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.
That is quite a reach. You said what he is doing is saying that homosexuality is wrong because of Leviticus 19:17
Leviticus 19:17 You shall not hate your brother in your heart: you shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.
Yep, and I still say that he seems to be justifying labelling homosexuality as a sin and condemning it as such by using Leviticus 19:17 but the context of Leviticus is not to individuals, it is to the sons of Israel through Moses .....
Yep, and I still say that he seems to be justifying labelling homosexuality as a sin and condemning it as such by using Leviticus 19:17 but the context of Leviticus is not to individuals, it is to the sons of Israel through Moses .....
The only way he woud ever consider that, is if it was written word for word in the verse. Unless it's in the bible he apparently doesn't beieve it, its it any wonder he has a difficult time accepting the majority of what Jesus taught, because he didn't teach the bible or from it. If it isn't found in Christ i won't believe it.... In him was life. It is that life i beileve.
I like Wommack but disagree with him here. What i find more disturbing in this debate is the attitude of the likes of you and Finn Jarber towards homosexuals. For arguments sake, let's say it is sinful, you and Finn Jarber simply do not have the ability to reach homosexuals because of the spirit you are both of, you both would do more damage than any good. The bible in the hands of a bible fundamentalist is a dangerous weapon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
You don't know our walk with the Lord so how can you say that our spirit is wrong based solely on some internet posts? That is pompous, arrogant and baseless judgement. You don't even point out exactly what you disagree in the video.
Why "I" disagree with the video - as I've stated many, many times on this thread - is because homosexuality is no more 'a sin' than is heterosexuality. That said, homosexuals - like heterosexuals - certainly can murder, steal, lie, etc. (i.e. 'sin') but their innate sexuality IS NOT 'a sin'. How often must this be repeated before it actually sinks in . . .??
Let's face it, with certain people it will NEVER sink in . . .
No one is promoting or encouraging this sin, Jeff. They are simply not judging and condemning anyone - "throwing the first stone." You and your fellow condemners are throwing not just the first but the second, third, fourth, etc. stones usurping God's role. You pretend that your "stones" are just protecting your religious freedom but no one is fooled by it. It has no relationship to Christ's love, period. No one is demanding that homosexuals be more important than any other group out there, just equally important.
I'm not judging anyone. I don't call out people specifically and run them down. That's what your side does. I'm merely speaking the truth that homosexuality is a sin. Only God knows the hearts of people and can righteously judge. I agree with Andrew's position. Homosexuals can be saved and I have no doubt that there are some out who are better Christians than me. We are all sinners and Christ paid for our sins.
However, I'm not going to hate my neighbor by pretending that their lifestyle is not in rebellion to God. At the very least, they are missing out on God's blessings for their life.
I'm not judging anyone. I don't call out people specifically and run them down. That's what your side does. I'm merely speaking the truth that homosexuality is a sin.
That is NOT the truth. You, and those like you, have chosen to quote mine your bible to define homosexuality as sin. Yet you studiously avoid those parts of the bible the endorse homosexuality, or more importantly, that your Christ didn't even mention it.
"I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left."
Two women grinding together... what could that possibly mean? Two men in one bed? Why?
It's biblical. Not only that, it's in the Gospels. Need an exact reference, or will you take my word for it? Ah... what the heck. Luke 17:34-35. Go read it, and it's in context, in case you want to bring that old canard up.
And then of course, David and Jonathan have a torrid love affair.
Yep, and I still say that he seems to be justifying labelling homosexuality as a sin and condemning it as such by using Leviticus 19:17 but the context of Leviticus is not to individuals, it is to the sons of Israel through Moses .....
"I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left."
Two women grinding together... what could that possibly mean? Two men in one bed? Why?
No, it does not sound sexual, and clearly you have no idea what it is about.
No, it does not sound sexual, and clearly you have no idea what it is about.
Yeah, discussion of bed in one sentence, followed by description of two women grinding together in the next sentence sounds positively bucolic, doesn't it?
If you want to set off most conservative Christians get on the topic of homosexuality or gay rights. The anger most of them have regarding this issue is unfathomable. right-wingers venting their anger and hatred towards these individuals. The same people come to the defense of people like Josh Duggar. Why is this? It seems to be getting a lot worse as many of the beliefs once confined to extremist groups like Westboro are now gaining traction among mainstream evangelicals.
I know right .
How unjust that the right wing Josh Duggar cheering Christians & the bitter Westboro Christians of California were able to defeat " Gay rights " not once , not twice , but three times .
I never would have figured these bitter white Westboro Church types were the sharp end of the stick in population in California ?
Who would have thought there were so many of them ?
Anyone ?
Bueller ?
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.
