The New Pope
- Thread starter Tainted Scrolls
- Start date
I think Calvin is whipping us all. We must respect our elders, we may not say 'u dumb' but words worded in a disrespecful way are the same thing.
Hence us younger ones need to apologize a lot more.
Heh, absolutely--nonetheless, I was never disrespecting anyone. I was merely expressing and explaining my belief. For that I will not apologize. But yes, it should always be done with love and humbleness.
Good -- I certainly don't want to. But if I ever do, please tell me.
I will. You seem to be a gent and one of the good Shapiros....I grew up with a Shapiro family in my neighbourhood.
Well, you seem to be one of the good Rustys.
Rusty.........what Bible verse does Paul say that "Divorced" men are unfit?
Paul is quoting YOU line for line?
I'm afraid if you believe this, I have NOTHING to say to you.I'm not married KJ, but your solution sounds very unstable to me. So you WILL listen to a saved gay priest? Good for you. If you feel this way then YOU are agreeing with Jesus and Paul KJ, NOT the reverse.
That's kinda vague. It's reminiscent of the racist who says some of his best friends are black.
How is it naive to say what I said KJ? The verse you quoted does indeed talk about the sexually immoral AND gays. Do you not know the difference? This isn't an amplified Bible KJ, it is distinct types of sin, INCLUDING adulterers. In the light of suing a brother, which Paul is talking about here, he equates "wrong doers", those causing the lawsuits, with sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who have sex with men, thieves, greedy, drunkards, slanderers, or swindlers, by saying 'neither'. God is the same KJ, you should know that, His covenant is not the same, hence why it is called a NEW covenant. We are NOT under the Old covenant, nor the Levitical law. Try keeping this issue in proper scriptural context KJ.
BTW, I know people like to use the word abomination to show how BAD some sins are, but the actual word used is detestable, and as far as I can see in scripture, ALL sin is detestable in God's eyes, including swearing, IF swearing is a sin.
ONLY if they have NOT repented and are advocating that lifestyle KJ. Do you think gayness is spread like aids?
It is not I that needs discernment here KJ.
Not speaking on Rusty's behalf, but...
1 Corinthians 7:10-11, Luke 16:18, Matthew 5:32.
The Bible has expressed a great concern with divorce, and part of that is due to it involving God so closely which can be found in Matthew 19:6. This is why the release of that binding is not through divorce, but through death (Romans 7:2). But that's further why when one gets involved with another who is divorced, it is seen as adultery in the eyes of our Lord.
Friend, don't take this facetiously, but you're confusing practice with tendency. This is why I said it's simplistic (not to be confused with simple).
The Bible is very VERY clear on where it stands with immoral practices. In at least 12 books of the Bible, it is blatant about not committing the practices of homosexuality. But let's say for argument's sake that we had two men who both lived chaste lives, though since both are men, both still have a natural temptation to sin...one would be tempted to have lustful thoughts about women. The other had lustful thoughts about men. Both of them prayed to God to redirect their temptations toward goodness, and God answered their prayers. Now because one of them happened to have a homosexual temptation but prayed out his thoughts, would this make him straight? And in the same light, because the straight man prayed out his own lustful (and straight) temptations, does this mean he is not straight?
"But Shapiro, heterosexuality isn't a sin." Of course not, but the point is that doesn't mean free game to do with our heterosexuality what we want. It becomes a question of what is the definition of homosexuality and where does sin begin (in other words, when has the temptation crossed over to sin).
Rehearsing the verses that express disapproval for homosexuality, I'm reading from the old text that it's referring to practices vs. tendencies. We recognize that alcoholism in excess is a sin, but we don't consider alcoholics to have sinned until they've pursued their own tendencies (this is only an analogy, mind you).
I think the discussion on homosexuality and where the line has drawn is a very important one because it means the souls of our brothers and sisters, but let's not shut out the discussion with "it's simple" -- this is a very careless approach to a pretty important topic. This doesn't mean I think your position should be thrown out the window either, but I think it's important to get to the bottom of it.
Last edited:
You have to try and understand levels of rebellion my friend and differentiate between saved and unsaved in every analogy. Your post here doesn't differentiate. I would say your question is irrelevant as both men are lost. But to the saved, lets judge properly!! using our God given brains and Holy Spirit discernment.
Christians become Christians because they CHOOSE to SUBMIT to the WILL of God. Now the will of God regarding our sex lives could not be any SIMPLER!!! Which means if we get it wrong....we are 100% guilty of jumping and slapping God square in the face. The ONLY people with an excuse / a bit of a blur are hermaphrodites.
All a person needs to do is look down and they can know God's will for their sex lives. 'If God wanted you to be with a man He would have made you a woman'. Any Christian living in homosexuality is DAILY (every second of that day) guilty of going 100% AGAINST the will of God for their life. Now my brain tells me that is a sure quick route to upsetting God!!! and scripture shows this!!!
The warning that I feel we who simply discuss this need to head / allow it to strike fear into our heart is Rom 1:32 (26 - 31 is just interesting and applicable) 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
We really do need to get our message out crystal clear! Not for fear of being hated and labelled as judge-mental haters, rather for fear that we in anyway stumble a brother stuck in this sin further and bring God's wrath upon us
.The best example / parallel that comes to mind on levels of sin is a married couple as we are the bride of Christ. My wife can think of other men but can still repent that I (and her) would trust her repentance. My wife can watch porn but still be able to sincerely repent and get victory. My wife can have a once-off affair and though very hard, still repent and we both trust the repentance....BUT continuous adultery.....I nor her would ever trust the repentance. A saved person who continues in an extremity of sin =
= Heb 10:29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? Homosexuality for a Christian = trampling on the cross / making shipwreck of your faith. Shipwreck = sailing into a storm and keeping course in that storm = insulting / grieving the Holy Spirit = very difficult for a Christian to get out off / sincerely repent of as the rebellion shows a complete change of hearts intention / in 100% inner opposition to the will of God. Not merely a phase / mistake as sin should be to a Christian.
Last edited:
I partially agree. I just think that each require closer judgement. I agree that all those you mention here need to be 'examined' by 'qualified' elders. The same for a homosexual. If we never allowed preachers grace and time to come right there would be no preachers. Their are stages of ''going wrong''. When a preacher is completely on the other side of the fence, they most definitely need to be placed under discipline / church mourn and pray hard for them.
If we look at Jimmy Swaggart as an example. I feel his heart is right / he has more then repented. I would take my whole family to hear him. He came right when he made his public confession. The fact the he cried so much and begged his wife to forgive him shows he went against the desire of his heart. A consistent adulterer would not likely do such...and that is my problem / gripe with homosexuality. It is consistent rebellion at an extremity. Not a mistake.
Our brothers need to be ''grabbed'' and ''slapped'' right because they have become very deaf due to the sin. Agreed this can be the case too for drunkards / fornicators etc 1 Cor 6:9-12.
Last edited:
I must say KingJ (hmmm that rhymesI think Calvin is whipping us all
Hence us younger ones need to apologize a lot more
) I have no idea how to understand your comment. I'm not whipping any one.Not speaking on Major's behalf, but...
Are you not straining at a gnat yet swallowing a Camel as Jesus so aptly diagnosed 'white washing'?
Did Jesus not say that to even look lustfully at a woman was to commit adultery in the heart?
Did Jesus not say that it is out of the heart that all evil comes?
Surely you can see that for a person to look lustfully at another person of the same gender is to live out that lust in their heart?
God is not deceived, a person with a preference is a person with a desire, no matter how much suppressed that desire is.
A homosexual who is a homosexual, is a homosexual.
A person who has homosexual leanings, can renounce those leanings as did a late nephew of mine. It can be done.
A repentant homosexual can revert to being heterosexual, or maybe an Eunuch. There are alternatives...always
The case for each of these person's salvation is irrelevant to what is a sin and what isn't. If it makes the scenario flow more smoothly, we can say they have each received Christ into their hearts, have been baptized, etc. etc. But that aside, the scenario is only using each person as a prop. In other words, a tree does make a noise as it falls in the woods if no one is there to hear it.
I'm trying to figure out this statement. I'm not refuting that when and why Christians submit themselves to Christ. I think the disagreement we're having is 1) does homosexuality begin at the practice (this including lustful homosexual thoughts) or at the moment the individual's persuasion has been identified, and 2) if the latter, does this mean one can't even find forgiveness in God even if submitting to Him and living in chastity?[/quote]
Friend, what makes you think everyone has been called to have a sex life in the first place? If someone has been called to NOT marry, then they are also called not to have a sex life as a sex life comes after marriage.
We really do need to get our message out crystal clear! Not for fear of being hated and labelled as judge-mental haters, rather for fear that we in anyway stumble a brother stuck in this sin further and bring God's wrath upon us
Don't take my position as a means of being politically correct. I absolutely agree with you that by falling into that trap, we are in no way being charitable. I think we should absolutely be clear on this, which is why I think it's also important to get to the bottom of this. There's a chance you and I won't partly because you believe in Sola Scriptura and I don't. [/quote]
The best example / parallel that comes to mind on levels of sin is a married couple as we are the bride of Christ. My wife can think of other men but can still repent that I (and her) would trust her repentance. My wife can watch porn but still be able to sincerely repent and get victory. My wife can have a once-off affair and though very hard, still repent and we both trust the repentance....BUT continuous adultery.....I nor her would ever trust the repentance. A saved person who continues in an extremity of sin =
Don't get my position mistaken for continuous sinning. In fact, my argument is that merely having a temptation is NOT a sin as Christ himself had temptations in the desert. It's the falling into temptation is where the sin beings.
I agree that sinning of any kind if a flat out offense to our Lord. This is not being refuted. I'm afraid you're mistaking my position for continuous sinning.
Last edited:
I've never once disagreed with this, friend. I'm afraid you're misreading what I have written.
What is a homosexual? What makes a homosexual a homosexual? I understand this may sound like a stupid question, but indulge me. Be precise. Explain how one becomes a homosexual, what entails being one, and how one can not be one.
Also, what is a heterosexual, how one becomes one, and how one can stop being one.
I'm not trying to be snarky, but I think you brought up an interesting point--we should get to the bottom of this one.
I must say KingJ (hmmm that rhymes
Your statement sepcified no-one, hence causing all (def me) I imagine to re-read their posts
.Not saying its common and sure coming right is a longshot. Likely forever disqualified from being an elder. Jimmy Swaggarts sex scandal 1988.
You have the tool for sex with a woman whether you marry or not. You said somewhere that people can be born gay. But a baby's thinking is not on sex. A baby however is NOT born neutral either....it is born hetrosexual as God MADE the baby straight. God even gives most people eyes and hands to confirm their sex. No Christian should entertain the homo-gene rubbish.
Last edited:
You bring up an interesting point, because I do agree with you that a baby is born neutral, but is heterosexual neutral? I remember having this discussion with my mom a year or so ago (she's an OBGYN). Both her, the multiple institutes for NIH (with whom I do work for--I'm providing public domain info) express that because the default gender for fetuses is female, when the fetus becomes male, hormones are released into the baby otherwise the body will reject the foreign object (a male fetus). Sometimes an abundance of these hormones are released and this can cause people (when they develop and get a little older) to have more female qualities, and sometimes this means sexual orientation.
I think one of the biggest problems with our culture is that we've decided that if something is too difficult, then we ought not consider it to be right. Our culture has now decided to embrace homosexuality among other things simply because it's easier (abortion is easier, sex before marriage is easier, divorce is easier, etc. etc.) But on the other side of the spectrum, it's also easier to say "this is black and this is white--it's that simple!" when sometimes there is much more that needs to be evaluated. I think we're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The "homo-gene" is not rubbish--it is a statement of embryology and bio-genesis whether we like it or not. However, practicing these tendencies IS a sin and should absolutely be rejected, not encouraged like our culture does.
But here's an example -- when I was 5, I knew I was straight, I wasn't neutral. I remember having little kid crush's on girls. Granted, they were immature because there was only so much I could understand, etc, but I knew that I was attracted to the opposite sex. This wasn't a decision of mine--I never looked at both boys and girls and said "I think I'm going to like girls more." That never even crossed my mind. It was instilled.
Of course, that's because that IS the default, but why couldn't we, with all the scientific evidence and all the logic we have, attribute the homosexual tendencies (not practices, but simply tendencies--before the a practice has even been committed) to an abnormality like autism or even cases when some people have a quicker, stronger temper than others (which in very few cases is due to a serotonin imbalance)?
I think it's just food for thought, especially since the scriptures expresses being against homosexual PRACTICES vs. homosexual tendencies. I think this is something that we should at least dissect and look into before either 1) throwing everything out the window or 2) accepting everything for merely being "tolerant" (especially when Scriptures and the Church are every direct regarding this).
Last edited: