As a Christian what are your thoughts?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

Does our uneasiness with homosexuality really come from God? God hates the sin for sure, but isn't it a matter of scale? The same text that puts homo's in hell has liars flying in the aisle seat. Nobody is all that outraged about living in a world chock full of liars even though God hates their sin as much as fags. Of course it's rare that you see a liar pride parade, so maybe it's more about being out and honest? So is it really just about degrees of socially acceptable denial?

Chris

I don't think the "sin" is greater or lessor than any other sin Chris. But the Attitude is what bothers God.

Most people tuck head and hold out hands to God for their indisgretions...

The Homosexual side of our house (a powerful group of) flaunts it and tells God to P**s off. Then goes on to attempt to force society to accept them and their ways, or there is something wrong with the majority of society?

I think here is a perfect example of "not in my face". Only it is God saying that, yet the advocates for homosexuality could care less what God is saying, or for that matter, what the majority of society is saying.

And Metropolis type cities, are not the majority Chris. Villages, Towns and Farm communities still hold the majority of US citizens...

Cities do not keep a nation alive...farmers do...

[madeinrussia89]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

I don't think it is the "body" one lusts after, that God hates, but rather the "lust" after the forbidden that He hates. To be attracted to the opposite sex is natural. To be attracted to the same sex is not natural (it makes no sense at all).

We all know God doesn't like lust regardless of who it is directed to.

But, I'm not going to condemn someone, or their thoughts, only God knows what they are really thinking anyway.

What really gets people is that alternative physical sex thing, forced upon society, and "oh, by the way...your children will be taught it too, whether you like it or not...and you will acknowledge us and you will accept us and you will put up with us and you will pay for us, and you will like it, because we deserve it and God has nothing to do with society because God does not exist, and that is what we are going to instill in your children, because we know better than you, and there is nothing you can do about it because we are the new echelons, and you are quaint and outdated and ready for extinction..."

Yeah? Not on my watch...so help me God.

I couldn't agree more, except that it is on your watch, and that is the reality children grow up with across the world.

[madeinrussia89]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

The same text that puts homo's in hell has liars flying in the aisle seat.

It's all about confessing your sins to God and repenting for them. There are former murderers in Heaven, all because of repentance.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by madeinrussia89

We all know God doesn't like lust regardless of who it is directed to.

Horses ass. God designed lust and desire into man. The whole point in this issue is for man to desire after his wife and his wife to desire after her husband. That is also called Lust. It is good in the eyes of God, because it means boy will not go after anyone else but his girl, and vise versa.

God loves man desiring after his mate. It makes God's plan work that much easier. And it gives Him pleasure to see that his creation is righteously giving and receiving pleasure to each other. The point is that the "mates" be bonded, and opposite in sex...because there is a second part to the pleasure...the creation of new life. And a third part...in that love raise the new ones to become adults and start the dance again...

That is the reality of life and the "Desire" of God.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by madeinrussia89

We all know God doesn't like lust regardless of who it is directed to.

But, I'm not going to condemn someone, or their thoughts, only God knows what they are really thinking anyway.



I couldn't agree more, except that it is on your watch, and that is the reality children grow up with across the world.

My "two children", are now young husbands themselves. They also chose to serve their country by putting on the uniform, and they have infants of their own. What shocked me, was the day I walked into their homes, and we sat down for supper...

They raise their hands, and bow their heads, and invite God to be present, before each meal; such a simple but profound testament to the past and hope for the future...I think, I started something good...the rest of you better get crackin'... (lol)

v/r

Q

[greymare]

me thinks, Im lagging behind. LOL

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

I don't think the "sin" is greater or lessor than any other sin Chris. But the Attitude is what bothers God.

Most people tuck head and hold out hands to God for their indisgretions...

The Homosexual side of our house (a powerful group of) flaunts it and tells God to P**s off. Then goes on to attempt to force society to accept them and their ways, or there is something wrong with the majority of society?

I think here is a perfect example of "not in my face". Only it is God saying that, yet the advocates for homosexuality could care less what God is saying, or for that matter, what the majority of society is saying.

And Metropolis type cities, are not the majority Chris. Villages, Towns and Farm communities still hold the majority of US citizens...

But Josh, where is it implied that the penitence of recidivist sinners mitigates God's just anger? Liars don't admit they lie, but if caught they might hedge. Out Homosexuals revel in their sin. But in the final analysis at the Judgment, which is worse: continuing to sin and expressing remorse only when caught, or sinning with abandon and accepting the guilt?

Maybe we should give equal time. Perhaps, just to catch up, we should talk about liars for a bazillion turns, then all the other deadly sins, and then come back to fags. I mean, the only reason we focus on them is their audacious honesty.

Chris

[bob x]

Caring about someone, the act of caring about someone's welfare - whether they live or die, is never wrong.

When I care for someone, I don't just want to keep him alive, I want to do whatever makes him happy, rather than "I love you, but not enough to do that".

And it's just fantastic how you assume every christian wants to stop your insurance coverage from going to your partner or vice versa

Not "every" Christian, just the majority.

like we're all financial vampires trying to suck the house out from under you

Not every Christian wants to make sure I can be evicted from my house, or fired from my job, just for being who I am-- but of course the legislative effort to prevent such discrimination is going to fail again, because of the Christians (it is always the Christians, never anybody else, who fights to do me injury) . There was a legislative effort to provide national assistance to local governments faced with gay-bashing murders (Laramie, Wyoming was almost wiped out financially by the Shepard case), but the good Christians blocked it, spreading hysterical rumors among the flock that "it is going to become a federal crime to read from the Bible!" (I am not making this up). In Michigan, school administrations are not allowed to intervene in bullying cases if the bullying takes the form of queer-bashing, because that is protected "religious speech"; there is a legislative effort to change that, but of course the Christians are going to block it.

that is certainly a misery for me.
And that's good for you.

You wonder why I find Christians evil??

Celibacy is no bad thing.

For some people, sure. I am not one of them. God does not make us all alike.

Christians generally aren't going to be happy for someone who is delighted in the false joy of sinning.

There is nothing false in the joy, and there is nothing sinful in loving.

Jesus is the Logos made flesh, and the Bible is very much the word of God and certainly not "dead".

Jesus was often critical of the Old Testament laws, acknowledging that they were written for primitive tribes when people knew no better, for example saying bluntly of the law on unilateral divorce "Out of hard-heartedness that was written." Someone like you who does not consider right and wrong to have anything to do with the difference between loving other people and doing them harm, but only to whether it violates the letter (the "dead" letter, as Paul called it) has nothing to do with Jesus, but rather has more in common with his crucifiers.

This is a really bad analogy, so take no offense because I am not connecting homosexual actions with it, but I'm going to use it to make a point.
If we understand why a pedophile rapes a child...

GODDAMN YOU TO THE DEEPEST PIT OF HELL, of course I take offense to such a comparison, but I am not surprised at such foulness from a Christian. It illustrates, more clearly than anything I could say, that you really have no comprehension of what makes pedophilia, or anything else, "wrong".

[bob x]

The Homosexual side of our house (a powerful group of) flaunts it and tells God to P**s off.

I have no quarrel with how God made me. It is you who are telling my Creator to piss off. I am telling certain humans, who has the effrontery to claim to speak for God, that they have nothing whatsoever to do with God.

Then goes on to attempt to force society to accept them and their ways...

Imagine that. We have the nerve to ask to be treated as if we were people.

Only it is God saying that, yet the advocates for homosexuality could care less what God is saying,

It is PRIMITIVE MIDDLE EASTERNERS who said it: the same book says that God considers shellfish-eaters an "abomination", and people who wear clothing with mixed fabrics, and people who cook on Saturdays (there is a death penalty inflicted in Numbers for attempted Saturday cooking-- he'd only gotten as far as gathering a little firewood, don't know what they would have done if he'd gotten it lit). But the only primitive part of the text that you will latch on to and continue to insist upon is the one that gives you an excuse for despising and abusing people for not being like yourself.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

But Josh, where is it implied that the penitence of recidivist sinners mitigates God's just anger? Liars don't admit they lie, but if caught they might hedge. Out Homosexuals revel in their sin. But in the final analysis at the Judgment, which is worse: continuing to sin and expressing remorse only when caught, or sinning with abandon and accepting the guilt?

Maybe we should give equal time. Perhaps, just to catch up, we should talk about liars for a bazillion turns, then all the other deadly sins, and then come back to fags. I mean, the only reason we focus on them is their audacious honesty.

Chris

You had me Chris... until you stated our focus was on their "honesty"...

[madeinrussia89]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Horses ass. God designed lust and desire into man. The whole point in this issue is for man to desire after his wife and his wife to desire after her husband. That is also called Lust. It is good in the eyes of God, because it means boy will not go after anyone else but his girl, and vise versa.

God loves man desiring after his mate. It makes God's plan work that much easier. And it gives Him pleasure to see that his creation is righteously giving and receiving pleasure to each other. The point is that the "mates" be bonded, and opposite in sex...because there is a second part to the pleasure...the creation of new life. And a third part...in that love raise the new ones to become adults and start the dance again...

That is the reality of life and the "Desire" of God.

Desiring your wife or husband is something God has given you, that is not lust and it is incorrect to call it thus. Since sexuality is meant to flow between spouses, you are not holding a excessive desire for something God hasn't given you and to call it lust would be calling sexuality within the bounds of marriage to be a sin and that is ridiculous.

[madeinrussia89]

Originally Posted by bob x

When I care for someone, I don't just want to keep him alive, I want to do whatever makes him happy, rather than "I love you, but not enough to do that".

I know you don't just want to keep him alive, but what makes someone happy isn't necessarily the best thing for them. But loving (in a non-sexual context) is never wrong. Love thy neighbor as thyself.

Not "every" Christian, just the majority.

If you mean Republican Evangelicals, sure, but there are a lot of Christians that don't fit into that mold. I didn't vote against insurance issues between homosexual couples or against civil unions, or for you to be kicked out of your house, or legally harassed at your work place. There are billions of Christians out there and we can't all be represented by a single voting block.

Not every Christian wants to make sure I can be evicted from my house, or fired from my job, just for being who I am-- but of course the legislative effort to prevent such discrimination is going to fail again, because of the Christians (it is always the Christians, never anybody else, who fights to do me injury) . There was a legislative effort to provide national assistance to local governments faced with gay-bashing murders (Laramie, Wyoming was almost wiped out financially by the Shepard case), but the good Christians blocked it, spreading hysterical rumors among the flock that "it is going to become a federal crime to read from the Bible!" (I am not making this up). In Michigan, school administrations are not allowed to intervene in bullying cases if the bullying takes the form of queer-bashing, because that is protected "religious speech"; there is a legislative effort to change that, but of course the Christians are going to block it.

Always Christians, huh? Never Muslims? When in doubt, blame the Christians? The Republican voting block doesn't represent Christians, just like the Pope doesn't. In fact, Catholics have historically voted liberal, but we never think of that. Not all of us are hardcore Republicans.

All I can say is that it isn't Christian to support murder, or to sit there and harass someone for anything. Stating your religious opinion is a right, but harassment isn't.

Someone like you who does not consider right and wrong to have anything to do with the difference between loving other people and doing them harm.

It has everything to do with right and wrong. Did I ever say doing someone harm was the right thing to do? Of course not, and I would never advocate it.

but only to whether it violates the letter (the "dead" letter, as Paul called it) has nothing to do with Jesus, but rather has more in common with his crucifiers.

Except that that " dead letter " is the Logos and Jesus is the Logos made flesh. Hardly does following the Word make me Christ's crucifier.

GODDAMN YOU TO THE DEEPEST PIT OF HELL, of course I take offense to such a comparison, but I am not surprised at such foulness from a Christian. It illustrates, more clearly than anything I could say, that you really have no comprehension of what makes pedophilia, or anything else, "wrong".

Sorry you feel that way, but it really wasn't a comparison between the sin of homosexual activity and the sin of child-raping, they really aren't comparable sins, which I was trying to say before I even made the analogy in the first place. Of course they are nowhere near the same, not in the slightest, the later being worse on so many incomprehensible levels. The only reason I used it because it was a stronger (much) image and more defined, to illustrate the point.

There is a gray area in homosexuality between the thought and the action depending on what Christian denomination someone is, while there is NO gray area in the analogy's sin, it is just wrong in thought, action, whatever, just all the way around, so it is easier to contemplate.

I have no comprehension of what makes pedophilia wrong? Do you not consider scarring a child for life wrong or is there some other mysterious
reason you see and I don't?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by madeinrussia89

Desiring your wife or husband is something God has given you, that is not lust and it is incorrect to call it thus. Since sexuality is meant to flow between spouses, you are not holding a excessive desire for something God hasn't given you and to call it lust would be calling sexuality within the bounds of marriage to be a sin and that is ridiculous.

The emotion is never the sin, the thought behind it and the intent to act on it, is the sin. Lust is a different word for desire, but they describe the same emotion. We can't help how we may feel, but we can determine whether or not to act on that feeling. There is absolutely nothing ridiculous about that.

[Francis king]

what I am finding most laughable is how a debate about preachers becomes a debate about the merits of homosexuality... it always comes bk to the same thing, doesn't it? why? what use is this? why?

BobX, by the looks of things, ur as bad as the christian bigots... u have a dislike of christians, who u assume to be ur enemy, en masse, yet when christians take the same attitude to u, u feel all affonted! Ha... what do they call it? Double standards? Great, I'll have a multi-pack, please...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Francis king

what I am finding most laughable is how a debate about preachers becomes a debate about the merits of homosexuality... it always comes bk to the same thing, doesn't it? why? what use is this? why?

BobX, by the looks of things, ur as bad as the christian bigots... u have a dislike of christians, who u assume to be ur enemy, en masse, yet when christians take the same attitude to u, u feel all affonted! Ha... what do they call it? Double standards? Great, I'll have a multi-pack, please...

Some might call it "having an axe to grind" and trying to find the right "grind stone" to do it with...

Oh, bigotry and Christianity are diametrically opposed in philosophy. You can have bigots who call themselves Christians, but you can't have a true Christian be a bigot.