|
Post by Grant on Apr 2, 2006 4:10:58 GMT -5
Would you still do good? Knowing that your fate is pain and torment? I appreciate your response to my heart felt plea to turkey... To answer your question, I am no good, but Christ through me is. So if I was going to hell, then obviously Christ wouldn't be in me and I couldn't possibly do good. But would I do what the world considers good such as help the poor and needy? You bet! I always have... but that doesn't hide the fact that I've fallen short of GOD's glory, violated His law and the image He created me to be, to which we will be judged for. And if found guilty (as we all are) of sin when I die, where do I go? Surely not heaven, Jesus Himself said no liar, fornicator, theif or murderer will enter the kingdom of heaven. Hell would be where I best fit. But to expound on my answer, if I were going to hell, I would indeed still serve GOD. Ten Shekels and Shirt is a great sermon to help you understand the reasoning. GOD is GOD, regardless if I'm saved or not, and He well deserves my full submission, surrender, and heart. As for both of the comments on "the splinter and the log" analogy Jesus uses, please continue onto the next verse, if you will. There He states first remove the log from your own so that you can then attend to your brethren's sin (paraphrased). So I can safely say I am free from fornication, never had a problem with homosexuality, free of pornography and adultery. So for me to state that perversion as sin is biblical, to flag it as needing to be repented of is biblical and if he is a brother in Christ, then I am under the obligation from Christ to attend to his sin. In regards to what should a Christian spend most of their time doing, 1) helping the homeless and hungry or 2) preaching sin, judgement, righteouslness... I choose to follow in Jesus' footsteps and those of Paul's and the rest of the prophets... both #1 and #2. But Jesus clearly doesn't speak about the physically needy as often as He does the spiritual needy; sinners and hell. But to be a good steward with all GOD's entrusted with me, I also do what the world considers "good", if that gives you any comfort. But its all for GOD's glory, not man's. Blessings
|
|
|
Post by prolifedorothy on Apr 2, 2006 5:45:55 GMT -5
I agree Jesse there is nothing "gay" about this sin. IF we call homosexuals "gay" then we have to call all the other sins by their modern newspeak such as "liasons for adultery, misquotes for liers, misappropiates for thieves, overspenders for coveters, etc. They all know who they are anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 2, 2006 13:27:16 GMT -5
Anyone who is living a homosexual lifestyle has no right to condemn homosexuality. Only those who are living in purity have the right to condemn impurity.
We must condemn sin. And one of the greatest sins of today is homo-sex. The holy men and women of God who are still in our society, the small remnant that they are, must condemn this sin along with all sin.
But if you have any sin in your life, any plank in your own eye, you have no right to try to remove something from someone elses eye until you remove all the sin out of your own life first.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 2, 2006 13:31:07 GMT -5
We were at a "peace parade/ralley" yesturday and were able to preach against the war men have raged against God. And asked that people stop their biological warfare of STD and AIDS by living pure and holy. They are a threat to national security, remember Sodom and Gommorrah.
Anyways these tree huggin, peace loving, anti everything people were really a large group of war-mongering people in disguise. They are the same people who have war rallys against God to promote homosexual rights and abortions etc.
They were very intolerate and hateful of us, and should have been diverse enough to accept us. But we did have some nice meetings there in the park where they gathered for awhile and listened.
Anyways, I think some of these war-mongers have wondered unto our boards.
But, I do want to make it clear that adulterers, liars, theives, drunkards, sodomites, homosexuals, perverts, are all welcome on these boards.
So I give all those types of people a hardy WELCOME! And I'm sure everyone else on the boards will do the same.
|
|
|
Post by manna/ E.Wallace on Apr 2, 2006 13:35:15 GMT -5
Greetings Jesse... Yes, God says they are only two types of people ( Righteous, and UnGodly) and here is what he says about it...Psalms 1:1-6 Psalm 1 1Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. 6For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish. Now, why do they perish everyone, because of what.. they worshipped (who) more then the Creator, the Lie, who is the father of lie's, satan.. Romans 1:25... Don't believe that, look at the oldest sin in the Holy Scriptures...Prophets and even the Psalmist, mocked them... So it brings me back to what is behind these Idols, and Moses in Deut 32:17 and the Psalmist in 106:36-37 equate false gods, with the devils..... Remember the verse in Romans 1 :25 the Apostle Paul said:: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the CREATOR, who is blessed, for ever.. AMEN..
There you go, was not satan created? and the Lie is the word of satan..
Blessed Regards..
|
|
Alison aka war monger
Guest
|
Post by Alison aka war monger on Apr 2, 2006 16:21:50 GMT -5
Anyways these tree huggin, peace loving, anti everything people were really a large group of war-mongering people in disguise. They are the same people who have war rallys against God to promote homosexual rights and abortions etc. They were very intolerate and hateful of us, and should have been diverse enough to accept us. But we did have some nice meetings there in the park where they gathered for awhile and listened. Anyways, I think some of these war-mongers have wondered unto our boards. But, I do want to make it clear that adulterers, liars, theives, drunkards, sodomites, homosexuals, perverts, are all welcome on these boards. So I give all those types of people a hardy WELCOME! And I'm sure everyone else on the boards will do the same. Thank you for the welcome. For the first time in my life, I'm being called a war-monger. I'm not going to argue with you on that because I would just exhaust and frustrate myself and most likely your opinions on who I am will not change. And after all, as far as I can tell, that's not what this board is about. But let me just say when I read that accusation I actually jumped out of my chair in my dorm room, did a couple of spins, and put my face in my hands and exclaimed several astoundish-like phrases, such as "whaaaat?", and concluded all that craziness by laughing hysterically. I'm sure it was quite a sight to see, too bad I'm alone in here. You know, I almost attended a rally just like that one yesterday, and would have if I could have made it. Too bad, because maybe we could have met in person. Anyway, I'm ok with being labeled a war monger. I'm a little shocked, but I think I'm in good company. I mean, there is a certain man that promoted equality, loved the sinners, openly protested societal norms (IE that one instance where he overturned those tables), called for peace (He was the Prince of it after all), etc. Yes, I think evidence shows Jesus was quite the "war-monger" himself, according to your standards. Now, let me direct you to the words of Hopeful Heart, who unlike me, can keep his cool and has actually presented some very good points that all of you have failed to address. Please, consider them and respond thoughtfully and with an open mind. One last thing, I'm really glad all of you are sinless, by the way. I wanted to throw that in. Peace.
|
|
|
Post by Jeffrey Olver on Apr 2, 2006 17:07:06 GMT -5
I was at the rally as well. And there definitely was some "warmongering." In the sense that many people in attendance passionately are against the war in Iraq are just as passionately waging war against God.
How?
By many of the lifestyle choices I saw exhibited there and choosing not to follow God. I would agree, Jesus is indeed a warmonger. Evidenced in scripture;
Exodus 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
Matthew 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
Revelation 2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
And Revelation 19:11-21
But His warring isn't the same as the warring we see on earth today. While it's true that God commended his love towards us that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us, those who set themselves against God by denying Him with their lips or lifestyle make themselves His adversaries (Hebrews 10:27, 30).
His war is just. His war is righteous. His war is won already. So our message at the peace rally was about finding peace with God. In order to have peace with God it requires unconditional surrender.
There's evidently a philosophy that this touchy generation has lost when it comes to any sort of message; "If the shoe fits, wear it." Any God fearing, peace loving individual who has his/her life right in the eyes of God had no need to worry over our message. But to all others concerned, to try to find peace on earth, peace with your neighbor, or even peace within yourself - all is vanity.
Isaiah 57:20-21 But the wicked are like the troubled sea, When it cannot rest, Whose waters cast up mire and dirt. “There is no peace,” Says my God, “for the wicked.”
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 2, 2006 17:41:44 GMT -5
Well, I find myself quite honored to have been the first. And Lord willing it won't be the last time.
We Christians are to rage war against sin. We are to protest sin like homosexuality, abortion, pornography, racism, and all sin.
Lu 12:51 - "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division"
Mt 10:34 - "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
I do believe that the church needs to focus a lot more on protesting the homosexual-perversion protesters. The biological war that homosexuality (and adultery and fornication) brings is a terrible threat to our country. I biological warfare I am referring to is STDs, AIDS etc.
Our message must be one of love. Love God and keep His commandments.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Apr 2, 2006 18:09:47 GMT -5
Now, let me direct you to the words of Hopeful Heart, who unlike me, can keep his cool and has actually presented some very good points that all of you have failed to address. Please, consider them and respond thoughtfully and with an open mind. Hi Alison, I thought I did respond to hopefulheart's post. Could you help me by pointing out which questions or comments he made that weren't addressed? Much appreciated... Btw, we might not respond to each and every statement someone makes on this MB regardless how differing our views/understandings are with them. Threads tend to vere off course and loose focus on the topics otherwise. But if you have specific and more focused questions in mind, feel free to create a new thread for them which can help discussions. Blessings
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Apr 2, 2006 23:23:39 GMT -5
I plan on responding to all of hopeful hearts points soon. Last night I came on after spending the day preaching and witnessing in Miami Beach. Today has been almost as busy. Same old points all the homosexuals and homosexual advocates always bring up. Don't you guys ever come up with anything new? Or do you get all of this stuff from the same website? It really sounds like you guys get all this stuff from the same website because everyone of you says exactly the same thing.
By the way you anti-war people are a bunch of hypocrites. You say you are against the war but continue to support and fund the war by paying your taxes. If you are really against the war then stop paying your taxes you bunch of hypocrites.
|
|
|
Post by josh on Apr 3, 2006 0:17:42 GMT -5
OH NO JOSH!!!!! HE JUST CALLED YOU A HOMOPHOBE!!!!!!!! Been called worse... ;D
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Apr 3, 2006 1:18:01 GMT -5
I learned from Uncle Ruben that if you want to get a tree hugger to take a gospel tract then you have to tell them it is made with recycled paper.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Apr 3, 2006 8:37:54 GMT -5
1Th 5:3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 3, 2006 15:40:55 GMT -5
Oh wow, internet's down for a day and all sorts of interesting things happen.
Grant, I really like your response. I have some questions about the last part, though.
In regards to what should a Christian spend most of their time doing, 1) helping the homeless and hungry or 2) preaching sin, judgement, righteouslness... I choose to follow in Jesus' footsteps and those of Paul's and the rest of the prophets... both #1 and #2. But Jesus clearly doesn't speak about the physically needy as often as He does the spiritual needy; sinners and hell. But to be a good steward with all GOD's entrusted with me, I also do what the world considers "good", if that gives you any comfort. But its all for GOD's glory, not man's.
I try to do good with all that God's entrusted in me as well. But to the second part of that sentence specifically, does that mean if the world still thought that slavery and women's subjugation were acceptible, you'd promote that, too?
Also, what does Jesus say about homosexuality? Again, I love Jesus because he didn't accept the social norm and he hit every topic. I like Paul, but he was a li'l bit afraid to challenge all the norms (like the head-coverings).
Only those who are living in purity have the right to condemn impurity.
SO true. I'll provide the stone if you provide the purity.
Anyways, I think some of these war-mongers have wondered unto our boards.
I'm going to assume that wasn't directed at me, since I've tried to be nothing but hospitable (and a little sarcastic at times, I'll be honest). And I readily encourage all people to do the same
There you go, was not satan created? and the Lie is the word of satan..
Actually, I don't believe in Satan. I take responsibility for all my own actions, expect others to do the same, and accept that bad things happen to good people - if we want to prevent that, we have to work for it.
Alison: Yer one of my favorite war-mongers, if that's the case, lol. Jesus still beats you in that department, but hey, we shouldn't compare ourself to the Prince ^_-
But His warring isn't the same as the warring we see on earth today. While it's true that God commended his love towards us that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us, those who set themselves against God by denying Him with their lips or lifestyle make themselves His adversaries (Hebrews 10:27, 30).
Right, but the debate is on what it is to set yourself against God.
Grant: I thought I did respond to hopefulheart's post. Could you help me by pointing out which questions or comments he made that weren't addressed? Much appreciated...
Well, actually, micah took us off on the tangent because I stated a fact about homophobia. But no one actually touched any of the points I tried to make in my first post, and I don't think anyone has yet. I understand it was a long post, though - maybe it should be made into a seperate thread? I'd love to discuss those points further and shine as much light as we can on these issues.
Jesse: We Christians are to rage war against sin. We are to protest sin like homosexuality, abortion, pornography, racism, and all sin.
Lu 12:51 - "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division"
Mt 10:34 - "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
I do believe that the church needs to focus a lot more on protesting the homosexual-perversion protesters. The biological war that homosexuality (and adultery and fornication) brings is a terrible threat to our country. I biological warfare I am referring to is STDs, AIDS etc.
Biological war?... *blinks* I'm sorry, I must have missed what you meant on that one. It sounds to me like you're inferring that STDs and AIDS are only spread by homosexuals... What about babies born with it? People who contract it in accidents? Minorities who fail to safeguard against it?
The way this sounds, we need to be promoting safer-sex rather what you're suggesting...
Oh, and though I've stated this before, it's a factoid that lesbians have the lowest STD rates. Does that mean they're ok - they're not a part of this 'biological war'?
Micah: By the way you anti-war people are a bunch of hypocrites. You say you are against the war but continue to support and fund the war by paying your taxes. If you are really against the war then stop paying your taxes you bunch of hypocrites.
Don't you tend to get in a lot of trouble by not paying taxes? I've heard the IRS frowns on that.
I learned from Uncle Ruben that if you want to get a tree hugger to take a gospel tract then you have to tell them it is made with recycled paper.
Hahaha, good one =D
I've read some pretty hardcore, narrowminded, and flat out wrong tracts, though.
Oh yeah, and how do I do quotes? That would make this stuff easier =) Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Jeffrey Olver on Apr 3, 2006 16:05:37 GMT -5
The environment of homosexual sex is one of the more conducive environments for disease and injury.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Apr 3, 2006 16:30:10 GMT -5
Don't you tend to get in a lot of trouble by not paying taxes? I've heard the IRS frowns on that.
Well, in places like communist China the government frowns on true Christians. They send them to prison and torture them. They disobey the government. It is civil disobedience.
So if a person thinks the war is wrong and it is murder, they should continue to pay their taxes because they will get into trouble. Sounds hypocritical to me. What happened to all that rhetoric you posted about not liking hypocrites?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 3, 2006 16:32:55 GMT -5
Yes in wars innocent people get injured. The babies born with diseases are victims. But those who are sexually immoral are criminals.
The only safe sex is holy sex. Any sex that can put you in hell is not safe at all. If people stopped being sexually active outside of the safe boundaries of marriage, the "sexually transmitted diseases" would be stopped in their tracks. A virgin who marries another virgin has no threat of an "sexually transmitted disease".
Well, both homosexuality and lesbian are threats to national security by bringing upon our country the wrath and anger of God. And Romans chapter 1 clearly condemns both.
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 3, 2006 16:56:15 GMT -5
So if a person thinks the war is wrong and it is murder, they should continue to pay their taxes because they will get into trouble. Sounds hypocritical to me. What happened to all that rhetoric you posted about not liking hypocrites?
lol. Oh no, I didn't say you should do it because it gets you into trouble. Remember, the war isn't the only place those funds go. They also go towards taking care of the homeless, the needy, and the forgotten.
The only safe sex is holy sex.
For starters, holy should be a word reserved for God, not an act of mortals. Thanks.
Any sex that can put you in hell is not safe at all.
Again, the debate is about what constituates a sinful act and isn't. Once again I point to my first post, which it oculd be said people on this board are selectively filtering out because it may not prescribe to their worldview.
If people stopped being sexually active outside of the safe boundaries of marriage, the "sexually transmitted diseases" would be stopped in their tracks. A virgin who marries another virgin has no threat of an "sexually transmitted disease".
Incorrect. While it's true that they're more likely to be safer, there is no guaranteed safety in this world, especially when these diseases are inheritable. And as I've stated before, we shouldn't do things simply because of what it profits us - right thing, wrong reason, just like doing good things simply to get into heaven. It's "the greatest sin".
Well, both homosexuality and lesbian are threats to national security by bringing upon our country the wrath and anger of God. And Romans chapter 1 clearly condemns both.
You're worried about national security, eh? It's my understanding that there will be no more nation when God passes out his wrath and anger ~.~
Jesse, I once again implore you to look to my first post. Please save me the trouble of repeating myself - I've already discussed Romans 1. I don't feel a need to say anything more about it unless someone will take me up on the point I've made first.
|
|
|
Post by manna/ E.Wallace on Apr 3, 2006 17:31:02 GMT -5
Interesting, hums to myself.. Ethical relativism, running rabid in this country… Hopefulheart, your quote from your friend Freud.. "Another very interesting study provided support for the Freudian hypothesis that reaction formation underlies homophobia in males. Adams, Wright, and Lohr (1996) found that when homophobic men are shown an erotic videotape depicting homosexual activity, they exhibit sexual arousal not seen in nonhomophobic subjects."
Now less see how well you do, what you have said is that many on this board must have these homosexual tendencies by the way that only by the way they make a stand against such…
And then there is you, whom have said well I am neutral, but if you believe that ethical relativism is your position that there are no moral absolutes, no moral right and wrongs.. then what you are really saying is that you by admission of your own words, that by stating that your are neutral , that really in context to what you believe in the words of Freud, then you are the one who has problems with the homosexual tendencies, by trying to proving you don’t…
And if you believed in Divine Absolute Ethics Giver as in Jesus, you wouldn’t believe in Freud, Maslow, B. F. Skinner and such as it deny your beliefs . Replaced the tone to religious values, from God's Moral law.. read up on the Word Value, how it creeped in to replace, God's law...
Does truth contradict itself? Moses did not receive the Ten Values from God on Mount Sinai..God made the Ten MORAL LAWS.. even the word Value suggest something subjective, , you know how you have put it, our values , society's values, my values ( remember you said am neutral)...global religio-political agenda equals to what? Hell and Damnation of the soul...
" William Law Quote:" William Law wrote this over 200 years ago and it still remains the same today... ..."Man needs to be saved from his own wisdom as much as from his own righteousness, for they produce one and the same corruption."
Get it…
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 3, 2006 18:10:15 GMT -5
Now less see how well you do, what you have said is that many on this board must have these homosexual tendencies by the way that only by the way they make a stand against such…
Aww, now it's starting to get fun ^_-
No, I have said no such thing as many on this board must have these homosexual tendencies. I have stated evidence about those who have a fear of homosexuality (ie, a homophobe, -phobe being the suffix that denotes fear). Not at one point have I accused anyone on this board of such. You make it sound like it's impossible to take a stand except out of fear or hate.
And then there is you, whom have said well I am neutral, but if you believe that ethical relativism is your position that there are no moral absolutes, no moral right and wrongs.. then what you are really saying is that you by admission of your own words, that by stating that your are neutral , that really in context to what you believe in the words of Freud, then you are the one who has problems with the homosexual tendencies, by trying to proving you don’t…
Hehe, like all things (including Bible quotes), what I said has to be taken in context. I said I was going to not state my orientation to remain neutral. Silly people make many assumptions. Micah, for instance, automatically assumed I was a homosexual. Trust me, I have no problems with my sexuality ^_- Good try, though.
And if you believed in Divine Absolute Ethics Giver as in Jesus, you wouldn’t believe in Freud, Maslow, B. F. Skinner and such as it deny your beliefs . Replaced the tone to religious values, from God's Moral law.. read up on the Word Value, how it creeped in to replace, God's law...
I never said I believed in those psychologist's views. Please don't put words in my mouth or make assumptions - it's unconducive to the learning environment. If I were a psychologist I'd be a Humanist, because I believe in free will - something more than genetics, operational learning, and conditioning. Maslow was one of those, btw - the rest weren't. What I stated was that there was evidence that backed up one of Freud's theories, not all =)
Does truth contradict itself? Moses did not receive the Ten Values from God on Mount Sinai..God made the Ten MORAL LAWS.. even the word Value suggest something subjective, , you know how you have put it, our values , society's values, my values ( remember you said am neutral)...global religio-political agenda equals to what? Hell and d**nation of the soul...
And Jesus took the laws that Moses gave and went to the heart of them. Another reason why I love Jesus - he went to the heart of the matter. Most religions identify the Golden Rule - treat others as you want to be treated. I wonder, though, what's the heart of that? Love everyone unconditionally? That's what I think, at least.
Truth doesn't contradict itself, I don't think. I could be mistaken. The Bible, however, contradicts itself many, many, many, many times. What do you do about that?
Jesus had the right idea - get to the heart of the matter. And what's from the heart? Love, of course =)
Good luck in your next attempt to try to back me into a silly corner, lol, though I'd rather you actually tackle a real point I've made instead of some secondary, if not tertiary point like homophobia.
Could someone explain to me why everyone decided to attack that topic rather than the important ones I posted about?
" William Law Quote:" William Law wrote this over 200 years ago and it still remains the same today... ..."Man needs to be saved from his own wisdom as much as from his own righteousness, for they produce one and the same corruption."
“Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.” --Buddha
|
|
|
Post by manna/ E.Wallace on Apr 3, 2006 18:34:36 GMT -5
You stated that :I never said I believed in those psychologist's views. manna :Then why did you quote Feudalism?, from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
Please don't put words in my mouth or make assumptions - it's unconducive to the learning environment. If I were a psychologist I'd be a Humanist, because I believe in free will - something more than genetics, operational learning, and conditioning. Maslow was one of those, btw - the rest weren't. What I stated was that there was evidence that backed up one of Freud's theories, not all =)
So what you are saying is that a logical absolute that something could exist and also not exist ?
You stated: Truth doesn't contradict itself, I don't think. I could be mistaken. The Bible, however, contradicts itself many, many, many, many times. What do you do about that?
manna, show me where!!
You stated that: And Jesus took the laws that Moses gave and went to the heart of them. Another reason why I love Jesus - he went to the heart of the matter. Most religions identify the Golden Rule - treat others as you want to be treated. I wonder, though, what's the heart of that? Love everyone unconditionally? That's what I think, at least.
manna: Yep!! seems to be universal among cultures that it is wrong to murder, to steal, and to lie ( Try reading Romans 2:15 lately, you will see why)… have you ever told a lie? Or stole anything regardless of the value, ever murdered anyone? Jesus said that if you hate someone without cause you are a murderer ever did that, ever lusted after anyone?
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 3, 2006 18:52:48 GMT -5
manna :Then why did you quote Feudalism?, from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
I believe I quoted evidence that backs up a Freudian theory. I do regard that evidence. To say I believe in all of his theories, though, would be entirely innaccurate. Just as bad as saying that I believe everything in the Bible happened word-for-word *gasp*
*skips ahead* manna, show me where!!
lol, wow, such an easy one. Reconsile the Gospels for me. For instance, in what order did Satan challenge Jesus? What about the differences described in the challenges themselves? In fact, just try to reconsile John with the other 3.
Let's go back to the beginning. That's right, In The Beginning. The Bible presents 2 different versions of the Creation story. They are clearly different. The two were included because both were popular beliefs of the time and those who put the Bible together decided not to choose between the two.
So what you are saying is that a logical absolute that something could exist and also not exist ?
I'm sorry, I don't understand - please rephrase.
Me: And Jesus took the laws that Moses gave and went to the heart of them. Another reason why I love Jesus - he went to the heart of the matter. Most religions identify the Golden Rule - treat others as you want to be treated. I wonder, though, what's the heart of that? Love everyone unconditionally? That's what I think, at least.
manna: Yep!! seems to be universal among cultures that it is wrong to murder, to steal, and to lie ( Try reading Romans 2:15 lately, you will see why)… have you ever told a lie? Or stole anything regardless of the value, ever murdered anyone? Jesus said that if you hate someone without cause you are a murderer , ever lusted after anyone?
I'm sorry, was there a point to that?... Have I ever lied? Yes. And I've moved past it. I'm sorry that I lied and I'm trying to be truthful in the future. Ever stolen anything? I think I may have. Same thing as the lie. Maybe you'd call that repenting? Hated someone? Yes, but now I've returned to loving them, as everyone should be loved - unconditionally. I'm thankful for that person, including the pain they put me through. Lusted after anyone? Well, according to someone else on this board (not going to look through to find it), no? I don't believe so. But I personally define lust differently from that definition.
Lust, as one of the 7 Deadly Sins, is to be countered with the 7 Heavenly Virtues. Is it wrong to desire another person? No. So let's look at your definition of 'lust', perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Apr 3, 2006 19:23:26 GMT -5
Hopefulheart, Hello You've explained the meaning of Romans 1:26-27 as, "It's just not natural. Straight men giving up their normal straight lives to be with other men and straight women giving up their normal straight lives for other women. Tch. It's just not true to their heart. That's so unnatural. That'd be like a gay man going for a woman. Unnatural. After all, how many people would Choose to be gay? Especially nowadays..." I'm sure that you're aware that the text in Romans 1 is calling the male - female relationship natural and the male - male / female - female relationship unnatural. The point: There's no such thing as a natural homosexual / lesbian relationship. The whole point of the argument in this text is that when men / women choose to reject the one true God they end up perverse. In essence sexual perversion is the symptom of a deeper sickness - idolatry. That is the argument made in Romans 1. Look at the passage and I think it will be clear: "21For 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. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." The only way you can support homosexuality / lesbianism and quote the Bible is because you are an idolater. That simply means that you've made a god in your own image. You've rejected the holy God revealed in the Scriptures for a god who condones wickedness. I ask you to look over the passage in Romans 1 and show me where I've missed it. God has given you a conscience and the only way you can argue as you do here is becuase you silenced it a long time ago. The conscience is like a smoke detector. Why have you taken the batteries out? It makes no difference whether or not you "win" these arguments. You'll never be able to get away from that gnawing in your heart that your at enmity with God and in need of reconciliation. You don't have forever to repent and turn to God. How long will you resist the Holy Spirit? Steve
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Apr 3, 2006 19:23:31 GMT -5
Dear Hopefulheart, I am glad that you have joined us on this message board. I think it would be helpful if you visited the following pages as they would help you understand where we are coming from... www.NeedGod.comPlease listen to the messages "Hell's Best Kept Secret" and "True and False Conversion" at this page... livingwaters.com/start.shtmlPsalm 9:7,8 Liz
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Apr 3, 2006 19:30:52 GMT -5
Also, here is a good website with articles concerning contradictions in the Bible, in case you wanted to hear both sides of the debate. drdino.com/articles.php?cat=15[glow=red,2,300]"It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand." -Mark Twain[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by manna/ E.Wallace on Apr 3, 2006 19:42:36 GMT -5
Hey.. i will break it down for a flow, here...in which i don't mind answering anyother questions relating to the Holy Scriptures,I will get to the other later...this below is more important..
I ask you manna: So what you are saying is that a logical absolute that something could exist and also not exist ? What I am asking can moral absolutes and can moral values stand beside each other without contradicting the other ?…
You stated by you own admission : I'm sorry, was there a point to that?... Have I ever lied? Yes. And I've moved past it. I'm sorry that I lied and I'm trying to be truthful in the future. Ever stolen anything? I think I may have. Same thing as the lie. Maybe you'd call that repenting? Hated someone? Yes, but now I've returned to loving them, as everyone should be loved - unconditionally. I'm thankful for that person, including the pain they put me through. Lusted after anyone? Well, according to someone else on this board (not going to look through to find it), no? I don't believe so. But I personally define lust differently from that definition.
What I had ask you were from the Ten Commandments earlier, you know the Divine Absolute Ethics Giver , God himself.. This is important because I do care about you will spend eternity You started that you had lied, what does that make you? You said that you think that you may have had stole something, what does that make you? So in you past you have said that you had hated someone, and now have made it right.. Jesus said that if you hate someone without cause you murder them, how many times does it take someone to hate , to be a murderer? And we have not went through the rest of God’s Holy Moral Absolutes, So by your own admission you are lying, thieving, murderer at heart, and on the day of Judgement , when you face a Holy and Just God, by His Righteousness standard, will you be guilty or innocence ?[/b]
In His grip...
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 3, 2006 19:48:49 GMT -5
First off, thank you Steve - I really appreciate you engaging my point.
I'm sure that you're aware that the text in Romans 1 is calling the male - female relationship natural and the male - male / female - female relationship unnatural. The point: There's no such thing as a natural homosexual / lesbian relationship. The whole point of the argument in this text is that when men / women choose to reject the one true God they end up perverse. In essence sexual perversion is the symptom of a deeper sickness - idolatry. That is the argument made in Romans 1. Look at the passage and I think it will be clear:
But the key point in question is what is 'natural'? If you refer to 'natural' as how we're born, then homosexuality is natural. Honestly, would you choose to be a homosexual? Now, I agree, sexual verversion is a symptom of idolatry, as you've said. But let's look at the context of Paul's writing. To quote from "Thus Far by Grace,":
"It seems entirely plausible to understand 'unnatural intercourse' as a reference to those sexual practices that the Jewish tradition at the time of Paul (remember, Paulw as a Jew) believed to be 'unnatural' precisely because they did not end up in the conception and nurture of new life. ...We know, for example, that the Jews of Paul's day rejected heterosexual practices such as coitus interruptus, anal intercourse, and a female taking the superior position; those positions were considered 'unnatural' for the simple reason that they did not lead to babies. There is no need therefore to interpret this verse (1:26-27) as referring to same-sex behavior between women."
Now for the next part. Paul often writes assuming that there are things that the communities already know. To continue quoting as an explanation for Romans 27:
"One explanation is that Pail is referring, in verse 27, not to same-sex behavior in general, but to a specific form of it, well known among the Romans, that Paul found detestable. It was common in those days, and generally accepted, for men (who understood themselves to be heterosexuals) to have a boy for their sexual pleasure." (I'll stop there)
To sum it up, the context of the time was that men were superior. Women were 'naturally' inferior to men. After all, they didn't have a penis. As were young boys - they weren't matured, after all. The result? All subjugated to the male head of the household. It's a repeated pattern in the Bible.
Another case could be made stating that that's another reason why homosexuality wasn't favored. Full grown men weren't meant to be passive like boys and females. So the partner who was penetrated was shamed. That's why a man shouldn't sleep with a man as he would another man and why a woman shouldn't do the same. It's a matter of status.
The only way you can support homosexuality / lesbianism and quote the Bible is because you are an idolater. That simply means that you've made a god in your own image. You've rejected the holy God revealed in the Scriptures for a god who condones wickedness.
I'm sure this argument has been used to argue for a lot of 'status quos'. I've listed them as examples before and I'll list them again: Slavery, rascism, and the subjugation of women. I can just as easily say that you're the idolator, the one making God in your own image.
Jesus made everything clear - why wouldn't he attack homosexuality if it was such a sinful thing? He never hesitated on anything else.
I ask you to look over the passage in Romans 1 and show me where I've missed it.
I look forward to continued discussion with you ^_^
To Liz: I stopped looking at each site as soon as it asked me if I'm good enough to get into heaven. Anyone who does things to secure a position for themselves is a sinner.
I would definitely like to hear a women's perspective on all I've had to say about the subjugation of women in the Bible, though.
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 3, 2006 19:55:56 GMT -5
And I looked over the site about the contradictions. It tries very hard to reconcile everything. It fails. Just to give a basic example: Genesis 2 is not an extension of Genesis 1. The writing styles are different and the events within are different. God didn't make man and woman both from dirt - Eve was made from Adam's rib. And what about the methods he used? Did he breathe us into existence or did he speak it? Things like that are important. They don't coexist.
And to Manna: By pretending that we were ever meant to be perfect is like pretending we were meant to be God Himself. God didn't make us perfect creatures. If he had wanted us to be perfect, he would have made us so. It's within His power to do so.
Did Jesus condemn every sinner he met to hell? No. He basically told them to try harder, to not sin again. He forgave them. Unconditionally. The exception to this may be the ones who refused to repent. If I'm sorry for something, truly sorry, then I think I'll be just fine.
"To err is human, to forgive divine."
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Apr 3, 2006 19:58:01 GMT -5
Jesus said in Matthew 23:11 "But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant." I have no problem being told to serve others including men. Read Phillipians 2:1-11... I am more than willing to follow my master's example.
As for the websites, I read through all of your posts out of respect even if I don't like what they say. I hope you would show me the same respect and read the things that I have posted including the websites.
Liz
|
|
|
Post by Alison on Apr 3, 2006 20:10:02 GMT -5
By the way you anti-war people are a bunch of hypocrites. You say you are against the war but continue to support and fund the war by paying your taxes. If you are really against the war then stop paying your taxes you bunch of hypocrites. By the way, I don't pay taxes. College student, not enough income to be taxed yet, etc. But even if I did, I wouldn't stop paying them to protest the war. The thing is, not all the tax money goes to war. We all stop paying our taxes and the underprivileged are out of luck, the educational systems have even less money, etc. Yeah, I hate war. I a peace lovin' hippie actually, and proud of it. (Though I know we can't leave Iraq now...so don't start on that.) But the thing is, if you really want to see things change, you have to take action in ways that aren't immature and pointless. Little acts of defiance like refusing to pay taxes would not do any good and hurts those helped by our government. I prefer to fight the system in more effective ways by being informed about and involved in the political process. I write/call/email my Congressmen. I promote political awareness in my school. I'm not a hypocrite, thank you. I'll let you people call me a warmonger, and even laugh about it, but really, paying taxes even though you think the government needs some major reconstructive surgery does not make anyone a hypocrite. Sorry I'm neglecting some of previous points, but I'm more of a jump from here to there poster, and this political thing really caught my eye, as I'm very concerned with the current political situations. Anyway, I'll try to address some of the other things.
|
|