagreement, but it seems we can at least see across the fence if something makes sense. :e4e: -Lon

 

[Lon]

Wrong! It WAS forbidden, way back in the day, with all those other laws which you ignore
.

:nono: Wishful thinking. Both the Apostle Paul and Peter call it yet wrong. Acts made it clear gentiles were to refrain from 'sexual' sin. lain:

Your problem? You don't really know the bible. You make stuff up as you go as far as I assess.

You can EITHER support misbehavior OR you can support God and His word. You can't do both. You cannot serve two opposed masters.

(all of these scriptures btw 1 Peter 5:8 Acts 15:29 1 Corinthians 5:9–11)

 

[glassjester]

If I remember, it is a Protestant/Catholic disagreement, but it seems we can at least see across the fence if something makes sense. :e4e: -Lon

You may be right about that. We are not, I believe, personally culpable for our concupiscence. Does Protestantism share this concept? I am not sure.

Keep in mind, Christ, Himself, was tempted. Experiencing temptation is not a sin.
Only when we consent, through an act of the will, to temptation (in thought or in action) do we sin.

 

[Lon]

You may be right about that. We are not, I believe, personally culpable for our concupiscence. Does Protestantism share this concept? I am not sure.

Some do. Psalm 19:13

Keep in mind, Christ, Himself, was tempted. Experiencing temptation is not a sin.
Only when we consent, through an act of the will, to temptation (in thought or in action) do we sin.

Christology is its own discussion. He was tempted but sinned not. We? I don't believe we do. Matthew 5:27-30 All of us, imho, should be walking around blind. Sin isn't our master, as new believers, otherwise, I'd have become a hermit in Alaska. -Lon

 

[eider]

Ephesians 5:3-17


not sure why you think i'm shouting :idunno:

You have totally lost the plot.
Nowhere in those verses is Gay-Marriage, a bond between two persons, mentioned.

On the side, dedicated researchers claim that Ephesians was not written by Paul.

 

[eider]

And by Christ, through His Apostle.

I wonder why Jesus never mentioned anything about this.

 

[ok doser]

.... dedicated researchers claim that Ephesians was not written by Paul.

:darwinsm:

:mock:i-durrrr, the :loser:

 

[eider]

:nono: Wishful thinking. Both the Apostle Paul and Peter call it yet wrong. Acts made it clear gentiles were to refrain from 'sexual' sin. lain:

SSM is a closed relationship between two women, or two men.
They mentioned sexual sin, which was any sexual conduct that could transmit illness.

Your problem? You don't really know the bible. You make stuff up as you go as far as I assess.

That's what you do.
You're looking in a mirror.

You can EITHER support misbehavior OR you can support God and His word. You can't do both. You cannot serve two opposed masters.

You're making 'misbehaviour' an abomional defilement now?
Since you twist the words that you see, you'll never see the light, methinks.

(all of these scriptures btw 1 Peter 5:8 Acts 15:29 1 Corinthians 5:9–11)

None of those mention closed Gay relationships. They probably refer to promiscuous behaviour of all kinds, including heterosexual behaviour.

 

[eider]

:darwinsm:

:mock:i-durrrr, the :loser:

So you had no intelligent reply?

 

[ok doser]

They mentioned sexual sin, which was any sexual conduct that could transmit illness.

you just make up stuff at the drop of a hat, doncha? :chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

So you had no intelligent reply?

you're a retard

why would i waste my time on a reply that you wouldn't understand?

 

[glassjester]

I wonder why Jesus never mentioned anything about this.

He may have. He preached and taught for three years. Do you have a record of every word He spoke?

 

[dodge]

Yes they do.....
They come into the light, standing together, taking vows together, for all to see.

SSM is here to stay, Imo, and it is slowly becoming legal throughout the western world, and there is no religious argument against it either, unless of course you are Muslim?

There is no light in same sex !

Jesus said, "when it gets like Sodom and Gomorrah look up your redeemer draws near".
It is getting like that more everyday. Time is short keep following you and you will spend eternity in hell.

 

[Lon]

SSM is a closed relationship between two women, or two men.
They mentioned sexual sin, which was any sexual conduct that could transmit illness.

You are rationalizing scriptures.

That's what you do.
You're looking in a mirror.

:nono: I KNOW my bible. You? Do you read your bible everyday in the morning? How many times have you read through the whole thing?
I 'think' you are projecting here. Look, ALL I want to do is love and honor the Lord Jesus Christ and if at all I am capable, love my fellow man.
I cannot shove scriptures down your throat, but I can challenge you to read them.

You're making 'misbehaviour' an abomional defilement now?
Since you twist the words that you see, you'll never see the light, methinks.

Depends on our goals. Me? I seek first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness. Matthew 6:33

None of those mention closed Gay relationships. They probably refer to promiscuous behaviour of all kinds, including heterosexual behaviour.

Even you have said, in this very thread, that the Apostle Paul clearly denounces homosexuality. There is NO scripture about a 'loving' sexual relationship BUT a man and wife as God made them. Paul says "To the rest I say this..." 1 Corinthians 7:8

You can think as you like. We are responsible before God. I yet, encourage you to be faithful and molded, by the scriptures. You've already said, in this very thread, that the Apostle Paul preached against homosexuality.