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

Skip to comments.

MyTake: The Bible condemns a lot, but here’s why we focus on homosexuality
CNN ^ | 5/22/12 | R Albert Mohler, Jr.

Posted on 05/22/2012 5:45:32 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper

Are conservative Christians hypocritical and selective when it comes to the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality? With all that the Bible condemns, why the focus on gay sex and same-sex marriage?

Given the heated nature of our current debates, it’s a question conservative Christians have learned to expect. “Look,” we are told, “the Bible condemns eating shellfish, wearing mixed fabrics and any number of other things. Why do you ignore those things and insist that the Bible must be obeyed when it comes to sex?”

(Excerpt) Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bible; gay; marriage; religion; sin; sodomy; theology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 next last
To: PastorJimCM

All very good and excellent points. I find very few people have an understanding that the Old Testament is far more than just a bunch of entertaining stories. It is a window on how God deals with believers and non-believers throughout the ages. Nothing has changed.


81 posted on 05/22/2012 12:37:51 PM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

Once more people edit my statements to look like they imply other than what they do, and then criticize the result. This was something I thought only liberals do.

I am saying not a word that is not in line with plenary infallible inspiration. However, God intended the point of view of the MEN (show me a WOMAN written scripture) who penned them to figure integrally in the meaning.


82 posted on 05/22/2012 12:50:09 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Churches are full of hypocrites you say? Welcome: there's always room for one more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

I could just as well say you are wrong in “nothing has changed” — in that God had a plan of dealing with men under various covenants which God intended to unfold over what men perceive as time.

Now certainly you will squeal that you were misunderstood and maybe you were — but I want to illustrate that fair’s fair.


83 posted on 05/22/2012 12:52:09 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Churches are full of hypocrites you say? Welcome: there's always room for one more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
However, God intended the point of view of the MEN (show me a WOMAN written scripture) who penned them to figure integrally in the meaning.

Where do you find validation for THAT "insight?"

84 posted on 05/22/2012 12:54:45 PM PDT by papertyger ("And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if..."))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: jboot

Sorry to unfix your fix, but God intended the point of view of the author to figure in the meaning. You can’t take a statement born in specific circumstance and turn it blanket like you would want to. You can justify Christian “jihads” that way if you do.


85 posted on 05/22/2012 12:55:45 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Churches are full of hypocrites you say? Welcome: there's always room for one more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: papertyger

All you need to do is follow the creation account to see it happening at once. Where were the waters being separated from the waters? Way up in God’s heaven? No, it was down here on the earth.

Your would-be manner of interpretation falls to reductio ad absurdum.


86 posted on 05/22/2012 12:57:40 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Churches are full of hypocrites you say? Welcome: there's always room for one more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
You can’t take a statement born in specific circumstance and turn it blanket like you would want to. You can justify Christian “jihads” that way if you do.

There is no scriptural justification for inferences to editorialize scripture.

And no, it is not a justification for Christian jihad. In fact "Hath God Said?" has always been the beginning of twisting God's word.

87 posted on 05/22/2012 1:02:14 PM PDT by papertyger ("And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if..."))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Where were the waters being separated from the waters? Way up in God’s heaven? No, it was down here on the earth. Your would-be manner of interpretation falls to reductio ad absurdum.

You don't know that. Ever hear of a "cloud?"

As for my "would-be manner of interpretation," find just one scriptural instance an interpretation of Scripture being dependent on the "circumstances" of the writer.

88 posted on 05/22/2012 1:08:03 PM PDT by papertyger ("And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if..."))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Your post #80 seems completely consistent with my understanding of Christian love. To love is to desire the good of another ... the greatest good being salvation from sin. We love our enemies by doing the things that we believe will lead them to repentance of sin, conversion to Christ, and salvation from Hell. "Love" doesn't mean "be nice to".

You write:

It is OUR responsibility as Christians to tell them they need to repent and ask God's forgiveness. And if they do not repent, they continue to be enemies of God and the wrath of God rest on them.

Exactly.

Your post #12, however, makes no sense. You wrote (in response to the admonition "love the sinner hate the sin"):

Not when the sinner is deliberately opposed to God.

Huh? That makes no sense from a Christian perspective, and seems to me to contradict what you wrote in #80.

89 posted on 05/22/2012 1:25:42 PM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Forgot:

Now which is more loving 1) to keep quiet and say nothing to "the abortionists, the queers, the socialists, and the mohammedans" hoping that our prayers will do the trick; or 2) to tell them they are living in sin and they need to get right with God?

The answer is "both and", not "either or" ... If prayer is not followed by action, it may rightly be seen as cowardly ... if action is not accompanied by prayer it will not be Godly.

In no case, though, may we hate (that is, desire evil to befall) the abortionists etc.

90 posted on 05/22/2012 1:29:06 PM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

My apology. I thought he was a Spongian or like that Jack Black commercial. I read the full article after my premature post.


91 posted on 05/22/2012 2:56:26 PM PDT by hecht (Murray use your coaster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Mohler’s commentary is as insightful as ever.

The 5,000+ comments, on the other hand, just go to show that the comment boxes on major news-site blogs have become pretty much nothing but accumulators of idiocy.


92 posted on 05/22/2012 3:07:00 PM PDT by RansomOttawa (tm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Boop Their Noses – They’re So Cute!

We Voted!
You Get to Donate Monthly
To Help End FReepathons

Sponsors will contribute $10 for each new monthly donor sign up!
FReeper RonC will contribute $25 for each new Dollar-A-Day Club member

93 posted on 05/22/2012 3:29:11 PM PDT by TheOldLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

So, in your opinion, is Psalm 139 profitable for the Christian, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness? Or not?


94 posted on 05/22/2012 3:36:26 PM PDT by jboot (Emperor: "How will this end?" Kosh: "In fire.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
Your post #12, however, makes no sense. You wrote (in response to the admonition "love the sinner hate the sin"): Not when the sinner is deliberately opposed to God. Huh? That makes no sense from a Christian perspective

It's not very hard to understand. We are to be imitators of Christ. But even Christ drove the money changers out of the temple with whips (several times). There comes a point when one has to say enough is enough.
95 posted on 05/22/2012 5:15:42 PM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: thulldud

> “Yeah, not sure he [Darwin] was mad at God. Hard to be mad at anyone you don’t believe exists, I would think.” [ilovesarah2012]
> “Happens all the time. I guess you [ilovesarah2012] don’t know any atheists of that sort?” [thulldud]

And what’s your evidence that this happens all the time? I don’t believe it ever happens, and have difficulty understanding how it could happen. In fact there’s a wry atheist joke about why God allows so much suffering to exist in the world: “God’s only excuse is that he doesn’t exist.” (This line is often attributed to the French novelist Stendhal — in French “La seule excuse de Dieu, c’est qu’il n’existe pas” — but I can’t find it in his works.)

If you mean that some atheists are hostile toward persons who believe in God, that’s something else. Similarly people in this country can’t really be mad at the God that Al Qaeda members worship (their conception of “Allah”). We’re mad at them for what their delusions are leading them to do.


96 posted on 05/22/2012 5:58:37 PM PDT by GJones2 (Darwin mad at God?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: GJones2
And what’s your evidence that this happens all the time? I don’t believe it ever happens, and have difficulty understanding how it could happen.

The unstated premise in this byplay is that the atheist knows good and well that God exists, but refuses to acknowledge that fact.

Rom 1:18 ¶ For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Rom 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.

In the vernacular, what this says is that every man knows God exists, because God has shown it to them in the world around them (the inference is so simple they are without excuse).

BUT, and this is a very big "but,' if they should refuse to acknowledge the obvious, he gives them up to believing (or more properly, being dedicated to) their own excuse.

And yes, that does mean "evolution" for the "modern" excuse.

97 posted on 05/22/2012 7:53:42 PM PDT by papertyger ("And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if..."))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
I have NO sympathy for homosexuals!

Homosexuality is a "Mark" of disobedience.
Someone once asked The answer is in the definition of "REPROBATE". And the reason"why" is given in the Bible.

God has a cure for homosexuals.
98 posted on 05/22/2012 8:05:53 PM PDT by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

Your point (1) contradicts itself. You seem confused as to the meaning of the word “love”,

Your point (3) contradicts your point (1).


99 posted on 05/22/2012 8:14:32 PM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

Your point (1) contradicts itself. You seem confused as to the meaning of the word “love”,

Your point (3) contradicts your point (1).


100 posted on 05/22/2012 8:14:35 PM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 next last

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.

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