Leaderboard

I'm a straight man. I have been married to my beloved wife for almost 30 years, and have never had any sexual experience with anyone else in the world, ever. I don't seek to stand up and defend gay people because I am gay, openly or secretly. I stand up and defend gay people from bullying and abuse because they are people. They are people God created and Jesus died for, and they deserve better from those who claim to follow Jesus. In all the debates and discussions, we need to be aware of how they impact on people. These are real sons and daughters, uncles and aunts, members of families, people with jobs and hobbies and lives and interests. It's important to know the truth and to speak the truth, but if we don't have love we don't have anything. I take the point that love does not mean 'anything goes', and that if we love someone and are fully convinced that they are on a dangerous path and we are in a close relationship with them it may be appropriate to privately tell them so. I'm not so sure it's ever appropriate to publicly shame and attack someone. What was Jesus approach to those who accused the woman caught in adultery, and to the woman herself? I hope we'll continue to delve into what the Bible says and means, but I did want to make it clear why I think it's important. It's not because I'm against the Bible: if I was, life would be much simpler, I could just rely on my own opinion to say that I believe homosexual people are people like everyone else with all the same rights and freedoms. I'm seeking to determine what the Bible actually says and means, and trying to do so as carefully as I can.

I have peaches, nectarines, plums, apricots, & pears in bloom now.

See it happening on a live cam: http://dceaglecam.eagles.org/ Watch Mr. President caring for it.

So let me ask the question that seems to be ignored!! Can 2 men or 2 women pro-create?? Did not God give us an example at creation of marriage????? And than what did he ask them to do??? Just because heterosexuals have problems with there marriages has nothing to do with what God instituted at creation!! We as humans messed that up!!

That's been my whole point. And who does the convicting? It's not me nor anybody else...it's the work of the Holy Spirit. I really don't understand why so many feel they need to do His work.

I stumbled upon CA and then didn't come back for a long time... i have no idea why at the time. I finally stepped in venturing to experience community... i found incredible diversity which i am very at home with... I have been enjoying participating in and reading if not posting. It really has helped my communication of my faith everywhere i go. God is wherever you find Him.

@Kevin(wrx) I was, I believe in China when this was posted and only had an iPhone to use, am only now responding as I dwell in my Canadian Abode. Trust me here, if all the posters had to agree with me, there would be only 1-2 other posters, I found the whole homosexual event repugnant, including gay marriage. Therefor I will never be involved in that act, nor would I ever marry a male. When I get myself 100% pure then I will begin working on others. I know this, we all have struggles, I wouldn't trade mine for that of a gay person. I believe in christian fellowship, as well as a powerful God who can convict and transform by his mighty power. I do not believe that I am to replace the Holy Spirit, and God has not asked me to so far, and I do not see a change in the immediate future. I do believe we need to open our circle of friends, and support and pray for one another. Bringing up the gay issue to me, is just as annoying as "that" person bringing up the fact that I am over weight, and he has had totally victory over that. It is very ok to differ, it is not very ok to condemn or slam people, over victories we have had and they have not. Just my opinion, others will differ, and I am ok with that,

I'm just curious but didn't want to disturb any of the active topics going on right now, but why is it that it is primarily men who are debating the issue of homosexuality here?

What about Land Lord? Those who own Land are called Lords. Mayors are "His Worship" Judges are also Lords. "If it please thee My Lord" I provide this..... whatever. We call people Brother and Sister to sounds religious, and he that does the will of our father is our brother, BUT no where in the Bible does it say "Give greetings to Brother Paul or Peter" etc

the titles for religious officials don't particularly bother me... they're just titles of respect. George Bush used "his holiness" to address Pope John Paul because that was the correct way to address him. What was he supposed to say — "Hey, Dude"? what irritates me more are the familiarity words bandied about by Christians: "Brother so and so", "Sister so and so", the "saints" in the church, "mothers of Israel", "prophet" — those words (and others) are sometimes used with such indiscretion that they have been cheapened and the usages are basically nullified (in my mind).

No, it is not. The dilemma is real. The point is not to prove up the validity of any one thing in the long laundry list of rules/laws. The point at this stage is not to establish whether any one point of conduct is or is not moral or sin or civil infraction or practical advice. As David has already simply explained there are a whole bunch of rules in that list of Levitical rules. They are Scripture and therefore to be taken seriously, as I think he is doing. It is clear from numerous comments just here, but more widely among Christians as a whole that absolutely nobody is still following all of them. (For a delightful effort to highlight this fact, see the book "Year of Living Biblically") The simple question is which still do apply to us as moral laws and which do not. There are 3 choices - (1) all are still binding, (2) none are, or, (3) some are and some not. It is abundantly clear that #1 is out. And given the discussion here many think at least one is still binding, so #2 is also out. We are left with #3. The dilemma being tested here is how do you decide which are and which are not. If each of us divided the entire list onto two columns, "applies" and "doesn't apply", the serious and important question for each and every distinction is to have a coherent answer to the question "why?" The answer should hopefully give some guidance to helping with deciding on the hard to figure out rules or the disputed rules. Thus far I do not see anyone giving a good answer to that question. Nobody seems to have a logically consistent answer or set of answers. There is a lot of beating around the bush and evasion of the question. One would hope for something helpful that gives some logical guidance to making the hard distinctions.

we have survived the Winter, it was actually very mild. In the last few weeks we have had temperatures in the mid-teens Celsius and trees are starting to bud, which of course is not great as it will likely freeze hard a few more times. Would love to have fruit trees in my backyard...that is likely more of a Heaven reality ?

God never referred to red hair as an abomination or included that or skin color in the list of those that would be excluded from eternal life. Trivialize much?

I can't believe you of all people are trying to compare red hair with homosexuality!!

HEY ALL the temperature for this 1st spring day in middle TENNESSEE --- is high 48---low 31 i think that is spring weather---right? dgrimm60

Is it superficial study to simply decide that verse 22 of one chapter is binding and verse 27 of the next is not (and remember, the chapters are later additions, the books of the bible were originally not divided this way), without giving any reason? I think not. Rather the reverse: careful study is required. Simply not *caring* what it means to 'round the corners of your head means is what seems sloppy to me. The Jewish links are not definitive, but it's their language we're discussing, and those pages go in some detail in considering what "pe'ah", the word translated as 'corners', actually means. I'm being as careful as I can be, not to be vexatious but because I think it is important.

Yes, God created free-will beings made in His image and after His likeness, but He also warned them that "“You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.” (Gen 2:16,17) So "yes" homosexuals can marry if they so desire, but they too can suffer the consequences of practicing this sin as a legitimate lifestyle. According to Scriptures "Whoever practices sin is of the devil" (see 1 John 3:8). Practicing sin and sinning are not the same. I sin many times during the day because I have nature that enjoys sin. It's not easy to "walk in the Spirit", after all human nature is very deceptive. The question is what do I do when God's Spirit convicts me of my sins - do I repent or do I justify my sins? Do I admit to Christ my sins? If not, then I'm taking the position that I'm not a sinner. If I'm not a sinner then I don't need Christ's righteousness. If I reject Christ then I must stand before God's law in my own righteousness, which is as filthy rags. So again, sure, the Christian who has homosexual tendencies may justify marrying another of his own gender, but in so doing he is following the dictates of his flesh. To live for the flesh as a lifestyle if very dangerous (see Romans 8:5-8). In fact it will eventually lead to apostasy.

So you believe that God created men and women with homosexual tendencies and that it is natural?

Christ's 'church' can stand until the end, He is taking care of it. Flawed humans are going to fix it? If something needs 'fixing', I trust God enough to take care of it.

This link below isn't from an SDA source/author/artist, but I still recommend it. http://adam4d.com/dont-hate/ Update: Here's a new comic on the subject, by the same artist.

1869 ~ a Native American overlooks the newly completed transcontinental railroad

The first motorcycle with internal combustion ~ In 1885, the Daimler Reitwagen ("riding wagon") or Einspur ("single track") was a motor vehicle made by Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach, and is widely recognized as the first motorcycle. Daimler is often called "the father of the motorcycle" for this invention. Even when the three steam powered two wheelers that preceded the Reitwagen, the Michaux-Perreaux and Roper of 1867–1869, and the 1884 Copeland, are considered motorcycles, it remains nonetheless the first gasoline internal combustion motorcycle, and the forerunner of all vehicles, land, sea and air, that use its overwhelmingly popular engine type. Drawings from 1884 showed a twist grip belt tensioner, complex steering linkage and used a belt drive. The working model had a simple handlebar and used a pinion gear drive.

Or as they would say in Australia and so many other places in the world, FIRST day of FALL.

I think that David would say: O.K. Establish that.

Were you up to greet it in????

Red hair is about as prevalent as homosexuality. The argument that homosexuality is a characteristic of a minority and therefore not the 'norm' applies in the same way to redheadedness, yet I don't see that being described as a 'perversion' or as a result of the Fall. I don't see people being accused of 'blaming God' for redheadedness.

David, apparently you glossed over my responses. Sinning isn't the issue. We are all guilty of sin. Its what we do, when convicted of sin, that makes the difference. This is not to say we shouldn't strive to walk by the Spirit and hence not fulfill the lust of the flesh.

I said that homosexuality is a perversion. Cancer and other diseases are a result of the fall.

I think you have some valid points. However, you have not established that "rounding the corners of your head" means cutting hair. Perhaps it refers to practices such as have occurred among certain tribes where the head is shaped in certain ways by a system of molds during growth. To be honest, I didn't read the Jewish links. They have been known to make up their own laws and interpretations on things. They missed understanding a BIG truth, that Jesus was the Messiah, so why should I expect them to get anything else right? Find it in the Bible for me, isn't that fair enough? There is nothing unclear about the wording regarding male-to-male sex in that passage. That's not quite the same, perhaps, as "rounding corners." Nevertheless, if it can be proven that a man should never cut his hair, I think you should start a sect of Nazarites.

The two links I included considered the issue of baldness, and there are specific texts to say that male pattern baldness means that being hairless in particular places is not sin. The reason I keep pushing this is because you are seeking to push particular texts on others. If you were not, I would be delighted to leave the issue alone. I personally don't care about what you do with your hair and beard. The point here is that you are claiming that the texts about male-male sex mean God cares about that. If so, then God clearly also cares about this issue, or why is it included in the Bible? It's a very simple logical point: either all of it applies, or none of it does, or some does. If some does, there needs to be a clear criterion for deciding which does and which does not. You have presented no criterion for distinguishing, and you claim some does, therefore all does. Therefore, you should have a full beard including sideburns. Maybe you do, who knows. You should also be calling for all Christian believers to have one, if you wish to be consistent.

I'm not sure why you keep pushing this one so hard. 1) You don't know me, have never met me, and are clueless about what hairstyle I might have. 2) You have not proven the text addresses haircuts. Referencing Jewish interpretations means nothing to me--are they the sole interpreters of scripture? (Sounds almost Catholic.) 3) Would it be a sin to be naturally bald? 4) No one is casting stones. 5) The commandment regarding the casting of stones does not nullify the other commandments of God. 6) If one should not condemn sin, what should one do instead? uphold it? tolerate it? keep silent about it?

I am not certain as to exactly what you mean by endorsing homosexual marriage. But, it is on Biblical grounds that I support laws that make it possible for homosexuals to marry persons of the same gender. How is that position Biblical? It is Biblical in that it is founded in the nature of God. Back in Eden, God gave humanity the right to chose how their life would be lived. I therefore believe that God gave homosexuals the right to chose whom they should marry. I will and I do support that right as a legal right in our society. NOTE: Do not expand my comment well beyond what I have said. 1) Clergy should have and do have the right to chose whom they will provide marriage ceremonies for. 2) I am not advocating a right to rape others--either children or adults. 3) I could name a lot of other things that I am not advocating.

If in this forum people decide to discuss what is right and what is wrong, I would expect that the basis of that discussion would lie in a Biblical understanding of what is right and wrong. .

I just learned that gays are more likely to suffer from depression, anxiety, OCD, alcoholism and drug abuse and other ills that I wrote down but don't have access to at the moment. Doesn't it seem that we should befriend these to give them access to Jesus? When I came to Christ, it was through the love of those who serve Him that I came. I already knew the sorrow and shame of the results of sin.

Yeah, I had some nectarines last week. Awful! Probably picked too green.

Watched a video (no nudity exposed) of gay and lesbian people touching for the first time some one of the opposite sex. Both the female and male, found it totally disgusting. There is much I fail to grasp, but I do know this, Jesus was the friend of sinners. am ok with.

This is the last in a short series of guest blogs from my friend, Gaby Phillips. I find her perspective extremely helpful in wrestling through the issues of how Adventists can and should relate to Islam. It is tempting to buy into morbidly negative views of Islam, on the one hand, and overly positive ones, […] The post Can Muslims follow Christ as Muslims? appeared first on Jon Paulien's Blog. View the full article

Lol! He's the goalie

That would be the subject of another thread...not this one....

A bit of distraction from the chaos around me in some very remote, lonely places on the planet - oh, and curiosity and nostalgia... First post - but I've had a profile for 3 years. There are some of us (I suspect) who regularly visit this forum (for me, it is in the weekends when I travel - which is about 6-months in any given year). Ex-SDA (35 years now) - but found this forum online when I was out on a humanitarian mission in Ethiopia (that's the nostalgia and distraction reason covered) Curiosity to see if anything has changed since I got up and left my home town and church all those years ago. Seems like an eclectic group of people here, with debates ranging across a spectrum of beliefs and viewpoints. All the best Excaliba

Sunday is the first day of spring and the forecast is predicting snow!

I joined at the invitation of one of the moderators, who read my posts on another forum. I too was about to jump ship because of the hypocrisy I perceived at all levels of the church; and the problems I had with some of the "cultural" interpretations of the 28 Fundies. A very kind and concerned member of this forum took the time to go through each of the Fundies with me as posted on the official church website. I couldn't find any fault in the way they were actually stated, so I postponed leaving. As I started posting more, I found some wonderful, smart, open-minded people here; as well as those who believe differently than I do. The ones that have mastered the art of disagreeing without being disagreeable have inspired me to study more. I still have issues with the way some of the more traditional folks see things; but I'm sure there are those that have issues with my viewpoint. As long as the differences of opinion inspire spirited conversation and deeper study, that's a good thing IMHO. This actually has sorta become my home church. I spend more time with CA than I do my local congregation. I am blessed to be here.

I've been a denizen since fairly early on, and am coming up on 15,000 posts now. I come here to think with friends, and have learned a heap and (I hope) grown over the years. 'Iron sharpens iron', as the Book says, and we learn... perhaps most from those with whom we disagree. There are ways to disagree without being disagreeable, and I always try to and aspire to, but sometimes fall short. I hope I apologise and withdraw the comments when I fail, but even better not to have made it in the first place. Like all of us, I'm still growing up.

Since I have never seen your biblical backup for this (or if I have seen it, it didn't make enough sense to gel in my mind), I have no basis but your word on which to accept this premise. I think that most of us are "awake" enough to discern the signs of the times, if we keep our minds open to the possibilities. Your analogy about waiting until it's too late to check out the facts doesn't happen until the church is taken into the sky and the 3 "Woes" and/or the 7 bowls start to fall. As far as "checking out the facts" goes, believe me, I have done MUCH fact checking. I have just reached different conclusions than you by looking at those facts. None of us knows the details about the future. We form our constructs based on our own logic and experience. Prophecy will unfold the way it unfolds; and all of us will likely be surprised by how it does happen. Jesus was the only one in His day that knew how the prophecies of His First Coming would unfold; it caught everyone else by surprise. Who actually believed that a body that battered and injured could come back from the dead? Certainly none of His disciples believed until they saw the empty tomb. By the grace of God, we should know who is the beast, antichrist, harlot, etc. WAY before the seven bowl fall - if we keep our eyes open. I don't totally dismiss your scenario; I just hold the one Thomas and I currently profess as more feasible and realistic, given what we see in the world today. Future events could alter my opinion. Blessings to you; over and out.

That's not a pejorative, it's a description of a behaviour. If you read carefully, you would see that my comment about the title you chose for another thread was not that it wasn't 'nice' but that it was biased, and as such made it difficult for a discussion to be fruitful. I'm not that concerned about 'nice'. I'm trying to follow Jesus, and he called people 'a generation of vipers' and 'whited sepulchres'. What you'll notice, though, was that he comforted the afflicted and afflicted the comfortable. Those words were directed to the powerful and corrupt. With the woman at the well, the lepers, the woman caught in adultery, everyone vulnerable, he was gentle. You're just piling on to the most vulnerable people, and as such I have no hesitation in describing that behaviour as bullying.

hch, Like I have posted before, until prophecy unfolds, we can only speculate on how it will unfold. Until the time that it does unfold, all any of us can do is offer an opinion. Could the papacy or the RCC play a larger role than Isalm in the end times? Yes. Could Islam play a larger role than the RCC? Yes. Could they both have a major role? Yes. Could it be something completely different having nothing to do with either Islam or the RCC? Yes. That being said, I find Thomas' and my scenario much less convoluted and "fantastic" than yours. Admittedly, that is at least partially because I reached the same conclusions as he has independently of ever meeting him. I personally find your theories about Obama's role in the end times and equating "loose loins" with altar boy abuse a little over the top. My own son was sexually abused by an SDA teacher; and then kicked out of the church when he complained about it. He's dead now; IMHO at least partially due to the trauma of being molested by a spiritual and educational mentor and then being persecuted by the church he loved rather than being believed and supported. I know women who have been propositioned and seduced by SDA pastors; and then threatened with being disfellowshipped if they said anything. How different is this than what happens in the RCC? ANSWER: Not very. I have heard the same stories about leaders in other denominations as well. They all have "loose loins". Restricting lust to priests and Catholics is a libelous fantasy. "Loose loins" is a problem with a person; not a denomination. What about radical Muslim jihadis kidnapping thousands of women as sex slaves? Or raping them in the streets and alleys of countries who have offered them sanctuary? Is that not "loose loins" as well? What about imams telling European women that if they don't want to be raped, to stay at home? Nonetheless, if your scenario plays out, I'll be glad to admit that I was wrong and you were right. Will you do the same if Thomas' and my scenario plays out?

Good advice for hch; and good advice for all Christians looking forward to the end of this age and the coming Kingdom. Don't leave your denominational blinders in place and miss the current "Signs of the Times"!

In Rev 17:10, 5 "heads"/kings/mountains had fallen when John received the vision. One "was". That would make pagan Rome the 6th head. The "other" who was "yet to come" would "continue a SHORT TIME". Islam has existed since 660 AD. Not exactly a "short time". And the Papacy also lasted longer than several of the others. Not a "short time". Hitler lasted only a short time - compared with the other heads/kings. That is the biggest reason that I see the 8th head as being LIKE Hitler. Now the 8th head - THAT I could definitely see lasting only a "short time".

Just for clarification, and I told a member I would respond publicly. I know some have had struggles in the past and crossed lines, truth is, we all have, some got caught and others did not. Our concern is what happens in here now and in the future. If someone approaches you for fund raising, or private things that they should not be asking for, Please contact Gregory. I know in the past we have raised money for members in need, and some of them were. Some of them according to reports were NOT. AND we paid for their week long parties. Still others sought after widows for funds to "Fill desperate needs". None of the above fill the mission of this forum. Thanks to Gregory for his comments and wanting to protect people here.