by Entropic_Prodigy on Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:17 pm
(Theo_Book wrote)
As long as the saints are willing to allow liars to teach, thieves to take the collection to the bank, homosexuals to teach "home and family," Child molesters to take charge of summer camp, or any of a number of obvious misapplications of leadership scenarios, there should be prevalent in the bosom of the congregation one lasting quiestion; i.e., "How long will God allow us to continue to represent him in this community?"?
(Entropic_Prodigy)
Did I say that they should teach "home and family"? (I assume you're referring to their right to adopt children and raise families) Also, I can't find where I mentioned anything about letting unrepentant thieves handle congregation money...hmmm.
(Theo)
Sorry. I was really addressing the thread, not your post particularly. In fact, I guess I was mainly taking issue with anyone who thinks it is wrong to correct sin of any kind in the church. Not addressing your remarks so much as the general theme of the thread.
(Theo) God has destroyed NATIONS over this issue, and you want Christians to back off? What does past bad treatment by prejudiced zealots have to do with what stand Christians should be taking against what God has sufficiently labeled"abomination?" Are you saying God is wrong? Are you saying Christians should not take a stand? Are you saying it should be ignored in the church? Or are you simply implying it is unfair to include homosexuals without including all other categories of sin?
(Entropic_Prodigy)
I'm sure ALL homosexuals are more than aware of how Christianity views their actions. My point was that because of the history many churches have of wrongly condeming people and being discriminatory, our preaching is "pretty much viewed as a bunch of bible bangers trying to manifest a way to discriminate against another person and oppress their rights as human beings." Forcefullness and righteous condemnation isn't going to help us convince anyone of anything. And although I didn't intend to imply that it's unfair to include homosexuals without including all other categories of sin, thanks for pointing that out. I'm implying it now, retroactively.
(Theo) Again, let me say I am not attacking your position nearly so much as I am attacking any and all who say we shoulod not attack sin in whatever guise we find it. And I agree wtih YOU that the church goes way too far in selecting who it is we want to point out, rather than preach against sin in general.
(Theo) Well, if you will look at the heading of the OP, you will see it reads
"Homosexuality," not "sin." I have no patience with people who think they are doing God a service by killing off all who disagree with "Orthodox" positions of a church. I also have no patience with those who express the idea all sin should be allowed in the congregation lest we be seen to "offend" the sinner.
(Entropic_Prodigy) Oops, I just saw the heading of the OP, and you're right -- I probably mis-posted because not even once did I ever mention homosexuality anywhere in my post. My bad.
Seriously, where did I say that we should allow them into our congregation? Our churches? Could you point this out? I *tried* to express that our preaching and constant affirmation that their lifestyles were considered an abomination by God is being viewed as hate speech -- because there are many instances in the past where religious organizations HAVE wrongly discriminated against individuals for truly WRONG reasons. It has now become the little boy who cried "wolf".
(Theo) It hurts me to have to say it....unh! ..... unh! You are right! OWWY!
I disagree with the "politically correct" idiots who invented "hate speech" to silence those who would warn of the wrath to come. And I for one will NOT remain silent when my Lord directs me to speak. And I know you will not either.
(Theo) "Political correctness" says we can no longer "discriminate." Well I for one shall discriminate till my last breath. We are a discriminating people. How can you "come out from among them and be ye separate" if we do not discriminate? How will God know there are yet ten righteous people in town, if we do not discriminate?
(Entropic_Prodigy)
Discriminate right from wrong all you want, but leave the judging to God -- it's His job.
(Theo) I do not judge. I correct the misjudgment of others who quote scripture and say "Scripture is not against homosexuality." And I agree with my whole heart and soul with your response.
(Theo) Do I hate homosexuals? I find some of the lovingest people to be homosexuals, and I am not referencing sensuality, but caring and interpersonal behaviour. Some of them ar eindeed, people of whom it can be said, "What a lovely person?" BUT, what am I to understand is my responsibility as Christian? Am I to ignore knowledge? Am I to turn a blind eye to abominable behaviour for the sake of peace? Or to avoid offense?
(Entropic_Prodigy)
The Lord does not leave the guilty unpunished -- our responsiblity is to make them aware of the word of God, not jam it down their throat continuously.
(Theo) Hmmm!! Don't remember doing that. I think I posted my essay in the thread, and leave it up to whoever to read or ignore it. The warning is there for those who would heed it, and makes no sense for those who will not use the good sense God gave them for the purpose of heeding just such warnings.
(Theo)
It is not an easy issue to resolve, anymore than knowing what is my responsibility if I see my best friend take privileges he is not entitles to, with his best friends wife or child.
(Entropic_Prodigy)
That's different -- you have a relationship with that person. I'm talking about random strangers. If he was not your best friend and you did not know any of the parties involved, you would have no responsibility. You hear people talk about who cheated on so and so all the time, right? Do you ever go find any of these people you don't know and have no affiliation with and confront them?
(Theo) All the time. And I am not welcomed back into the fold, because I seem to "cause disruption" by such behaviour. I never confront individuals, but preach generically, to avoid the appearance of attacking just the one involved. The gospel of truth will always make it seem as though someone is selected from among many, for pointing out their sins. Is is not so, but seems to be for many.
(Theo)
God expects us to not only behave ourselves, he expects us to take issue where issue exists. And he expects us not to soil our own hands because we have handsoiled friends. God legislated that the Jews in the wilderness wandering, should carry on their person, a paddle, used for the express purpose of covering over that which proceedeth from the body, as they relieved themselves in the desert. They were NOT to relieve themselves in the camp. And do you know why? It was NOT because there is anything wrong with relieving one's self, nor was it because of health considerations, but it was because God might want to walk in the camp with his people, and he did not want to step in something considered unclean. With that kind of provision for his people in a wilderness setting, how do you think God could possibly provide for liars, fornicators, homosexuals, thieves, and worse, in his family, his church?
(Entropic_Prodigy)
Issues should be taken when actions harm another person. Homosexuality usually only harms the individuals involved; however, with more recent requests for rights such as adoption and marriage, this may change. And unrepentant sinners have no place in OUR CHURCHES. Did I say that we should allow practicing homosexuals to attend our church services? Hold hands in our pews? NO. I don't see how you can misinterpret so much in just three paragraphs of post. IMO, All sinners should be given the opportunity to turn from their wickedness and come to the Lord, and if they don't repent, then they will be judged by God, and the appropriate punishment dealt. My post was about how the Lord's word is being received today, based on the history of religion and its impact on society. Please re-read.
(Theo) Apologies all over the place. I did not make it clear in my post, I was addressing all the wrongs I perceive in several posts, but since I posted it right after your post, I can see where it seems like I posted to YOUR remarks. I agree with most of what you stated. Not all, but certainly most of it.
But there is no room among God's people for indiscriminate silence in the midst of sin within the camp. Someone MUST speak out, someone MUST be ready to lead the weak "out from among them" so as to "be separate."
Again, I think we are much in agreement. Please do not take my remarks as addressed to your post, even though it does follow your post in the thread. You can read your post and my post and tell which remarks of yours are involved.
Go with God in peace!
