Posted on 11/30/2012 12:10:18 PM PST by Coleus
Kewl...I can join his church...start banging his wife and not really worry if I was comitting sin.
Same thing right ?
TV image has misguided many a good man to be a fence sitter, he had better review the Bible’s stance on tepid water.
It is sinful just as adultery, stealing, murder etc...
All this I get from my wife:
My wife has a middle aged acquaintance that is a homosexual. He was raised in a Christian home. I don’t know what event(s) made him turn. He lives with his partner (they are very successful) and has vowed to never have children, raise any, nor does he and his flaunt their life style in public (no pda), on the contrary he bemoans all the queers on tv and the jumping up and down they do. He never talks outside his two or three friends about his life.
He has never asked for “marriage” rights only to be able to spend his life as he wants and has indicated “marriage rights for homos are stupid”. He also talked to being a believer and very fearful of God’s wrath for his chosen lifestyle (his words not mine), but says he cannot turn away from it (I do not know his reasoning). A nicer, gentler person you could not meet.
I cannot help but pray for him that he does believe and will turn away from his sin, but he is a sinner just like the rest of us and is depraved like the rest of us and upon his death will be freed from his sin and go to be with the Lord if he truly believes. Only he and the Lord know if he does.
In the end it is all about faith not what men think will get them in.
Saddleback church? Maybe ol Rick has had some ‘brokeback’ experience that influences his perspective.
Of course we're all sinners, but homosexuality is the only sin that denies BEING one. I don't see adulterers, liars, thieves, and murderers running around, demanding that their sins be fawned upon and pronounced normal and right.
see post 40
re: “Or, different readings of the Bible,” Hill injected. “Or different readings — that’s very true,” Warren agreed. Later during the interview, when Hill asked Warren if he believes homosexuals will go to Hell, he replied that they will not. “No, not because they’re gay,” he said. “We go to Hell because we choose to reject the grace of God.” When Hill asked what happens to a homosexual that accepts Jesus, Warren responded enthusiastically. “He’s going to Heaven!” he declared. “Without a doubt.”
Here is the quote from the article that is creating the problem:
“When Hill asked what happens to a homosexual that accepts Jesus, Warren responded enthusiastically. “He’s going to Heaven!” he declared. “Without a doubt.”
If you take what Warren said, without qualifying that a homosexual/lesbian must stop practicing homosexuality, then it can sound like he’s saying that a practicing homosexual, if he/she accepts Christ as their Savior, will go to Heaven.
On the other hand, it is possible that Warren implied that the homosexual who turns to Christ must stop living that life of sin - but what is reported in the article does not do that. So, one could be left with the impression that as long as a homosexual accepts Christ as Savior, no lifestyle change is necessary and that person will go to Heaven.
Warren needs to explain what he meant by his last statement.
So, we’re to not consider the context in this mysterious and superior “reading comprehension” that you’re referring to?
Are you seriously trying to defend Rick Warren on this?
Or are you in awe of his ability to _technically_ not answer the question yet appear to?
He’s separating attraction from action, and saying that being attracted to same sex is far different from having sex with the same sex.
Just as a man might be attracted to a woman who is not his wife, but that isn’t a sin. The sin is when he acts on that attraction, and has sex with a woman who is not his wife.
Similarly, one might also be tempted to steal, lie, cheat, or even kill,but not take the step to act on that.
Scripture tells us to repent and believe and we will be saved. Warren's quote describes belief without repentance. The demons also believe, and tremble.
Does anyone know what The Message says about homosexuality? That’s the “bible” “pastor” Rick uses isn’t it? Warren is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations so his true religion is more aligned with humanism and Gaia worship. Eternity isn’t going to be a good time for wolves Ricky boy.
Homosexual ACTS are a sin. Yes. I don’t believe he said they weren’t. And, I hate to break it to you, but heaven is filled with sinners.
I'm no fan of Rick Warren, but the way I read that statement, he isn't speaking to just homosexual acts. It isn't a sin to love somebody. A man who loves his wife is not sinning. It also isn't necessarily a sin to have sex with someone you love: a man who sleeps with his wife is not sinning. The "it might be" statement, to my understanding, acknowledges that there are situations in which having sex with someone you love is a sin--sex outside of marriage, for example, or homosexual acts, although Warren does seem to dodge the line of questioning a bit.
OK, so, to paraphrase some other sin into his quote -
“it’s not a sin to be tempted to steal something, but it MIGHT BE a sin to actually steal it. MIGHT BE.”
What he’s saying is that it MIGHT BE a sin, which means he’s saying that it possibly could NOT be a sin.
If he were, as you say, separating the act from the temptation, he wouldn’t have said “might be”, much less RE stated “might be” for emphasis.
For those who stumble over the "homosexual" angle, substitute any sin...shoplifting, coveting, adultery, whatever...all sin separates from God equally, and all sinners need to repent to be saved from it.
” Any “Christian” who expresses ambivelancy about the sinfulness of homosexuality has no place behind the pulpit of a Christian church.”
Guilt-free churches attract many, and make big money.
Seriously, this is as bad as arguing with liberals who try to isolate down the quote or the behavior to the point where they exclude all context in order to deny what is plainly obvious about a person and their beliefs.
Rev. Graham fully understood the risks and did the right thing anyway. Warren seeks to avoid the risks.
If Rev. Graham is the Moses at Mt. Sinai, then Warren doesn't even amount to Aaron who consented to making the golden calf.
He’s a con.
LOL! ‘SaddleUp’
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.