Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind
Sadly, you do not appear to comprehend what you have been led to argue. Note the following from your reasoning:

"Is Jim Baker's adultery with a woman any less reprehensible than Ted Haggard's lying with a male prostitute?"

With this question as a foundation for trying to make claims to tolerate the degenerate so long as they are resisting temptation, you reveal the twisted nature of your own thinking! Instead of focusing upon the Deliverer, you would have us focus upon the abject failure of highly regarded, still unregenerate men who held themselves and their lusts as superior to the deliverance Jesus brings to the human soul by placing His Life int he human spirit!

Why would you try to focus the discussion on the 'contradiction inherent in Haggert's or Baker's life in opposition to their profession'? To make room for tolerating the contradiction between the sexual degenerate's profession and the reality of their living! Then, when you are called on the duplicity of such apologetics, you and others resort to conflating the unregenerate known by their actions, with the saved in Christ falling on occasion into temptation, who, when they fall, seek the throne of forgiveness.

Did you miss the lesson taught by Paul in Romans Chapter one: 1:21&22 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. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools
1:24&25 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.

You might ask yourself: 'If God gave them up to the lusts of their hearts, were they under the law when given up or under Grace?'

The very nature of continuing to identify the self by the degeneracy which holds their heart is evidence that they are under the law not Grace.

You are alive in at least two dimensions, body and soul. The Delivered soul has a third dimension of Life, the spirit with the earnest of the inheritance within, God's Life, making such an one living under Grace rather than the law. The story of the Prodigal Son might be helpful.

While off in the pig sty, the son was under the law. When he set his mind to return to his father's jurisdiction, he walked into Grace, as evidenced by his father running to meet him on the road. Now ask yourself, 'under what regime did the son who had remained at home believe he lived?' Why undert the law of course! And he was jealous of the Grace his father extended to the Prodigal Son. But in reality, the son who remained at home could always have know the same Grace. And as a further elsson, read the book of Ruth. The story heats up when Ruth seeks grace by gleening in the harvested fields, to feed her and her mother-in-law, Naomi. It ends with Ruth and Obed living under Grace of the kinsman Redeemer, and there is no further chapter of Ruth crawling around in the fields picking up grain fallen during harvest, for she has right to the barn full of Grain, the storehouse of Grace.

46 posted on 08/22/2009 10:52:48 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: MHGinTN
"Is Jim Baker's adultery with a woman any less reprehensible than Ted Haggard's lying with a male prostitute?"

With this question as a foundation for trying to make claims to tolerate the degenerate so long as they are resisting temptation, you reveal the twisted nature of your own thinking! Instead of focusing upon the Deliverer, you would have us focus upon the abject failure of highly regarded, still unregenerate men who held themselves and their lusts as superior to the deliverance Jesus brings to the human soul by placing His Life int he human spirit!


My friend, why would the above question I posed by interpreted as TOLERATING the degenerate ? The asking of the question should imply that I DO NOT tolerate sexual degeneracy in both forms --- heterosexual or homosexual.

As for "highly regarded" men --- that is exactly my point -- NO ONE, NO MATTER HOW HIGHLY REGARDED IS IMMUNE FROM temptation.

The problem I have is this -- Christians mostly focus on ONE FORM of degeneracy (homosexual lust) and then take for granted the other form of degeneracy ( heterosexual lust ). That is a very unbalanced view. If you won't tolerate one, you should not tolerate the other.

As for focusing on the deliverer, of course we should. But to do that, we have to KNOW the sin He is delivering us from, and it is not simply sexual lust ( in both forms ), but lust of other things ( e.g. money, power, etc.).

And here's my point again --- pastors are tempted by ALL FORMS of lusts ( be it sexual or material ). When a pastor is tempted, but through God's grace, does not fall for the temptation, we do not then say that the pastor is not fit for his position. Therefore, if a pastor is tempted by sexual lust ( heterosexual or homosexual ) but through God's help, does not fall for it ( i.e. remains celibate, or is abstinent ), why should the pastor not be fit to continue being a pastor ? *THAT* is my point.
47 posted on 08/22/2009 8:36:33 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson