Christian "Love" for "Homosexuals"

[Haven]

Christian fundamentalists often claim to "love" lesbians, gays, and bisexuals (who they invariably label "homosexuals"), while at the same time actively opposing gay rights, including marriage equality, hate crimes laws, and even decriminalization of same-sex relationships. This seems ridiculous to me, as love implies support, but these individuals certainly don't support LGB people.

Debate question: Is it possible to love gay, lesbian, and bisexual people while opposing gay rights?[/i

[99percentatheism]

Alright now. Back to some meat and potatoes.

KCKID:

If Bible affirming Christians are to be equated to KKK members, Wesrboro protesters (and homosexual/gay pride activists), are we not compelled to answer that spurious charge?

So why would anyone compare Bible-affirming Christians that live the Gospel message . . . to the KKK and one small "activist" church in Kansas? That's just not a sound charge. There is the same void of support for their behavior in the New Testament as there is a void of support for promoting gay pride. So why would anyone use that comparison as some kind of accusation of wrongdoing?

The KKK is an evangelical Christian organization, as is the WBC. They are both "Bible-believing Christian" groups, and they follow Biblical morality through to its logical conclusion.

The Klan is hardly aligning their actions to that of the Apostles. The people that implemented the evangel. The Westboro group is hardly acting like the teachings of Jesus when they are picketing the funerals of soldiers.

Yes, the picketing of the funerals of soldiers is bad. It's far more scripturally acceptable - and raises fewer complaints from Christians - when the Westboro Baptist Church picket the funerals of the likes of murdered Matthew Shepard with signs that read: Fags Must Die: See Leviticus 20:13 . . .

You mean the Matthew Shepard that was killed by drug dudes? That Matthew Shepard. Tragic and horrific event:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/26/arts/ ... print&_r=0

I can't understand why the WBC would want to put the effort out to picket funerals. They should be down in the Castro District, West Hollywood or just about anywhere in Boston. I see North Carolina is now a hotbed of gay pride activity.

That said, the picketing of the funerals of soldiers IS related to that particular Leviticus text. Soldiers, say the WBC, are supporting a country that accepts 'sodomites'.

And, while they say that, they don't even have a clue what the word means!* Nor, apparently, does most of Christianity! So, would it not be best, perhaps, for Christians to disassociate themselves from Leviticus 20:13 altogether? I mean, some actually believe it to be the word of God . . .

I know Jews certainly do. The Torah is serious business to them.

[/quote]

And Leviticus????

What about Genesis 14:

But Abram said to the king (Bera) of Sodom,

“With raised hand I have sworn an oath to the Lord, God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth, that I will accept nothing belonging to you, not even a thread or the strap of a sandal, so that you will never be able to say, ‘I made Abram rich.’

Kinda reminds me of:

. . . keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

Be merciful to those who doubt; save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

- Jude (of course)

*Strong's Definition of Sodomite:
qadesh: a temple prostitute
Original Word: קָדֵש�
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: qadesh
Phonetic Spelling: (kaw-dashe')
Short Definition: prostitute[/color]

I have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance right here on the desk next to my PC. It just says: SODOMITE (sod' -om-ite) See also SODOMITES

It references Deuteronomy 23:14

De 23:17 nor a s. of the sons of Israel ................. 6945

Page 1272 in my Strong's

But wait a minute, what if one is born with a prostitution orientation? Does that void the proscription in Deuteronomy? I mean with your theology, anyone's personal feelings can trump anything in the Bible.

And you still have the nagging 2000-PLUS years of history that denotes sodomy with just regular people. Why should the gay pride movement be able to force their beliefs about sodomy and the what and the who it is . . . on Christians and others that define it as homosexuality? You seem to always ignore that sexuality as in proper sexuality is to be in a marriage. And marriage even in the OT is man and woman/husband and wife. And we know it is immutably man and woman/husband and wife in Christian truth.

The Beatitudes:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.

Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.

Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.

Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

I doubt seriously, that fighting to have homosexual acts "affirmed" and celebrated in The Church, as well as in public, and being outraged by having that firmly opposed by Christians, qualifies for any of the above.

But like I've written many times, people are free to invent any new religion they so desire. And others are free to reject that.

Ah, the Beatitudes. A very wise piece of scripture. Perhaps a trifle self-righteous, however, by presenting them as if they are are consistently practiced by one's self.

You seem to always miss the point of Christian ethics. One cannot justify and "affirm" their own sins. They must repent. So they certainly can't encourage and support the wanton sins of others'. They must repent as well.

[Danmark]

I have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance right here on the desk next to my PC. It just says: SODOMITE (sod' -om-ite) See also SODOMITES

But wait a minute, what if one is born with a prostitution orientation? . . . sodomy . . . beliefs about sodomy and... homosexuality? You seem to always ignore that sexuality as in proper sexuality....

You talk more about sex, and 'sodomy' in particular, more than everyone one else on this forum combined. Have you examined why you are so interested in the subject?

There are so many issues today a Christian should be interested in tackling: poverty, education, equal pay for equal work with no regard to gender, abuse of the aged, violence in general, rescuing our youth, disease, illiteracy . . . .
But 99% of what you talk about is sex. Have you asked yourself why this particular issue represents almost the only thing you talk about on this forum?

[KCKID]

Oh my, I really do need to get a life. But, here I go again . . .

Alright now. Back to some meat and potatoes.

If Bible affirming Christians are to be equated to KKK members, Wesrboro protesters (and homosexual/gay pride activists), are we not compelled to answer that spurious charge?

So why would anyone compare Bible-affirming Christians that live the Gospel message . . . to the KKK and one small "activist" church in Kansas? That's just not a sound charge. There is the same void of support for their behavior in the New Testament as there is a void of support for promoting gay pride. So why would anyone use that comparison as some kind of accusation of wrongdoing?

The KKK is an evangelical Christian organization, as is the WBC. They are both "Bible-believing Christian" groups, and they follow Biblical morality through to its logical conclusion.

The Klan is hardly aligning their actions to that of the Apostles. The people that implemented the evangel. The Westboro group is hardly acting like the teachings of Jesus when they are picketing the funerals of soldiers.

Yes, the picketing of the funerals of soldiers is bad. It's far more scripturally acceptable - and raises fewer complaints from Christians - when the Westboro Baptist Church picket the funerals of the likes of murdered Matthew Shepard with signs that read: Fags Must Die: See Leviticus 20:13 . . .

You mean the Matthew Shepard that was killed by drug dudes? That Matthew Shepard. Tragic and horrific event:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/26/arts/ ... print&_r=0

I made no mention as to why Matthew Shepard was killed. Nor was that my point. My point was that he was a gay man and, because of this, his funeral was picketed by the Westboro Baptist Church with banners that used the very same Levitical texts that you and the average Christian uses to pass judgment on homosexuals.

I can't understand why the WBC would want to put the effort out to picket funerals. They should be down in the Castro District, West Hollywood or just about anywhere in Boston. I see North Carolina is now a hotbed of gay pride activity.

Perhaps they prefer to play it safe. Not that I would approve of this but they may get lynched if they showed up in those places you mention.

Incidentally, you'll probably find "hotbeds of heterosexual sexual activity" in and around every nightclub environment throughout the world. That's not to mention similar 'hotbeds' within most heterosexual communities that don't even have nightclubs . Heterosexual sex - even by those that are (gasp) UNMARRIED! - is a recreational sport, 99percent! This, of course, excludes convents and monasteries.

But then again, hmmm . . .

That said, the picketing of the funerals of soldiers IS related to that particular Leviticus text. Soldiers, say the WBC, are supporting a country that accepts 'sodomites'.

And, while they say that, they don't even have a clue what the word means!* Nor, apparently, does most of Christianity! So, would it not be best, perhaps, for Christians to disassociate themselves from Leviticus 20:13 altogether? I mean, some actually believe it to be the word of God . . .

I know Jews certainly do. The Torah is serious business to them.

And yet we have the quote by Rabbi William Gershon: "The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened."

And Leviticus????

What about Leviticus????

What about Genesis 14:

But Abram said to the king (Bera) of Sodom,

“With raised hand I have sworn an oath to the Lord, God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth, that I will accept nothing belonging to you, not even a thread or the strap of a sandal, so that you will never be able to say, ‘I made Abram rich.’

Kinda reminds me of:

. . . keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

Be merciful to those who doubt; save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

- Jude (of course)

Another sermonet, I see.

*Strong's Definition of Sodomite:
qadesh: a temple prostitute
Original Word: קָדֵש�
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: qadesh
Phonetic Spelling: (kaw-dashe')
Short Definition: prostitute[/color]

I have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance right here on the desk next to my PC. It just says: SODOMITE (sod' -om-ite) See also SODOMITES

It references Deuteronomy 23:14

De 23:17 nor a s. of the sons of Israel ................. 6945

Page 1272 in my Strong's.

Well, I grabbed the previous definition from the web since it provided me with the fancy hieroglyphic that I can't type in myself. So, I got out MY Strong's Exhaustive Bible Concordance and found "sodomite". This is what it says:

6945: qadesh a (quasi) sacred person, i.e. (techn.) a (male) devotee (by prostitution) to licentious idolatry:-sodomite, unclean.

So, it really does look as though we need to strike the term "sodomite" from our 'scriptural judgment of gays' arsenal . . .

But wait a minute, what if one is born with a prostitution orientation? Does that void the proscription in Deuteronomy? I mean with your theology, anyone's personal feelings can trump anything in the Bible.

It's only fair that if I'm allowed light-hearted banter with you that you should be allowed to reciprocate.

And you still have the nagging 2000-PLUS years of history that denotes sodomy with just regular people.

Yes, I can feel the frustration. It's downright irritating to find out that a favored word we've used forever with which to condemn another human being really doesn't mean what we SO want it to mean.

Why should the gay pride movement be able to force their beliefs about sodomy and the what and the who it is . . . on Christians and others that define it as homosexuality?

What?? Are you now crying 'persecution' because you've been robbed of a hateful term that, by virtue its ACTUAL definition, weakens some 'anti-gay' Christian agenda? Then again, perhaps Strong's has also been 'taken over' by the sinister gay-agenda' that you're always referring to . . .insert "Twilight Zone" theme.

You seem to always ignore that sexuality as in proper sexuality is to be in a marriage. And marriage even in the OT is man and woman/husband and wife. And we know it is immutably man and woman/husband and wife in Christian truth.

And, man and woman can and do still marry. Nothing has changed. However, this thread is - yet again - Christian "Love" for "Homosexuals" . . .

The Beatitudes:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.

Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.

Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.

Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

I doubt seriously, that fighting to have homosexual acts "affirmed" and celebrated in The Church, as well as in public, and being outraged by having that firmly opposed by Christians, qualifies for any of the above.

How do 'homosexual acts' affect you? How do they affect 'The Church'? Do 'heterosexual acts' affect you or 'The Church'? If so ...how?

But like I've written many times, people are free to invent any new religion they so desire. And others are free to reject that.

Perhaps it's because "Jesus" appeals to them and they'd prefer to join a Church that adheres to the principles of Jesus. Actually, exactly for the same reasons that many heterosexuals choose to join a Church. One's sexuality has absolutely no bearing on one's reasons for wanting to attend a Church of their choice.

Ah, the Beatitudes. A very wise piece of scripture. Perhaps a trifle self-righteous, however, by presenting them as if they are are consistently practiced by one's self.

You seem to always miss the point of Christian ethics. One cannot justify and "affirm" their own sins. They must repent. So they certainly can't encourage and support the wanton sins of others'. They must repent as well.

Whether one chooses to repent of whatever it is they feel the need to repent of is up to the individual and not you. That said, if you would expect a homosexual to 'repent of their homosexuality' then the same would be expected of a heterosexual. Assuming that you are heterosexual, 99percent, have you repented for your heterosexuality?

[Danmark]

It is the responsibility of "the gay community" to end the accusatory and litigious actions towards Christians that will not, have not and cannot endorse homosexuality.

Wrong. The 'gay community' and those who are not part of that community, but respect the civil rights of others have no obligation to allow the extremist, angry, self righteous, "I'm a VICTIM!" faction of those who claim to be Christians to run roughshod over others while they promote their personal agendas by their insistence on misinterpreting the message of Christ by their anti intellectual literalisms.

Instead, all who claim to be Christian should observe the words of Jesus and walk in humility, quietly working for what is good instead of demanding their own way, braying publicly in a loud voice so their words may be heard, and bringing discredit upon the Christ they claim to follow.

"And whosoever shall cause one of these little ones that believe on me to stumble, it were better for him if a great millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea."
Mark 9:42

[99percentatheism]

KCKID

Oh my, I really do need to get a life. But, here I go again . . .

Become a Conservative Evangelical Christian. The life is amazingly fulfilling. Eternally so.

Just a suggestion. I'm not proselytizing.

Alright now. Back to some meat and potatoes.

If Bible affirming Christians are to be equated to KKK members, Wesrboro protesters (and homosexual/gay pride activists), are we not compelled to answer that spurious charge?

So why would anyone compare Bible-affirming Christians that live the Gospel message . . . to the KKK and one small "activist" church in Kansas? That's just not a sound charge. There is the same void of support for their behavior in the New Testament as there is a void of support for promoting gay pride. So why would anyone use that comparison as some kind of accusation of wrongdoing?

The KKK is an evangelical Christian organization, as is the WBC. They are both "Bible-believing Christian" groups, and they follow Biblical morality through to its logical conclusion.

The Klan is hardly aligning their actions to that of the Apostles. The people that implemented the evangel. The Westboro group is hardly acting like the teachings of Jesus when they are picketing the funerals of soldiers.

Yes, the picketing of the funerals of soldiers is bad. It's far more scripturally acceptable - and raises fewer complaints from Christians - when the Westboro Baptist Church picket the funerals of the likes of murdered Matthew Shepard with signs that read: Fags Must Die: See Leviticus 20:13 . . .

You mean the Matthew Shepard that was killed by drug dudes? That Matthew Shepard. Tragic and horrific event:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/26/arts/ ... print&_r=0

I made no mention as to why Matthew Shepard was killed. Nor was that my point. My point was that he was a gay man and, because of this, his funeral was picketed by the Westboro Baptist Church with banners that used the very same Levitical texts that you and the average Christian uses to pass judgment on homosexuals.

Any reference to Matthew Shepard in a debate about gay pride bears its gay pride nature. The WBC has its freedom of speech rights. I notice that no one is running to join their little denom. If gay pride can be touted as religious speech, then the WBC gets the same rights.

I can't understand why the WBC would want to put the effort out to picket funerals. They should be down in the Castro District, West Hollywood or just about anywhere in Boston. I see North Carolina is now a hotbed of gay pride activity.

Perhaps they prefer to play it safe. Not that I would approve of this but they may get lynched if they showed up in those places you mention.

Obviously they are not playing it safe where they are doing their business.

Incidentally, you'll probably find "hotbeds of heterosexual sexual activity" in and around every nightclub environment throughout the world.

Yes true. But you don't see that preached as appropriate behavior in any Church that I know of. But the same gay pride flag flies on gay bars as it does on "gay affirming" Churches, I have literally observed this in the Hyde Park University district of Chicago. That is to say, in real life. (I was visiting a Museum in that area with my wife and kids.)

That's not to mention similar 'hotbeds' within most heterosexual communities that don't even have nightclubs . Heterosexual sex - even by those that are (gasp) UNMARRIED! - is a recreational sport, 99percent! This, of course, excludes convents and monasteries.

But then again, hmmm . . .

But it is not called hate speech to preach against this kind of behavior in Evangelical Churches.

That said, the picketing of the funerals of soldiers IS related to that particular Leviticus text. Soldiers, say the WBC, are supporting a country that accepts 'sodomites'.

And, while they say that, they don't even have a clue what the word means!* Nor, apparently, does most of Christianity! So, would it not be best, perhaps, for Christians to disassociate themselves from Leviticus 20:13 altogether? I mean, some actually believe it to be the word of God . . .

I know Jews certainly do. The Torah is serious business to them.

And yet we have the quote by Rabbi William Gershon: "The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened."

Yes I have read the quote under one person's postings here. You have read about how many "Jews" there were that wandered the desert in Exodus haven't you? I have no desire to follow the advice of Mr. Gerson.

And Leviticus????

What about Leviticus????

What about Genesis 14:

But Abram said to the king (Bera) of Sodom,

“With raised hand I have sworn an oath to the Lord, God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth, that I will accept nothing belonging to you, not even a thread or the strap of a sandal, so that you will never be able to say, ‘I made Abram rich.’

Kinda reminds me of:

. . . keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

Be merciful to those who doubt; save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

- Jude (of course)

Another sermonet, I see.

It is called evidence from scripture. I would never give a sermon (or sermonet) to you or anyone else in these threads. For the obvious reasons.

*Strong's Definition of Sodomite:
qadesh: a temple prostitute
Original Word: קָדֵש�
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: qadesh
Phonetic Spelling: (kaw-dashe')
Short Definition: prostitute[/color]

I have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance right here on the desk next to my PC. It just says: SODOMITE (sod' -om-ite) See also SODOMITES

It references Deuteronomy 23:14

De 23:17 nor a s. of the sons of Israel ................. 6945

Page 1272 in my Strong's.

Well, I grabbed the previous definition from the web since it provided me with the fancy hieroglyphic that I can't type in myself. So, I got out MY Strong's Exhaustive Bible Concordance and found "sodomite". This is what it says:

6945: qadesh a (quasi) sacred person, i.e. (techn.) a (male) devotee (by prostitution) to licentious idolatry:-sodomite, unclean.

So, it really does look as though we need to strike the term "sodomite" from our 'scriptural judgment of gays' arsenal . . .

No problem here. I have many more accurate definitions of LGBT activism to rely on for the truth of the matter in what The Church is facing coming at it. Arsenokoitai can be defined in modern terms. "men in bed together" is denounced from scripture to modern Pulpit. OK by me.

But it is clear what kind of people Sodomites were. In the recounting of what Lot endured, there is no way EVERY MAN in Sodom could have been a Temple prostitute. And as gay pride gets more authority, we will all see what is at the bottom of this issue. The fact is, "marriage" in Christian truth is man and woman/husband and wife.

But wait a minute, what if one is born with a prostitution orientation? Does that void the proscription in Deuteronomy? I mean with your theology, anyone's personal feelings can trump anything in the Bible.

It's only fair that if I'm allowed light-hearted banter with you that you should be allowed to reciprocate.

Not the way I am hunted here. It appears I have enemies well placed that follow every word I write differently than they do my adversaries. I could be wrong, but experience is a good teacher. (And a cyber martyrdom is not really that scary.) And Christians must expect a massive backlash to holding the line on truth.

And you still have the nagging 2000-PLUS years of history that denotes sodomy with just regular people.

Yes, I can feel the frustration. It's downright irritating to find out that a favored word we've used forever with which to condemn another human being really doesn't mean what we SO want it to mean.

Oh really. Paul invented arsenokoitai instead of using Sodomite. Neologism cannot hide sin, sinning and sinfulness. And you neglect once again, that "marriage" in Christian truth is not same gender couplings. No where in the entire Bible. That includes Rabbi Gershon's portion. So I have no problem using more definitive words to describe same gender sexuality and those that imbibe it.

Why should the gay pride movement be able to force their beliefs about sodomy and the what and the who it is . . . on Christians and others that define it as homosexuality?

What?? Are you now crying 'persecution' because you've been robbed of a hateful term that, by virtue its ACTUAL definition, weakens some 'anti-gay' Christian agenda?

Weakens? The "gay pride flag" is a beacon calling all to that follow it to service KCKID. It represents a belief system. I am all for recognizing "who" is a Sodomite and why we would use that connotation towards them even to this day. And I am committed to defining the homosexual pride movement in more modern terminology too. Jude didn't just write for The Church era of his day. Immutable truth doesn't change for the date on the calendar of for pop culture fads.

Then again, perhaps Strong's has also been 'taken over' by the sinister gay-agenda' that you're always referring to . . .insert "Twilight Zone" theme.

As the future "husband and husband" march down the aisle? Which Lesbian "wife" in a two female "marriage" is the father to "their" children?

Very Twilight Zone material KCKID. A reference to Hollywood is so appropriate.

But no where recorded in scripture is there any reality in this.

You seem to always ignore that sexuality as in proper sexuality is to be in a marriage. And marriage even in the OT is man and woman/husband and wife. And we know it is immutably man and woman/husband and wife in Christian truth.

And, man and woman can and do still marry. Nothing has changed. However, this thread is - yet again - Christian "Love" for "Homosexuals" . . .

Celebrating sin is not love. Condoning a" different Gospel" is not love. Putting the wolves sheep's clothing on the wolf is not love for the flock or the lost sheep. Jesus made that extremely clear.

The Beatitudes:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.

Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.

Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.

Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

I doubt seriously, that fighting to have homosexual acts "affirmed" and celebrated in The Church, as well as in public, and being outraged by having that firmly opposed by Christians, qualifies for any of the above.

How do 'homosexual acts' affect you? How do they affect 'The Church'? Do 'heterosexual acts' affect you or 'The Church'? If so ...how?

How DID and DOES divorce and remarriage affect The Church???

YOU make that case solidly. A now you demand to reinvent and redefine "marriage" even further?

I cannot write what really empowers this movement because I have too many enemies well placed that judge me with means I cannot fight against.

But like I've written many times, people are free to invent any new religion they so desire. And others are free to reject that.

Perhaps it's because "Jesus" appeals to them and they'd prefer to join a Church that adheres to the principles of Jesus.

How? "Marriage" is man and woman/husband and wife to Jesus. Jesus was a Torah observant "Jew." And as has been proven over and over again, "a different Gospel" is a bad thing.

Actually, exactly for the same reasons that many heterosexuals choose to join a Church. One's sexuality has absolutely no bearing on one's reasons for wanting to attend a Church of their choice.

The "gay pride movement" is about homosexuality, bi-sexuality and whatever the T stands for. It is designed to support sexual behavior and the rights of those that enjoy that kind of sexual behavior.

And anyway, homosexuals and bi-sexuals already have a few religious organizations they cam patronize that "affirm" their sexual decisions. No need to badger those of us hundreds of millions of Christians that won't affirm their sexual behaviors.

Ever notice how I always promote tolerance and diversity? There is not place where I try to say that homosexuals and bi-sexuals and Trans . . . shouldn't be allowed to ply their wares in their own religious enclaves. Let's see what places garner converts to The Gospel of Christ and which are just like the world and its ways? I'm cool with that.

Ah, the Beatitudes. A very wise piece of scripture. Perhaps a trifle self-righteous, however, by presenting them as if they are are consistently practiced by one's self.

You seem to always miss the point of Christian ethics. One cannot justify and "affirm" their own sins. They must repent. So they certainly can't encourage and support the wanton sins of others'. They must repent as well.

Whether one chooses to repent of whatever it is they feel the need to repent of is up to the individual and not you. That said, if you would expect a homosexual to 'repent of their homosexuality' then the same would be expected of a heterosexual. Assuming that you are heterosexual, 99percent, have you repented for your heterosexuality?

Yup. Plank gone. Now for the LGBT (and Q and +) specks to be removed from my brothers and sisters eyes? THAT does appear to be my business "in The Church."

Here's the support for that from none other than our Lord:

Matthew 7
New International Version (NIV)

Judging Others

7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.


Luke 6:

Judging Others

37 “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. 38 Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.�

39 He also told them this parable: “Can the blind lead the blind? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 The student is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like their teacher.

41 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

A Tree and Its Fruit

43 “No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. 44 Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers. 45 A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of.

But before the quote above in Luke Jesus talks about loving your enemies. I can't imagine a higher love than to draw the hatred of sinners by keeping honest about the Gospel:

Love for Enemies

27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

This is where The Church should head in this war against it by forces arrayed, as enemies, within it and outside of it.

The following isn't a sermon or "sermonet' from me. It is called support for my Christian positions. It is simply reality to the issue now facing Christians worldwide:

The Narrow and Wide Gates

13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

True and False Prophets

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

True and False Disciples

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

The Wise and Foolish Builders

24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.�

28 When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, 29 because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.

[bluethread]

bluethread

Well, the OP is about love and how one reacts to the sexual activities of others. That said, at a minimum, I would think that the loving thing to do with regard to those who take part in sexual sadism, erotic strangulation and suicide pacts is to inform them of the dangers of those practices.

I believe that Jesus prescribed: Go, and sin no more.

That is good advise to one who acknowledges sin.

If they ignore my warnings, then the loving thing for my community, at a minimum, would be to inform my friends and family of those practices and avoid contact with those people as much as possible.

I hear Peter chiming in:

As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God. For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you . . .

1 Peter 4

That doesn't relieve me of the responsibility to inform them anyway. As I said, if they reject the advise all I can do is take actions to protect others.

Just walking by on the other side of the road, while people harm one another, even if it is consensual, is not what I call, loving my neighbor.

It seems it is to the world and its ways.

Yes and I am called to live according to Adonai's ways.

[99percentatheism]

bluethread

bluethread

Well, the OP is about love and how one reacts to the sexual activities of others. That said, at a minimum, I would think that the loving thing to do with regard to those who take part in sexual sadism, erotic strangulation and suicide pacts is to inform them of the dangers of those practices.

I believe that Jesus prescribed: Go, and sin no more.

That is good advise to one who acknowledges sin.

I don't speak for or about non or anti Christian positions or organizations. I just contend for the faith delivered only once to the saints as I should. There is a reason why my positions are hated. And it is not because my positions are simply accurate to scriptures. Which of course they are.

If they ignore my warnings, then the loving thing for my community, at a minimum, would be to inform my friends and family of those practices and avoid contact with those people as much as possible.

I hear Peter chiming in:

As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God. For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you . . .

1 Peter 4

That doesn't relieve me of the responsibility to inform them anyway. As I said, if they reject the advise all I can do is take actions to protect others.

Only once. Then Jesus instructs us to leave them the dust from our shoes and to the condition Paul recognized in Romans 1.

Just walking by on the other side of the road, while people harm one another, even if it is consensual, is not what I call, loving my neighbor.

It seems it is to the world and its ways.

Yes and I am called to live according to Adonai's ways.

Adonai, The Lord . . . Amen

Hosanna (Hoshana) in the highest.

Barechu et Adonai hamevorach.

[KCKID]

bluethread

Well, the OP is about love and how one reacts to the sexual activities of others. That said, at a minimum, I would think that the loving thing to do with regard to those who take part in sexual sadism, erotic strangulation and suicide pacts is to inform them of the dangers of those practices.

I believe that Jesus prescribed: Go, and sin no more.

That is good advise to one who acknowledges sin.

But hardly practical advice for 'sinful' mortals who are 'that way' by design ...?

If they ignore my warnings, then the loving thing for my community, at a minimum, would be to inform my friends and family of those practices and avoid contact with those people as much as possible.

I hear Peter chiming in:

As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God. For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you . . .

1 Peter 4

That doesn't relieve me of the responsibility to inform them anyway. As I said, if they reject the advise all I can do is take actions to protect others.

Are you saying here that you're required (by God) to protect others in society from gay people? Who are these gay people who you (and 99percent) feel are running amok in society and adversely affecting others?

Just walking by on the other side of the road, while people harm one another, even if it is consensual, is not what I call, loving my neighbor.

It seems it is to the world and its ways.

Yes and I am called to live according to Adonai's ways.

That's a pretty sweeping statement to make. How do you manage to live according to Adonai's ways and stay within the bounds of man's law?

[99percentatheism]

Danmark

I have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance right here on the desk next to my PC. It just says: SODOMITE (sod' -om-ite) See also SODOMITES

But wait a minute, what if one is born with a prostitution orientation? . . . sodomy . . . beliefs about sodomy and... homosexuality? You seem to always ignore that sexuality as in proper sexuality....

You talk more about sex, and 'sodomy' in particular, more than everyone one else on this forum combined. Have you examined why you are so interested in the subject?

It's just reality. Actuality really. When dealing with the LGBT (etc., etc., etc., ) community and its culture and worldview, that is just what is THEIR proclamations. I'd rather not have to ever have deal with them or this subject at all. I don't cruise gay bars, I am not a MSM or any other aspect of LGBT life and culture and worldview. I am not seeking to convert them in anyway. Their choices are clear and that is the way it is. Jesus taught how to handle this. Cast off the dust and move on. BUT when the rabble mob bangs on the doors of The Church and finds inroads to try to setup authority, well that needs to be contended against.

AND, just as Jude and Peter had to deal with actuality of their days; and the Church throughout its history . . . I have to deal with facts. The L the G and the B ALL deal with sexual behavior as the reason for the letters to exist. Who's kidding who if they say it isn't? And marriage? There is no such thing as same gender in Christian truth. Or else, please show its description in scripture BEFORE going after me with propaganda tactic after tactic. That gets boring.

There are so many issues today a Christian should be interested in tackling: poverty, education, equal pay for equal work with no regard to gender, abuse of the aged, violence in general, rescuing our youth, disease, illiteracy . . . .

Done. We are hip deep in all of those cultural issues. AND, gender in its proper and perfect definition is not a hate crime to us though.

And none of those subjects are people trying to silence us and sue us into complete submission. Poor children are not a threat to alter our doctrines and theology or else get sued.

But 99% of what you talk about is sex.

Oh really? The LGBT community defines itself by its members' sex acts. Or thoughts about sex acts. Who you kiddn' man? Er, I mean gender neutral person. Don't want to be heterosexist now do I? What do you think lesbianism represents? Tennis serves? And "Gay" is that about how a man mails out his bills? And Bi-Sexual . . . well that's as self-descriptive about sex acts as it gets.

By the way, from the rabble mob that threw the adulterous woman at the feet of Jesus. What kind of descriptions of behaviors do you think Jesus actuallu heard from them???

We Christians live in the real world. Beauty and depravity and all.

Have you asked yourself why this particular issue represents almost the only thing you talk about on this forum?

Practice for what I deal with in the real world. And it has paid off well for me. No one (lefty, progressive, atheist-humanist etc., etc., etc.,) has ever shaken me up on the radio even once. You do watch the news and read it and listen to it as well right? This is a MAJOR issues threatening my brothers and sisters in Christ worldwide. The LGBT community is not looking for a treaty or tolerance on homosexuality. It is demanding complete rule on the subject and behavior. EVERYWHERE. If i'm wrong on that please point out where? And I will point you to the HRC, Gay Pride Orgs in Europe, Central and South America and African countries etc., etc..

Contending for the faith is a full time event.

[Danmark]

Danmark

I have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance right here on the desk next to my PC. It just says: SODOMITE (sod' -om-ite) See also SODOMITES

But wait a minute, what if one is born with a prostitution orientation? . . . sodomy . . . beliefs about sodomy and... homosexuality? You seem to always ignore that sexuality as in proper sexuality....

You talk more about sex, and 'sodomy' in particular, more than everyone one else on this forum combined. Have you examined why you are so interested in the subject?

It's just reality. Actuality really. When dealing with the LGBT (etc., etc., etc., ) community and its culture and worldview, that is just what is THEIR proclamations. I'd rather not have to ever have deal with them or this subject at all....

Then why not stop? You're just about the only one here who 'deals with it' constantly by talking about it.

I've never heard any of my gay or lesbian friends or relatives talk about sex. Sex talk seems to be one of the dominant topics of conversation between heterosexual children, teens and young people. I don't understand why you feel so compelled to 'deal' with it if you don't like 'dealing with it.