Leaderboard

I don't believe the word "drag" in the song has anything to do with the drag your thinking of?? One of my favorite's also. What I really like about there music was that jazz saxophone that they played!!

Nor do I; which is why I am conflicted on the issue. Fortunately, I am not charged with drawing any lines. That is for Him to decide. As President Obama famously quipped on a different issue during the Saddleback Chuch "debate" back in 2008, this question is above my pay-grade. As I get older I realize that I don't need to have the answers to everything. This is one issue for which I'm comfortable not knowing the answer.

I do not want to side-track this discussion began by Bavus. I consider it to be of value and I am delighted that he has begun it. But, I will make a couple of comments, that that may not be related to each other. The SDA denomination has published on this issue,, for informational purposes, I will cite a couple of those publications. Ronald M. Springett, Homosexuality in History and the Scriptures, was probably the first major publication. It was authored by a conservative professor in the Religion Department of Southern. From this perspective it can not be considered to be a liberal publication. It was first published about 1980 (I have not checked.) and was 164 pages in length. Its 1999 edition was 183 pages in length. It was groundbreaking in part due to the fact that Springett argued that several of the Biblical verses commonly used against homosexuality were improperly used. To be clear, he supported the common usage of other Biblical verses. I will say that this is important. If someone argues that a specific verse should not be used as it has been used in the past, that does not mean that one is taking an overall position on homosexuality. In addition, I believe that this book is of value in that it alerted me to the fact that the meaning of the word “homosexual” is defined differently by people who use the word. This is important in that sometimes in our conversations we simply are talking over the head of the other and the communication is not based upon a common understanding. In 2012 Andrews University published a the 578 page book: Homosexuality, Marriage, and the Church: Biblical, Counseling and Religious Liberty Issues. It has about 17 different authors. While I do not consider everything to be of value, It has much of value. This includes how we treat people and that homosexuals are God’s children and loved by God. It addresses a large number of issues. As a personal statement: I do not believe that homosexuality is a choice. I did not chose to be a heterosexual. I do not believe that one choses to be a homosexual. I am firmly committed to this position. In my understanding, homosexuality is not defined by activity. Rather, it is defined by gender preference. So in my understanding, a celibate homosexual remains a homosexual. Now back to looking at the Biblical verses.

I see no reason to retract. It has generally been the unspoken reason for going to an SDA college to find a suitable Christian to marry. What better place for a Christian gay boy to find a Christian husband?! [TIC]

He was lost ?

I checked it out for some of the states I would consider moving to. Some of the cities mentioned are pretty dangerous places for retired people to live. For example, Albuquerque, NM is currently ranked #1 in the highest rate of robbery and auto theft in the U.S..

Everyone sins; but some people are very good at hiding the more socially unacceptable ones. The "socially acceptable" sins (like little white lies, gossip given as a false expression of concern, telling a homeless guy to get a job instead of helping him out a little) are so commonly practiced that neither the sinner nor many of the witnesses to the sin realize that sin is occurring. Secret sin or public sin, God always sees.

In a way, I kinda get where B/W is coming from. Although I enjoy the company of my gay friends and am thrilled to see some of them coming to church (even some of them staring to lead celibate lives), I'm at odds with myself as to just how far into the church we let them or anyone else who is practicing open sin. I think it's okay for them to attend; and maybe be members; but I would be uncomfortable having an openly gay person ( or a person who smelled like they just had a cigarette or a shot of tequila) lead out in the congregation. OTOH, how many "closet" gays - those who are extremely discrete and secretive - do we already have in the church and its leadership? I'll bet my bippy (only folks over 60 will know what a bippy is) that there are more than a few. One whom I know was a church elder until he became convicted that hiding his gayness was being a hypocrite. He "came out" and resigned his eldership. He's just a regular church guy now; but he is still a member. As a matter of fact, he is married to a wonderful understanding woman and has 2 kids now. Gay or not, he is a great guy and much loved by the congregation. He still claims to be attracted to men; but is very comfortable in his exclusively heterosexual relationship.

"stone age" is about right as that was more than 50 years ago. In the early 2000s, I was in line to see John Mayall (John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers). I heard someone near me in line say, "Boy am I glad to get to see John Mayall before he dies!" Time passes by. Hard to imagine Mick Jagger is 76. Bill Wyman passed his 80th several years ago. Keith Richards looks like "death warmed over" sometimes. Someone said that "for every cigarette you smoke, Keith Richards gets 20 more minutes of life!" Good times!

Promoting a concept or enabling one to engage in a certain practice is no longer a private sin but a very public sin. So, the practice of promoting wrongdoing by an organization makes it even more public. Those doing so were blessed with the benediction that it would be "better to tie a rock around their necks and throw them into the sea."

While you may be able to make a claim that for society in general "loving, committed, monogamous homosexual relationships" are better. But little of human society will in any way be part of the world to come. When God said "Let us make man in Our image" He then created a man and a woman. So, this man and woman was the image of God. The tired old cliche of "Adam & Steve" is not the image of God. Two of the same sex cannot be the image of God. I would submit that presenting a gay union as the image of God to be blasphemy. Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, or sacred objects, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable. I would further submit that someone engaging in homosexuality does not have the "mind of Jesus" and does not reflect the image of God. Not all "goodness" is necessarily of God and even has it's own ulterior motives. There is much "goodness" in the world today that at it's core is selfish in nature.

We are all born with unnatural "proclivities," ... It is being born into sin. I see nothing in Scripture that excuses one for engaging in "unnatural sexual proclivities" because they are sexual in nature. When and where will you draw the line and finally say this has just gone to far in being "born with unnatural sexual proclivities" and a certain activity is finally sin?

This is what I have found as well. I have also found Jews, atheists, and people who like to eat shellfish, bacon, or to enjoy an occasional beer or glass of wine to be fine people too. I personally have grave questions about a God who condemns people who were born with unnatural sexual proclivities, and who may have fallen to strong temptations that I have never and will never face. But I trust Him to judge justly. I don't trust most of my fellow church members to judge justly.

What a blast from the past! I actually saw the Dave Clark 5 live back in 1966. They were one of my favorite bands; and their song "Glad All Over " was one of my favorite songs back in the stone age of British Rock and before the 'Stoned Age".

Lou: Someone raised this question: “Was there no Sabbath before Creation Week? If the commandments are a transcript of God’s character, there must have been a Sabbath before the creation of our world. And is not the Sabbath going to be carried into the new earth and eternity (Isa 66:22-23)? Will not all creation keep […] The post Questions and Answers (11:7) appeared first on Jon Paulien's Blog. View the full article