Forum Replies Created
-
Tinkerbelle:
Your Youth Pastor would have been referring to the story/parable of Lazarus and the rich man. When the rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus to dip his finger in water and cool his tongue, Abraham answered and told him that people could not travel from either side to the other. Now, note two things:
1. This was referring to being able to move from the abode of the righteous dead and the abode of the unrighteous dead; it has nothing to do with anything connected to our earthly existence.
2. While they could not travel back and forth, they obviously COULD see and hear from one side to the other, so comunication was possible.Your warnings are valid; too many people think that all ‘spirits’ are benevolent, and that all ‘angels’ are God’s angels. We can open ‘doorways’ to the spirit realm, sometimes deliberately, and sometimes unwittingly, and subject ourselves to oppression and worse, regardless of our original intent.
Blessings,
heretocheeryouup said:
” So at some point you become unsaved.”Response:
I don’t want to hijack the thread, or to digress except to make this observation.It is interesting that you quoted a huge passage of scripture, then make an assertion like this that is nowhere found in the passage quoted, and is not supported by it.
Blessings,
Hey Joey:
I don’t know where you got the ‘anger’ from in my post—-perhaps I wasn’t communicating as clearly as I thought.I was merely making some personal observations about the man’s website, which I read through; and no, I’m under no illusion that it’s necessarily your views. I got the picture that you wanted to show the rationalizations that Episcopalians use.
As far as the ‘gross’ factor goes, the ‘gay movement’ has been very successful at ‘marketing’ themselves as ‘just like anyone else’. Most heterosexuals quite probably have no idea just what practices are common among homosexuals, and I do suspect that the ‘gross’ factor would grow if people were aware.
However, I don’t discriminate—I find some heterosexual practices ‘gross’ as well!! (LOL)
Quote:
“and I wish you luck in your battle against it.”Response:
Back up the bus, Joey. I’m no Don Quixote, tilting at the windmill of homosexuality. I post my opinion on many threads on this site and others, but I’m on no crusade; if fact, this one is getting rather boring already.The major crusade we all (those who name the Name of Christ) should be engaging in is ‘preaching’ the ‘glad tidings’, and bringing people to a knowledge of Jesus Christ as their Savior. When His life indwells us, a lot of the chaff just blows away.
God Bless you, brother,Hey Matt:
I’m sorry if I seemed to be coming down on you—that wasn’t my intent. (forgiven?????)I just know, from personal experience, how easy it is to formulate opinions without ever critically examining them both for logic, fact, as well as conformity with scripture; and I want to urge you to truly examine your position and your theories in the light of scripture especially.
There is a vast difference between mistranslation and misinterpretation; many times we misinterpret a verse or passage—that’s probably the root cause behind our plethora of denominations.
However, mistranslation? There are so many translations, especially in the last 100 years or so, that if your thesis were correct, surely someone would have gotten it right, wouldn’t you think?
We have copies of many of the books of the Bible that date back to 100 or more B.C., and the differences between them and the previously oldest copies from around 1100 A.D. are miniscule and don’t affect any essential doctrine, so I find it hard to believe that in this particular area, somehow, things got turned around 180 degrees.
There are excellent online sites where you can examine interlinear Bibles and see for yourself what the original word was and what word is used in the English translation–again, be like the Bereans were, examine the scripture for yourself to see if it’s true.
And lastly, don’t cling to an unfounded belief in the theory of ‘mistranslation’ just to avoid having to give up your favorite theory, okay?
Blessings,Pastorddk said:
“Mommy’s and Daddy’s produce babies.”response:
Actually, many, many ‘Mommies and daddies’ DO NOT produce babies, whether by choice or by the combination of circumstances and genetics.Other than that, your post was an example to us of not compromising the truth, yet still speaking compassionately.
God Bless you,
Pastorddk:
I don’t have a problem with that.I’d add a caveat that according to ‘experts’, only 7% of our communication is verbal, the other 93% is non-verbal; this includes facial expressions, tones, gestures, etc. We are all operating under a ‘disability’ by posting messages back and forth already. (anyone had disagreements with people via email or snailmail that could have been avoided by direct contact?)
It really behooves us, first as human beings, and secondly as ‘brothers and sisters’, to make every effort to clarify what we say and what we mean, and to refrain wherever possible from judging another’s thoughts, emotions, and motives.
Blessings,
Hi Joey:
Interesting website, and obviously just as one-sided and biased as they accuse organizations like Focus on the Family and many Christian churches of being.There is no apparent recognition that there are many words we use today to describe concepts ‘fleshed out’ doctrinally in the Bible, but not actually named by the ‘handle’ we have attached to them. The word ‘Trinity’ comes immediately to mind.
Also missing is any recognition of the fact that ‘interpretation’ is involved any time we look at scripture and try to extract the meaning from it. And the author of this website makes numerous unwarranted assumptions and draws conclusions not supported by the text, all to support his own agenda. (one can presume that, being a self-professed homosexual, bias on his part is inevitable)
He still touts the long discredited ‘Kinsey’ report on sexuality that claimed that homosexuals make up 10% of the population. Most studies in the past 25 years put it at somewhere between 1.5-5%. And, he goes much beyond this. He claims that the statistically revealed homosexual level barely represents 1% of their numbers. So, taking a median approximation of 3%, my math would indicate that he is claiming that homosexuals make up 300% of the population, a mathematical impossibility.
I could go on and on, but what’s the point? I found his arguments incredibly unconvincing. He makes sweeping generalizations and misrepresentations of Evangelical/fundamental Christians, and engages in ‘name-calling’ and vilifying on at least the same level as that which he decries in these groups.
IMHO, they’ll have to do a lot better than this; I can’t see this convincing many people who have a basic knowledge of the Word; granted, many people including Christians lack this same knowledge.
Blessings,heretocheeryouup said:
” I did not say that to be rude but just to clearify the wonderful observation you made.”Response:
I honestly can’t tell whether this is sarcasm or not, so I won’t address it.Quote:
” Incorrect if you kill and do not repent and ask for forgiveness than you have sinned and go to hell.”Given that an offence in ‘one point’ of the law is a de facto ‘breaking’ of all of the law, and given that Jesus made it clear that ‘breaking the law’ went far beyond the ‘letter’, then I am forced to assume that what you actually mean is that if we happen to die with ANY unconfessed ‘sin’ in our life, we go straight to hell.
Quote:
“Sorry that should be common knowledge.”Response:
Actually, Christians and theologians have disagreed on Soteriology (doctrines of salvation) for hundreds of years; either viewpoint is only ‘common knowledge’ if one’s experience and exposure has been limited to a singular viewpoint on the subject.As I said, though, the issue of the nature of our Salvation is not really the purpose of this thread, and it has been addressed in a number of threads ad nauseum, so I hereby bow out and let the thread continue.
Blessings,Good point, Richard.
Given the plethora of teachings and injunctions about relationships and marriage, etc (all clearly referring to heterosexual relationships), it is surprising that not only are homosexual relationships proscribed, but also that there are simply no affirmations of these alleged ‘righteous’ homosexual relationships.
Blessings,Pastorddk said:
“Psalm 105:15
Do not touch my anointed ones;
do my prophets no harm.”Response:
Did Paul then violate this when he contended with Peter over Peter’s actions/attitudes concerning the Judaizers’ approach to the Gentile Christians??In my view, this verse (and others like it) have been grossly misused in recent years by those who seek to stifle criticism and correction aimed at leaders of various ‘ministries’, so perhaps I am a little oversensitive to its use.
Besides, my commentary says that it refers in its larger sense to ‘all’ in whom the Spirit of God resides. We are all called to be Saints, annointed of God, and ‘set apart’ for His service.
As I said, this did not preclude Paul from chastising, correcting, and reproving various people in various NT churches, or even Peter himself.
What this verse refers back to is a verse in Genesis:
” Gen 26:11 And Abimelech charged all the people, saying, He that toucheth this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.”This carries with it a somewhat different connotation than remonstrating with someone in ‘leadership’ for their approach or their attitude, doesn’t it?
Context is everything!!
Blessings,
Hi Matt
You say that you’ve read all of the scripture that’s been posted and still cling to your theory?Well, that’s why I’m asking you to take the scripture that various people have posted and give us your exegetical analysis of them, since obviously you don’t accept the clear (to me) interpretation of them.
That’s why I’m asking you to SHOW us where it’s been mistranslated or misinterpreted, in your opinion.
Also, if your theory is correct, surely somewhere in the 66 books of the Bible would be found an affirmation of your oxymoron, a ‘righteous practicing homosexual’; we’d really like to see it, if it exists.
The Bible is full of descriptions of how God created the sexes, and how He wants us to relate to each other, and in what kinds of relationships. Surely, if your theory holds water, somewhere, God would have affirmed the specific kind of relationship that you envision???
Unlike some who post here, I have no problem seeing people with a heart for God, and wanting to serve Him, and loving Him, with a ‘walled off’ area of their lives that is ‘off limits’ to Him. For some, it is an apparently insurmountable addiction to alcohol, or illicit (or prescription) drugs, or seemingly overpowering ‘urges’, like sexual addictions, pornography, internet porn, fornication, or yes, even homosexual urges.
Many of us have our private area(s) of personal defeat in our lives, that we can’t seem to master (or allow God to transform), they just aren’t necessarily as obvious as this one, so it’s easier for us to hide them, and pretend that all is well with our ‘walk’ with God.
Of course, the ‘sins’ of arrogance, or pride, or ‘murmuring’, or gossipping, or gluttony, many of which various ‘christians’ seem to find insurmountable, are much more socially acceptable in our churches than the more obvious sins that we decry.
Where we run into problems, ultimately, is when we decide that rather than admit them, and continue to seek change and healing, it’s easier to rationalize them and justify them. All we need to do is ‘re-interpret’ a few verses, and Voila! Our problem disappears! Now, if we could just persuade all of our brothers and sisters to accept our ‘new’ interpretation, all would be well, wouldn’t it?
NOT!
What ultimately counts is if we are ‘justified’ in God’s eyes, not in our own, or each others’.So, I for one am waiting for your clear exegesis showing us where we’ve mistranslated or misinterpreted all of the scriptures that have been put forth. Let’s have it, okay?
Blessings,Suzieq:
Thank you for the kind words.
I’ve been ‘cursed’ with the ‘gift’ of seeing both sides of situations and stories; and it makes it much harder to be ‘in your face’ dogmatic.For many years, you could probably say that I ‘hated’ homosexuals. And, I was quite blatant and confrontational about it. My excuse (reason) is that I had worked from a young (and young looking) teenager on in places that had a preponderance of them. I’ve been propositioned, threatened(with sexual assault), had it attempted against me, etc. Very blatant, considering we’re going back close to 40 years; quite typical of activist behaviour today.
It took a lot of years for God to work on me, to show me, through my own failings that I was far from perfect, and, on my own merits would have never deserved mercy or grace.
I have long thought that we can’t do a thing about ‘growing older'(after all, it beats the alternative, lol), however, if we have to ‘grow old’, the least we can do is to strive to acquire knowledge and wisdom and compassion and love as well.How am I doing? Well, it depends on the day, and who you ask, but I believe that God is still ‘chipping’ away at the rough spots and corners; and it all has made and kept me painfully aware of my own total dependance on God’s mercy and grace, and Jesus’ atonement for me.
I try to bear in mind when someone online ‘grates’ on me that 93% of communication is nonverbal, and perhaps if I were talking to them in person, my perception of them might be quite different. (Hey, it’s my illusion, and I’m clinging to it,lol)
However, that remaining 7% that consists our posts, is all a non-christian sees when they visit this site. I still think that it behooves us to remember that—their brief visit to praize might be the only ‘glimpse’ of Jesus that they get in their whole life. It’s someone’s right to ‘reject Christ’ and His claim on their life; I just don’t want their rejection to be because of my attitudes, words, or lack of compassion and love, because then it might be on my head.
Blessings,
