quack quack quack ..sally kern is a tired old fool...her hate will make her a one term legislator.... pllus ... she has a gay son....More Hypocracy from the same old hypocrites

quack quack quack ..sally kern is a tired old fool...her hate will make her a one term legislator.... pllus ... she has a gay son....More Hypocracy from the same old hypocrites

Sally Kern is leading a nonsensical battle and I am ashamed that she calls herself a Christian. With her words, she is telling gays they cannot also be Christian, and that is shameful to Jesus. God wants Christians to bring everyone closer to him, not pass judgment. How can she point out the splinter in other's eyes when she cannot see the tree in her own?

feetxxxl - you asked why do I say it is sin if the "two" who are in the loving relationship are of the same sex, since there is no "evident" sin in it. God made man and woman to become 1 flesh, homosexuality is opposed to God's design, it couldn't be more clear as to why it is a sin and it is quite obvious in the natural world and in scripture.

my reasoning is scriptural and my witness is in and thru fellowship in christ.

feetlxxx--

Never in all my life have I seen such obtuseness combined with such an obstinate refusal to either hear the Word of God, or to keep it. How many Christians here on this board, and other threads I've seen, have rebuked you for your willful, stubborn refusal to hear? You have "itching ears" and you are following a false doctrine that you either heard from someone else, or that you made up yourself. I've never seen anything like it. You have Christian after Christian showing you your error plainly but you refuse to see or to hear.

As for me, I have nothing left to say to you, I'm "shaking the dust off my feet" and "shaking my cloak out" at you, metaphorically speaking, and I'm done. It's wasted effort at this point. Only the grace of God and the power of the Holy Spirit can help you now. Pray for God's guidance, grace and mercy. You seem to be a very, very lost and troubled soul and you need his grace and mercy more than anything.

As believers we know that we are created in His image; "male and female He created them." Also, the God-given covenant of marriage between a man and woman mirrors the relationship between Christ and His church. As the church we are His bride.

God did not create another male to be Adam's help-meet, Jesus did not say that "a man shall leave his mother and father and cleave unto his husband" and the church is Christ's bride, complete with all the female connotations that reside therein.


MATTHEW 19:11 GIVES DISPENSATION FOR THOSE WHO WISH TO BOND WITH THE SAME SEX. IT IS A SPIRIT MESSAGE FOR ALL TIME AND IS NOT LIMITED BY LEGALITIES.

OPP. SEX MARRIAGE EMBODIES A SPIRIT RELATIONSHIP THAT MIRRIORS THE RELATIONSHIP OF CHRIST AND THE CHURCH.. EXPLAIN HOW MARITAL SEXUAL RELATIONS OF THEMSELVES MIRRIORS THAT SAME RELATIONSHIP?
A relationship of the type that you are espousing (other than man-woman) seeks to warp the image which God made of Himself and dishonors the groom-bride relationship expressed in Christ being groom to the church. In pursuing such a non-biblical model for human relationships, God's very image is mocked. ...and "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

ANYTHING THAT IS OF THE SAME SPIRIT AS ANOTHER, IN SPIRIT IS EQUAL TO THE OTHER.. THE IMAGE OF GOD IS NOT ABOUT FORM, BUT ABOUT SPIRIT.


I BOTH MARRIAGES BOND IN THE SAME SPIRIT., AND THE SEXUAL INTIMACY IN BOTH IS AN AFFIRMATION AND AN EXPRESSION OF THAT LOVE AND DEVOTION.

However since you seem to wish to engage in verbal jousting so be it...
You are pushing the faulty argument that as Christians walking in grace we are free to ignore the law and are thus concluding that the liberty derived from grace alone permits absolute license in matters previously mentioned in the law. Holding this view may be comfort for the deceived half-hearted pew-warmer hoping for fire insurance, but not for the truly obedient Christian who "studies to show himself approved"
He would find that Paul writes in Romans 6:1,2,4: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid!... even so we also should walk in newness of life."

IF YOU ARE SAYING THAT THE LAW SAYS HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN...................... I DISAGREE WITH YOU.


EVERYTHING I HAVE SAID WAS ABOUT THAT AS FOLLOWERS OF CHRIST, WE NOW FULFILL THE LAW, AND NATURALLY IF WE FULFILL IT WE AUTOMATICALLY FOLLOW IT. BUT EVEN THRU FULFILLINGTHE LAW, WE DONT RECEIVE SALVATION.

GRACE IS SOMETHING WE RECEIVE THAT WE DIDNT PAY FOR OR EARN. WHATEVER GRACE, WE RECEIVE, WE RECEIVE THRU THE SPIRIT THAT LIVES IN US.


STUDIES IS WORKS. WE DONT RECEIVE SALVATION THRU WORKS. WORKS CAN BE AN INDICATION OF OUR DEPTH OF FAITH. THROUGHOUT HISTORY MANY PEOPLE STUDIED BUT MANY OF THOSE SAME PEOPLE MARTYRED THE SAINTS

HOW COULD WE POSSIBLY FULFILL THE LAW THRU SINNING?

Feet,
You're so torqued off about defending your pet sin that you aren't even reading straight! I did not post the comment that you seem to be responding to.

However since you seem to wish to engage in verbal jousting so be it...
You are pushing the faulty argument that as Christians walking in grace we are free to ignore the law and are thus concluding that the liberty derived from grace alone permits absolute license in matters previously mentioned in the law. Holding this view may be comfort for the deceived half-hearted pew-warmer hoping for fire insurance, but not for the truly obedient Christian who "studies to show himself approved"
He would find that Paul writes in Romans 6:1,2,4: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid!... even so we also should walk in newness of life."

As believers we know that we are created in His image; "male and female He created them." Also, the God-given covenant of marriage between a man and woman mirrors the relationship between Christ and His church. As the church we are His bride.

God did not create another male to be Adam's help-meet, Jesus did not say that "a man shall leave his mother and father and cleave unto his husband" and the church is Christ's bride, complete with all the female connotations that reside therein.

A relationship of the type that you are espousing (other than man-woman) seeks to warp the image which God made of Himself and dishonors the groom-bride relationship expressed in Christ being groom to the church. In pursuing such a non-biblical model for human relationships, God's very image is mocked. ...and "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

You persist in mental gymnastics and contortions of logic in order to continue pushing a biblical basis for your fantasy that God that somehow blesses your behavior because nowhere in the bible does it say explicitly "Feetxxxl, your behavior is sin".
You do so at your own peril. It would seem that you believe that if you can repeat it often enough, even though no one else will buy into your false doctrine, at least you'll further convince yourself.

You need prayer and you need to pray; pray for a renewed mind, pray for open eyes and pray that by the Holy Spirit's conviction and empowerment that you might repent of your slavery to this sin and walk in newness of life.

my opologies, i addressed my reply to the wrong person. it should have been john14-6

This isn't about "love", because what you are calling "love" is simply perverted lust, and it is in violation of the order of creation and it is a perversion of God's intent. "Male and female he created them", even Jesus restates this. Paul says that no one who engages in homosexual behavior will inherit the Kingdom of God, he also talks about men burning with lust for one another as "shameful" and he says that such desires and lust are the result of God abandoning a human being to their sin, giving them over to unnatural lusts. It is referred to as a *punishment from God*. He says the same thing about women engaging in sex with other women.
FIRST OF ALL YOU MAKE A STATEMENTS WITHOUT ANY FELLOWSHIP WITNESS.

IF WE WALK INTHE LIGHT AS HE IS IN THE LIGHT WE HAVE FELLLOWSHIP WITH ONE ANOTHER, WHAT LOVE OF CHRIST IS THERE THAT IS WITHOUT FELLOWSHHIP. ............................LOVE AT A DISTANCE?.............................WE DONT EVEN LOVE OUR ENEMIES THAT WAY.


THIS MAKES YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT LUST MERE OPINIONS. ARE YOU TRYING TO ESTABLISH LUST BY REGULATION.

" BECAUSE MY INTERPRETATION SAYS THERE'S LUST, IT MUST BE THERE. I HAVE NOT SEEN IT .........BUT BECAUSE OF MY INTERPRETATION I KNOW ITS THERE".


"THAT WHICH WE LOOKED AT, WE SAW WITH OUR EYES, AND OUR HANDS TOUCHED"
SHOW ME IN SCRIPTURE ANY OTHER WAY OF MAKING A VALID WITNESS.

EXPLAIN HOW "MALEBED" MEANS HOMOSEXUALITY. .

MEN BURN WITH SHAME BASED LUST AND COMMIT OPPOSITE SEX ACTS. THAT DOESNT CONDEMN HETEROSEXUALITY, WHY SHOULD THE SAME CONDEMN HOMOSEXUALITY.


SHAME BASED LUST PROTENDS THAT THEIR IS NO BONDING, BECAUSE OF WHAT COMMITMENT THERE IS . IT IS TO THE LUST.

QUECAT

This is really getting old. Where is the "sin" in that? The sin is that they are violating the natural order of Creation that God set up from the beginning. The sin is that God instituted marriage between man and woman to procreate and raise a family. The sin is in equating two men engaging in anal sodomy (a filthy, deviant behavior) being equated with a man and a woman engaging in normal relations that are designed not only for pleasure, but for creating children. Are you really this juvenile? Do I need to explain it this simplistically and graphically? Do you even have a Bible? It can't be the same one I have.




(im using capital letters so you can see my answer easier)

SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THAT BY REGULATION, BY RULE , BY RULE ABOUT ORDER.
(ARE YOU CREDITING YOUR SELF WITH KNOWING THE MIND OF GOD )
SUCH A THING CANNOT BE OF GOD.
BUT, WE ARE NOT LIVING IN THE OLD RELATIONSHIP TO THE WRITTEN CODE, AND ARE LED BY THE SPIRIT, WHICH THE LAW IS NOW USED TO POINT TO, MAKING US CONSCIOUS OFTHE SPIRIT THAT WE ARE EITHER LED BY OR GIVEN OVER TO(AS IN ROMANS)..

WHAT OTHER SIN OF COMMISSION IS THERE APART FROM THE SIN NATURE. PAUL IN ROMANS SAYS IT IS THIS SIN THAT DEMANDS THAT WE HAVE A SAVIOR IN ORDER TO BE UNITED WITH GOD.

SODOMY IS ABOUT THOSE SINS(OF COMMISSION) THAT WERE COMMITTED BY THOSE WHO LIVED IN SODOM.




THE FOLLOWING OF ANY REGULATION CAN BE DONE THRU ANY SPIRIT.

NOT SO, IN FOLLOWING CHRIST

"ABOMINATION" IS A WORD THAT IS USED LAVISHLY IN THE NKJ BUT NOT SO IN NIV. AND IT IS USED WITH WITH A NUMBER OF ACTS WHICH OF THEMSELVES ARE NOT SINS

Chris333,
I have to give you an "A" for effort. Heaven knows how many of us in these forums have engaged in this same discussion with "Feet"and others. Know that we're here agreeing with you.
Their hearts are hardened to the truth. They refuse to surrender that portion of their lives to the Lord, because they are unwilling to render obedience to God in the matter. They have convinced themselves of a convenient lie...convenient only to their carnal flesh.

2Th 3:13-15 "But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing.
And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.
Yet count [him] not as an enemy, but admonish [him] as a brother. "

Hbr 3:12-13 "Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin."

Maranatha!

feetlxxx--

This is really getting old. Where is the "sin" in that? The sin is that they are violating the natural order of Creation that God set up from the beginning. The sin is that God instituted marriage between man and woman to procreate and raise a family. The sin is in equating two men engaging in anal sodomy (a filthy, deviant behavior) being equated with a man and a woman engaging in normal relations that are designed not only for pleasure, but for creating children. Are you really this juvenile? Do I need to explain it this simplistically and graphically? Do you even have a Bible? It can't be the same one I have.

This isn't about "love", because what you are calling "love" is simply perverted lust, and it is in violation of the order of creation and it is a perversion of God's intent. "Male and female he created them", even Jesus restates this. Paul says that no one who engages in homosexual behavior will inherit the Kingdom of God, he also talks about men burning with lust for one another as "shameful" and he says that such desires and lust are the result of God abandoning a human being to their sin, giving them over to unnatural lusts. It is referred to as a *punishment from God*. He says the same thing about women engaging in sex with other women.

Paul reiterates this sin in a list of sins in 1 Corinthians. It is called an "abomination" by God in Leviticus. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their rampant homosexuality (no, he did not destroy them because of their "lack of hospitality" or because the men of Sodom wanted to gang rape the two angels who arrived at Lots' house. God had already determined to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah before the angels arrived, and it was for their rampant sexual deviancy).

Why does any Christian need to explain this to you over and over? Why don't you pray over this and accept that you are WRONG, you are in error, and you are leading people into sin and violating God's Word with what you are pushing here. Accept the rebuke. I pray the Holy Spirit will convict you of your error and that you will repent and stop all this proselytizing for a sinful and shameful behavior. The fall occurred when the devil got Eve to question God's Word, with the words, "Did God really mean?..." You are doing JUST that here, you are saying, "Did God really mean?...". God's Word says homosexuality is abomination, it is shameful, it is deviant, and it is sin. Anyone who says otherwise is not speaking truth.

b0az

2 people people are married to each other , bonded thru mutual, love, attraction, respect , trust and devotion and their faith in christ. the sexual intimacy in the relationship is an affirmation and an expression of that mutual love,attraction, devotion,etc .

however both are of the same sex............ what or where is the sin?

paul says in gal5 the things of the sin nature are obvious, meaning that by there very nature they are self explanatory. so what is self explantory about the above situation. if you say it is because the bible says, then you are saying it is not self explanatory, and you are using the old relationship to the law in the old covenant, that we no longer have in the the new covenant.

in the new covenant our leading is by the spirit. what spirit in the above relationship is against the spirit of christ?

if there is no obvious sin(something that is self explanatory) then homosexuality is not of the sin nature, and therefore is not a sin.

Wow, this has gotten way off track, the bottom line is; is homsexuality a sin? If it is we should be willing to say so, along with pride, gluttony, adultery, idolatry and everything else that keeps us from walking with God.

you are confusing me

i gave you 1cor13 and 1john1 4:8 and you said who can say what love is. then when i gave you the three commandments you said you believed in love as defined by scripture

is that not 1cor13 and 1john 4:8?


what scriptural definition are you talking about?

gotta go!

"explain to me how saying the above is not also saying that he three commandments of love mean nothing?"

Feet,

I would ask you not to twist what I say, it is only kind. I was criticizing the blanket use of "God is love", you must qualify such a statement as "God is love". I have not rejected what the Bible has defined as love, I have rejected a gross modification of what the Bible says is love. Never in all the Bible does it say, "Love is happiness". Never in all the Bible are Homosexual relationships blessed. They are always looked down upon, and in a few places condemned or spoken of as sin/abomination. You failed to address the points I brought up, it is very poor debating on your part to not address what I have stated and to bring a new accusation in. Go back, address what I said (and am now saying) and then you can state your case. Otherwise I should just copy and paste.

This statement is worthless, who defines what love is? Who defines what is the proper form of love? Who defines what is right or wrong? The one standard is the Bible, which God has given us. God can be loving and against homosexuality. But you forget that God is also just. Anyways, why should we accept the 21st Century conception of love over the 1st Century's? I need a real argument.

explain to me how saying the above is not also saying that he three commandments of love mean nothing?

Feet,

"dont we all believe in the inerrancy of scripture affirmed by 1tim," that ALL scripture is god breathed""

Yes, we are debating your interpretation, which seems to go directly against Scripture.

"everything i have emailed has been annotated with scripture."

Big deal, satan used Scripture to try to give credibility to his side.

"i have explained why all scriptural verses that though mentioning same sex relations does not say that homosexuality is a sin"

So I suppose that being an abomination does not mean sin... give me a break. I am also going to need positive evidence, you have to show me a place in the Bible where homosexuality is blessed. I mean we can make the same outrageous claims about incest. i.e. "Oh, the Bible never says "LOVING" incestuous relationships are wrong." So what is the difference? You have relativized the Bible and put "MY" Jesus in the place of the real Jesus.

"you have given your understanding of the same scripture but have not confronted my challenge to your reasoning and are without a fellowship witness. "

Do you read what I write? Do you read what others write? I have many people who agree that homosexuality is wrong. Having people on your side doesn't matter, the truth matters. I could get some weirdos out there to approve of pedophilia, that doesn't make it right. Your standard is clearly your self, and your fellowship.

"you appear to give no credibility to 1cor13 and 1john 4:8"

No, I do give credibility to them, I just don't twist them to say what they don't.

"there is only one standard. that is the love that is god."

This statement is worthless, who defines what love is? Who defines what is the proper form of love? Who defines what is right or wrong? The one standard is the Bible, which God has given us. God can be loving and against homosexuality. But you forget that God is also just. Anyways, why should we accept the 21st Century conception of love over the 1st Century's? I need a real argument.

"do you think knowing (Jesus) comes from following a particular understanding of the law?"

No, what is your point? Are you saying that under the law homosexuality is wrong? If you are, then it is wrong and you have proved yourself a liar. If you are saying that NO law applies now, then we must accept loving incestuous relationships, as well as loving pedophilia relationships, as well as anything that defines itself as loving. You are undermining your own argument.

"my disagreement with you is, that you use scripture to condemn without any acknowledgement of the spirit that motivates the act you are condemning, nor the corresponding fruits of that spirit. "

I have said nothing hateful against homosexuals, I have condemned homosexuality, because the Scriptures tell me to hate sin. No I am not going to conform to "YOUR" Jesus, I am conforming to the actual Jesus.