You can't just quote the Bible and then in the same post say that being Gay is not immoral. That may be YOUR stance on the topic but, clearly NOT the stance of the Bible from which you were cherry picking to make your point. I'm all for forgiveness and redemption but acceptance of one's sins is a prerequisite.
JOHN 5:14-15 14 Afterward, Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, “Look, you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing happen to you.” 15 The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well.
Obviously, we are all sinners so "Going and sinning no more" is an impossibility but, we should at least TRY to not do something that we know to be a sin.
I didn't say being gay isn't immoral. Sorry—are there some sins that are "OK" and others that are worse? Is there a "trying not to sin but failing" that's more noble than anything else? Did Jesus say, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," or no?
Gee - saying that being gay is not a sexual deviancy ring a bell? Clearly the Bible states otherwise. If adult males and adult females want to have homosexual relations that's on them and they will be held accountable for their sins just as I will be held accountable for mine (I have done many). My point of contention with your comment was that you were excusing their sins (Gays) as not being deviant by specifically saying they were not deviants while also quoting the Bible which DOES view them as deviants.
PS: Why are my replies to your comment not in the board anymore? Because you're a mod and I questioned your opinion? I though GAW was above that sort of thing. Later Zuckerberg
Psst. Replies don't show under stickied comments until the comment is unstickied. That's a .WIN feature and not something mods can invoke or control.
LOL, Zuckerberg. Tell me you're losing without telling me you're losing. Brother—don't you know me better than that? I personally thought we were having a nice discussion, here.
PS - should I find the idea that you think I'd get "butthurt" in a gay thread some kind of insult? FROG. haha
As if - my original reply was there - now it's not. Losing? All I did was point out that the Bible sees homosexuality differently then you do. I'll retract my "Zuckerberg" if that is a point of concern for you. Sorry if I'm wrong in my assessment - I have never had any of my comments not show in the board so I have my reason for doubt.
There is a clear difference between sin and evil. Sin can lead to evil, but acts of evil are considerably worse. There is forgiveness for sin. Best I can tell there isn't any for evil.
In the end Jesus judges us individually. Fundamentalists STILL have not figured out how to respect this fact. They think they are right and therefore know what's best for everyone. In the end, a Christian theocracy is just another flavor of tyranny that will eventually lead to horrible atrocities based on the interpretations of a few.
The Founding Fathers knew man could not be trusted to be truthful with it's handling of the Word of God. So they gave us the Constitution to limit ideological control and influence.
But here's the real kick in the balls: Jesus was NEVER forceful. He cleaned out the temple, but that was already established as His house. His property. He didn't flip tables or make war with anyone beyond that. He spoke and people listened. People chose to hear Him because they wanted to. A theocracy robs people of that choice. It violates their consent and therefore is wrong.
You can't just quote the Bible and then in the same post say that being Gay is not immoral. That may be YOUR stance on the topic but, clearly NOT the stance of the Bible from which you were cherry picking to make your point. I'm all for forgiveness and redemption but acceptance of one's sins is a prerequisite.
JOHN 5:14-15 14 Afterward, Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, “Look, you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing happen to you.” 15 The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well.
Obviously, we are all sinners so "Going and sinning no more" is an impossibility but, we should at least TRY to not do something that we know to be a sin.
I didn't say being gay isn't immoral. Sorry—are there some sins that are "OK" and others that are worse? Is there a "trying not to sin but failing" that's more noble than anything else? Did Jesus say, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," or no?
Gee - saying that being gay is not a sexual deviancy ring a bell? Clearly the Bible states otherwise. If adult males and adult females want to have homosexual relations that's on them and they will be held accountable for their sins just as I will be held accountable for mine (I have done many). My point of contention with your comment was that you were excusing their sins (Gays) as not being deviant by specifically saying they were not deviants while also quoting the Bible which DOES view them as deviants.
Psst. Replies don't show under stickied comments until the comment is unstickied. That's a .WIN feature and not something mods can invoke or control.
LOL, Zuckerberg. Tell me you're losing without telling me you're losing. Brother—don't you know me better than that? I personally thought we were having a nice discussion, here.
PS - should I find the idea that you think I'd get "butthurt" in a gay thread some kind of insult? FROG. haha
As if - my original reply was there - now it's not. Losing? All I did was point out that the Bible sees homosexuality differently then you do. I'll retract my "Zuckerberg" if that is a point of concern for you. Sorry if I'm wrong in my assessment - I have never had any of my comments not show in the board so I have my reason for doubt.
There is a clear difference between sin and evil. Sin can lead to evil, but acts of evil are considerably worse. There is forgiveness for sin. Best I can tell there isn't any for evil.
In the end Jesus judges us individually. Fundamentalists STILL have not figured out how to respect this fact. They think they are right and therefore know what's best for everyone. In the end, a Christian theocracy is just another flavor of tyranny that will eventually lead to horrible atrocities based on the interpretations of a few.
The Founding Fathers knew man could not be trusted to be truthful with it's handling of the Word of God. So they gave us the Constitution to limit ideological control and influence.
But here's the real kick in the balls: Jesus was NEVER forceful. He cleaned out the temple, but that was already established as His house. His property. He didn't flip tables or make war with anyone beyond that. He spoke and people listened. People chose to hear Him because they wanted to. A theocracy robs people of that choice. It violates their consent and therefore is wrong.