Posted on 11/04/2004 6:26:10 PM PST by Nice50BMG
Patricia Ireland just said that she grew up as a Christian in Indiana and asked that (paraphrase) "if there was a real problem with lesbians and gays, why didn't Jesus say anything about it?"
The Old and New Testaments both vehemently and consistently condemns all forms of adultery, even the very thoughts of it. It is considered a serious sin against God.
Any acts or deeds, even mental ones, of sex by a man outside of marriage is a form of adultery.
Jesus was a teacher (rabbi) and did not promote a free, gay sex party to his followers. On the contrary, after he stopped the stoning of a prostitute, He told her "Go, and sin no more".
When the libs like Patricia Ireland starts to justify her sick philosophy with the Good Book, we know that the Dems are not the party for us.
Jesus never told the poor to go to the government for assistance either.
Are you saying this to me or did you just click on my name?
Why would someone manufacture "funny money" unless it was for the intent of "purchasing" something with funds they did not earn & were not legal? For framing? :)
I'm telling you atheists, who subsribe to idiotic statements like Ireland's and others...you'd better wake up. If you think you can make up your own rules like Jilly and stand before the big Man on J-day, you are in for a surprise, if it's possible to overstate that.....
Honestly, I was just trying to add on to the end of the thread.
I was simply trying to add to this discussion. I did not mean to personalize it.
[...]1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
[...]
Paul confirms his view of homosexual behaviour in Romans 1:26-27 and in that context also specifically mentions female homosexuality as a sinful perversion. Paul was simply following what he knew of OT ethics which called for the stoning of homosexual offenders (as well as heterosexual adulterers, it should be noted).
In an era where homosexual marriage union is being promoted and in a country that may even move to making it mandatory for ministers to perform such unions, I feel compelled to spell out what is obvious here. God surely cannot sanction unions that simply institutionalize a sexual behaviour that He spells out to be fundamentally a perversion and essentially sinful. Therefore neither can we. The Bible does not address the issue of homosexual orientation. For those who struggle with this, I believe the church needs to show great compassion and offer healing in the context of individual counselling and group counselling such as in ‘Living Waters’. The solution morally for such people is to abstain from sexual behaviour in the same manner that heterosexual unmarried people are called to celibacy. Henri Nouwen whose books on spiritual theology so many of us enjoy was a case of someone who had a homosexual orientation, sought to overcome that, but who remained celibate.
Just as Paul indicated in chapter 5, we are not to ostracize and judge homosexuals who are not Christian, but rather to treat them as any other human being and seek to love them into the kingdom. We love the sinner whilst hating the sin, as much as we hate all other sins. To expect Christians who take seriously the Word of God to sanction the notion of homosexual union is however, unrealistic and indeed, wrong-headed. It would be hoped that our religious freedom to believe and practise these convictions will be granted in this ‘free’ nation.
For those with eyes to see what Paul is saying in this passage, it is clear that abstention from the homosexual act is a gospel issue. Those who habitually and unrepentantly practise this behaviour in such a way that this identified them as people are not going into the kingdom. It is hard to imagine therefore how any Christian theologian whose sole authority is the word of God (and this is the test issue – for liberal theologians the Bible is one of two other guides to their thinking: human reason above rather than under revelation, and culture) could imagine that God could bless homosexual unions that in fact simply institutionalize a behaviour God considers inherently sinful because it violates the image of God in humans (Gen.1:27 – male and female together reflect the image of God; Gen. 2:20-24 – Adam and Eve became one flesh - not Adam and Steve ). Particularly in a context where Paul is speaking of habitual behaviours that define people who are not of the kingdom, it is unimaginable that Paul might sanction homosexual marriage in order to provide opportunity for homosexual activity abhorrent to God.
[...]
Framing artwork, or just stacking it in piles, is not stealing, while it is illegal and immoral, as is abortion.
Abortion is murder.
She's an idiot.
Jesus is God the Son. God is the same in the Old Testament and the New Testament. There are plenty of warnings in the Old Testament about homosexual behavior.
Why does she care, anyway? Her religion is liberalism.
This is why the Dems will continue to lose in the red states/counties....
But the early church drove a Honda. "They were all together in one Accord."
Jesus did not have to say anything. The law was written in the Old Testament. Any sex outside of marriage is fornication.The hebrew word is "zanah".
Are there any theological freepers out there than can provide a Bible-based defense?Mt15:17-20:
"Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.'"Jesus' audience knew that same-sex sodomy was enumerated in the Law as one of the sins that "sexual immorality" comprises. Jesus was using polite shorthand.
There are many things not mentioned in the Scripture...they could not comprehend the idea of purposely wrenching a child from a mother's womb. Why would God have spoken of it? He told them to multiply, killing the children would have been contradictory to HIi own command. Actually, child sacrifce was condemned. Don't see much difference between that & abortion.
The same holds true for many "unmentioned" evils. Counterfeiting fits the "do not covet" directive as well.
These preverts are very clever, note how she mentioned Jesus and not the Bible.
They know that verse is there but will say that was Paul and not Christ.
There is plenty in the bible about homosexuals, but nature should show a person how wrong it is.
Matt 19 - And [Jesus] answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, `FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'? "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
God's plan: one man, one woman, for life.
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.