Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Absolutely I would. I don’t see myself as better than any other sinner.
So what sin do you draw the line at? Unrepentant racist? Unrepentant thief?
Unrepentant Fundie?
Quote:
I bet my bottom dollar you have plenty of “unrepentant” adulterers in your church, too. If someone committed adultery and was divorced, then remarried to another, according to Scripture both are living in adultery continuously. This is why Jesus rejected the Law that was interpreted to mean only the physical act was adultery to state that in God’s eyes one has committed adultery by even lusting.
Yes. I'm sure we do. But if my pastor comes out as an adulterer, tells everyone that's just how God made him and he refuses to change? He's done. To be honest, he'd likely be done anyway.
Quote:
So yes, you probably have listened to unrepentant adulterers speak from your pulpit or in your Sunday School class. If they were repentant they would either return to the spouse they cheated on or remain single. Do you see how hypocritical your view is regarding “unrepentant” homosexuals. You’ve got a good 25% of your congregation who are practicing adulterers. But your mind dismisses the demands of Jesus by ASSUMING one can become an adulterer, pray for forgiveness, and then no longer be an adulterer.
For a guy who doesn’t care for theologians with alternate viewpoints, you remain steadfastly attached to an unbiblical view of adultery.
You're correct, in that sin is sin. And Scripture admonishes us to judge pastors/elders more strictly. We should be bothered by an openly sinning adulterer, fornicator, etc. who makes no effort to change.
As for an elder who commits adultery, yes--he's disqualified from ministry.
That's a silly argument. We just pretend immoral activity is moral? That's like telling a Jew that he shouldn't let it bother him if he is asked to cater a Nazi rally.
Is it? A Jew isn’t asked by His Master to go a second mile (when “sinned” against. Jesus demands it of those who claim His name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Whenever you go against God's plan and design, it is certainly destructive on spiritual level.
but you continue to go against God’s plan and design for having roughly 5% of the human population born “different” with regard to their desire for something other than heterosexual relationship. Over and over, generation upon generation, executed by “christians” like yourself or not. God keeps bringing them back and flaunting them in your “holier than thou” face.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Ok ,a grown sister and her brother both consent to have sexual relations. Perfectly fine using your rational, right?
you mean like Abram and Sara? Did God see that as wrong? Their are genetic reasons for CULTURE to make such unions illegal, but I suppose you would imprison or kill brother and sister for having relations? How “christian” of you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
If you bring down one moral barrier then the door is open to break down the next. And every argument to justify same sex orientation makes you hypocritical if you don't approve of all other kinds of orientation.
Moral barriers are created from one generation to the next. The Bible condoned slavery, you do not. The Bible called for burning witches, but you do not. Or do you? With weird punitive views such as you hold, I suppose you might. You now accept adulterers in your church, but that wasn’t true of churches many decades ago. My own grandfather left the KKK after some of his cohorts dragged an adulterer from church, tied him to a tree and took a bullwhip to him—on a Sunday morning. Your same kind of self-righteous punishment of others.
What is sad is how your idea of morality always involves punishment, never restoration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Spare me the theatrics. Of course, I know straight people engage in risky behavior, but guess what, straight people vastly outnumber gay people yet the STD stats vastly occur in the gay demographic. The logical conclusion is gay people have unsafe sex with multiple partners at much higher rate than heterosexuals.
And your last statement is at least indirectly attributable to YOU, who have compared homosexuals to animals eating their young, to pedophiles, to those who should be avoided by self-righteous people like you. They’ve had to hide, stay in the closet, and remain unable to be who God made them to be—-because of you.
The only thing I see is that you will be judged with the same judgement you render onto them.
Quite sad coming from a latent homosexual who will also be judged for his blazing hypocrisy.
Last edited by mensaguy; 10-10-2018 at 02:21 PM..
Reason: Fixed 5 quote tags. Maybe preview next time.
That's a silly argument. We just pretend immoral activity is moral? That's like telling a Jew that he shouldn't let it bother him if he is asked to cater a Nazi rally.
No more silly than expecting someone to do the job they are supposed to do, or face penalties. Why do you expect special privileges for your religion or beliefs? That is the crux of the issue. You want to be treated special because of the certain God you believe in, while forcing people to live under your God's laws as well. I hate to break it to you, but if you are a public servant, or have a business open to the public, you don't get to just willy-nilly discriminate against anyone you don't like. Unless you are willing to open that up to each and every religion and belief system. You willing to do that? Yea, not hardly.
And no, it isn't anything like that. At all. I suspect you know that, but have no better arguments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Whenever you go against God's plan and design, it is certainly destructive on spiritual level.
People who don't believe in your particular God don't care about his plan or design, just to be frank. And orientation in and of itself creates no destruction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Ok ,a grown sister and her brother both consent to have sexual relations. Perfectly fine using your rational, right?
None of my business if they are consenting adults and there is no abuse. Same thing goes for some guy who has 4 wives, or a relationship with 3 dudes and 3 chicks. None of my business. None of yours either.
Would I agree with a brother and sister getting it on? No, of course not. Would I be foaming at the mouth on City-Data about it? Not unless they were having deformed babies or something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
If you bring down one moral barrier then the door is open to break down the next. And every argument to justify same sex orientation makes you hypocritical if you don't approve of all other kinds of orientation.
No, that is just the ignorant argument you chicken littles use. Saying gay marriage is legal does not, and will not, open the door for incestual marriages, cross species marriages, or child marriage. Period. Again, I suspect you know that, but have no better arguments.
And no, it does not make me hypocritical. Unlike you guys, who have nothing but rigid, religious thinking, I can actually see the differences and make a determination on each one individually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Spare me the theatrics. Of course, I know straight people engage in risky behavior, but guess what, straight people vastly outnumber gay people yet the STD stats vastly occur in the gay demographic. The logical conclusion is gay people have unsafe sex with multiple partners at much higher rate than heterosexuals.
Maybe, but the fact remains, it isn't just a "gay disease". Cutting out gay sex will never eradicate aids. However, if the Catholics and other "no birth control ever!" advocates would stop with that nonsense, it would probably help moreso than outlawing gay sex. Aids skyrocketed in Africa after missionaries had them stop using contraception. So why don't you go on a rant about that? They are causing far more harm than the gays.
Also, you are extremely naïve if you think gay people are just out having sex with everyone, while straight people aren't. You are hard pressed to find a straight virgin in high school, for instance. Teen pregnancies are normal (especially in the bible belt, funny enough). Multiple marriages are commonplace, and marriages are broken up by cheating spouses daily. Face it. You just don't like gay people, and think gay sex is yucky. Instead of minding your own business, you stick your nose in their business, and try to legislate it.
So what sin do you draw the line at? Unrepentant racist? Unrepentant thief?
Unrepentant Fundie?
Yes. I'm sure we do. But if my pastor comes out as an adulterer, tells everyone that's just how God made him and he refuses to change? He's done. To be honest, he'd likely be done anyway.
You're correct, in that sin is sin. And Scripture admonishes us to judge pastors/elders more strictly. We should be bothered by an openly sinning adulterer, fornicator, etc. who makes no effort to change.
As for an elder who commits adultery, yes--he's disqualified from ministry.
First I was a Fundie, and then God brought me to repentance. He just hasn’t found a way to help you yet.
And yes, I was literally in a church where the pastor committed adultery with the church secretary. We did fire him, but he now pastors another Baptist church with the church secretary as his wife.
God brings people to repentance, not you, not your church, not your mission statement, nor any other rules, biblical or not, that you wish to impose.
Jesus didn’t reject sinners did He? In fact, sinners were the reason He came.
Quote:
When the scribes who were Pharisees saw Jesus eating with these people, they asked His disciples, “Why does He eat with tax collectors and sinners?” 17On hearing this, Jesus told them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”
Mark 2:16-17
No, you are far too righteous to let sinners into your church—but that’s also the reason Jesus doesn’t reside there.
First I was a Fundie, and then God brought me to repentance. He just hasn’t found a way to help you yet.
So being a fundie is a worse sin than adultery, theft or homosexuality? Interesting.
Quote:
And yes, I was literally in a church where the pastor committed adultery with the church secretary. We did fire him, but he now pastors another Baptist church with the church secretary as his wife.
And he has no business being in ministry.
Quote:
God brings people to repentance, not you, not your church, not your mission statement, nor any other rules, biblical or not, that you wish to impose.
No argument. But in the meantime, we have no business having unrepentant blatant sinners leading our churches. God gave his requirements to be a pastor or elder in 1 Timothy.
Quote:
Jesus didn’t reject sinners did He? In fact, sinners were the reason He came.
Mark 2:16-17
No, you are far too righteous to let sinners into your church—but that’s also the reason Jesus doesn’t reside there.
No one is suggesting that we reject any sinner. So please just stop this stupid strawman argument.
But you have told me you wouldn't trust a fundie in your church. So I guess the church that "Jesus doesn't reside" in is more forgiving than your church. Interesting.
You have a gross misunderstanding of the impact this episode had on Jesus. He bore the weight of the sin of EVERY person who ever lived, to the point that the Father forsook Him. He will bear those scars forever. Imagine taking the punishment of every criminal in history (ETA) and being a king.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
Religious Mysticism?
There was no forsaking him and the Penal Substitution theory is fallacious as well.
And, You cannot IMPUTE your sins to him, nor his righteousness to that of yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
But that ^^^ is the accepted belief of mainstream Christianity ...right? I assume this to be the case whenever I address topical issues with professed Christians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
They have syncretistically, mixed and blended in various beliefs over time. What amazes me is they condemn people for being new age, yet they are the one's who hold to a secret or concealed knowledge; one that is highly mystical in nature. And they hide behind it, while condemning other people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej
Yes, it is and has been for 2,000 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
No it hasn't. You really need to check into the history of atonement theory.
The Bible tells us that one person cannot be punished for another. Christ’s atonement was to defeat death and forgive us of our sins through love and mercy. It was never based on a punishment that would appease a wrathful god. And he was never forsaken.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do!"
The Bible tells us that one person cannot be punished for another. Christ’s atonement was to defeat death and forgive us of our sins through love and mercy. It was never based on a punishment that would appease a wrathful god. And he was never forsaken.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do!"
One MAN can't be held accountable. God can, though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
