Homophiles 'praying'...

[MissileMan]

They're saying they don't condone passing Sin off as acceptable, it's really not all that hard to grasp.

Actually, it sounds more like they don't condone someone else's sin passed off as acceptable. Their own, at the time they are committing it intentionally, is okie dokie!

 

[Phaedrus]

They recognize it as Sin, and thus it is lessened by repentance.

 

[dmp]

Actually, it sounds more like they don't condone someone else's sin passed off as acceptable. Their own, at the time they are committing it intentionally, is okie dokie!

You are much smarter than that - those kinds of 'conclusions' won't get you anywhere...are you trying to fool us?

I mean - really? Is that a serious statement?

 

[Phaedrus]

There are a few erroneous presuppositions with your post:

I don't pretend to be an expert on the Bible, I state what I believe to be true. If I am wrong, please correct me as you did. I am not trying to say what is a Sin and what isn't or who is right and who is wrong. However, you do have a faith in common, whether you believe they are true to it or not.

I am not trying to justify their actions, simply stating I do not believe them to be as fallen as you imply. There is room for redemption, and if they do not reach for it, it's alright. They believed in God, they just didn't make the final effort.

Respect is due to all who are given choice. For you I believe there is a right and a wrong, but I don't think things can be put so simply. Certain things are tragic, but that doesn't make them wrong IMHO. Nor does following the Bible make you right, if you do it in bad faith.

I take stock in intention, it does not save you, but it will garner my respect.

 

[dmp]

Phaedrus - I really enjoy your replies. Welcome to the board.

 

[Phaedrus]

Thanks, it's nice to be here.

 

[MissileMan]

You are much smarter than that - those kinds of 'conclusions' won't get you anywhere...are you trying to fool us?

I mean - really? Is that a serious statement?

Diversionary tactics? Say it ain't so!

Let's see your answers to the questions in #38 and #41.

 

[dmp]

So exactly how is your intentional sin any different than a homosexuals?

I don't ask The Church to ALLOW for my sin. I didn't say I sin INTENTIALLY - I wrote "I know when I'm sinning or have sinned." The part you wont read, because you're obtuse follows:

When I sin, I repent.

So in your opinion, it isn't hypocritical for someone to call themselves a Christian after admitting intentionally sinning, but then claim that homosexuals can't be Christians because they intentionally sin?

Again - you're wordsmithing. That's a stupid conclusion. You took what I wrote, and changed it and are trying to lead me to an answer you hope to see.

ANYONE who CONTINUALLY, WILLINGLY, WILLFULLY sins is 'wrong'. That person Needs to REPENT...and 'stop' sinning.

Do we need a "Christianity 101' thread, because it's clear you don't understand the basic concepts of the faith - yet LOVE sharp-shooting.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Except nobody is 'born' a homosexual. One can't BE homosexual unless they 'do' homosexuality. Homosexuals won't have 'more' desire to help people with AIDS and other problems.

That's why I put the "born" in quotes. Nobody really knows for sure how a person winds up with a homosexual orientation. Homosexuals claim to have feelings for the same sex long before they choose to act on those feelings. Just because a person does not choose to 'do' homosexuality does not mean that they can't 'be' homosexual in orientation. Just as a straight priest chooses to not act on his heterosexual urges, a homosexual priest can choose to not act on his homosexual urges. You can't say that a heterosexual priest is not heterosexual just because he didn't 'do' it.

True, a homosexual may not necessarily have any 'more' desire to help people with AIDS, but I think it's more likely he would if he was.

 

[MissileMan]

I don't ask The Church to ALLOW for my sin. I didn't say I sin INTENTIALLY - I wrote "I know when I'm sinning or have sinned." The part you wont read, because you're obtuse follows:

When I sin, I repent.

I'm not attacking your character, but your reasoning. If you are doing something even though you know it is a sin, you ARE sinning intentionally. That's not taking shit out of context, or wordsmithing, that's fact.

At the time you are committing this intentional sin, it must be acceptable to you, or you wouldn't be doing it. Feeling sorry and asking forgiveness later or even planning to feel sorry and ask for forgiveness later while you are sinning doesn't mitigate anything IMO.

But, if repentance is this great magic button, can homosexuals be Christians as long as they are sorry about being homosexual? Is there a limit on the frequency of the sin/repent cycle?

 

[Nienna]

So in your opinion, it isn't hypocritical for someone to call themselves a Christian after admitting intentionally sinning, but then claim that homosexuals can't be Christians because they intentionally sin?

I didn't say that homosexuals can't be Christians. What I claim is that if someone knowingly continues on a sinful course of action, that person is divorcing himself from God. See, "Christian" is just a label, sometimes useful, sometimes not. But, what makes one "a Christian" is being in a surrendered relationship with God. God determines how far someone can intentionally stray from the relationship before He gives that person up to his sinful desires. Only God can know a person's heart.

But that doesn't mean that we can twist the truth, and claim that sin is okay, just because it makes someone feel more comfortable. If we are fellow Christians, we have the duty to help each other understand just how a sinful course of action is damaging our brothers' & sisters' relationship.

 

[Phaedrus]

(response to post #52)
hmm... where have I heard this before?

Maybe it's a simple question of being genuine?

Humans are fallible, to expect otherwise is to be ignorant.

Edit: It seems to me you are looking for an argument, alot of your questions can be rationally thought out, without explanation. If you truly don't understand, please keep asking questions. Otherwise stop the senseless bandying of snide comments.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I was reading an article about the National Day of Prayer. Part of the article read:




I just want to scratch my sack and ask 'What the FUCK?, over.'

I just don't get it. These people make a mockery of God yet claim to be doing 'His work'. They are no less misguided than Islamic Terrorists. Sin is Sin. Sanctioning sin is worse than sin, imo.

Look - I covet from time to time. That is sin. Pure and simple. However, I do NOT lobby for Coveting to be 'accepted' and 'tolerated' because I have the God-Given common sense to realize we are to REPENT of our sin - NOT fucking change the rules because we can't seem to get OVER sinning.

I grow nausiated at people linking "Jesus" with "Tolerance." Jesus befriended sinners - people like you and me - He ALSO held them accountable to CHANGE their behaviour...to change their hearts and desire for things of a sinful nature.

And these 'pastors and priests' March and protest to get the sins of their congregation sanctioned?

There has to be a special place in hell for people teaching Others - in the name of Christ - to revel in their sin.



Horrible. Absolutely.

And there's a special place in hell for people who teach others...in the name of Christ...to hate others.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Seriously - why are non-christians offering insights to christianity.

Because some so called Christians lack any insight into their self-proclaimed faith.

 

[Phaedrus]

If you make him quote that one passage in the Bible I know we're all thinking about...

 

[Bullypulpit]

That's SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO not true, luv. (sigh)....like your Myth about Constantine 'choosing the books of the bible' - There is only ONE brand of Christianity - those who follow the expressed words/example of Christ and the Bible. If ANY group believes God's Word is NOT accurate and true, they must forfiet their 'Christian' label.

"One brand of Christianity...", Nonsense. With all of the schisms, branchings, recantings over the centuries, there are more schools of Christian thought than we can even begin to discuss here.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Really? Please - inform us on some of the many contradictions you've found in the Bible...

<blockquote>GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.</blockquote>

<blockquote>GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.</blockquote>

And that's just for starters...

 

[Phaedrus]

wow I'm speechless...

(Gonna let it rest at that, feel free to follow my example).

 

[Bullypulpit]

It's not mine - it's God's. Sin is Sin. Sin all leads to 'death' regardless.

The wages of sin is death...But after taxes, it's just sort of a tired feeling.

 

[MissileMan]

(response to post #52)
hmm... where have I heard this before?

Not sure...where?

Maybe it's a simple question of being genuine?

And who besides one's chosen deity gets to decide genuineness?

If you truly don't understand, please keep asking questions.

Thanks for your permission.

Otherwise stop the senseless bandying of snide comments.

Hey Look! A rolling donut!