Jesus supports Gay rights

[christian_soldier]

NO ONE needs to repent from a predisposition that they had no part in, soldier. And they don't need to justify this in any way, shape, or form to you. it's between them and God. Savvy?

Yes they do, and your saying otherwise won't change that.

You won't fully understand until you get past your own areas of disbelief in the Word of God...actually, we all won't fully understand until we are in God's presence.

For some, that may be too late.

You aren't helping anyone by offering justification for the unjustifiable.

 

[Drew]

NO ONE needs to repent from a predisposition that they had no part in, soldier. And they don't need to justify this in any way, shape, or form to you. it's between them and God. Savvy?

Yes they do, and your saying otherwise won't change that.

You won't fully understand until you get past your own areas of disbelief in the Word of God...actually, we all won't fully understand until we are in God's presence.

For some, that may be too late.

You aren't helping anyone by offering justification for the unjustifiable.

I have to agree with Sputnik here, and I would ask christian soldier (or anyone) to explain how it is sensible for someone to repent from an innate ("born with") disposition (as importantly contrasted to actions taken).

 

[Solo]

Yes they do, and your saying otherwise won't change that.

You won't fully understand until you get past your own areas of disbelief in the Word of God...actually, we all won't fully understand until we are in God's presence.

For some, that may be too late.

You aren't helping anyone by offering justification for the unjustifiable.

You are correct in your assessment, christian_soldier. Those who disagree, do not understand the matter of the natural man being sold under sin without the ability to understand the spiritual things of God.
Those who have an innate tendency to sin whether heterosexual or homosexual, they will be held accountable for their choices. Those sins however will not be the sins that send them to hell. It is the sin of unbelief in Jesus Christ that will send them to hell, whether they go to church every time the door is open, profess to be a Christian, and give all that they have to the poor; when they reject being born again, they are condemned already.

It is interesting that Paul lays out why homosexuals commit the sin of homosexuality in the following verse of scripture:

• 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world 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 that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 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. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. Romans 1:19-31

 

[Oscar3]

Why is not surprising that sput and drew are both supporting sinning.
You guys keep complaining and complaining to anyone who will hear that you are tired of hearing you are not a Christian and that you guys belong to a cult and yada, yada, yada, but then you break out with these cult teachings of yours and well. Are you really surprised?

 

[Drew]

Why is not surprising that sput and drew are both supporting sinning.
You guys keep complaining and complaining to anyone who will hear that you are tired of hearing you are not a Christian and that you guys belong to a cult and yada, yada, yada, but then you break out with these cult teachings of yours and well. Are you really surprised?

Ho-hum.

We will now go through the usual ritual. I will ask Oscar3 to explain where, exactly, I have supported sin. He, of course, will not be able to find any such statement (I choose my words with extreme care - try it yourself sometime, Oscar).

He will either respond with more rhetoric or simply refuse to take responsibility for substantiating his claims.

The careful reader will know that I have never claimed that homosexual acts are not sin.

 

[Oscar3]

I have to agree with Sputnik here, and I would ask christian soldier (or anyone) to explain how it is sensible for someone to repent from an innate ("born with") disposition (as importantly contrasted to actions taken).

Here you go

 

[Drew]

I have to agree with Sputnik here, and I would ask christian soldier (or anyone) to explain how it is sensible for someone to repent from an innate ("born with") disposition (as importantly contrasted to actions taken).

Here you go

This is supposed to be evidence of my supporting sin?

Oy vey....

I suppose that if one believes one believes that one is morally responsible for being born with certain "innate and therefore unchosen dispositions", then oscar may have a point.

One can no more repent of a disposition than one can repent of one's skin colour. By the very meaning of the term "repent", one must have the degree of freedom to choose the right path. And an innate disposition, again by the very meaning of the term, is a state of affairs where no choice is involved.

 

[christian_soldier]

This is supposed to be evidence of my supporting sin?

Oy vey....

I suppose that if one believes one believes that one is morally responsible for being born with certain "innate and therefore unchosen dispositions", then oscar may have a point.

One can no more repent of a disposition than one can repent of one's skin colour. By the very meaning of the term "repent", one must have the degree of freedom to choose the right path. And an innate disposition, again by the very meaning of the term, is a state of affairs where no choice is involved.

You toss the term "innate disposition" around like it is fact. DOCUMENT THIS FACT.

It is an innate disposition for a man to be sexually attracted to a woman. IT IS SINFUL FOR A MAN TO LUST OVER A WOMAN (unless its his wife).

All men have a choice to give free rein to lust, or to willfully keep it in check.

If someone formed the Lusters' Church of Jesus Christ, would that make any less sense than the Gay Church? I think not.

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.

Galatians 6:7-9 KJV

 

[SputnikBoy]

You toss the term "innate disposition" around like it is fact. DOCUMENT THIS FACT.

It is an innate disposition for a man to be sexually attracted to a woman. IT IS SINFUL FOR A MAN TO LUST OVER A WOMAN (unless its his wife).

All men have a choice to give free rein to lust, or to willfully keep it in check.

If someone formed the Lusters' Church of Jesus Christ, would that make any less sense than the Gay Church? I think not.

You talk much and say little of meaning.

I don't know that Drew and I see eye to eye on every issue. For instance, he believes that the ACT of homosexuality is a (scriptural) sin as do you, soldier. I, on the other hand, am not totally convinced that the Bible addresses this issue AS SUCH at all . . .

Having said that, of the people on this forum that I admire for perception, intelligence and the tenacity to explore and understand scripture for him/herself, Drew would be up there among the best. This is not 'patting him on the back' just for the sake of it. Nor does it obligate him to support me in the future should he feel that I've totally lost the plot on an issue. :D Nor do I expect or even want a response from him right now. These are simply my thoughts.

SO, I therefore take exception to your remark that he talks much and says little of meaning. Nothing could be further from the truth. You're new to the forum and obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[SputnikBoy]

In all fairness to you, soldier, I see that you edited your post and withdrew the remark about Drew talking much and saying little of meaning. Thank you.

By the way, would you say that you, soldier, and probably others on this forum, have an innate disposition against homosexuality that has NOTHING to do with the Bible?

Also, is it the 'innate disposition' of the homosexual that you see as 'the sin' or is it the ACT of homosexuality that you see as being 'the sin'? Or is it both of the above ...?

ALSO, do you see the HETEROSEXUAL act of sodomy as being a sin? Just curious.

 

[Lewis]

oscar3 wrote:
Sputnikboy
Are you a homosexual? By your reactions and screen name it appears so.
I don't care if you are or not. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[christian_soldier]

In all fairness to you, soldier, I see that you edited your post and withdrew the remark about Drew talking much and saying little of meaning. Thank you.

By the way, would you say that you, soldier, and probably others on this forum, have an innate disposition against homosexuality that has NOTHING to do with the Bible?

Also, is it the 'innate disposition' of the homosexual that you see as 'the sin' or is it the ACT of homosexuality that you see as being 'the sin'? Or is it both of the above ...?

ALSO, do you see the heterosexual act of sodomy as being a sin? Just curious.

I don't hold to the theory of innate disposition to homosexuality...still waiting for documentation to support that assertion.

Anal sex is a stupid move no matter who practices it. The lower intestinal tract isn't designed for the abuse.

The Bible is pretty clear on sodomy, isn't it?

 

[Lewis]

People have temptations, and I believe there is no sin in having them. The sin comes when we give in to those temptations. The fact of the mattter is there is NO sin that even a Christian is NOT capable of commiting. Sometimes the temptation is more than a man wants to resist.

I had a sister-in-law who was sex crazy. Her husband (my brother) wasn't any better. They were into swapping and tried to get my wife and me to swap with them. She had four children during their marriage. One belonged to her husband, two others belonged to two of my other brothers, and the fourth belonged to a black man. I have a niece who is half black. She wanted a fifth one by me, but I wasn't interested.

I was told that one day she was alone with one of my brothers who was the father of one of her kids. She walked out of the bedroom totally nude, spread out her arms and said, "You want it?" What's a man to do? Especially when he doesn't have the power of God to give him the strength to resist. He took her up on her offer.

God promises that we have an excape from temptation, but we don't always want to avail ourselves of it. Sometimes we WANT to give in to the temptation. Not even Christians are above yielding to temptation when the voice of desire yells louder than the voice of the Holy Spirit. The unsaved don't have the voice of the Holy Spirit to guide them, and His voice doesn't do a believer any good if we won't listen.

Does it matter that she is a darker child ? Because I noticed that you also said that the 4th belonged to a black man. So what' what difference does it make. Your sister in-law was wrong but color should not even have come up.

 

[Lewis]

People have temptations, and I believe there is no sin in having them. The sin comes when we give in to those temptations. The fact of the mattter is there is NO sin that even a Christian is NOT capable of commiting. Sometimes the temptation is more than a man wants to resist.

I had a sister-in-law who was sex crazy. Her husband (my brother) wasn't any better. They were into swapping and tried to get my wife and me to swap with them. She had four children during their marriage. One belonged to her husband, two others belonged to two of my other brothers, and the fourth belonged to a black man. I have a niece who is half black. She wanted a fifth one by me, but I wasn't interested.

I was told that one day she was alone with one of my brothers who was the father of one of her kids. She walked out of the bedroom totally nude, spread out her arms and said, "You want it?" What's a man to do? Especially when he doesn't have the power of God to give him the strength to resist. He took her up on her offer.

God promises that we have an excape from temptation, but we don't always want to avail ourselves of it. Sometimes we WANT to give in to the temptation. Not even Christians are above yielding to temptation when the voice of desire yells louder than the voice of the Holy Spirit. The unsaved don't have the voice of the Holy Spirit to guide them, and His voice doesn't do a believer any good if we won't listen.

Does it matter that she is a darker child ? Because I noticed that you also said that the 4th belonged to a black man. So what' what difference does it make. Your sister in-law was wrong but color should not even have come up.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Well, I'm glad to see you so tickled but that's somewhat a delayed reaction, isn't it? That post from Oscar was from a couple of days ago.

By the way, does 'Sputnik' mean something devious in Russian that I'm not aware of? Or is it the 'Boy' part? Hmmm . . .I never thought of this before ...it's most probably a combination of the two that means ..."h-o-m-o-s-e-x-u-a-l" . . .:smt017

Oh my ...it took someone as astute as Oscar to pick it up . . . :smt043

 

[Lewis]

Well, I'm glad to see you so tickled but that's somewhat a delayed reaction, isn't it? That post from Oscar was from a couple of days ago.

But I am just seeing it.