What would you do if your child came and told you he was gay? [Archive] - Theology Forum

s9s27s54

February 3rd, 2003, 07:17 PM

Read Romans 1:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

From this scripture, are gays saved? God hates that sin as He does all sin. If one is saved, they will become normal. They will like the opposite sex.

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:23 PM

Originally posted by s9s27s54

You cannot be gay and saved. God says it's an abomination in His eyes. He destroyed Sodom and Gohmora because of the homo's there.

God didn't destroy 'Sodom and Gohmora' for atrocious spelling and apostrophe placement though. Interesting that someone with such a lack of attention to detail is aware of God's reasons for doing things.

lucybelle

February 3rd, 2003, 07:25 PM

OH WOW! I have a CHILD!?!?!

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:26 PM

I find it so amazing that people have this deep seated hatred and unconivcing Biblical backup of their hatred towards gays.

Do you even separate sexually active gays and non-sexually active gays?

Are you as strong towards premarital heterosexual sex as you are toward gays?

Do you have any gay friends?

Sheesh. Please tell me that one of you 'superantigaychristians' currently resides outside of the U.S. of A.

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 07:26 PM

So If there are gay Christians...over time they will like the opposite sex...well I guess that is one theory.
It is funny to me...how one sin to you is not equal to another. How do you weigh sin?

YOU CAN'T!

s9s27s54

February 3rd, 2003, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by AsLan
I find it so amazing that people have this deep seated hatred and unconivcing Biblical backup of their hatred towards gays.

Do you even separate sexually active gays and non-sexually active gays?

Are you as strong towards premarital heterosexual sex as you are toward gays?

Do you have any gay friends?

Sheesh. Please tell me that one of you 'superantigaychristians' currently resides outside of the U.S. of A.
READ YOUR BIBLE!

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by s9s27s54
Read Romans 1:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

From this scripture, are gays saved? God hates that sin as He does all sin. If one is saved, they will become normal. They will like the opposite sex.

Oh man.

Does this change happen instantaneously or over time in your experience?

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:28 PM

Originally posted by s9s27s54

READ YOUR BIBLE!

I have, in its entirety. ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!

s9s27s54

February 3rd, 2003, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

I have, in its entirety. ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!
If you have, you would know how God feels towards them.

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by s9s27s54

If you have, you would know how God feels towards them.

'them'. That says it all right there.

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:33 PM

Why do 'christians' put so much effort and time into this topic, when it's obvious that Christ did not?

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 07:35 PM

ok...now.. I see what you are saying SOZo. Maybe you are right by gays not accepting that being homosexual is a sin. And your right they need too! I agree with you! WOW!
But, even if they don't know...there has to be a way to help them though their sin...and to be a Christian.
Anything is possible!

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:37 PM

Originally posted by Sozo

Because homosexuals put in a lot of effort trying to justify it.

'Christian' ones? Ones you know? You're friends with? Or imaginary 'them' in your mind and your nightmares?

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by Sozo

There are no Christian homosexuals, that is a figment of your imagination.

But, to deny that homosexuals are vocal about the validity of their lifestyle, you would have to be asleep.

Are there 'christians' that sin then?

Are you trying to push 'christian' morals on unsaved people?

sigh.

A figment of my imagination is where I think there may be a chance that you comprehend Jesus' message and how He treated people who needed Him while He was here on earth.

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 07:47 PM

Granted homosexuality is wrong...but...WILL THEY GO TO HELL...even if they have accepted Christ as their Savior. Answer that question directly...YES OR NO!!!!!!

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by mberthot
Granted homosexuality is wrong...but...WILL THEY GO TO HELL...even if they have accepted Christ as their Savior. Answer that question directly...YES OR NO!!!!!!

Mortals don't make that decision.

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 07:55 PM

EXACTLY!!!! And that is why SOZO will not answer that question! Because he knows that God is love. And God has all the answers. And that the Bible does not have all the answers in the universe because we are not supposed to know everything. Instead of BASHING gays why don't you go out and try helping them! Preach the gospel and show them the love that Christ showed the whores and cheaters!
AMEN!

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 07:57 PM

And Christians are human right!!!! Therfore we sin!!!! We are sinful by nature from when we are born until we die. Man where did you come from?

AsLan

February 3rd, 2003, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by Sozo Christians do not sin.

You lost me here. Do expound.

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 08:07 PM

SOZO? Where are you now?

osucowboytc

February 3rd, 2003, 08:15 PM

If you will read carefully you will notice that homosexuality is detestable to God, not the people committing the sin. Many believers continue in lives of sin, whether homosexuality or another form of sin. Does that mean that anyone who still gives into their flesh is going to Hell. In that case, Paul is in Hell because according to him, he is the worst of all sinners. He even said that he does what he doesn't want to and doesn't do what he wants to. The logic that no Christian can be homosexual just doesn't stand up. Just because you are a Christian doesn't mean you will be free from a life of sin. It is all for His Glory and Renown.
Tyler

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 08:18 PM

Tyler, well put!
but I doubt that SOZO will agree.

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 08:29 PM

Right we are not slaves to sin and sin does not have any power over us anymore. But we do Sin! Because we still have flesh we sin. But the power of sin does not have any hold over us!
AMEN!

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 08:37 PM

Walking in the light

5This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. 7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all[2] sin.
8If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.

This passage says it all. I really think you should read this very carefully!

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 08:48 PM

So do you admit that you have sinned? Do you sin? And if you don't sin...are you perfect? And if you do sin...do you repent?

I understand your point...my mentor takes the same approach. But by saying we never ever sin????

Because Christ lives within us we are holy...right.
But because we have flesh we still sin.

I am a new creation with Christ Jesus...basically "Matthew in who Christ dwells" right.

i think I am starting to see where you come from.

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 09:01 PM

So Sozo...do you believe that as a Christian we are completly and always forgiven? That is what I believe.

elected4ever

February 3rd, 2003, 09:05 PM

Can a homo be saved? The answer is clearly------yes.

Really, why the two faces just because you might not like smething someone does. Every person on planet earth has weakness of some sort. Every one of us gives in to temtation to the flesh at some point in his life after salvation.

Sin is a condition in which we were all born. Sins are acts that are commetted out of that condition. The penelty for sin is death. That penelty was paid by Jesus Christ at Calvery. If we have accepted that sacrifice of the blood of Jesus Christ as an atonement for our sin debt it is sufficient for all our sin period.

Though we are justified by the blood of Jesus Christ our relationship with each other is another matter. We are to live honorably before all men as representatives of the King and the Kingdom.

What is you response to theft, anger, adultry and a whole host of other actions that are commonly refered to as sins? We surely do not give places of authority in the body of the Church to such individuals. We do have the right to hold the standard of Christ as a worthy goal. Church dicipline is a necessary function of the church and is often to little practiced. Most often we ignor the individual christian and give little or no support but condemn excessively.

The flesh has not been saved. It has been cleansed that we may do the service of the King. That is why the body dies the physical death. All sin has been condemned in the flesh and we shell never take it with us.

1 Corinthians 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

1 Corinthians 5:1 ¶It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Galatians 6:1 ¶Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5 For every man shall bear his own burden.
6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

mberthot

February 3rd, 2003, 09:11 PM

Excellent points...again thank you for the wisdom!

elected4ever

February 3rd, 2003, 09:12 PM

Oh, by the way, don't call a homo gay. They are the most miserable people on earth. Thay may fake ther wellbeing and and act like they are happy but that is just a fassad to make them look normal to society. They put on a game face so to speek.

ibowatjesusfeet

February 3rd, 2003, 09:12 PM

Morality has nothing to do with the gospel.
Sozo and I have been through this before.

Oddly enough, we had a speaker at my church this past Sunday who used to be gay, but is now married (to a woman who also used to be gay) and has kids.

He said that people who become gay usually were either sexually abused as children or were lacking a father figure (this doesn't mean that anyone who has either of those problems as kids will be gay, it's just what is often seen in gays). It is often a combination of the two. He became gay because men were "mysterious" to him (he identified more with women). He became gay because he needed someone to fill a void in his life and he thought that a physical relationship with a man would do that.

Six years after he "officially" came out, a Christian couple (man and wife, of course) started going into the Kinko's where he worked. They knew he was gay (he said it was obvious) and he knew they were Christians by the papers they would have him copy. Through their love (not being judgemental) they told him what Jesus could do for him. He realized that Jesus was the one who could feel that void. He turned his life over to God and changed his lifestyle. It was completely his choice, he didn't like the way he was living and wanted to change. He had also been a very big gay rights activist, so the change was all the more incredible.

He has spent the last 16 years of his life preaching the word of God to those who have similar problems that he had. He now works with Dr. James Dobson. I found this to be a great testament to what Jesus can do.

Flipper

February 3rd, 2003, 09:18 PM

ibowatjesusfeet wrote:

He has spent the last 16 years of his life preaching the word of God to those who have similar problems that he had. He now works with Dr. James Dobson. I found this to be a great testament to what Jesus can do.

That wouldn't be John Paulk, would it?

ibowatjesusfeet

February 3rd, 2003, 09:27 PM

Yes it would.

ibowatjesusfeet

February 3rd, 2003, 09:28 PM

I couldn't remember his last name, thanks.

Flipper

February 4th, 2003, 08:30 PM

Not, perhaps, the greatest example.

http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/825/825_paulk.asp

He only bailed from that bar when he realized he'd been recognized. On subsequent shows of FoTF, he was clearly terrified and blubbering with repentance. I suspect it's because he knew he was going to lose his job, otherwise. And I wonder what the job market is like for people who make their living being an "ex-gay"?

Dobbo has a low tolerance level for employees who actually slip into sin; which is why his current co-host has been with him for just over a year.

Mustard Seed

February 4th, 2003, 09:17 PM

In reference to Sozo's remarks

Originally posted by AsLan

You lost me here. Do expound.

I've already tried to figgure out his reasoning. He says he dosen't sin yet he's appologized and asked others to forgive him. I always thought an admision of guilt was an indicator of sin either that or a lie which of course would also be a sin.

As far as what I hope I would do if the day ever came that I had a child and the child approached me about this I woul pray I'd be able to express my heart felt love in such a way as to let him/her feel that I loved him/her as much as I ever had and still be able to explain that in God's eyes it is a sin but that like with all sins there is a way out and a way to repent. I would plead with my child to fight temptation but at the same time I would not cut him/her off. I would offer my support of any attempt to fight those tendancys and help him/her sort it all out. I would make it clear that while I could never accept a decision to follow those tendancies as being good or correct I could equally not allow it to come between the love I have for them. I pray such day never comes for it would be one of the saddest days of my life.

AsLan

February 4th, 2003, 11:22 PM

It's clear the non-sinning Sozo isn't writing these posts and isn't simply trying to pull our collective leg since the non-sinning Sozo doesn't exist.

However, if it is the non-christian Sozo writing these posts, because he still sins and therefore can't be a 'christian', then we can keep him in our thoughts.

If only 'Sozo' would reveal himself.

elected4ever

February 5th, 2003, 06:28 AM

AsLan----------It's clear the non-sinning Sozo isn't writing these posts and isn't simply trying to pull our collective leg since the non-sinning Sozo doesn't exist.

However, if it is the non-christian Sozo writing these posts, because he still sins and therefore can't be a 'christian', then we can keep him in our thoughts.

If only 'Sozo' would reveal himself.

e4e-----------I am quite confident you do not know what you are saying. If you did that stupid stuff would not come out of your mouth.

Mustard Seed----------- I've already tried to figgure out his reasoning. He says he dosen't sin yet he's appologized and asked others to forgive him. I always thought an admision of guilt was an indicator of sin either that or a lie which of course would also be a sin.

e4e------------------Musteredseed, Don't you have any idea at all what sin is? What a lame brain statement.

Freak

February 5th, 2003, 08:58 AM

What would you do if your child came and told you he was gay?

I would tell my child I loved him and that God loves him and nothing will change that love.

Explain to him the dangers of homosexuality (spiritual, emotional, and physical) and the need to repent of this evil.

I would then break off any fellowship--not communication--but fellowship until the child repents. I'm assuming you're speaking of someone over 18.

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by Freak
What would you do if your child came and told you he was gay?

I would tell my child I loved him and that God loves him and nothing will change that love.

Explain to him the dangers of homosexuality (spiritual, emotional, and physical) and the need to repent of this evil.

I would then break off any fellowship--not communication--but fellowship until the child repents. I'm assuming you're speaking of someone over 18.

I don't disagree with you, but can you define 'fellowship' please?

Poly

February 5th, 2003, 12:01 PM

Originally posted by Freak
What would you do if your child came and told you he was gay?

I would tell my child I loved him and that God loves him and nothing will change that love.

Explain to him the dangers of homosexuality (spiritual, emotional, and physical) and the need to repent of this evil.

I would then break off any fellowship--not communication--but fellowship until the child repents. I'm assuming you're speaking of someone over 18.

Wow, Freak, there's hope for you yet. (kidding:D ) :thumb:

Hank

February 5th, 2003, 12:38 PM

No one who defines themselves as "gay" has accepted Jesus.
They might continue to commit homosexual acts, but they won't like it, and wish they could stop.

No one who defines themselves as "obese" has accepted Jesus.
They might continue to commit the overeating, but they won't like it, and wish they could stop.

Poly

February 5th, 2003, 12:49 PM

Originally posted by Hank

No one who defines themselves as "obese" has accepted Jesus.
They might continue to commit the overeating, but they won't like it, and wish they could stop.

You are honestly going to compare eating to homosexuality? Eating is a necessity. Breaking bread together in the bible is described as a special time. While eating to an excess may be considered sin, homosexuality is a sin to whatever extent it is taken. It is also destructive to the one committing the sin as well as other innocent people having nothing to do with it. This is not the case in overeating. And you find nowhere in the bible where overeating is described with such powerful hate words by God as abominable.

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo

You are honestly going to compare eating to homosexuality? Eating is a necessity. Breaking bread together in the bible is described as a special time. While eating to an excess may be considered sin, homosexuality is a sin to whatever extent it is taken. It is also destructive to the one committing the sin as well as other innocent people having nothing to do with it. This is not the case in overeating. And you find nowhere in the bible where overeating is described with such powerful hate words by God as abominable.

Do we have a chubby bunny here?

In an age where so many people are starving with malnutrition, and Amercia fattens itself on Fast Food, Doritos and overconsumption, feeding the gluttonous pit that they love to attempt to fill, I would say that the obese are affecting other people a lot more than two men kissing or having anal sex.

There are people in here that have never spoken more than 2 words to gays, and man, it shows.

Poly

February 5th, 2003, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

Do we have a chubby bunny here?

I know you are but what am I?

In an age where so many people are starving with malnutrition, and Amercia fattens itself on Fast Food, Doritos and overconsumption, feeding the gluttonous pit that they love to attempt to fill, I would say that the obese are affecting other people a lot more than two men kissing or having anal sex.
I think now is a good time to start that "fruitcake" thread kind of like the fruitcake video when people are just off the charts with stupidity.

There are people in here that have never spoken more than 2 words to gays, and man, it shows.

Hey people can help it if they're sickened by them. I for one don't mind speaking to them at all. It takes way more than a few words to tell somebody how utterly repulsed I am of them.

Freak

February 5th, 2003, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

I don't disagree with you, but can you define 'fellowship' please?

Spending quality time....

Homosexuals need to be loved and shown that Jesus loves them. We need to moderate this by explaining to the homosexual that God abhors homosexuality and the homosexual needs to repent.

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo Hey people can help it if they're sickened by them. I for one don't mind speaking to them at all. It takes way more than a few words to tell somebody how utterly repulsed I am of them.

When you say 'them', you bigot, are you talking about 'christian' or secular gays, are they sexually active, are they just possibly attracted to the other sex, or are you just comfortable with your nice and tidy box of hatred, and really couldn't care less?

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Freak

Spending quality time....

Homosexuals need to be loved and shown that Jesus loves them. We need to moderate this by explaining to the homosexual that God abhors homosexuality and the homosexual needs to repent.

Ok, so could you describe a relationship with communication but void of fellowship?

Freak

February 5th, 2003, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

Ok, so could you describe a relationship with communication but void of fellowship?

You can have communication without fellowship. Phone, email, letters, brief visits, etc. The point is to make the homosexual realize there is a lack of intimacy in the relationship due to sin.

Poly

February 5th, 2003, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

When you say 'them', you bigot, are you talking about 'christian' or secular gays, are they sexually active, are they just possibly attracted to the other sex, or are you just comfortable with your nice and tidy box of hatred, and really couldn't care less?

When I say "them" (ick) I mean those haughty good for nothing God hating homos. The ones who are proud of what they do and have no remorse. And yes I'm quite comfortable with my hatred towards them because it is required of me by my God. I'm zealous over Him and will not allow "them" to drag his name through the dirt. If this is the definition of bigot then so be it. It is a shame however that people will put homos in the same catagory as those who are unjustly descriminated against. "They" ride on the coat tails of respectful people because "they" know that "they" are hard for people to tolerate.

mberthot

February 5th, 2003, 05:23 PM

I don't think it is our job to show homosexuals that there is a "lack of intimacy in a relationship due to sin!" I think that they will experience that for themselves! Plus I agree with Aslan...Jesus said to show love to all...and you know what...I bet he even talked with them when he was alive. Just like he talked and showed the Love...to the whores...and the cheaters.
As Christians we should show love and not hate.

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by Freak

You can have communication without fellowship. Phone, email, letters, brief visits, etc. The point is to make the homosexual realize there is a lack of intimacy in the relationship due to sin.

So, you wouldn't give them a hug for instance? You would show or pretend that you don't 'enjoy' their company? Conversation is cold, no laughing?

s9s27s54

February 5th, 2003, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

So, you wouldn't give them a hug for instance? You would show or pretend that you don't 'enjoy' their company? Conversation is cold, no laughing?
That would be very hard. I must realize we're talking about a child here. Your own flesh and blood that you gave birth to.

mberthot

February 5th, 2003, 05:34 PM

good point Aslan

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo

When I say "them" (ick) I mean those haughty good for nothing God hating homos. The ones who are proud of what they do and have no remorse. And yes I'm quite comfortable with my hatred towards them because it is required of me by my God. I'm zealous over Him and will not allow "them" to drag his name through the dirt. If this is the definition of bigot then so be it. It is a shame however that people will put homos in the same catagory as those who are unjustly descriminated against. "They" ride on the coat tails of respectful people because "they" know that "they" are hard for people to tolerate.

You've clearly never spoken to one that you know as a friend.

You have no idea what a person has been through in their life to lead them to seek acceptance with a gay community.

You're superficially and sweepingly judgmental over a vague group of people about whom you could care less.

This sort of attitude displayed by 'believers' does nothing but determent what virtues Christ displayed while here on earth.

There are times to be steadfast, unmoving and to see what individual people sow. You, however, are not anywhere near the epitome of how those actions are to be carried out.

mberthot

February 5th, 2003, 05:51 PM

Homerun for Aslan...
How can you call yourself a Christian..."One in whom Christ dwells..." If you do not show the Love towards all humans? Do you think that Christ would have turned his back on homosexuals and give them the cold sholder? NO!!!!
Love man, Love!

s9s27s54

February 5th, 2003, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by mberthot
Homerun for Aslan...
How can you call yourself a Christian..."One in whom Christ dwells..." If you do not show the Love towards all humans? Do you think that Christ would have turned his back on homosexuals and give them the cold sholder? NO!!!!
Love man, Love!
Then why did He destroy Sodom and Gomora?

mberthot

February 5th, 2003, 06:05 PM

...you tell me all knowing s9s27s54.
And that was before the new covenant...right. Again...if Jesus died for all sins and if the homosexual is a Christian and has accepted Jesus. Than isn't that sin just as bad as any other sin?
Something to think about.

s9s27s54

February 5th, 2003, 06:08 PM

Originally posted by mberthot
...you tell me all knowing s9s27s54.
And that was before the new covenant...right. Again...if Jesus died for all sins and if the homosexual is a Christian and has accepted Jesus. Than isn't that sin just as bad as any other sin?
Something to think about.
I also pointed out that God still does not approve of that sin. He doesn't approve of any sin. I pointed out in Romans how homosexuality is still a sin. Jesus did die for that sin. Jesus does save those people. After they get saved they change.

mberthot

February 5th, 2003, 06:14 PM

So after you have been saved...s9s27s54....you never lie now or cuss now or think bad thoughts ever now. WOW You are perfect!
To say that when a Homosexual accepts Jesus they change...WOW!!! That is amazing...no...you are amazing!
As far as what SOZO said. I agree with SOZO!!! Wow I never thought I would say that!

Freak

February 5th, 2003, 06:34 PM

Freak

February 5th, 2003, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

So, you wouldn't give them a hug for instance? You would show or pretend that you don't 'enjoy' their company? Conversation is cold, no laughing?

You haven't bothered to read my posts either.

I made it clear-we should love the homosexual-verbally & nonverbally-you can do this without the fellowship-

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by Freak

You haven't bothered to read my posts either.

I made it clear-we should love the homosexual-verbally & nonverbally-you can do this without the fellowship-

Considering I've been inquiring about your definition of 'fellowship' and 'communication' for about 4 posts in a row, including responses from you, I would say I've been reading your posts.

I'm asking you what the short communicative meetings with this non-fellowship person would be like.

To restate:

So, you wouldn't give them a hug for instance? You would show or pretend that you don't 'enjoy' their company? Conversation is cold, no laughing?

For the nosebleed seats, I want details. I want to know how you go about this sort of action. I'm sure you've done it before, or else you wouldn't be describing this formula to the world. If you fail to answer my questions, I'll assume that you have no experience with your 'treatment' as described and I'll not waste my time in conversation with you further.

Mustard Seed

February 5th, 2003, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by mberthot
I don't think it is our job to show homosexuals that there is a "lack of intimacy in a relationship due to sin!" I think that they will experience that for themselves! Plus I agree with Aslan...Jesus said to show love to all...and you know what...I bet he even talked with them when he was alive. Just like he talked and showed the Love...to the whores...and the cheaters.
As Christians we should show love and not hate.

Agreed

For we are all sinners and in need of Jesus just as much as anyone else regardless of the severity of their sin. I had a friend make the observation that we tend to be very hard on those who commit sin that is easy for us to avoid yet we are rather sympathetic to those who have the same weaknesses we do. In short he said to not knock someone just because you don't understand what they've been through or exactly what they have to strugle with.

mberthot

February 5th, 2003, 06:57 PM

You hit it right on the head mustard seed.
YEAH!!! FOR YOU!!!

Hank

February 5th, 2003, 07:40 PM

You are honestly going to compare eating to homosexuality?

No I am comparing overeating, a sin in the Bible, to homosexuality, a sin in the Bible.

Eating is a necessity. Breaking bread together in the bible is described as a special time. While eating to an excess may be considered sin, homosexuality is a sin to whatever extent it is taken.

Overeating is a sin to whatever extent it is taken.

It is also destructive to the one committing the sin as well as other innocent people having nothing to do with it. This is not the case in overeating. And you find nowhere in the bible where overeating is described with such powerful hate words by God as abominable.

So a sin that is described as an abomination is worse than a sin that is not? Well eating pork is an abomination to God. Have you ever eaten pork?

Poly I have asked this question several times and no one has ever touched it. I was wondering if you would take a stab. If a hermaphrodite has sex with someone, are they a homosexual?

BTW my post was basically in regard to hypocrisy and self-righteousness. I think Jesus talked a lot about that.

Freak

February 5th, 2003, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

Considering I've been inquiring about your definition of 'fellowship' and 'communication' for about 4 posts in a row, including responses from you, I would say I've been reading your posts.

I'm asking you what the short communicative meetings with this non-fellowship person would be like.

To restate:

So, you wouldn't give them a hug for instance? You would show or pretend that you don't 'enjoy' their company? Conversation is cold, no laughing?

For the nosebleed seats, I want details. I want to know how you go about this sort of action. I'm sure you've done it before, or else you wouldn't be describing this formula to the world. If you fail to answer my questions, I'll assume that you have no experience with your 'treatment' as described and I'll not waste my time in conversation with you further.

Look, I have been clear in my responses to you. I have spent many years counseling those in bondage. I know how to reach people with the love of Jesus!

Show the homosexual that you love him-pray for them, affirm their worth to God, share their burdens/concerns, tell them you love them, be kind, hug them,....and you can do all of this without fellowshipping with them..

In doing this explain to them the consequences of their sin/evil practices....and their need to come to repentance.

Goose

February 5th, 2003, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by mberthot
Do you think that Christ would have turned his back on homosexuals...I try NOT to turn my back to homosexuals. :up:

AsLan

February 5th, 2003, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by Freak

Look, I have been clear in my responses to you. I have spent many years counseling those in bondage. I know how to reach people with the love of Jesus!

Show the homosexual that you love him-pray for them, affirm their worth to God, share their burdens/concerns, tell them you love them, be kind, hug them,....and you can do all of this without fellowshipping with them..

In doing this explain to them the consequences of their sin/evil practices....and their need to come to repentance.

That sounds fine, apart from your choice of words 'the homosexual'.

So you're saying you become their counselor. What are they missing out on when you withhold your 'fellowship' though? I'm really unclear as to what this means, to not 'fellowship' with them, tell me in a tangible sense, not theoretical please.

s9s27s54

February 6th, 2003, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by mberthot
So after you have been saved...s9s27s54....you never lie now or cuss now or think bad thoughts ever now. WOW You are perfect!
To say that when a Homosexual accepts Jesus they change...WOW!!! That is amazing...no...you are amazing!
As far as what SOZO said. I agree with SOZO!!! Wow I never thought I would say that!
No, I'm not perfect. The homosexualality sin will be taken away once that person is saved and they know how the Lord feels towards that sin.

firechyld

February 6th, 2003, 06:55 AM

In the minority. What a surprise. :rolleyes:

Seriouosly... you must have known how the majority of posters around here would respond. What's the point of the poll?

firechyld

Freak

February 6th, 2003, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by AsLan

That sounds fine, apart from your choice of words 'the homosexual'.

So you're saying you become their counselor. What are they missing out on when you withhold your 'fellowship' though? I'm really unclear as to what this means, to not 'fellowship' with them, tell me in a tangible sense, not theoretical please.

Again, I made myself clear in earlier posts--the parents needs to cut off the fellowship (the amount of time) they would invest in their rebellious child. Again, keep the communication lines open (brief visits, email, phone calls, etc) but the intimacy in the parent-son relationship will no longer be present due to the sin!

AsLan

February 6th, 2003, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Freak

Again, I made myself clear in earlier posts--the parents needs to cut off the fellowship (the amount of time) they would invest in their rebellious child. Again, keep the communication lines open (brief visits, email, phone calls, etc) but the intimacy in the parent-son relationship will no longer be present due to the sin!

Since I'm the one to whom you're speaking, allow me to tell you if you're being clear or not. Do you judge yourself like this in all areas? Let me tell you, you're not being clear.

Now your definition of fellowship is simply the amount of time spent with the rebel in question. What are the time frames that you've used in your years of experience? The intimacy is still there obviously, as you've said that there can be hugs and quiet chats, etc.

I think perhaps it would be easiest for you to describe a successful case of your application of this theory.

Poly

February 6th, 2003, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by AsLan

You've clearly never spoken to one that you know as a friend. You have no idea what a person has been through in their life to lead them to seek acceptance with a gay community.

Do not even presume to pretend to know my life. This is a debate. Not a chance to lie about somebody. You need to refrain from out and out blatent lies about somebody else. Do you think when they stand before God on judgement day, He will allow the reasoning behind the fact that they are homosexuals give them an excuse? Think again.

I have spoken to ex homosexuals who said that they would not have turned to God except for the fact that somebody was harsh enough to care. People who say nothing but things like "God is love" and "God loves you and so do I" make those who hate God and living in sin, want to vomit. The lovey Christian world today has no backbone. Nothing but a bunch of jello Christians. When you get tough with one you cause them to stick around and fight. Not run because they are about to be sick over your "Lovey" God. When they stick around there's a chance for them to know truth. When they run, you've lost them.
You're superficially and sweepingly judgmental over a vague group of people about whom you could care less.
If this were true I would simply be telling them "God loves you" and leave at that.
This sort of attitude displayed by 'believers' does nothing but determent what virtues Christ displayed while here on earth.
Ok lets have a look at these scriptures you have to back this up. Oh wait, you don't have any. Christ was never forgiving to the blatently proud that were unrepentant of their sin. He never made apologies for His tyrant dad whom He was embarrassed over because He was too harsh. They were in perfect agreement over everything. The bible is full of times where God is harsh with people and He expects us to be harsh with them as well. In the Old Testament as well as the New.

Ezekial 3:18 When I say to the wicked, "You shall surely die" and you give him no warning, nor speak to him of his wicked ways, that same man shall die in his iniquity but his blood I will require of your hand.
Prov. 1:26 I also laugh at your calamity. I will mock you when you terror comes.
Prov. 11:20 Those that are of a preverse heart are an abomination to the Lord
2 Ch 19:2 ...Shouldest thou help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord?
Psalm5:6 The Lord abhors the bloodthirsty man.
Psalm 11:5 The Lord trieth the righteous but the
wicked and those that loveth violence His soul hates.
Matt 7:5 Thou hypocrite...
Matt 10:22 And ye shall be hated by all men for my name sake.
Matt 10:34 ...I came not to send peace but a sword.
Matt 15:13 Every plant that my heavenly father hath not planted shall be rooted up.
Luke 11:40 Ye fools...
Luke 12:20 Thou fool...
Luke 12:56 Ye hypocrites
Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Romans 9:23 says and I Peter 2:8 says that Jesus is "The Rock of offense"

There are times to be steadfast, unmoving and to see what individual people sow. You, however, are not anywhere near the epitome of how those actions are to be carried out.
Again nothing scriptural to back this up.
Prov27:5 Open rebuke is better than love carefully concealed.
According to God my ways are the actions that should be carried out. Not yours.

AsLan

February 6th, 2003, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo

Do not even presume to pretend to know my life. This is a debate. Not a chance to lie about somebody. You need to refrain from out and out blatent lies about somebody else. Do you think when they stand before God on judgement day that he will allow the reasoning behind the fact that they are homosexuals give them an excuse? Think again.

I have spoken to ex homosexuals who said that they would not have turned to God except for the fact that somebody was harsh enough to care. People who say nothing but things like "God is love" and "God loves you and so do I" make those that hate God and living in sin, want to vomit. The lovey Christian world today has no backbone. Nothing but a bunch of jello Christians. When you get tough with one you cause them to stick around and fight. Not run because they are about to be sick over your "Lovey" God. When they stick around there's a chance for them to know truth. When they run, you've lost them.

My 'lack of backbone', by the grace of God, took me to sell all my earthly belongings, buy a ticket to Nairobi, end up in Ethiopia teaching Bible, English and basic computer skills. I hadn't a penny to my name when I landed in Ethiopia.

Care for photos?

It's easy to hate and to judge. How far will you go to understand people and help them to deal with their problems?

Matthew 7:1 "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.

Luke 6:36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. 37 "Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo
Ok lets have a look at these scriptures you have to back this up. Oh wait, you don't have any. Christ was never forgiving to the blatently proud that were unrepentant of their sin. He never made apologies for His tyrant dad whom He was embarrassed over because He was too harsh. They were in perfect agreement over everything. The bible is full of times where God is harsh with people and He expects us to be harsh with them as well. In the Old Testament as well as the New.

Now we're talking about a 'blatantly proud' homosexual that is 'unrepentant of their sin'.

That's convenient that you know so much about them already. Perhaps it would be best if you could comment on the description of the person's history and relationship with both yourself and God, as it's obvious you know more about the persion in question than has been posed elsewhere in this article.

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo
Ezekial 3:18 When I say to the wicked, "You shall surely die" and you give him no warning, nor speak to him of his wicked ways, that same man shall die in his iniquity but his blood I will require of your hand.
Prov. 1:26 I also laugh at your calamity. I will mock you when you terror comes.
Prov. 11:20 Those that are of a preverse heart are an abomination to the Lord
2 Ch 19:2 ...Shouldest thou help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord?
Psalm5:6 The Lord abhors the bloodthirsty man.
Psalm 11:5 The Lord trieth the righteous but the
wicked and those that loveth violence His soul hates.
Matt 7:5 Thou hypocrite...
Matt 10:22 And ye shall be hated by all men for my name sake.
Matt 10:34 ...I came not to send peace but a sword.
Matt 15:13 Every plant that my heavenly father hath not planted shall be rooted up.
Luke 11:40 Ye fools...
Luke 12:20 Thou fool...
Luke 12:56 Ye hypocrites
Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Romans 9:23 says and I Peter 2:8 says that Jesus is "The Rock of offense"

Again nothing to scriptural to back this up.
Prov27:5 Open rebuke is better than love carefully concealed.
According to God my way are the actions that should be carried out. Not yours.

No idea what you're trying to say with your shorthand list of scriptures here.

Poly

February 6th, 2003, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by AsLan

My 'lack of backbone', by the grace of God, took me to sell all my earthly belongings, buy a ticket to Nairobi, end up in Ethiopia teaching Bible, English and basic computer skills. I hadn't a penny to my name when I landed in Ethiopia.

Well, good for you. If you can do something like this then why can you not do something God has specifically told you to do in His word like hate those that love iniquity?
Matthew 7:1 "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Luke 6:36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. 37 "Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven."
I'll not do as you chose to do and tell you that I have no idea what you are trying to say with these verses. I know exactly what you are trying to say by using this as an excuse not to have to confront anyone.

Last I checked I was not a homosexual so the "judgement I am pronouncing" I will not be judged by so the "measure I give" will not be the measure I get. This is not a verse saying we are never to judge. God commands us to judge but not hypocritically as Matt. 7:1 says. Verse 3 says to get the speck out (not a speck of homosexuality do I have) THEN you can judge. He would not have put the latter part of that verse in if we were never to judge. But incase this isn't good enough for you let me list some other verses that you will "have no idea what I am trying to say". (Just put a couple of brain cells together, Aslan. You'll get it.)
Luke 7:43...Thou hast judged rightly.
Luke 12:57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?
1 Cor 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things things that pertain to this life?
1 Cor 11:13 Judge in yourselves...
Isaiah 54:17 ....and every tongue that shall rise agaisnt thee in judgment thou shalt condemn.

Now we're talking about a 'blatantly proud' homosexual that is 'unrepentant of their sin'.
Again you are trying to win an arguement in lying or being deceitful about somebody else. You specifically asked me on a previous postWhen you say 'them', you bigot, are you talking about 'christian' or secular gays, are they sexually active, are they just possibly attracted to the other sex, or are you just comfortable with your nice and tidy box of hatred, and really couldn't care less?
To which I respondedWhen I say "them" (ick) I mean those haughty good for nothing God hating homos. The ones who are proud of what they do and have no remorse. And yes I'm quite comfortable with my hatred towards them because it is required of me by my God. I'm zealous over Him and will not allow "them" to drag his name through the dirt. If this is the definition of bigot then so be it. It is a shame however that people will put homos in the same catagory as those who are unjustly descriminated against. "They" ride on the coat tails of respectful people because "they" know that "they" are hard for people to tolerate.

There's no reason for me to think that we are not still talking about "them". But you would love for it to look as though I am meaning even the unrepentant or say such things as "NOW, I am talking about..." as though I am changing my tune. If you feel that what you have to say is true and of God then it is your responsibilty to show where I am wrong through scripture and what God has to say about it. Not by using deceiving tactics.

AsLan

February 6th, 2003, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo

Well, good for you. If you can do something like this then why can you not do something God has specifically told you to do in His word like hate those that love iniquity?

If you feel that the Bible tells you to 'hate those that love iniquity' then go ahead, but you're wrong. First of all, how can you judge men's hearts as to whether they love iniquity or not? I assume if you see one man kiss another, they love iniquity, they are haughty God-hating people?

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo I'll not do as you chose to do and tell you that I have no idea what you are trying to say with these verses. I know exactly what you are trying to say by using this as an excuse not to have to confront anyone.

I have no lack of courage. I'm not backing down from your weak, hate-based, misinterpretation of the Bible, and I don't back down speaking to people in person. I'm not lying when I say that your choice of scriptures do not have anything to do with how Christ told us to relate to people.

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo Last I checked I was not a homosexual so the "judgement I am pronouncing" I will not be judged by so the "measure I give" will not be the measure I get. This is not a verse saying we are never to judge. God commands us to judge but not hypocritically as Matt. 7:1 says. Verse 3 says to get the speck out (not a speck of homosexuality do I have) THEN you can judge. He would not have put the latter part of that verse in if we were never to judge. But incase this isn't good enough for you let me list some other verses that you will "have no idea what I am trying to say". (Just put a couple of brain cells together, Aslan. You'll get it.)

Sarcasm and calling me stupid. Your colours show through here with brilliant contrasts and hues.

I'll go no further with you.

Hank

February 6th, 2003, 12:28 PM

Poly you never replied to my post but it is interesting that you used part of this Bible verse. The whole verse reads:

Matt. 7:[5] Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Of course usually Jesus was referring to the self-righteous Pharisees when he used the word hypocrite.

Goose

February 6th, 2003, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by Hank
Of course usually Jesus was referring to the self-righteous Pharisees when he used the word hypocrite. Actually, I think he was talking to just the random people that were listening to him there. Jesus called some of his best friends "Satan". Jesus called it like he saw it.

Poly

February 6th, 2003, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

If you feel that the Bible tells you to 'hate those that love iniquity' then go ahead, but you're wrong.

Oh really?

2 Ch 19:2 ...Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?

Psalm 129:31 Do not I hate them that hate Thee, O Lord?
Psalm 129:32 I hate them with a perfect hatred.

Rom 12:9 Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor that which is evil.

I'll go no further with you.

And who could blame you when you are unable to back up what you say.

Freak

February 6th, 2003, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

Since I'm the one to whom you're speaking, allow me to tell you if you're being clear or not. Do you judge yourself like this in all areas? Let me tell you, you're not being clear.

Now your definition of fellowship is simply the amount of time spent with the rebel in question. What are the time frames that you've used in your years of experience? The intimacy is still there obviously, as you've said that there can be hugs and quiet chats, etc.

I think perhaps it would be easiest for you to describe a successful case of your application of this theory.

Moral clarity is not subjective as you assume. Homosexuality is a sin. At least we are clear on this.

In regards to "fellowship"--it can be subjective--one needs to rely upon ones conscience and the direction of the Holy Spirit (that is if you are a believer in Christ).

AsLan, now stop acting like a brat and THINK about what I wrote.

Hank

February 6th, 2003, 04:42 PM

Actually, I think he was talking to just the random people that were listening to him there. Jesus called some of his best friends "Satan". Jesus called it like he saw it.

I know that Goose. I was careful to say usually, I didn’t say it was right then.

AsLan

February 6th, 2003, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by Freak

Moral clarity is not subjective as you assume. Homosexuality is a sin. At least we are clear on this.

In regards to "fellowship"--it can be subjective--one needs to rely upon ones conscience and the direction of the Holy Spirit (that is if you are a believer in Christ).

AsLan, now stop acting like a brat and THINK about what I wrote.

I'm thinking.

Homosexuality isn't an action, it's a person's sexual orientation. You can't 'homosexual'. 'Lust' or 'anal sex with a man' or 'premarital sex' may very well be sins, however your all encompassing sexual orientation term, whether for celibates or not, christians or not, doesn't really hold much water in a practical sense, with what I've experienced in life.

My thoughts lead me to think that you can't describe in a short paragraph an actual instance where you utilized this 'communicate but not fellowship' technique.

I'm beginning to think that it's just a vague theory you read somewhere.

Is it really that difficult to describe how to physically, practically carry out this style of relationship using one instance, no names, in detail?

calvinistkid

February 6th, 2003, 04:57 PM

<quote by Poly>
I have spoken to ex homosexuals who said that they would not have turned to God except for the fact that somebody was harsh enough to care. People who say nothing but things like "God is love" and "God loves you and so do I" make those who hate God and living in sin, want to vomit. The lovey Christian world today has no backbone. Nothing but a bunch of jello Christians. When you get tough with one you cause them to stick around and fight. Not run because they are about to be sick over your "Lovey" God. When they stick around there's a chance for them to know truth. When they run, you've lost them.
<end quote>
I didn't think I would ever hear myself say this, but AMEN Poly!!! The "gospel" taught in so many churches completely cuts out concepts such as the holiness of God and instead paints him as an all-accepting grandfather type figure. We need to return to the scriptural concept of a God who is loving, but also will not tolerate sin.

Freak

February 6th, 2003, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

I'm thinking.

Homosexuality isn't an action, it's a person's sexual orientation. You can't 'homosexual'. 'Lust' or 'anal sex with a man' or 'premarital sex' may very well be sins, however your all encompassing sexual orientation term, whether for celibates or not, christians or not, doesn't really hold much water in a practical sense, with what I've experienced in life.

My thoughts lead me to think that you can't describe in a short paragraph an actual instance where you utilized this 'communicate but not fellowship' technique.

I'm beginning to think that it's just a vague theory you read somewhere.

Is it really that difficult to describe how to physically, practically carry out this style of relationship using one instance, no names, in detail?

If you can't use commone sense then I seriously question if you'd ever understand.

Homosexuality is the practice of homosexual behaviour which would include all the perverse practices you have mentioned. Now, you would agree homosexual practices are evil, correct?

Vague theory? I'm not vague. Homosexuality is a perverse evil that God abhors. Is that vague? Believers in Christ should not be buddy buddy with homosexuals. Is that vague? We ought to love homosexuals and affirm their value before God. Is that vague?

Stopping being an idiot and THINK!

AsLan

February 6th, 2003, 06:27 PM

sigh.

Freak

February 6th, 2003, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by AsLan
sigh.

:D

Hank

February 7th, 2003, 12:35 PM

AsLan although Freak and I agree on very little, I often side with him because of the following:

1. He stands by his principles.
2. He has a good heart.

I think if you will reread what he is saying, you might come to the same conclusion. I believe Freak is truly trying to follow the teachings of Jesus, especially concerning loving others. Compare this to the diatribe that Poly produced against homo-sexuals in this thread. She doesn’t have a clue about the teachings of Jesus.

beanieboy

February 7th, 2003, 01:00 PM

There once was a coach.
He coached a little league team.
When the little boys would miss the ball, he called them a "sissy," and told them they were idiots. This, he told me, would help them try harder to catch the ball.
When they overthrew, he told them that they threw like girls, and belittled them. This, he said, he did because he wanted them to work on the arm and improve it.
When they missed the ball, he called them a wiffer.
He complained about the awful coaches that would say, "That's alright, Billy. You can do it. Keep your eye on the ball. You can do it."
He hated the coaches that said, "Try again. Keep trying until you get it right. You can do this."
He hated the coach that said, "We lost today. But you played hard. I'm proud of you."
He hated the coach that said, "we made a lot of mistakes today. What did you learn?"

He said that kids needed to be belittled, yelled at, humiliated, and called the most insulting of names in order to improve.
But he said all of these things out of "love" to help make his team better players.

Unfortunately, none of them stuck around long enough to improve. In fact, most of them grew to hate the game itself, but to especially hate the coach.

And the coach said, "Fine. Go ahead and quit. But you hate me because you don't want to work. You hate me because you are no good. And the more you hate me, the more it proves that I was a great coach."

The head of the Little League watched his methods, told him he was a disgrace to the the League, and he was removed immediately.

AsLan

February 7th, 2003, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Hank
AsLan although Freak and I agree on very little, I often side with him because of the following:

1. He stands by his principles.
2. He has a good heart.

I think if you will reread what he is saying, you might come to the same conclusion. I believe Freak is truly trying to follow the teachings of Jesus, especially concerning loving others. Compare this to the diatribe that Poly produced against homo-sexuals in this thread. She doesn’t have a clue about the teachings of Jesus.

I don't doubt he is. I'm not even disagreeing with him.

All I wanted, and asked for in multiple posts, was an actual scenario detailing his relationship with an unnamed homosexual before and after initiating the 'communicate without fellowship' stance.

Poly

February 7th, 2003, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by Hank
Compare this to the diatribe that Poly produced against homo-sexuals in this thread. She doesn’t have a clue about the teachings of Jesus.

Hank, you've not even attempted to back up what you believe with any kind of scripture. So everybody believe the way Hank believes. Why? Because you say so? This kind of Christian behavior really gets old. How about giving God the respect that he deserves and finding out what he says about it and then showing us where you come to your conclusions.

Lion

February 7th, 2003, 05:13 PM

It’s really pretty simple. If the homo is unsaved, you can certainly talk with him and have some type of casual relationship, for the purpose of bringing that person to Christ. You can even work with him at a job. But just as I would not want to have a personal, friendly relationship with a pedophile, I don’t want to have that kind of relationship with any kind of pervert, other than one where I am using the law against that person in order to bring him closer to Christ.1Cor. 5:9-10 I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.However, if the pervert calls himself a Christian, that is another matter completely. We are to excommunicate them instantly, refuse to eat or even to speak with them until they repent and stop their corruptive behavior, so that they might return to the Lord. Christian peer pressure to the max!

The law does not apply to them for salvation, so don’t try and use it. But we as members of the body of Christ should expel them, for their sake, for our sake and for the sake of unbelievers that might come to the Lord.1Cor. 5:11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner — not even to eat with such a person.

Patroclus

February 7th, 2003, 05:38 PM

It amazes me that we, as Christians, have so little to offer in the way of real support. It seems to me that the common reaction to sin is: Don't do it. The problem is that some sins are not that simple to overcome. God doesn't always kick people's drug or alcohol addictions cold-turkey. Why do we expect that people will instantly stop desiring homosexual stimuli?

Poly

February 7th, 2003, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by Patroclus
It amazes me that we, as Christians, have so little to offer in the way of real support. It seems to me that the common reaction to sin is: Don't do it. The problem is that some sins are not that simple to overcome. God doesn't always kick people's drug or alcohol addictions cold-turkey. Why do we expect that people will instantly stop desiring homosexual stimuli?

So we allow the child molester to wean himself off gradually. Just a few kids to molest in a week rather than his usual average 6 per week.

AsLan

February 7th, 2003, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by Polycarpadvo

So we allow the child molester to wean himself off gradually. Just a few kids to molest in a week rather than his usual average 6 per week.

These kind of moronic comments display such a lack of understanding: equating a criminal offense with sexual orientation; show just how quick to judge you are; how inexperienced with actual people you are; and also how you fail to grasp the 'walk a mile in a man's shoes' concept.

Pathetic.

AsLan

February 7th, 2003, 06:38 PM

s9s27s54

February 7th, 2003, 07:04 PM

Sozo.

I agree with you completely.

:thumb: :D :)

temple2006

February 7th, 2003, 08:02 PM

Sozo...So is hetero adultery. yes? Do you think it should be criminalized?

temple2006

February 7th, 2003, 08:20 PM

Sozo....Oh! Do you have any problems with enforcing them? (Hit the submit button too quickly)

temple2006

February 7th, 2003, 09:49 PM

Sozo...No offense meant....I was just wondering. If you have a family, it has been my experience that not everybody agrees and you know me...curiosity is my middle name.

Goose

February 7th, 2003, 11:13 PM

Homesexuality is wrong. People aren't born homosexual. It's a choice. It's not only a sin, it is and should be criminal and punishable.

AsLan

February 8th, 2003, 12:00 AM

Originally posted by Goose
Homesexuality is wrong. People aren't born homosexual. It's a choice. It's not only a sin, it is and should be criminal and punishable.

It amazes me how vague people are with the term 'homosexuality' and then tack on such weighty words as 'criminal', 'stoning death penalty', 'sin'.

Are you talking about someone who speaks to a friend in confidence and wonders if they like guys or girls or both?

Are you talking about someone who is married to someone of the same sex?

Are you talking about someone who is having homosexual premarital sex?

Are you talking about someone who has a single sexual experience with more than one person at the same time, possibly the same sex and different sex?

Are you talking from Christian viewpoint or a secular 'moral' viewpoint?

Should extra or premarital sex with the opposite gender be included in whatever punishments society deems appropriate for 'homosexuals'?

Such sweeping generalizations are indicative of nonchalant judgments that haven't been given the slightest thought.

Goose

February 8th, 2003, 12:03 AM

Common liberal tactic: Definition Game

A homosexual is someone who lusts after the same sex and commits sexual acts with them.

Flipper

February 8th, 2003, 01:25 AM

Goose: If there's a general agreement on the terms, then there can be useful debate. If not, then the possibility of misinterpretation and talking past one another is much higher. It's not a liberal thing. It's a logic thing.

AsLan

February 8th, 2003, 10:48 AM

Originally posted by Goose
Common liberal tactic: Definition Game

A homosexual is someone who lusts after the same sex and commits sexual acts with them.

I see. So a heterosexual, like yourself I'm assuming, previous to marriage, was lusting after the opposite sex, and committing sexual acts with them?

Goose

February 9th, 2003, 01:44 AM

Originally posted by AsLan

I see. So a heterosexual, like yourself I'm assuming, previous to marriage, was lusting after the opposite sex, and committing sexual acts with them? No. You fail to see that homosexuals and heterosexuals aren't the complete opposite of eachother. Here's an example:

ALL homosexuals are perverts

SOME heterosexuals are perverts

Using your logic, NO heterosexuals are perverts. you can't make those kinds of assumptions. See the fallacy?

Kaliinanna

February 9th, 2003, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by Goose
Common liberal tactic: Definition Game

A homosexual is someone who lusts after the same sex and commits sexual acts with them.

I disagree. I believe homosexuality is something one is born with, not something one chooses. And homosexuals have emotional feelings, love if you will, for their partners. That's the difference, in a nutshell, between bi- and homosexuals who are only in it for the variety of sex, and those who are truly only capable of loving another of the same sex. I'm heterosexual, but I have absolutely no problem with homosexuals, other than those who are obviously choosing to be so for the sexual aspects of it. If two people love each other, who am I to tell them they can't?
Shoot, for that matter, if two people ARE only in it for the sex, who am I to tell them they can't do it? If it isn't affecting my life or harming the lives of others, then it's not my business to tag them with opinionated labels.

AsLan

February 9th, 2003, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by Goose
No. You fail to see that homosexuals and heterosexuals aren't the complete opposite of eachother. Here's an example:

ALL homosexuals are perverts

SOME heterosexuals are perverts

Using your logic, NO heterosexuals are perverts. you can't make those kinds of assumptions. See the fallacy?

Classic.

Q. Define A please.

A. Well, A is B (which is also undefined).

sigh.

For the cheap seats, let's go down this little pathway you've created. Define 'pervert' now.

Is it scary in that mind of yours; where you simply go by long trails of undefined unmovable rules without being able to explain them clearly to someone who uses the same written language as yourself?

Goose

February 9th, 2003, 12:02 PM

I've already defined "pervert" in another thread. Enough of the definition game.

Hank

February 9th, 2003, 12:10 PM

Hank, you've not even attempted to back up what you believe with any kind of scripture. So everybody believe the way Hank believes. Why? Because you say so? This kind of Christian behavior really gets old. How about giving God the respect that he deserves and finding out what he says about it and then showing us where you come to your conclusions.

Poly the kind of hate you expressed is not abated by quoting the Bible. That’s done at this forum all the time and though occasionally someone concedes a minor point, no ones mind is changed. This kind of hate is only changed by prayer and fasting. BTW I’m not a Christian.

Hank

February 9th, 2003, 12:25 PM

By Sozo

Also, homosexuality is a choice and should be criminalized.

Sexual acts, both heterosexual and homosexual are a choice. Sexual orientation is not a choice. I am attracted to the opposite gender. No amount someone telling me that was a sin (if it was) could make me be attracted to the same gender.

According to your logic, everything that is a choice, and I assume you are talking about a sin according to your interpretation of the Bible, should be a criminal act. However we live in a democracy, not a theocracy, and it was deliberately set up that way because of the abuses created under theocracies that had occurred.

AsLan

February 9th, 2003, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by Goose
I've already defined "pervert" in another thread. Enough of the definition game.

Maybe start a 'Goose Dictionary Quick Reference' thread.

Goose

February 9th, 2003, 09:22 PM

Originally posted by AsLan

Maybe start a 'Goose Dictionary Quick Reference' thread. Maybe read a dictionary and use common sense. I can't force you to care so quit wasting my time.

AsLan

February 10th, 2003, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by Goose
Maybe read a dictionary and use common sense. I can't force you to care so quit wasting my time.

Well, that doesn't sting. Not from you. Enjoy standing on your wobbly little tower of definition blocks without being able to explain your disgust with the undefined 'them' of society.

Freak

February 10th, 2003, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by Goose
Maybe read a dictionary and use common sense. I can't force you to care so quit wasting my time.

AsLan, is a clown. You are not alone in attempting to clarify something to this punk. He refuses to read. He is hopeless. But Jesus loves him.

Goose

February 10th, 2003, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by AsLan

Well, that doesn't sting. Not from you. Enjoy standing on your wobbly little tower of definition blocks without being able to explain your disgust with the undefined 'them' of society. I've already defined "them" for you. It's you who seems to be needing the definition.

Goose

February 10th, 2003, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by Freak

AsLan, is a clown....Depends on what your definition of "is" is. :D :thumb:

AsLan

February 10th, 2003, 12:19 PM

This is how Goose defines homosexual.

Originally posted by Goose
Common liberal tactic: Definition Game

A homosexual is someone who lusts after the same sex and commits sexual acts with them.

An extramarital, sexually active person interested in the same sex would be how I would explain his definition.

I asked a lot of questions, which he simply evaded to save his fingers typing I assume:

Are you talking about someone who speaks to a friend in confidence and wonders if they like guys or girls or both?

Are you talking about someone who is married to someone of the same sex?

Are you talking about someone who is having homosexual premarital sex?

Are you talking about someone who has a single sexual experience with more than one person at the same time, possibly the same sex and different sex?

Are you talking from Christian viewpoint or a secular 'moral' viewpoint?

Should extra or premarital sex with the opposite gender be included in whatever punishments society deems appropriate for 'homosexuals'?

Later in the thread he reverts to using the word pervert:

Originally posted by Goose
ALL homosexuals are perverts

Which webster's defines as:

per·vert ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-vûrt)
tr.v. per·vert·ed, per·vert·ing, per·verts
To cause to turn away from what is right, proper, or good; corrupt.
To bring to a bad or worse condition; debase.
To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. See Synonyms at corrupt.
To interpret incorrectly; misconstrue or distort: an analysis that perverts the meaning of the poem.

As you can see, pervert isn't an objective term. It is up to the person using the word as to what is 'right, proper, or good'.

His reasons for 'them' being 'perverts' is merely because he thinks it's wrong. This is a fine reason of course, but he could have saved us a lot of typing by simply saying it was his opinion from the beginning.

So we are still left with Goose, who defines his stance using purely subjective terms and makes no effort to clearly enunciate what his obdurate thinking has to offer us.

Hank

February 10th, 2003, 12:48 PM

I disagree. I believe homosexuality is something one is born with, not something one chooses. And homosexuals have emotional feelings, love if you will, for their partners. That's the difference, in a nutshell, between bi- and homosexuals who are only in it for the variety of sex, and those who are truly only capable of loving another of the same sex. I'm heterosexual, but I have absolutely no problem with homosexuals, other than those who are obviously choosing to be so for the sexual aspects of it. If two people love each other, who am I to tell them they can't?
Shoot, for that matter, if two people ARE only in it for the sex, who am I to tell them they can't do it? If it isn't affecting my life or harming the lives of others, then it's not my business to tag them with opinionated labels.

I agree with you Kali

Mustard Seed

February 10th, 2003, 01:29 PM

Even if one is born with "homosexual tenddancies" Tha does not mean they have to be homosexual. I have many tendancies which I could atribute my sin to but I know that we all have are weak points. I do not believe God would give us any weakness we could not overcome. Not saying it's easy to overcome but so much of the world would like us to think we are the way we are and there is nothiing we can do about it. I think this is one of the most dangerous things we can inflict on ourselves, a feeling of "predestination" to sin.

Mustard Seed

February 10th, 2003, 01:31 PM

"our" not "are". I am far to impatient when I go to submit these posts.

mberthot

February 10th, 2003, 08:26 PM

Here is something to think about...

because I am hetrosexual, does that define who I am? NO
So just because they are homosexuals, does not mean that is all they are. If they believe in Christ they are Christian and one in whom Christ dwells.
Just as we sin they sin and they pay for sin everyday in this life just as we do for our sins.

Falcon

February 12th, 2003, 07:21 PM

Do you all believe that "being gay" is a choice, and not the makeup of your genes at birth? Do you think if a gay person had a choice, he or she would choose to be gay? It is so hypocritical and ignorant for you to presume how Jesus would or would not accept any soul who loved him.

Sting

February 12th, 2003, 08:36 PM

I believe being gay is a choice. I'm sure a lot of gay people would wish to be straight if they were asked what they would choose if they had a choice, because a lot comes along with telling others you are gay. But if that is how they feel then they are being very true to themselves to be bold about something that is very widely and blantantly looked at as being wrong. I don't believe sexuality can define if Jesus will love you or not.

Sting

February 12th, 2003, 08:43 PM

I am amazed at what some of you said about what you would say about your child stating he or she was gay! That takes amazing courage and strength to even admit that to the few people in the world who mean everything to you, your parents! If my child had the will to tell me that, I would be so taken aback by their courage to even approach me about the subject. What a wonderful thing to see in your child! The will and strength to find something out about himself and to act truthfully to his feelings, I would be so proud to raise a child that had enough self-esteem to do that. And you all said that you would drop him and pray for him to repent? That you would love to see him be "fixed" of this problem that he so strongly feels upon? I'm sorry, I don't see how that is right or just. I don't enjoy it, but thats my kid! I can't just drop my kid because he has a difference in sexuality than most, that is the least of my worries! I really dont' understand how you guys can think that! Please do explain.

Luke-mc

February 16th, 2003, 04:20 PM

if being gay is a sin and your child tells you he is gay maybe you should examine your part, parent

Flipper

February 16th, 2003, 05:56 PM

Sozo wrote:

Logic? Whose logic?

Y'know. Argumentative logic. particularly inductive argumentation (which is mostly what we are concerned with on these sites). Unless the premise is axiomatic or a definition is not required, which almost never happens in the murky, opinionated world of argumentative logic then terms need to be defined.

The problem with language as the medium of logic was explained by Prof. Rudolf Carnap, who used to teach logic at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton:

"If certain scientific elements - concepts, theories, assertions, derivations, and the like - are to be analyzed logically, then often the best procedure is to translate them into symbolic language. In this language, in contrast to ordinary word language, we have signs that are unambiguous and formulations that are exact: in this language, therefore, the purity and correctness of a derivation can be tested with greater ease and accuracy. A derivation is counted pure when it utilizes no other presuppositions than those specifically enumerated. A derivation in word-language often involves presuppositions which were not made explicitly, but which entered unnoticed..."

It is worth pointing out that when Carnap talks about word-language definitions, he means in the sense of Euclidian axioms which are realms away from the levels of presupposition that arguments on social or philosophical issues contain. Without some sort of definition, these inductive arguments are often utterly worthless.

Patroclus

February 16th, 2003, 11:35 PM

It is worth pointing out that when Carnap talks about word-language definitions, he means in the sense of Euclidian axioms which are realms away from the levels of presupposition that arguments on social or philosophical issues contain.

Perhaps you could expaciate on this a bit more, because my first objection comes with the fact that symbols carry with them myraids of meaning. For instance, the sea is often a symbol for life, or death, or both simultaneously.

Goose

March 3rd, 2003, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by Falcon
Do you all believe that "being gay" is a choice, and not the makeup of your genes at birth? Do you think if a gay person had a choice, he or she would choose to be gay? It is so hypocritical and ignorant for you to presume how Jesus would or would not accept any soul who loved him. It's been proven by gay and normal biological studies that people aren't born gay.

beanieboy

March 3rd, 2003, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by Goose
It's been proven by gay and normal biological studies that people aren't born gay.

Citation, please.
Studies I've read say differently.

I'm amazed how often one can point out that studies are finding a combination of nature and nurture, and point this out on TOL, and people will still insist that it is a simple choice.

Hank

March 3rd, 2003, 11:29 AM

By Goose

It's been proven by gay and normal biological studies that people aren't born gay.

That doesn’t even make sense. For the hundredth time, is a hermaphrodite gay from birth?

s9s27s54

March 3rd, 2003, 03:39 PM

Being gay is a sin. Read Romans 1

Sozo

March 3rd, 2003, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by Hank
By Goose

That doesn’t even make sense. For the hundredth time, is a hermaphrodite gay from birth?

I don't believe there is any record of a full born hermaphrodite (one that contains operational testicles and uterus). Whatever is their functional organ is what they are.

Goose

March 3rd, 2003, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by Hank
By Goose

That doesn’t even make sense. For the hundredth time, is a hermaphrodite gay from birth? No

Hank

March 3rd, 2003, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by Sozo

I don't believe there is any record of a full born hermaphrodite (one that contains operational testicles and uterus). Whatever is their functional organ is what they are.

Sozo and Goose

See the new thread I started in the current events section titled "The in-between sex"

Hank

March 3rd, 2003, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by Goose
No

Well according to you definition, if they had a desire for either sex wouldn't they be gay?

Goose

March 4th, 2003, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by Hank

Well according to you definition, if they had a desire for either sex wouldn't they be gay? No.

Poly

March 4th, 2003, 03:01 PM

There's an echo in here!

Hank

March 4th, 2003, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by Goose
No.

Then would you explain why this is not the case instead of just saying "No".

allsmiles

December 13th, 2005, 03:45 PM

classic case of paranoid and fixation.

sentientsynth

December 14th, 2005, 02:50 AM

All right! My vote put us in the lead. Woo hoo!

kmoney

January 12th, 2006, 04:51 PM

:confused: how did this get bumped??

oh, and I just voted for the first choice...

Mr. 5020

January 12th, 2006, 04:52 PM

:confused: how did this get bumped??

oh, and I just voted for the first choice...Somebody probably voted.

That's even more realistic because SS was celebrating a 1 point lead, and now the 2nd option is leading by 2 points.

Mr. 5020

January 12th, 2006, 04:54 PM

:confused: how did this get bumped??

oh, and I just voted for the first choice...Also, it shows I voted for the first choice.

I must've changed since then, because I want to vote for the second one.

Where's that cuzin of mine?

Neo01

January 12th, 2006, 09:56 PM

Well mom I dont think you will have to worry about that! After all we are YOUR kids LOL.

logos_x

January 13th, 2006, 12:56 PM

Tell him that you love him but you must cut him off and have nothing to do with him unless he repents.

the Sibbie

January 15th, 2006, 12:58 PM

I would cut him off unless he repents (or discipline him if he is too young to be kicked out of the house).

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 01:10 PM

How do you think God would want you to react if your son came to you and told you he was gay?

Buy him a dress? :freak:

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 01:12 PM

I can't believe #2 is the prefered method out of the choices given. :nono:

Sozo

January 15th, 2006, 01:29 PM

I can't believe #2 is the prefered method out of the choices given. :nono:

What happen to sending them to Iran with a sign around their neck "Muslims are perverts"?

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 01:33 PM

If fags should be executed and your child is gay, shouldn't you just kill him imediately and get it over with?

Sozo

January 15th, 2006, 01:57 PM

If fags should be executed and your child is gay, shouldn't you just kill him imediately and get it over with?
The law here does not allow for that. If my son was a child molestor, I would want him punished to the fullest extent of the law. I see no difference between child molestors and those with homosexual behavior. They are equally perverted.

logos_x

January 15th, 2006, 02:07 PM

I can't believe #2 is the prefered method out of the choices given. :nono:

Isn't that what God will do?

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 02:53 PM

The law here does not allow for that. If my son was a child molestor, I would want him punished to the fullest extent of the law. I see no difference between child molestors and those with homosexual behavior. They are equally perverted.

I do not agree, my friend. While I find homo sex absolutely repulsive, 2 men willingly engaged in it is NOT the same as a man molesting an innocent child.

Child molestation is by far a worse crime.

koban

January 15th, 2006, 04:11 PM

I do not agree, my friend. While I find homo sex absolutely repulsive......

All homo sex? :think:

kmoney

January 15th, 2006, 04:14 PM

All homo sex? :think:
:shocked:

:shut:

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 04:24 PM

All homo sex? :think:

Yes....but lesbian sex is somewhat more tolerable.

Don't ask me why.....:angel:

koban

January 15th, 2006, 04:29 PM

Even "hairy muscular sweaty Russian peasant women with facial hair and carbuncles" lesbian sex? :eek:

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 04:33 PM

Even "hairy muscular sweaty Russian peasant women with facial hair and carbuncles" lesbian sex? :eek:

Um..no...I don't want to watch your Mom and her girlfriend.....! :shocked:

:devil:

[What the hell is a 'carbuncle'?] :darwinsm:

Sozo

January 15th, 2006, 05:12 PM

I do not agree, my friend. While I find homo sex absolutely repulsive, 2 men willingly engaged in it is NOT the same as a man molesting an innocent child.

Child molestation is by far a worse crime.

I agree that it is far more repulsive, but it is no less perverted. It comes from the same mindset.

There are several crimes that deserve death, even if one is more offensive than another,

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 05:27 PM

I agree that it is far more repulsive, but it is no less perverted. It comes from the same mindset.

There are several crimes that deserve death, even if one is more offensive than another,

I know that's is how you 'feel', Sozo. I do not think that adult gay sex is worthy of execution. Sorry, I just don't see it that way.

Let me put it this way. If I had a son who as an adult became gay I would not want him executed.

If that same son was to become a child molester, I would struggle with my love for him and desire to protect him, but fundamentally I expect his execution as the only fair punishment.

I realize that my position is not going to be popular, but it is what it is.

I would never kill my child for being gay....not ever. :nono:

I would have a much harder decision if he was a child molester. If anyone molested my children, I would kill them myself. As an honerable man, I would expect the same penalty if my son molested someone elses child.

The reality is that I cannot know how I would react to such a scenario until it actually happens. I hope I would be able to balance my love for him with my sense of morality and duty. I also hope that I never have to make that choice.

Sozo

January 15th, 2006, 05:38 PM

It's tough, I know, to take the stand that I have, but it is the subtle acceptance and tolerance of homosexual behavior that has increased the opportunity for our children to make that choice. I would have to support the ultimate penalty to protect my other children and grandchildren.

If the law suddenly allowed child molestors to have consenual sex with anyone over 11 years of age, what kind of steps would we have to take to protect our children?

It is far more important to take a hard stand for laws that punish offenders now, then to have to learn to tolerate evil in the future.

koban

January 15th, 2006, 06:07 PM

I agree that it is far more repulsive, but it is no less perverted. It comes from the same mindset.

There are several crimes that deserve death, even if one is more offensive than another,

According to God, all men deserve spiritual death, but He sent His only Son to redeem us.

Is that not an example that one might use with their own son?

BillyBob

January 15th, 2006, 06:43 PM

Wow, I just finished a half hour 'debate' with Mrs.BillyBob about this topic.

If nothing else, this thread inspired an interesting conversation between myself and a brilliant woman. Thanks Sozo. :cheers:

[I totally kicked her asss, even though she won't admit it] :banana:

Flipper

January 19th, 2006, 11:14 PM

What was Mrs BB's position on this topic?

Big Mouth Nana

January 22nd, 2006, 09:06 PM

How do you think God would want you to react if your son came to you and told you he was gay?It's probably easy for people to say that they would cut them off unless they repent, but I couldn't do that. I said that I disapprove but accept them anyway. This is your own flesh and blood, and cutting them off no matter how grievious the sin is would be impossible for me. I would be in prayer for their repentance, and ask God to convict them of this sin. If they are "cut off" from you, how are you going to let the love of God show, or even talk to them about this if they aren't around? God hates the sin, but He loves the sinner.

Evee

January 22nd, 2006, 09:33 PM

Yes....but lesbian sex is somewhat more tolerable.

Don't ask me why.....:angel:
Ok why can't I ask you?
Could it be because the thought is provokingly sexual to you? :deb:

Sozo

January 23rd, 2006, 12:22 AM

It's probably easy for people to say that they would cut them off unless they repent, but I couldn't do that. I said that I disapprove but accept them anyway. This is your own flesh and blood, and cutting them off no matter how grievious the sin is would be impossible for me. I would be in prayer for their repentance, and ask God to convict them of this sin. If they are "cut off" from you, how are you going to let the love of God show, or even talk to them about this if they aren't around? God hates the sin, but He loves the sinner.

Welcome Big Mouth Nana!

Do you have children?

When I rebuke or punish my child, who is doing wrong, it sends a clear message to the other children in our family, and it also sends a message to them when they see the rebuked child repent, and my forgiveness being extended in love.

As I just stated a few posts ago... It is far more important to take a hard stand now, for laws that punish offenders, then to have to learn to tolerate evil in the future.