The bible and gays

[BenTheBeliever]

Everybody is so special in God's eyes that they are born into goodness. No one is "born into sin." We are born from the breath of God. How can that be sin???

That is not what the word of God says. It makes it clear we are all born into sin and need the grace of God in our lifes

 

[sojourner]

That makes no sense. What does black and white have to do with anything?

Because saying that "gay happened after Eden" is the exact same thing as saying "black happened after Eden." Nothing "happened after Eden." Eden is eternal. IOW, you're placing a temporal line in the sand where no temporal line exists. You and I are part of the same humanity that God blew God's breath into in Eden.

 

[sojourner]

You took what I said out of content.

No. I didn't. You said "science has nothing to do with being a Christian." I responded to that.

 

[sojourner]

That is not what the word of God says. It makes it clear we are all born into sin and need the grace of God in our lifes

The bible makes clear that we are created in God's image. How is that "born into sin?"

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I am willing but can you guys?

Why do you think I've been asking you so many questions and trying to get you to justify your claims so much? The fact is that your position simply doesn't make sense. I would never say that I don't care about your opinion, though. Could you please stop projecting?

You guys make it clear you won't change your views to met mine why ask me to do the same? I am not asking you guys to do it

I have never once "made it clear" that I won't change my views. I've never said anything like that, and I never would. And nobody on here expects you to change your views. What we do expect is a meaningful debate where you support your position in a reasonable manner and respect the views of other people - rather than just dismissing them and telling them that you don't care. You're not coming across as someone who is honest, but as someone who knows they are wrong and are desperate to avoid admitting it. You are being defensive and telling people you don't care about their views when they disagree with you. These are not the actions of someone who genuinely believes they are right.

 

[BenTheBeliever]

Because saying that "gay happened after Eden" is the exact same thing as saying "black happened after Eden." Nothing "happened after Eden." Eden is eternal. IOW, you're placing a temporal line in the sand where no temporal line exists. You and I are part of the same humanity that God blew God's breath into in Eden.

You kept avoiding the talk of sin though

 

[BenTheBeliever]

No. I didn't. You said "science has nothing to do with being a Christian." I responded to that.

You must of not read what else I wrote cause if you did you would see where I was talking about wit context. I was talking about me as a person. Science has nothing to do with me being a Christian

 

[BenTheBeliever]

The bible makes clear that we are created in God's image. How is that "born into sin?"

We might be born in his image but it is clear we need salvation and grace to be forgiven of our 'sins'

 

[BenTheBeliever]

Why do you think I've been asking you so many questions and trying to get you to justify your claims so much? The fact is that your position simply doesn't make sense. I would never say that I don't care about your opinion, though. Could you please stop projecting?


I have never once "made it clear" that I won't change my views. I've never said anything like that, and I never would. And nobody on here expects you to change your views. What we do expect is a meaningful debate where you support your position in a reasonable manner and respect the views of other people - rather than just dismissing them and telling them that you don't care. You're not coming across as someone who is honest, but as someone who knows they are wrong and are desperate to avoid admitting it. You are being defensive and telling people you don't care about their views when they disagree with you. These are not the actions of someone who genuinely believes they are right.

And that is what I have been trying to do. Have a friendly debate.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

And that is what I have been trying to do. Have a friendly debate.

And your idea of having a friendly debate includes being rude, telling people you don't care about their opinion, dismissing other people's posts and refusing to support your own statements?

 

[BenTheBeliever]

And your idea of having a friendly debate includes being rude, telling people you don't care about their opinion, dismissing other people's posts and refusing to support your own statements?

To be honest I view you the same way you seem to view me.

 

[ether-ore]

That's not spelled out in the bible. Yet it seems iron-clad to you -- even though it happened in the bible, and then it didn't happen, and then JS decided that it should happen, and then somebody else decided that it shouldn't, yaddayaddayadda... How do you know Somebody hasn't decided that homosexual marriage is OK, even if that's not spelled out in the bible? In fact, interracial marriage is contraindicated in the bible, yet that seems to be OK now -- "Somebody" decided that it was really OK now. Well, homosexual marriage has been declared OK now. Get over it.

We are talking about what God sanctions, not what man sanctions. God did establish a precedence concerning plural marriage in the Old Testament. God re-established plural marriage for a time because of all the male members of the church who were murdered during the Mormon expulsions from one place to the next. Remember, the State of Illinois had an extermination order out against anyone who was a Mormon. In order to maintain the LDS population God allowed it and the members would have kept practicing it regardless until God (not man) rescinded it... which He did. What was contraindicated in the Bible was not so much racially oriented as it was covenant oriented. The Children of Israel were commanded not to marry outside of the covenant. Since God established laws against homosexuality, it follows that He would not sanction Homosexual unions even though He may allow men to use their agency in that regard. Man may have decided; we'll see how that holds up on judgment day.

No, it's really true! many Christians have accepted -- not only homosexual activity, but homosexual marriage as OK. It's no mistake.

I say 'some', you say 'many'; it is still not 'all'. Man's acceptance says nothing about what God will acept.

Sure they can! Humanity, itself, is very diverse, and God is very, very, very big.

That humanity is diverse does not offer conclusive evidence that religion should be diverse. What you mean by God being very big seems to depend on a human definitions of what God identity is rather then on how God sees Himself and how He chooses to reveal it.

You've made the right choice for you. Just as others have made the right choice for them. The point is, your morality is your morality. You don't get to decide what's "right" or "decent" for the rest of the world. If homosexual marriage turns you off because of how you identify, then, by all means, don't become homosexually married! But don't dehumanize others for making their choices, based upon their identities.

If God is not diverse in Himself, then there can only be one choice; in which case, each individual must indeed decide what that entails. But, I still maintain that such diverse opinions cannot, by their nature, all be right.

I just about guarantee you that this is nothing more than Conservative Scare Tactic.

Time will tell

They SHOULD be accepted!!! They're sexual human beings, same as all the rest of us heterosexuals, aren't they? Do you not accept blacks, because they're not "the same" as the majority? They're not "white enough?" Do you not accept Jews, because they're not "Christian enough," like us? Do you not accept First Nations people, because they're not "European enough," like the rest of us? People are who they are. Being black isn't a sin. Being homosexual isn't a sin. But engaging in bigotry is.

Being black is not an action; homosexuality is and it is against God's law. None of those other things you mentioned are action either, so those are false comparisons. Homosexuality is a sin.

And you think you can stop it through keeping them beat down. What's next on your agenda, when you find out you can't pray them away? "Homosexuals only" drinking fountains? No! Wait! Even better! Let's segregate heaven and keep them completely out of God's Mormon Presence! Yah! That'll show 'em!

No. I don't believe I can stop it. I would that I could because I believe it is not in their best interest of their eternal welfare. Perhaps it is so ingrained that they cannot be reached, but perhaps there are some that can be. If they come and ask for prayer, I'll pray with them. I have done so. If I think one of them might have AIDS, no, I won't drink after them. That is only a common sense precaution. I don't wish to "show" anyone for the purposes of gaining some point. I want to reason with them that what they are doing is harmful to their eternal welfare and that it will indeed keep them out of the presence of God.

 

[Jumi]

Homosexuality is not an action. A "homosexual act" is an action.

 

[ether-ore]

They were. And it all came back to whether or not love was being shown. Jesus didn't berate the thieves for beating the traveler nearly to death. He did berate the Levite and the Pharisee for not showing compassion. And he called the outsider a "neighbor." Will you do the same, when the elder and the Stake President pass by on the road without stopping, and the homosexual stops to help?

The point of that parable was not to dwell on the thieves because they were not the point. The issue was neighborliness which Christ intended to illustrate with those that He did dwell on. I think you are making assumptions about what an Elder or a Stake President, or even myself might do.

Perhaps it should be asked who's showing more of God's love here? Who's "keeping [God's] commandment" to show hospitality to the stranger and the outsider? Me? Or you?

Indeed! That question will be asked when we both stand before the bar of god.

I'm dong no such thing. Show the love to the outcast, the downtrodden, and the disenfranchised, for Pete's sake!! Love them for who they are -- not for who you want them to be.

I think you are attempting to interpret my motives to support your own position. And it is not what I want them to be, but what God would have them be.

To tell a neighbor that who he is isn't good enough, isn't love. It's dehumanization.

Warning a neighbor of impending danger because of something he is doing is love.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

To be honest I view you the same way you seem to view me.

Can you give an example of where I have been rude, told you I don't care about your views, dismissed your opinion or refused to support my opinion?

 

[Awoon]

Can you give an example of where I have been rude, told you I don't care about your views, dismissed your opinion or refused to support my opinion?

Why bother. If Sojourner cant convince him of anything, no one can.

 

[ether-ore]

I'm not only attempting to suggest it, I am stating it. Many people don't recognize God. Are you going to force God's law on them, even as you're afraid that the gays are going to force you to solemnize their marriages? See the double standard you're proposing? It's OK for you to force homosexuals to the back of the theological bus who aren't Mormon, because you're right. It's not OK for them to force you to do something, though. No. God's laws are subjective. They apply only to those who accept them.

Very well, you're stating it. God's laws are only subjective from a diverse human perspective. The laws as they exist, are objective as will be discovered on the day of judgment. We'll have to wait until then to find out. In the meantime, we'll continue to debate it.

Isn't that the way it works? The rule used to be that homosexuals couldn't get married. Now they can. Used to suck to be them; now it sucks to be you. Our job is to stop making everybody else suck.

Yes, you are absolutely right on this point. That is indeed how it works during the course of mortality since agency is the rule of the day.

Who's sinning here? the Gay for being Gay, or the Elder who refuses to sully himself by being helpful?

Both would be sinning, but that wasn't the point of what I said. One cannot continue to sin and expect to be saved. They have to stop it or they cannot be saved.

...Because God always holds grudges.

It is not, and never has been about holding grudges. It is the simple fact that God says that no unclean thing can enter into the Kingdom of God. The atonement of Jesus Christ will wash us clean so that we can enter, but only on condition of repentance. Christ saves us from sins that we have committed if we repent. He cannot violate His own law and allow us into His Kingdom if we do not repent and keep sinning.

I think God saves everyone.

If that were the case, then there would have been no point in our coming into mortality. He could have then saved us from the start and avoided all of this misery. But that is not the case. We are here to be tested to see if we will do all that the Lord commands. And if we repent and do His commands and endure to the end of our lives... then He will save us.

How do you know that, when standing face-to-face with the Ultimate Reality that is God, everyone won't see the error of their ways and turn toward that reality? Or do you simply not have any faith in humanity to recognize reality -- or in God to save?

I know it because it is stated in scripture. Matthew 7:21: "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. If this life is a test (and I believe it is) then what one does during the test is what determines the reward. If you take a test in school, you do not get to change your grade after seeing the correct answer. By then it is too late. God does indeed have infinite capacity to save, but it is on His terms, and His terms are that everyone repent and be baptized... not on what terms you hope it will be.

 

[ether-ore]

Homosexuality is not an action. A "homosexual act" is an action.

I stand corrected.

 

[viole]

We might be born in his image but it is clear we need salvation and grace to be forgiven of our 'sins'

If we are in His image, why don't we hate sin the way He does? That would have solved a lot of problems just by implementing a very small additional hack on our created brains.

You might say that this would interfere with our free will, but that would entail that hating sin and having free will are incompatibe. And that would lead to God not having any free will at all, if He hates sin.

So, why don't we hate sin in the same way we hate other things?

Ciao

- viole

 

[BenTheBeliever]

If we are in His image, why don't we hate sin the way He does? That would have solved a lot of problems just by implementing a very small additional hack on our created brains.

You might say that this would interfere with our free will, but that would entail that hating sin and having free will are incompatibe. And that would lead to God not having any free will at all, if He hates sin.

So, why don't we hate sin in the same way we hate other things?

Ciao

- viole

We should hate sin. Thus the saying hate the sin love the sinner. But people prefer their sins over God.