La Sierra 'professor' urges people to repent of heterosexuality...

[M. T. Cross]

I still love you, EC !!! In spite of all my shortcomings !

Well being the totally flawless person I am, I really don't understand shortcomings.........

At least by loving me you show you have some taste anyway...... specially with some nice bbq sauce roasted over a fire under a full moon

[debbym]

if the same sermon had been preached by a man, then i think here would be a much more serious response, since it is a women,

it seems there is less concern by the powers that be.

[fccool]

Quote:

Notice the reference to the principle of the law and that the Golden Rule all by its lonesome sums up the law and the prophets.

I think golden rule is a very imperfect idea in terms of the obvious implications.

For example, if a person enjoys being raped... it would make it quite ok to rape. It would likewise seem to be ok for a masochist to inflict pain on other, simply because he enjoys it being done to them.

A better improvement would be "Do no harm". It's very simple and precise.

[fccool]

I'm sure someone already must have made the distinction between heterosexism and heterosexuality.

Whatever negative effects one may believe Homosexuality can have on the society, one must likewise admit that singling out the "sin" as the hot topic of the day is merely the issue of convenience. It's convenience to point at shortcomings of other as means to scapegoat the problems of society, especially if such problems are not a part of the church. Thus it's easy to blame "the world" and avoid facing the mirror.

Homosexuals are not the cause of problems in society. Most Christians have problems with "homosexual lifestyle" because it involves sex with numerous partners, yet they seem to be quite against a relationship commitment that would restrict sexual relations to a committed couple.

It's sort of : Homosexuality is terrible because of it's rampant aids-inducing multi-partner lifestyle. BUT, even if it was not, it's still terrible. Why criticize multi-partner lifestyle then as if that makes any difference?

I think that making this a sex issue is extremely immature, and that's the main point of homosexual movement. If we chart the time that couples pend having sex relative to doing everything else, it's so insignificant that it hardly makes any use of making the relationship about sex and sexual orientation. Sexual attraction is merely the driving and uniting factor. I think we can agree that sex in itself occupies less than 1% of the time spent in any relationship.

Even at 1%, that would make it 15 minutes a day every day for the rest of one's life. Even with accumulated longer times, I doubt most of the people would hit that amount. Some people probably spend more time brushing their teeth, or using the bathroom. People certainly spend more time eating than having sex.

So, the question being, why not fight obesity more avidly than fighting homosexuality? The answer is simple. If Adventist church would fight obesity the same way it fights homosexuality ... i.e. it's sinful, disgusting and unnatural - they would probably would not have much members left. Some people simply can't fight their obesity. They can maintain it, but that's about it. For some it's a condition they will die with.

Let's get real here. Homosexuality is nothing special to be clamoring about. It's naturally occurring, and there's very little that can be done about it. Denying these people sexual intercourse for the rest of their lives is like demanding that all of the obese people in your church limit their food intake only to healthy necessary. When churches begin doing that, I think they'll be in much better position to criticize homosexuals.

[M. T. Cross]

So, the question being, why not fight obesity more avidly than fighting homosexuality? The answer is simple. If Adventist church would fight obesity the same way it fights homosexuality ... i.e. it's sinful, disgusting and unnatural - they would probably would not have much members left. Some people simply can't fight their obesity. They can maintain it, but that's about it. For some it's a condition they will die with.

Let's get real here. Homosexuality is nothing special to be clamoring about. It's naturally occurring, and there's very little that can be done about it. Denying these people sexual intercourse for the rest of their lives is like demanding that all of the obese people in your church limit their food intake only to healthy necessary. When churches begin doing that, I think they'll be in much better position to criticize homosexuals.

**Standing Ovation**

The whole post really was great, but these last two paragraphs stood head and shoulders above the rest.

So very true, so very well said. My hat is off to you.

[BobRyan]

if the same sermon had been preached by a man, then i think here would be a much more serious response, since it is a women,

it seems there is less concern by the powers that be.

Standing ovation -

And I think you could add that having her give that "talk" at a church in the SECC was probably a good idea if one is planning on promoting error with the least resistance.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Quote:

The equivalent of what you're saying is that God created thieves, murderers, liars, etc... because many people are born with the predeliction toward those sins too.

Quote:

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7)

People have problems with this. Good and evil are opposite sides of the same coin - just as darkness and light are.

Just as "darkness" is simply the absence of "light" rather than a totally different thing, so "good" is the absence of "evil". We would not know the difference between "light" and "dark" unless they both existed. Similarly, we would not know the difference between "good" and "evil" unless both existed.

Don't the 10 Commandements attempt codify what is "evil" for Christians? Didn't God create the 10 Commandments? If God "defines" what is good and evil for Christians, didn't He, in a sense, "create" them both? By creating the Law, did He not create sin? (Sin is, after all just an absence of the Law, isn't it?) Would we even have universal "good" or "evil" if there wan't a law to define it?

The Calvinist idea is "if I am evil it is because God made me evil" -- as Seventh-day Adventists - we are Arminian not Calvinist.

How interesting then that the pagans declare themselves in Calvinist terms.

I think there are some Calvinists out there who should be wincing.

in Christ,

Bob

[olger]

if the same sermon had been preached by a man, then i think here would be a much more serious response, since it is a women,

it seems there is less concern by the powers that be.

That is a valid point Deb.

rejoice always,

G

[olger]

The Calvinist idea is "if I am evil it is because God made me evil" -- as Seventh-day Adventists - we are Arminian not Calvinist.

How interesting then that the pagans declare themselves in Calvinist terms.

I think there are some Calvinists out there who should be wincing.

in Christ,

Bob

A hearty forsooth! Nothing is so plainly taught in Scripture that God is in no way responsible for sin and suffering. Sin is an intruder, foreign to the Creator's plan.

Simple.

[JoeMo]

Quote:

Nothing is so plainly taught in Scripture that God is in no way responsible for sin and suffering. Sin is an intruder, foreign to the Creator's plan.

Really? What about "the buck stops here" theory. In almost every business and government, accountability for things that go wrong goes straight to the top. God knew man would fall; even before He created him. God devised a plan to mitigate the impact of sin; and created man any ways. On top of that, God gave man a free will to disobey Him; which did nothing but enhance the likelihood of someone in all the billions of creatures would rebel. In that sense, yes, God created sin and evil - He knew what would happen and created (or evolved)us anyways.

Fortunately, He didn't stop there. He also devised and implemented a plan to eventually totally eradicate sin from the planet. It is the redemption of man and recreation of the universe that I try to focus on. God felt responsible enough (and loved us enough) to offer His own Son to pay the penalty for our sin. So even of God wasn't responsible for sin and evil, He TOOK responsibility for it and is handling the problem (or so the story goes).

[JoeMo]

Quote:

The Calvinist idea is "if I am evil it is because God made me evil" -- as Seventh-day Adventists - we are Arminian not Calvinist.

Bob, can you introduce me to your dealer? You are obviously smoking much stronger stuff than I am. Nowhere in my post did I say that God made me evil - that's a judgement you put on me. Never have I said that "the devil made me do it". Just because I think that God created ("allowed" might be a better word) evil does not mean that I think He made me evil. I am the most Armenian guy you will ever meet. Predestination is a 4-letter word in my vocabulary.

You have an incredible gift for being condescending and wearing people out by constantly looking for the most negative way to take a post and twist your responses into rebukes. Do you think the little "In Christ" closing makes it all better?Dis Christ spend His life looking for ways to make Himself look more righteous at the expense of everyone else's supposed evil infidelity and heresy?

[JoeMo]

Quote:

it's clear you don't really believe the Bible when it says the Holy Spirit will convince the world of both righteousness and sin. If you did you would know your argument is not supportable from the Biblical perspective.

Ahh, joeb,

now the rebukes come out.

Let's take a look at the bible verses with which you are beating me:

Quote:

And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. (John 16:8-11)

Jesus is talking directly to His apostles. If you look at the context, it is an "I/You" conversation. Yet He says "...Of sin, because they believe not on me ..." Who is the "they"? "They" are the world, not His disciples. It is the world that does not believe in Him. I consider myself a disciple; and so does God (what you consider me is irrelevant); therefore I don't consider myself in the group that is convicted of sin. I believe; so I am redeemed, I believe! I am convicted of righteousness, because Jesus went to the Father and offered His blood on my behalf - His righteousness is my righteousness. As far as judgement goes, it is the prince of the world (satan) who is judged, not me or you.

Please refrain from accusing me of not believing the Bible. It's judgemental and it's insulting. Just cuz I don't believe exactly like you doesn't make me an infidel heretic (although I am in the club).

[phkrause]

Can you show me where in the Bible you read that?

[JoeMo]

Why else would the Lamb have been slain from the foundation of the world?

Quote:

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.(Rev. 13:8)

If God knows all things - past, present, and future - wouldn't He have known that man would fall (which is why he devised the plan of redemption to begin with)? If there are things that God doesn't( or didn't) know, please show me where it says that in the bible.

[olger]

Breathe...Joe..

[BobRyan]

Nothing is so plainly taught in Scripture that God is in no way responsible for sin and suffering. Sin is an intruder, foreign to the Creator's plan.

[M. T. Cross]

How interesting then that the pagans declare themselves in Calvinist terms.

Eh?

Upon reading this I went and brushed up on what Calvinism is, been a very long time since I have even heard the term.

So now freshly refreshed.........

I really have no idea how you could at all come to the above conclusion.

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: JoeMo

Don't the 10 Commandements attempt codify what is "evil" for Christians? Didn't God create the 10 Commandments? If God "defines" what is good and evil for Christians, didn't He, in a sense, "create" them both? By creating the Law, did He not create sin? (Sin is, after all just an absence of the Law, isn't it?) Would we even have universal "good" or "evil" if there wan't a law to define it?

The Calvinist idea is "if I am evil it is because God made me evil" -- as Seventh-day Adventists - we are Arminian not Calvinist.

How interesting then that the pagans declare themselves in Calvinist terms.

I think there are some Calvinists out there who should be wincing.

[BobRyan]

I was just happy to see you using a Calvinist argument - whether you realized it or not - they do agree with you on some basic points.

in Christ,

Bob

[JoeMo]

Quote:

You are turning the point into "God knows the future so can we in some way blame God for the future" combined with "God made us with the ability to think - so God is to blame if we think bad thoughts".

There you go again, twisting my words into something I never said - falsely accusing again. You obviously had a great teacher in this area.

I'm not blaming God for anything. Between me and satan, we can come up with enough evil to warrant my eternal damnation. I thank God that He has given me the righteousness of His Son, Jesus, or I would be DOOMED! I THANK God and GLORIFY God that He has made a path for a sinner like me to gain eternal life; and that He has given all men and women - straight and gay - the same path. I am responsible for the path I take; no one else is. Also, I do not have the right to dictate what someone else's path is if I haven't walked down that path with them.

[M. T. Cross]

I was just happy to see you using a Calvinist argument - whether you realized it or not - they do agree with you on some basic points.

in Christ,

Bob

Like?

[phkrause]

Why else would the Lamb have been slain from the foundation of the world?

Quote:

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.(Rev. 13:8)

If God knows all things - past, present, and future - wouldn't He have known that man would fall (which is why he devised the plan of redemption to begin with)? If there are things that God doesn't( or didn't) know, please show me where it says that in the bible.

God knows all things, I knew that. What I was looking for those exact words? You see EGW tells us that, in those words. Most people would not get that from the Bible unless they actually read what EGW said about this subject. I'm in total agreement with your post though, that God knows all things.

[joeb]

Quote:

it's clear you don't really believe the Bible when it says the Holy Spirit will convince the world of both righteousness and sin. If you did you would know your argument is not supportable from the Biblical perspective.

Ahh, joeb,

now the rebukes come out.

Let's take a look at the bible verses with which you are beating me:

Quote:

And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. (John 16:8-11)

Jesus is talking directly to His apostles. If you look at the context, it is an "I/You" conversation. Yet He says "...Of sin, because they believe not on me ..." Who is the "they"? "They" are the world, not His disciples. It is the world that does not believe in Him. I consider myself a disciple; and so does God (what you consider me is irrelevant); therefore I don't consider myself in the group that is convicted of sin. I believe; so I am redeemed, I believe! I am convicted of righteousness, because Jesus went to the Father and offered His blood on my behalf - His righteousness is my righteousness. As far as judgement goes, it is the prince of the world (satan) who is judged, not me or you.

Please refrain from accusing me of not believing the Bible. It's judgemental and it's insulting. Just cuz I don't believe exactly like you doesn't make me an infidel heretic (although I am in the club).

JoeMo,

I had no intention of insulting you. I thought you had figured that out by now. But, for doing that to you, I apologize.

Of course Jesus was speaking to His disciples, but He was also speaking to the world-wide audience the Bible reaches/will_reach until the end of time. That's why these specific words of His were included in the Bible. They were meant just as much for us as they were for the 12. I thought that this was self-evident to any Christian, thus my comment to you.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

There you go again, twisting my words into something I never said - falsely accusing again. You obviously had a great teacher in this area.

You're learning! Tis the favorite ploy to redirect from answering plain and simple questions or ideas into ones own agenda. Some people often have great difficulty with expanding their thinking or listening to others because of the fear their preconceived ideas need some revision.

Assumption and presumption get in the way much dialogue on these threads...sad to say. Sometimes it is best to just drop the subject because you will never be able to correct the perception of others when it is a prized one.

[joeb]

Why else would the Lamb have been slain from the foundation of the world?

Quote:

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.(Rev. 13:8)

If God knows all things - past, present, and future - wouldn't He have known that man would fall (which is why he devised the plan of redemption to begin with)? If there are things that God doesn't( or didn't) know, please show me where it says that in the bible.

I'd agree God knew sin would arise. That's almost a foregone conclusion given that God has given His entire sentient creation the gift of free will.

That the Lamb was slain from the foundations of the world doesn't mean it was meant solely for this world. The same plan would have been put in place on any world where sin came into being.

That sin happened here means all of the plan is explained to us so that we understand it, thus the terminology is given in terms of this earth.