Wow! You're a regular me. :) Good to see you again.
FK: "I wonder what Biblical "sexual perversion" would be to a homosexual."
... but the general line was that the most forceful condemnations of homosexuality we both could find were in terms of "lying with man as with women" and he argued, that condemned bi-sexuality only. Silly, I agree.
That's interesting since the L's and the G's and the B's and the T's all seem so unified and junk. It's funny that they would throw some of their own under the bus to justify their Christianity. :)
FK: "During physical life, "eternal life" only lasts until the next mortal sin."
Well, sure. This is like saying that a Honda runs forever unless you wreck it. It is a valid statement about an indestructible (hyperbolically, in that case) motor, is it not?
I don't think so. There is a big difference between a motor and the vehicle surrounding it. If God gave me an indestructible motor, it would remain in tact no matter how many accidents it was in. The important point is that God would NOT tell me "Here is a car that runs forever". That would be very misleading since God could very well give me such a car. If only the motor was meant to be indestructible, then that's what He would say. I think it is the same with "eternal life". If He really meant "eternal life with a ton of strings and conditions attached" then He would have said so. I don't think He did.
[continuing:] Christ used the term in the same conditional sense, e.g when He said "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you" (John 6:54), right when he devotes several passages to eternal life.
As above, I see this as two different things. It seems to me that you are building in an entirely new level of condition that I do not see there. The verse by itself says that if you take Christ inside yourself, i.e. accept Him, that you will have life in you. It does not add a further condition that you will lose that life if you do not do a, b, and c. Using the word "eternal" here would be like referring to the whole car when only the motor was intended. I don't think God did that. If He really meant only temporary life, or a "chance" for eternal life, then I think that concept would be clear enough in scripture. I know there are a few verses that "sound" like one can lose his salvation, but the whole weight of scripture is squarely on one side, IMO.
The delivery of the prayers of the saints (Apoc. 5:8, 8:3-4) might be at the end of time, but what makes you conclude the subjects of these prayers are unrelated to the present events? It is the present being judged, after all.
While I can see why you interpret these verses the way you do, I see it a little different. (Shock! :) I don't see the angel and the elders as actually having offered the prayers, but only the incense. The incense represents the prayers, but are not the prayers themselves. The parallel is to a regular Temple service, wherein the priest would offer incense while the people prayed (directly) to God.
"While I can see why you interpret these verses the way you do, I see it a little different. (Shock! :) I don't see the angel and the elders as actually having offered the prayers, but only the incense. The incense represents the prayers, but are not the prayers themselves. The parallel is to a regular Temple service, wherein the priest would offer incense while the people prayed (directly) to God."
Actually, incense is seen as a sublime offering to God and in a sense is a prayer. Your comment reminds me of a verse/refrain we will chant tonight at the Presanctified Liturgy:
"Let my prayer arise as incense before You and the lifting up of my hands as an evening sacrifice."
Same here, although it is nice to take a break from these conversations when they appear to do little but tread water.
It's funny that they would throw some of their own under the bus to justify their Christianity
The person I was conversing with was a conservative heterosexual man, who had some sympathy with certain "gay rights" claims. I do not know how representative he was of the GLBT views. He reduced what is wrong with homosexuality to one thing everyone agrees is profoundly wrong: a married man having a homosexual affair, and tried to convince me that that was the only thing St. Paul meant to condemn. What I see coming directly from the gay lobby is more of a generic kumbaya stuff.
If God gave me an indestructible motor, it would remain in tact no matter how many accidents it was in. The important point is that God would NOT tell me "Here is a car that runs forever". That would be very misleading since God could very well give me such a car. If only the motor was meant to be indestructible, then that's what He would say. I think it is the same with "eternal life". If He really meant "eternal life with a ton of strings and conditions attached" then He would have said so.
Same as with Honda's near supernatural hardware, the "motor" is given you so that you can exercize freedom driving around. It is impossible to give one a car which you yourself drive, and then protect you from driving it into a telephone pole. Jesus did say so much, -- moving on to John 6:54.
The verse by itself says that if you take Christ inside yourself, i.e. accept Him, that you will have life in you. It does not add a further condition that you will lose that life if you do not do a, b, and c
This is the verse 54, again: "Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you". The condition is right there: take the Eucharist, and the consequence of violating it is there, too: you shall not have life.
I know there are a few verses that "sound" like one can lose his salvation, but the whole weight of scripture is squarely on one side, IMO.
he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved (Mt 10:22, 24:13, similar Mark 13:!3)Wherefore he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall. (1 Cor 10:12, also see the entire preceding discourse)
by good works you may make sure your calling and election. (2 Peter 1:10)
6 Who will render to every man according to his works. 7 To them indeed, who according to patience in good work, seek glory and honour and incorruption, eternal life: 8 But to them that are contentious, and who obey not the truth, but give credit to iniquity, wrath and indignation. 9 Tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Greek. 10 But glory, and honour, and peace to every one that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (Romans 2)
The incense represents the prayers, but are not the prayers themselves
The text does not say anything about "represents" in either Chapter 5 or 8. Besides, what difference would that make anyway: obviously incense is not the prayer itself, but the reality described in Apocalypse 5 and 8 is still saints praying to God who knows of the prayer as He is judging us.
Thanks much for all your pings and great points.