Don't Hate...

[CoAspen]

Your post......

Quote

My opinion is that any behavior society and media promotes is probably a behavior condemned by God.

My post.....

Quote

.....society and media promote kindness, caring for others, being responsible, etc, etc......

Do you see an issue with your post....? The behavior I pointed out you say God also condemns in you blanket statement.

Blanket statements get you in trouble and lead people to doubt your veracity.

[CoAspen]

Adios amigos.

 

[Jessie-Jess]

Um...what happened? How did this conversation get started? I think I missed something...

 

[Robert]

On 3/20/2016 at 8:45 PM, David Geelan said:

I've mentioned this before, but all it really requires is a little empathy and a little thinking. Just do the mental reversal: imagine that exactly the feelings you have toward an attractive woman, a gay man has toward an attractive man, and exactly the same feelings you have toward intimacy with a man, a gay man feels about a woman.

"men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts..."

1] Men desiring (lusting) men is unnatural.  It's not how God created the human race.  Hence these unnatural desires are a result of the fall of mankind.

2] These lusts led to shameful acts (sodomy).

Both the desire and the act are because of the fall.

Why can't we all just agree with Paul on this one?

The struggling sinner, resting in Christ, gets eternal life.

The condoning, justifying sinner isn't resting in Christ and the result is eternal damnation.  The sinner is therefore committing suicide. 

You see if we are resting in Christ our conscience will burn within us when we sin.  This leads us to repentance.  Therefore a true believer cannot condone sin as a lifestyle.  That why John says, "the one who practices sin is of the devil" (1 John 1:8).

It's rather simple.  No use to complicate it.  Again, sin is sin.  The struggling homosexual will make it to heaven where the practicing adulterous will not.  

[Kevin H]

The problem with just trusting Paul on that one is are we reading Paul correctly or are we reading into Paul's words ideas that were not on his mind. I have not yet heard (or I heard and forgot) the exact problems with this interpretation of this text, but from what I understand the quotes from Paul fit into one of 2 categories: where he quoting the Old Testament passages and is talking about the same problems that the Old Testament text was dealing with (that is the orgies in pagan worship or thinking they could steal some of a life force by raping another person) or he uses a specific word that is better translated pedophile, a specific word for adult men having sex with little boys in the gym. Thus while we need to trust in what Paul says  we need to trust in what he is actually saying and not reading more into this words than he meant and pushing those extra ideas on to other people who would normally not be included in the grouping that Paul had on his mind.  

[Robert]

3 hours ago, Kevin H said:

The problem with just trusting Paul on that one is are we reading Paul correctly or are we reading into Paul's words ideas that were not on his mind.

Kevin....Come on.  Pretty soon, using this school of thought, we will make the testimony of anything between Genesis and Revelation of no effect.  Why make it so complex? Paul is clear...why muddy it?

[Robert]

Romans 1:18 The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth through unrighteousness. 19 For what may be known about God is clear to them since God has shown it to them. 20 The invisible things about Him—His eternal power and deity—have been clearly seen since the creation of the world and are understood by the things that are made, so that they are without excuse.

21 Because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him or give thanks to Him as God, but became futile in their imaginations, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools.23 They changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man, birds, four-footed beasts, and creeping things.

24 Therefore God gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their own bodies among themselves. 25 They turned the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged the natural function for what is against nature.27 Likewise the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another, men with men doing that which is shameful, and receiving in themselves the due penalty of their error.

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not proper. 29 They were filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, proud, boastful, inventors of evil things, and disobedient toward parents, 31 without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, calloused, and unmerciful, 32 who know the righteous requirement of God, that those who commit such things are worthy of death. They not only do them, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

[Bravus]

My point had zero to do with condoning: it was about understanding. It is possible to understand something without supporting it. The fact that you want to double down on your lack of empathy, rather than challenge it through personal growth, is telling in itself... and calls the objectivity of your Bible study into question. If you are motivated by a visceral dislike of homosexuality, you are much more prone to motivated reasoning and confirmation bias.

[Gail]

10 minutes ago, David Geelan said:

It is possible to understand something without supporting it.

Thank you... 

[Robert]

10 hours ago, David Geelan said:

My point had zero to do with condoning: it was about understanding.

The phrases: "The good I would do, this I do not do" and "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" illustrate the fact that we are all too human and we sin.  Condoning sin is not to struggle in giving our nature over to God's Spirit so that He can say no to the desires of the flesh.  If there's no struggle then the mind and the flesh are in harmony.  According to Paul this is men's preconverted state. (see Eph 2:3) So I, along with the Bible (especially Paul - see Romans chapter 7), have sympathy and understanding.

Quote

It is possible to understand something without supporting it.

Yes.

Quote

The fact that you want to double down on your lack of empathy, rather than challenge it through personal growth, is telling in itself... and calls the objectivity of your Bible study into question.

You can question my motives all you desire, but only God knows my motives.  So why go there?  Keep in mind those 3 fingers pointing back....

Quote

If you are motivated by a visceral dislike of homosexuality, you are much more prone to motivated reasoning and confirmation bias.

I don't hate homosexuals.  I can't condone their lifestyle as I can't condone adultery even though I myself have committed physical adultery in the past.  Also keep in mind that if I look at a woman with lust I have committed adultery.  Christ has forgiven me 70x7 and He will do the same for the struggling homosexual.

Can I relate to homosexuality?  No.

[Bravus]

I have not claimed to be unbiased. I am an ally, and have been very clear about that.

Those who are claiming to be 'simply following the plain Word' are those who are claiming to be unbiased. There is no hypocrisy in my pointing out their bias, having owned my own.

It is also possible for me to conduct an inquiry that is objective, despite my biases, by being open about them but then discounting them and seeking 'disconfirming evidence'. That is, if I have a bias in one direction but earnestly seek out the best available evidence in the other direction, that is quite different to the behaviour I am challenging: having a bias in one direction and considering only the evidence that supports that bias, discarding all else.

[Bravus]

Have I specifically said that I condone and support homosexual activity? Or have I said that I support homosexual people?

There is a difference, and your continuous accusation that people here are doing the former when they are doing the latter does not do you credit. 

[Bravus]

No. You do not understand. Talk to some actual human beings, instead of assuming. 

I have, and regularly do. I know a number of people who are celibate by choice and homosexual by orientation.

Denying their orientation is denying who they are: pretending it does not exist. 

Your position is rigid, and it is based in ignorant assumptions that do not fit reality.

[Bravus]

2 minutes ago, Kevin(wrx) said:

¹³ “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. ¹⁴ For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

There are far fewer people who think the world is flat than think the world is round. Does that mean they are right?

The truth can be unpopular, but that does not mean all unpopular things are truthful.

Assuming that your own position is identical to the narrow gate to life shows a lack of self-reflection.

[CoAspen]

Quote

You cannot support homosexual people without supporting their lifestyle. 

Then I reckon you don't support anyone. That would mean anyone of any type, as all of us are sinners. In your world one would have to be a perfect specimen of humanity. David was kind in his remarks about the above statement. Ignorance sometimes knows no boundaries.

Ohhhhh....your statement just applies to gay people, I get it!

[Bravus]

I've been clear, you've been willfully obtuse, I'll be leaving.

[CoAspen]

I am glad that God supports us, even though we are sinners and continue to be sinners until he comes. 

I believe the real issue here is that some still believe that being a homosexual is a choice, and if one believes that, so be it. But others and much science says the opposite. We all pick the data we wish to believe.  This horse has been dead for so long and dug up so many times that it has no flesh on it and surely doth stink.

Adios

[Bravus]

Au contraire: I have answered it many times, as clearly as I know how.

You are choosing not to hear.

[Stan]

9 hours ago, David Geelan said:

Have I specifically said that I condone and support homosexual activity? Or have I said that I support homosexual people?

There is a difference, and your continuous accusation that people here are doing the former when they are doing the latter does not do you credit. 

I am of the same mind,,  I support all kinds of people, without supporting their lifestyle, I support overweight folks, which I am, with out supporting their previous dietary lifestyle, or what ever caused it, even if it is families genes.

Kevin, it seems like you have reached perfection in your lifestyle, and are without any struggles at all, well done.  I only dream of reaching that.

[Gregory Matthews]

Kevin (wrx) said:

What you have advocated is a reprobate lifestyle as if there is no need for change or a saviour.

The above is just one of the false statements that Kivin (wrx) has made about David.  David and others had clearly stated that Kevin's statement are false.  Yet, Kevin continues to bear false witness and to expand upon it.

This forum expects that people will engage in civil discourse.  It expects that people will often disagree.  But, it expects that such disagreement will be civil and have some level of integrity. 

I will suggest that Kevin (wrx) has failed to meet this standard.

I believe that it is time for the administration to give Kevin (wrx) a time-out that lasts for several months.  This will give  him the time that he needs to reflect on his relationship to people in this forum and whether or not he wants to continue to post here. 

[Green Cochoa]

56 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

I believe that it is time for the administration to give Kevin (wrx) a time-out that lasts for several months.  This will give  him the time that he needs to reflect on his relationship to people in this forum and whether or not he wants to continue to post here. 

Elijah the prophet spoke uncomfortable truths to King Ahab.  Essentially, the king banished Elijah from interacting with him or anyone else in Israel for three years and six months (James 5:17).  In the end, the truth still came out.

Kevin has posted much truth.  I may not always agree with his style, but who am I to say God is not behind it?  Elijah forced his entrance, uninvited, before the king to speak God's message to him--angering the king.  I would have to echo Gamaliel's wisdom on cases like this one: "Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God." (Acts 5:38-39)

[Robert]

2 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

I believe that it is time for the administration to give Kevin (wrx) a time-out that lasts for several months.  This will give  him the time that he needs to reflect on his relationship to people in this forum and whether or not he wants to continue to post here. 

Greg,

 Why not give Kevin another chance?  Every time you break one of God's rules does He give you time-outs?

Kevin,

David has asked "have I specifically said that I condone and support homosexual activity?"  It seems that he doesn't support homosexual sexual activity, but is supportive of homosexuals.  Anyway, my thoughts....

 

[Robert]

5 minutes ago, Kevin(wrx) said:

....the only thing that sets a homosexual apart from any other person is their homosexuality itself.....

Webster:

Full Definition of homosexual

1:  of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex

2:  of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex

[Stan]

I have yet to meet people who felt they did not give a balance presentation of a subject, and they were not attacking people.

[Robert]

Let's keep the following in mind:

"The danger has been presented to me again and again of entertaining, as a people, false ideas of justification by faith. I have been shown for years that Satan would work in a special manner to confuse the mind on this point. The law of God has been largely dwelt upon, and has been presented to congregations, almost as destitute of the knowledge of Jesus Christ and His relation to the law as was the offering of Cain. I have been shown that many have been kept from the faith because of the mixed, confused ideas of salvation, because the ministers have worked in a wrong manner to reach hearts. The point which has been urged upon my mind for years is the imputed righteousness of Christ. I have wondered that this matter was not made the subject of discourses in our churches throughout the land, when the matter has been kept so constantly urged upon me, and I have made it the subject of nearly every discourse and talk that I have given to the people."  [Unpublished Manuscript Release #371 Ellen G. White Manuscript 36, 1890]

The mixed, confused ideas of salvation is that we get to heaven by what Christ does in us (the imparted righteousness of Christ).  So then, what the sinner needs to hear is that "in Christ" he/she stands perfect now and in the judgement.  Then, through the grace of Christ, the sinner can begin to experience "the imparted righteousness of Christ", but never as a means of salvation.