backhoeboogie
Well-known member
badaxemoo said:Good to hear one of the morons check in.
badaxemoo said:Good to hear one of the morons check in.
Soapweed said:This is from www.gotquestions.org. Their motto is, "the Bible has the answers, we'll find them for you."
Question: "Is it possible to be a gay Christian?"
Answer: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). There is a tendency to declare homosexuality as the worst of all sins. While it is undeniable, biblically speaking, that homosexuality is immoral and unnatural (Romans 1:26-27), in no sense does the Bible describe homosexuality as an unforgivable sin. Nor does the Bible teach that homosexuality is a sin Christians will never struggle against.
Perhaps that is the key phrase in the question of whether it is possible to be a gay Christian: “struggle against.” It is possible for a Christian to struggle with homosexual temptations. Many homosexuals who become Christians have ongoing struggles with homosexual feelings and desires. Some strongly heterosexual men and women have experienced a “spark” of homosexual interest at some point in their lives. Whether or not these desires and temptations exist does not determine whether a person is a Christian. The Bible is clear that no Christian is sinless (1 John 1:8,10). While the specific sin / temptation varies from one Christian to another, all Christians have struggles with sin, and all Christians sometimes fail in those struggles (1 Corinthians 10:13).
What differentiates a Christian’s life from a non-Christian’s life is the struggle against sin. The Christian life is a progressive journey of overcoming the “acts of the flesh” (Galatians 5:19-21) and allowing God’s Spirit to produce the “fruit of the Spirit” (Galatians 5:22-23). Yes, Christians sin, sometimes horribly. Sadly, sometimes Christians are indistinguishable from non-Christians. However, a true Christian will always repent, will always eventually return to God, and will always resume the struggle against sin. But the Bible gives no support for the idea that a person who perpetually and unrepentantly engages in sin can indeed be a Christian. Notice 1 Corinthians 6:11, "And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."
First Corinthians 6:9-10 lists sins that, if indulged in continuously, identify a person as not being redeemed—not being a Christian. Often, homosexuality is singled out from this list. If a person struggles with homosexual temptations, that person is presumed to be unsaved. If a person actually engages in homosexual acts, that person is definitely thought to be unsaved. However, the same assumptions are not made, at least not with the same emphasis, regarding other sins in the list: fornication (pre-marital sex), idolatry, adultery, thievery, covetousness, alcoholism, slander, and deceit. It is inconsistent, for example, to declare those guilty of pre-marital sex as “disobedient Christians,” while declaring homosexuals definitively non-Christians.
Is it possible to be a gay Christian? If the phrase “gay Christian” refers to a person who struggles against homosexual desires and temptations – yes, a “gay Christian” is possible. However, the description “gay Christian” is not accurate for such a person, since he/she does not desire to be gay, and is struggling against the temptations. Such a person is not a “gay Christian,” but rather is simply a struggling Christian, just as there are Christians who struggle with fornication, lying, and stealing. If the phrase “gay Christian” refers to a person who actively, perpetually, and unrepentantly lives a homosexual lifestyle – no, it is not possible for such a person to truly be a Christian.
Recommended Resource: Coming out of Homosexuality by Bob Davies and 101 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality by Mike Haley.
Sandhusker said:Big Muddy rancher said:reader (the Second) said:Sandy misses us nonothing.
We have a basic disagreement about gay people. And while I'll argue politics, there is no purpose in our arguing people's religious views. Those are personal.
I've said why I support gay people's rights to have love in their life. As do many of you, I have gay friends and other than who they are attracted to sexually, they are like you and me.
Sexual desires, like religion, is a personal matter and unlike religion, it is something we are born with or are shaped very early in our childhood... VERY early. I do not condemn good people who live good lives for how they are.
Sexual desires are a personal matter?What defines perverse in your book?
Polygamy was mentioned earlier in this thread. People in the USA were persecuted for this just as bad as gay people have been. Why is this wrong?
Sexual desires are more than just a personal matter when demands are made to change laws because of said desires.
The big question to the libs is concerning their hypocritical stance regarding gays and bigamists and practitioners of incest. Even they don't believe their own liberal blather.
Soapweed said:TexasBred said:badaxemoo said:The funny thing about so many homophobes is that they are absolutely fascinated with gay and lesbian sex acts. Look at your descriptions. You must spend a lot of time thinking about gay sex.
You'll notice that when those of us who support gay rights talk about the issue we address the people. When I think of gay or lesbian neighbors or friends, I don't picture what they are up to in the privacy of their bedrooms. I picture my gay and lesbian neighbors having sex with each other as often as I do my straight neighbors, which is never.
I think about them raising their kids, buying their groceries, working their jobs, and being members of the community. In this part of the country, anyway, that is about all their is to the so-called "gay lifestyle".
Sandhusker, in another posting, once told me to "find an asparagus patch and do some deep knee bends".
Perhaps you two need to get together and to write some more homo-erotic literature. It might help you deal with those "funny" feelings that sometimes seem to confuse you both. I'm sure backhoeboogie would offer to be the scribe as you two wax poetic.
Bad..sound to me like you think by ignoring or pretending no there is no sexual activity it makes everything fine and dandy. Call it what you want, but I figure an ass has one use and the sign would read "exit only".
When I gave the "birds and bees" talk to my boys, I used an electric extension cord for an example. It is quite easy to see that there is a male end and a female end. They fit together one way and one way only. Anything different is a deviation from how the maker designed the cord to function. People and animals are "wired" in the same logical way, by their Supreme Maker.
CattleArmy said:Soapweed said:TexasBred said:Bad..sound to me like you think by ignoring or pretending no there is no sexual activity it makes everything fine and dandy. Call it what you want, but I figure an ass has one use and the sign would read "exit only".
When I gave the "birds and bees" talk to my boys, I used an electric extension cord for an example. It is quite easy to see that there is a male end and a female end. They fit together one way and one way only. Anything different is a deviation from how the maker designed the cord to function. People and animals are "wired" in the same logical way, by their Supreme Maker.
This sex talk brought to you from WTF Nebraska.
CattleArmy said:I call BS.
What makes homosexuality a bigger sin then many of us or our neighbors take part in? Does God simply turn away from us when we give in to temtations? A sin is a sin so many of you seem to want to classify one bigger then others. Sin is sin fellas and I'm pretty sure everyone has some in their backyard or on their porch.
(CNN) -- A Saudi judge has refused for a second time to annul a marriage between an 8-year-old girl and a 47-year-old man, a relative of the girl told CNN.
The relative said the judge, Sheikh Habib Al-Habib, "stuck by his earlier verdict and insisted that the girl could petition the court for a divorce once she reached puberty." The family member, who requested anonymity, added that the mother will continue to pursue a divorce for her daughter.
aplusmnt said:CattleArmy said:I call BS.
What makes homosexuality a bigger sin then many of us or our neighbors take part in? Does God simply turn away from us when we give in to temtations? A sin is a sin so many of you seem to want to classify one bigger then others. Sin is sin fellas and I'm pretty sure everyone has some in their backyard or on their porch.
Difference is the continuation of the sin, sure we all sin and God forgives us for them IFFFFF we acknowledge we did wrong and ask forgiveness for it!
I do not think being gay is a slip of the tongue or a slip of anger. It is a direct and continuous participation in a sin with no regard for changing or repenting for it. And that is why it is different from most peoples day to day sin!
hypocritexposer said:I have a question?
So here's my question? (okay a couple questions)
Is marrying who ever you want, a religious or legal issue?
Are we as a "community", going to speak out about Pedophilia when it comes to North America, as a religious right?
Sandhusker said:Good grief Sandhusker you need to check into reality. You can not even compare incest to gays and bigamists.
Why not? Does't the bedrock gay arguement about people being in love having the right to marry apply to them as well?
Incest is the same for heterosexuals and homosexuals it is illegal. Love doesn't come into play in this equation. We will end up with mutations and major birth defects in offspring if this is ever allowed. Incest is sexual acts that are illegal. Neither heterosexual or homosexual sex with consenting adults not related to each other is illegal.Homosexual or heterosexuals involved in incest is not legal and is just sick and wrong.
In most places gay marriage is illegal. I don't understand how you can say incest is sick and wrong while condemning those that say homosexuality is sick and wrong. Where are you drawing the line?
Sandhusker with homosexuals they cannot procreate. Incest can and that leads to another whole set of problems. It also reminds me of your gun laws. Even if you take the right to marry away from homosexuals it isn't going to stop the act that some of you seem to hate so.
Marriage is commitment between two individuals not 17.
Again, why don't you apply your standard evenly instead of being hypcocritical? Why don't 3 people in love have the same rights as two homos in love? How can you ratinalize erasing the sex line, but not the number line?
Bigamitry isn't that huge of issue to me. I don't know of any man in the world that I would want bad enough to share. I think that the women involved in these situations often driven by religious reasons are brainwashed into believing what is true and divine. If they are their on their own account then so be it. If they are held against their will or brainwashed that is a whole different story. Often it's the latter reason.Homosexuals that are seeking the right to marry are in committed legal aged relationships between two people of the same sex. They simply want what so many heterosexuals that are married have, the right of survirorship, the right to make choices when their spouse is unable to, the right to health benefits and so on.
That applies equally to incestual relationships and bigamists! See what happens when you start down that slope? Here you are giving these reasons why homos should be alllowed to marry, all the while wagging your finger at those who don't believe they should have that right, but then you turn around and waggle your finger at those who present the VERY SAME dang arguements you used on gays for incest and bigamy! How do you rationalize the hypocricy?
Pedophilia no matter wether a legal or church issue is wrong and should not be tolerated. Children should be safe. As adults it's our job to protect them and their innocence.
CattleArmy said:aplusmnt said:CattleArmy said:I call BS.
What makes homosexuality a bigger sin then many of us or our neighbors take part in? Does God simply turn away from us when we give in to temtations? A sin is a sin so many of you seem to want to classify one bigger then others. Sin is sin fellas and I'm pretty sure everyone has some in their backyard or on their porch.
Difference is the continuation of the sin, sure we all sin and God forgives us for them IFFFFF we acknowledge we did wrong and ask forgiveness for it!
I do not think being gay is a slip of the tongue or a slip of anger. It is a direct and continuous participation in a sin with no regard for changing or repenting for it. And that is why it is different from most peoples day to day sin!
Honestly Aplus do you think that gays chose to be involved in a lifestyle that will lead them to be hated by so many in society just because of who they love/sleep with? :???: Why in the world would anyone choose that? Being homosexual and attracted to the same sex is as born with as being heterosexual. The biggest difference being that people don't hate heterosexuals for who they sleep with.
Aplus as soon as you can change being attracted to women then come back and make your suggestion that homosexuals should change who they are attracted to. When I asked one of my gay friends to explain to me how he knew he was gay he said he shudders at the thought of a woman touching him in a sexual way much the same way I do. Made sense to me.
aplusmnt said:CattleArmy said:aplusmnt said:Difference is the continuation of the sin, sure we all sin and God forgives us for them IFFFFF we acknowledge we did wrong and ask forgiveness for it!
I do not think being gay is a slip of the tongue or a slip of anger. It is a direct and continuous participation in a sin with no regard for changing or repenting for it. And that is why it is different from most peoples day to day sin!
Honestly Aplus do you think that gays chose to be involved in a lifestyle that will lead them to be hated by so many in society just because of who they love/sleep with? :???: Why in the world would anyone choose that? Being homosexual and attracted to the same sex is as born with as being heterosexual. The biggest difference being that people don't hate heterosexuals for who they sleep with.
Aplus as soon as you can change being attracted to women then come back and make your suggestion that homosexuals should change who they are attracted to. When I asked one of my gay friends to explain to me how he knew he was gay he said he shudders at the thought of a woman touching him in a sexual way much the same way I do. Made sense to me.
Gay people change who they are attracted to all the time! Who was that woman that left Ellen Degeneres to be with a man? I thought she was born that way??????????????
What about people that are attracted to little children? Were they born that way? Many psychologist believe they were. Does it then make it ok for grown ups to have sex with little children? If they were not born that way then how do you explain their attraction? And whatever caused them to be pedophiles could it be the same for gays?
But the main point of my post is not to debate Homosexuals with you once again, it is to correct you on you trying to lump all sins into the same mold. There are different sinful situations and God judges us accordingly! Willfully practicing a sin with no remorse is different than committing a sin and trying to never do it again and repenting for it! Big difference!!!!!
Aplus there you go telling everyone what your take on the bible is..No one gives a crap about your speeches anymore....?
hypocritexposer said:Aplus there you go telling everyone what your take on the bible is..No one gives a crap about your speeches anymore....?
Way to go NoNothing, your Conservative side is showing!
Your expressing your beliefs, as many times as you like!
Thank you,as I am also showing my liberal side too as I am taking advantage of having free speech....Something those pesky Conservatives have tried but yet to take away ..
CattleArmy said:Sandhusker said:Good grief Sandhusker you need to check into reality. You can not even compare incest to gays and bigamists.
Why not? Does't the bedrock gay arguement about people being in love having the right to marry apply to them as well?
Incest is the same for heterosexuals and homosexuals it is illegal. Love doesn't come into play in this equation. We will end up with mutations and major birth defects in offspring if this is ever allowed. Incest is sexual acts that are illegal. Neither heterosexual or homosexual sex with consenting adults not related to each other is illegal.Homosexual or heterosexuals involved in incest is not legal and is just sick and wrong.
In most places gay marriage is illegal. I don't understand how you can say incest is sick and wrong while condemning those that say homosexuality is sick and wrong. Where are you drawing the line?
Sandhusker with homosexuals they cannot procreate. Incest can and that leads to another whole set of problems. It also reminds me of your gun laws. Even if you take the right to marry away from homosexuals it isn't going to stop the act that some of you seem to hate so.
Marriage is commitment between two individuals not 17.
Again, why don't you apply your standard evenly instead of being hypcocritical? Why don't 3 people in love have the same rights as two homos in love? How can you ratinalize erasing the sex line, but not the number line?
Bigamitry isn't that huge of issue to me. I don't know of any man in the world that I would want bad enough to share. I think that the women involved in these situations often driven by religious reasons are brainwashed into believing what is true and divine. If they are their on their own account then so be it. If they are held against their will or brainwashed that is a whole different story. Often it's the latter reason.Homosexuals that are seeking the right to marry are in committed legal aged relationships between two people of the same sex. They simply want what so many heterosexuals that are married have, the right of survirorship, the right to make choices when their spouse is unable to, the right to health benefits and so on.
That applies equally to incestual relationships and bigamists! See what happens when you start down that slope? Here you are giving these reasons why homos should be alllowed to marry, all the while wagging your finger at those who don't believe they should have that right, but then you turn around and waggle your finger at those who present the VERY SAME dang arguements you used on gays for incest and bigamy! How do you rationalize the hypocricy?
No I don't see what happens when you go down the slope. It's called leveling the playing field. Leave it at legal couples and look at just two individuals. Then you see the heterosexual couple that can marry and enjoy the benefits and you see homosexual couples that cannot make legal commitments. Sandhusker it's so far from a sex issue. Not letting homosexuals marry isn't going to make them stop having sex.
Sandhusker said:CattleArmy said:Sandhusker said:Good grief Sandhusker you need to check into reality. You can not even compare incest to gays and bigamists.
Why not? Does't the bedrock gay arguement about people being in love having the right to marry apply to them as well?
Incest is the same for heterosexuals and homosexuals it is illegal. Love doesn't come into play in this equation. We will end up with mutations and major birth defects in offspring if this is ever allowed. Incest is sexual acts that are illegal. Neither heterosexual or homosexual sex with consenting adults not related to each other is illegal.Homosexual or heterosexuals involved in incest is not legal and is just sick and wrong.
In most places gay marriage is illegal. I don't understand how you can say incest is sick and wrong while condemning those that say homosexuality is sick and wrong. Where are you drawing the line?
Sandhusker with homosexuals they cannot procreate. Incest can and that leads to another whole set of problems. It also reminds me of your gun laws. Even if you take the right to marry away from homosexuals it isn't going to stop the act that some of you seem to hate so.
Marriage is commitment between two individuals not 17.
Again, why don't you apply your standard evenly instead of being hypcocritical? Why don't 3 people in love have the same rights as two homos in love? How can you ratinalize erasing the sex line, but not the number line?
Bigamitry isn't that huge of issue to me. I don't know of any man in the world that I would want bad enough to share. I think that the women involved in these situations often driven by religious reasons are brainwashed into believing what is true and divine. If they are their on their own account then so be it. If they are held against their will or brainwashed that is a whole different story. Often it's the latter reason.Homosexuals that are seeking the right to marry are in committed legal aged relationships between two people of the same sex. They simply want what so many heterosexuals that are married have, the right of survirorship, the right to make choices when their spouse is unable to, the right to health benefits and so on.
That applies equally to incestual relationships and bigamists! See what happens when you start down that slope? Here you are giving these reasons why homos should be alllowed to marry, all the while wagging your finger at those who don't believe they should have that right, but then you turn around and waggle your finger at those who present the VERY SAME dang arguements you used on gays for incest and bigamy! How do you rationalize the hypocricy?
No I don't see what happens when you go down the slope. It's called leveling the playing field. Leave it at legal couples and look at just two individuals. Then you see the heterosexual couple that can marry and enjoy the benefits and you see homosexual couples that cannot make legal commitments. Sandhusker it's so far from a sex issue. Not letting homosexuals marry isn't going to make them stop having sex.
Why can't two adults who claim to be in love get married when one happens to be the other's father/mother/uncle, etc.... Don't they have the same rights as two homosexuals? Why can't they enjoy the same legal benefits marriage offers everybody else?
The act of sex of two related individuals called incest is illegal. Sex with a man and a woman is legal and sex with two of the same sex is legal. It's when you bring blood into it that it gets illegal. There are deeper lines drawn already for those that are involved in incestual relationships.
Why can't three consenting adults enjoy the same benefits that marriage would offer in a legal commitment?
mar⋅riage
–noun 1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.
2. the state, condition, or relationship of being married; wedlock: a happy marriage.
3. the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of a man and woman to live as husband and wife, including the accompanying social festivities: to officiate at a marriage.
4. a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage; homosexual marriage.
Sandhusker marriage is reserved for the commitment between two people not a whole herd.
I'm encouraged that you are drawing a line somewhere, but you've offered no explaination other than a personal perference why gays should be given marriage, but not bigamists or incestual couples. How can you say "These people are adults in love and thus deserve the right to be married", but then look at other adults in love and say "NO"?