DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
<
form action=&amp
;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; method=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;p
ost&
quot; target=&am
p;amp;amp;quot;_top&
amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;cmd&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; value=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot
;_s-xclick&a
mp;amp;quot;&amp
;amp;amp;gt; &am
p;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hosted_button_id&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; val
ue=&
quot;DKL7ADEKRVUBL&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;image&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.payp
alobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; border=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; nam
e=&q
uot;submit&a
mp;amp;quot; alt=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;quot;PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!
&quo
t;&g
t; &
lt;img alt=&
amp;amp;quot;&am
p;amp;amp;quot; border=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypalobjects.com
/en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; width=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; height=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/form&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
HTML https://3169.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Tattooed Theist Ministry
*****************************************************
#Post#: 28184--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest33 Date: April 5, 2021, 10:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg27720#msg27720
date=1617069481]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg27700#msg27700
date=1616983672]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27645#msg27645
date=1616903258]
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg19216#msg19216
date=1603332132]
[quote author=patrick jane link=topic=85.msg19198#msg19198
date=1603295302]
[quote author=patrick jane link=topic=85.msg18491#msg18491
date=1602088723]
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
[/quote]Controversial.
[/quote]
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under
judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness
through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own
bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a
lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the
Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read
this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual
revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's.
Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile
affections: for even their women did change the natural use into
that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving
the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and
receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was
meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another
judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became
rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's
Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice
homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final
step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in
their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do
those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness,
fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of
envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters,
haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil
things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding,
covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable,
unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is
because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His
words...
Blade
[/quote]
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that
homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began
here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they
love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul,
traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord,
being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus
forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there
are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was
a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for
adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to
love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus.
Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous.
He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced,
and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from
these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will.
The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by
certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear
false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each
sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you
understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must
know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting
his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset,
and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or
dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know
what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother.
Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it
caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I
addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner.
Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their
sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not
kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead,
God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing
others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not
kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In
general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then
not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained
to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins
are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of
course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and
the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God
Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the
subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
[/quote]
Good evening Michael....Thanks for the info and I agree and
disagree with different parts.. The two parts are Sin and the
ten commandments.
Sin.... I agree sin is in all of us. We lose our ability to
chose between sin and Jesus when our bodies die the 1st death.
If we have not chosen to Believe in His Gospel (according to
scripture), we will be condemned to live eternally away from Him
in the Lake of Fire. Therefore the only unforgivable Sin is
"Unbelief"
The Ten Commandments.. were KNOWN most likely known long before
Exodus was written. It is obvious that Cain and Abel knew about
the Sacrifice ritual which is the reason why GOD did not find
favor with Cain.
Jesus in the NT repeated seven commandments from the original
ten. These were given to us by our Apostle, Paul. The other
three commandments were
ceremonial in nature and with the end of Laws of Moses, they
could not be properly followed.
It is good to converse with you my friend...Pray you have a very
blessed week.
Blade
[/quote]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
Dear Blade,
Hey Buddy,
Thanks for your pleasant reply. I don't usually get time to
respond this soon, but I've got a dentist appt. after this, so I
had to get up early. I wonder if blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is
not the most unforgivable sin. Disbelief is a real bummer and
you can't really get much taught to you because of it.[/quote]
I stand corrected..according to Mat 12:31.."Wherefore I say unto
you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men:
but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven
unto men."
Yet without unbelief, blasphemy would not be possible!
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
So, did Cain actually know what he was doing when he struck Abel
with a rock and killed him. Get back to me and let me know more
about it.[/quote]
I am sure that Cain knows what killing was. Yet, His jealousy
was great because GOD chose Abel's offering over his......did He
really know what He was doing or did unrestrained evil take
over?
I will say this; I believe that we will see Cain in Heaven when
we get there!
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
Dying the first death is dying during this next resurrection, as
far as I know. Dying the second death is after this first
resurrection to come when Jesus returns for us. If you are
taken during the first resurrection, you don't have to be
concerned with the 2nd.
It was made known to me that the meek shall inherit the Earth
after this 1st resurrection and they will populate the Earth one
last time. Note that the 'rest of the dead did not live again
until the thousand years were fulfilled.' During those thousand
years, those who die during this 1st resurrection will rule with
Jesus over the people still on Earth. See Rev. 20:5KJV.
[/quote]
The first resurrection ended at the beginning of the millennium.
Rev 20:5.."But the rest of the dead lived not again until the
thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
From what I understand, the 2nd death will culminate with the
lack of our present Earth and a new Earth provided. See Rev.
21:1. There will be a new Heaven and no sea. As far as I know,
there will be a great explosion, possibly of the sun, and it
shall dissolve the elements. I don't know too much about it
because God doesn't tell me things that can wait until some
other time later. I have had enough to deal with and it has
often not been easy. There will be two nations: Gog & Magog.
Blade, you are one of the closest of friends that I know here on
FEF. I would love to be on this forum a lot more often, but so
far, I have been having tasks and medical predicaments that keep
me busy. It now takes me a long time just to do a load of
laundry. I was in the hospital for 2 months at once and I only
weigh 124 lbs. now. Perhaps it's soon time to give up the
ghost. Only God knows when. I used to weigh 173 lbs. a while
back. I'm glad to lose some weight, but Whoa!
If the Lord had not visited me often, I would not know all of
the things that I've learned from Him. I have had a few
overwhelming visions also, but they were worth it. I knew about
the CA fires back in 1982. Now, that was a tremendous vision --
not the most pleasant, but the most heavy. I saw a great,
massive earthquake after the brush fires burned there for quite
a while. It is written about in my book which was published in
1999. I'd best shut up now and get going.
May Jesus Hold Your Hands & Heart. Looking forward until we
speak again.
With Much Love For A Wonderful Brethren,
MichaelC
[/quote]
Thank you Michael for the conversation.
Blade
[/quote]
[font=andale corsiva]Oh Blade,
I don't know what to tell you. The first resurrection happens
when the Lord Jesus raises up the elect into the sky or Heaven
during the last days and they are seen by many. The 1st
resurrection happens before the 1,000 years that Christ will
reign. See Rev. 4-6KJV. A resurrection means some one or more
is raised up to Heaven. God {Jehovah/ Yahweh} is reigning now.
Jesus will reign after Armageddon for 1,000 years. The Lord God
said to the Lord Jesus, 'Sit thou on my right hand until I make
your enemies become your footstool.'
Google the word 'resurrection.' It is that time when Christ
returns to the Earth for the Rapture. The first. Those who
take part in the 1st need not worry about the '2nd death'
because they are already judged and saved, whereas those who are
not judged and saved yet have to wait until this 2nd death to
find out if they are saved after God judges them. See Rev.
20:13.
The elect can not be deceived during the Last Days. The elect
are those who are predetermined to be saved and they are raised
to Heaven first. The 1st resurrection written of in Rev. 20:5
is not referring to the initial raising of Christ right after
His death on the cross.
How else could the millennium's beginning have to deal with
those who did not receive the mark of the beast Rev. 20:4KJV.
That is during the last days, not the 1st millennium. When
Jesus first was resurrected on Easter, it was not during the
time that some were supposed to avoid the mark of the beast.
Satan shall be let loose again after the thousand years were
fulfilled {See Rev. 20:2KJV}. The beginning of the 1st
millennium is not the same time as during the latter days 2,000
years later. It refers to 1,000 years after Christ was on
Earth. Satan shall go out to deceive the nations of Gog and
Magog. They aren't established until after Jesus' second
coming.
Have I explained this well enough so that you can see what I
mean? Let me know and I will try harder to convince you, if
necessary. I do know what Google says. This is sort of a tough
one, I must admit. If you can't agree with me, BR, then that is
fine. Just tell me that you feel or think differently about it.
I will not bite your head off, of course. I do suppose there
are others who may interpret it the way that you do. No big
deal really, for we shall find out later in Heaven. These
things are written so that Satan and other evil people will not
understand.
I'll get going for now. May you rest your head on the Lord
God's shoulder!
MichaelC
[/font]
#Post#: 28188--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest8 Date: April 6, 2021, 10:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28184#msg28184
date=1617679811]
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg27720#msg27720
date=1617069481]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg27700#msg27700
date=1616983672]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27645#msg27645
date=1616903258]
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg19216#msg19216
date=1603332132]
[quote author=patrick jane link=topic=85.msg19198#msg19198
date=1603295302]
[quote author=patrick jane link=topic=85.msg18491#msg18491
date=1602088723]
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
[/quote]Controversial.
[/quote]
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under
judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness
through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own
bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a
lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the
Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read
this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual
revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's.
Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile
affections: for even their women did change the natural use into
that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving
the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and
receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was
meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another
judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became
rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's
Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice
homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final
step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in
their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do
those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness,
fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of
envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters,
haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil
things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding,
covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable,
unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is
because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His
words...
Blade
[/quote]
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that
homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began
here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they
love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul,
traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord,
being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus
forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there
are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was
a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for
adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to
love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus.
Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous.
He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced,
and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from
these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will.
The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by
certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear
false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each
sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you
understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must
know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting
his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset,
and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or
dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know
what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother.
Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it
caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I
addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner.
Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their
sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not
kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead,
God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing
others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not
kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In
general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then
not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained
to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins
are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of
course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and
the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God
Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the
subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
[/quote]
Good evening Michael....Thanks for the info and I agree and
disagree with different parts.. The two parts are Sin and the
ten commandments.
Sin.... I agree sin is in all of us. We lose our ability to
chose between sin and Jesus when our bodies die the 1st death.
If we have not chosen to Believe in His Gospel (according to
scripture), we will be condemned to live eternally away from Him
in the Lake of Fire. Therefore the only unforgivable Sin is
"Unbelief"
The Ten Commandments.. were KNOWN most likely known long before
Exodus was written. It is obvious that Cain and Abel knew about
the Sacrifice ritual which is the reason why GOD did not find
favor with Cain.
Jesus in the NT repeated seven commandments from the original
ten. These were given to us by our Apostle, Paul. The other
three commandments were
ceremonial in nature and with the end of Laws of Moses, they
could not be properly followed.
It is good to converse with you my friend...Pray you have a very
blessed week.
Blade
[/quote]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
Dear Blade,
Hey Buddy,
Thanks for your pleasant reply. I don't usually get time to
respond this soon, but I've got a dentist appt. after this, so I
had to get up early. I wonder if blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is
not the most unforgivable sin. Disbelief is a real bummer and
you can't really get much taught to you because of it.[/quote]
I stand corrected..according to Mat 12:31.."Wherefore I say unto
you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men:
but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven
unto men."
Yet without unbelief, blasphemy would not be possible!
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
So, did Cain actually know what he was doing when he struck Abel
with a rock and killed him. Get back to me and let me know more
about it.[/quote]
I am sure that Cain knows what killing was. Yet, His jealousy
was great because GOD chose Abel's offering over his......did He
really know what He was doing or did unrestrained evil take
over?
I will say this; I believe that we will see Cain in Heaven when
we get there!
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
Dying the first death is dying during this next resurrection, as
far as I know. Dying the second death is after this first
resurrection to come when Jesus returns for us. If you are
taken during the first resurrection, you don't have to be
concerned with the 2nd.
It was made known to me that the meek shall inherit the Earth
after this 1st resurrection and they will populate the Earth one
last time. Note that the 'rest of the dead did not live again
until the thousand years were fulfilled.' During those thousand
years, those who die during this 1st resurrection will rule with
Jesus over the people still on Earth. See Rev. 20:5KJV.
[/quote]
The first resurrection ended at the beginning of the millennium.
Rev 20:5.."But the rest of the dead lived not again until the
thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg27709#msg27709
date=1617038892]
From what I understand, the 2nd death will culminate with the
lack of our present Earth and a new Earth provided. See Rev.
21:1. There will be a new Heaven and no sea. As far as I know,
there will be a great explosion, possibly of the sun, and it
shall dissolve the elements. I don't know too much about it
because God doesn't tell me things that can wait until some
other time later. I have had enough to deal with and it has
often not been easy. There will be two nations: Gog & Magog.
Blade, you are one of the closest of friends that I know here on
FEF. I would love to be on this forum a lot more often, but so
far, I have been having tasks and medical predicaments that keep
me busy. It now takes me a long time just to do a load of
laundry. I was in the hospital for 2 months at once and I only
weigh 124 lbs. now. Perhaps it's soon time to give up the
ghost. Only God knows when. I used to weigh 173 lbs. a while
back. I'm glad to lose some weight, but Whoa!
If the Lord had not visited me often, I would not know all of
the things that I've learned from Him. I have had a few
overwhelming visions also, but they were worth it. I knew about
the CA fires back in 1982. Now, that was a tremendous vision --
not the most pleasant, but the most heavy. I saw a great,
massive earthquake after the brush fires burned there for quite
a while. It is written about in my book which was published in
1999. I'd best shut up now and get going.
May Jesus Hold Your Hands & Heart. Looking forward until we
speak again.
With Much Love For A Wonderful Brethren,
MichaelC
[/quote]
Thank you Michael for the conversation.
Blade
[/quote]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28184#msg28184
date=1617679811]
[font=andale corsiva]Oh Blade,
I don't know what to tell you. The first resurrection happens
when the Lord Jesus raises up the elect into the sky or Heaven
during the last days and they are seen by many. The 1st
resurrection happens before the 1,000 years that Christ will
reign. See Rev. 4-6KJV. A resurrection means some one or more
is raised up to Heaven. God {Jehovah/ Yahweh} is reigning now.
Jesus will reign after Armageddon for 1,000 years. The Lord God
said to the Lord Jesus, 'Sit thou on my right hand until I make
your enemies become your footstool.' [/quote]
[color=black][size=9pt]Hi Michael...The 1st resurrection would
include His Church (body of Christ)and will culminate in the
removal of all those believers during the Rapture. Yes, Jesus
will reign 1,000 years after Daniel's 70 th week has been
completed
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28184#msg28184
date=1617679811][i][b][size=12pt][font=andale corsiva]
Google the word 'resurrection.' It is that time when Christ
returns to the Earth for the Rapture. The first. Those who
take part in the 1st need not worry about the '2nd death'
because they are already judged and saved, whereas those who are
not judged and saved yet have to wait until this 2nd death to
find out if they are saved after God judges them. See Rev.
20:13.
The elect can not be deceived during the Last Days. The elect
are those who are predetermined to be saved and they are raised
to Heaven first. The 1st resurrection written of in Rev. 20:5
is not referring to the initial raising of Christ right after
His death on the cross.[/quote]
[color=black][size=9pt]I agree with you on the deceiving part
however, the elect were not all taken at the Rapture. There were
many elect left behind (I believe) who will become the
Tribulation Saints. These Saints are also of the 1st
Resurrection which ends right before the Great Tribulation (the
2nd half of Daniel's 70th week). For at this time there will be
no believers left on earth including the 144,000 Jewish
Evangelist. I might add, it is apparent the 144,000 and the
tribulation saints will have to die in their faith of Jesus. Rev
20:4
The 1st resurrection did indeed begin with the initial
resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Church, 144,000 and the
Tribulations Saints will be considered in the 1st Resurrection.
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28184#msg28184
date=1617679811]
[i][b][size=12pt][font=andale corsiva]
How else could the millennium's beginning have to deal with
those who did not receive the mark of the beast Rev. 20:4KJV.
That is during the last days, not the 1st millennium. When
Jesus first was resurrected on Easter, it was not during the
time that some were supposed to avoid the mark of the
beast.[/quote]
[color=black][size=9pt]When Jesus was resurrected it is
considered the 1st resurrection. In fact, I believe the 144,000
Jewish evangelist may also have been resurrected during this
time. We know that those in Abram's Bosom (Old Testament Saints)
were take to heaven (Paradise) to await the Rapture. This would
include the Apostles as well.
After the 144,000 and Tribulation saints are removed from the
earth, there are no believers remaining on earth and the
"Bowels"/ "Vials are yet to come. Those who survive (some in
all nations)will be the Gentiles that will live during the
Millennium. Of course, those who Jewish believers who fled Judah
during the Abomination of Abomination will also live and rule
Israel during the Millennium.
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28184#msg28184
date=1617679811]
[i][b][size=12pt][font=andale corsiva]
Satan shall be let loose again after the thousand years were
fulfilled {See Rev. 20:2KJV}. The beginning of the 1st
millennium is not the same time as during the latter days 2,000
years later. It refers to 1,000 years after Christ was on
Earth. Satan shall go out to deceive the nations of Gog and
Magog. They aren't established until after Jesus' second
coming.[/quote]
[color=black][size=9pt]The beginning of the millennium or the
1,000 years of Jesus Christ's (physical) Reign on earth will
indeed begin soon. The previous 2,000 years after the
resurrection of Christ should not be considered any part of the
Millennium.
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28184#msg28184
date=1617679811]
[i][b][size=12pt][font=andale corsiva]
Have I explained this well enough so that you can see what I
mean? Let me know and I will try harder to convince you, if
necessary. I do know what Google says. This is sort of a tough
one, I must admit. If you can't agree with me, BR, then that is
fine. Just tell me that you feel or think differently about it.
I will not bite your head off, of course. I do suppose there
are others who may interpret it the way that you do. No big
deal really, for we shall find out later in Heaven. These
things are written so that Satan and other evil people will not
understand.
I'll get going for now. May you rest your head on the Lord
God's shoulder!
MichaelC
[/font]
[/quote]
[size=9pt]MichaelC, you have explained thing very well and Yes,
we will find the truth out in Heaven. May God Bless you Michael.
good evening to you.
Blade
#Post#: 28196--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest116 Date: April 7, 2021, 1:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
THis has been a very excellent discussion. Thank you both for
all the information and viewpoints you have posted. I have
learned from this.
#Post#: 28198--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest8 Date: April 7, 2021, 8:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Chaplain Mark Schmidt
link=topic=85.msg28196#msg28196 date=1617819299]
THis has been a very excellent discussion. Thank you both for
all the information and viewpoints you have posted. I have
learned from this.
[/quote]
Hi Mark , Yes Michael always has many interesting points.
Have a great evening....won't be long before it is too hot to
sit outside and listen to the wonderful sounds of creation.
Blade
#Post#: 28250--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest33 Date: April 11, 2021, 2:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love
each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do
that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and
take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He
was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done,
just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes,
but don't become totally like them just because you should love
them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not
the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away
from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put
myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through.
Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't
mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's
okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should
treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love
towards each other without being derided about it by some
others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their
feelings of love for each other just because they are looked
down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not
talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm
trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you
can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well,
this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I
should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should
hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your
Lives,
MichaelC
#Post#: 28310--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest8 Date: April 11, 2021, 9:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28250#msg28250
date=1618127677]
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love
each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do
that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and
take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He
was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done,
just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes,
but don't become totally like them just because you should love
them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not
the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away
from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put
myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through.
Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't
mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's
okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should
treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love
towards each other without being derided about it by some
others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their
feelings of love for each other just because they are looked
down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not
talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm
trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you
can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well,
this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I
should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should
hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your
Lives,
MichaelC
[/quote]
Michael, the Lord wants us to love the person not the sin as you
say, yet if we do not tell it like it is, is that really loving
them. Not telling the truth about faces them is not loving
them....Not telling them what the judgement will be is not
loving them.
Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms what awaits the LGPTQ?????
person unless the repent and turn toward HIM in both testaments.
It is not judging them that is the problem. It is seeing the sin
for what it is and not telling them the truth.
Blade
#Post#: 28312--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest33 Date: April 12, 2021, 5:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg28310#msg28310
date=1618195017]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28250#msg28250
date=1618127677]
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love
each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do
that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and
take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He
was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done,
just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes,
but don't become totally like them just because you should love
them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not
the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away
from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put
myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through.
Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't
mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's
okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should
treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love
towards each other without being derided about it by some
others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their
feelings of love for each other just because they are looked
down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not
talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm
trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you
can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well,
this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I
should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should
hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your
Lives,
MichaelC
[/quote]
Michael, the Lord wants us to love the person not the sin as you
say, yet if we do not tell it like it is, is that really loving
them. Not telling the truth about faces them is not loving
them....Not telling them what the judgement will be is not
loving them.
Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms what awaits the LGPTQ?????
person unless the repent and turn toward HIM in both testaments.
It is not judging them that is the problem. It is seeing the sin
for what it is and not telling them the truth.
Blade
[/quote]
[font=andale mono]
Dear Blade,
It is really good to hear from you so soon! It will help me in
trying to explain it to others on Twitter. I do favor your
reply here and agree with you. We should identify which areas
of being gay are sins and, perhaps, help them find a way to
overcome them. BR, of course I plan to fill the Internet with
disdains towards what actions to cease from if they are having
anal or oral sex with other men or women. I believe that the
oral sex is less volatile than anything else. I want to let
them know that such sex is not necessary in order to show them
that you love them tons as an excellent friend.
In this way, I can also warn them why they should put wrong
actions away from them and just instead live in love, which is
so good for the heart, mind and soul. Of course, telling other
LGBTQ persons will help them with their lives and the world as a
whole.
Love is tricky sometimes. I would also tell them to refrain
from wearing a dress if you are serious about it and get rid of
the prissy sound of their voices which some gay men have. It is
very unpleasant listening to it, to say the least.
Some people have very big hearts and I am one of them. I love
just about everybody, but sometimes each have a way or more that
I don't like, yet I still love the person they are, despite
their sins. I know it seems unlikely plausible. It's not so
hard to do, but at times, I know it can be. I guess you are the
same way as me.
Some "macho" guys will simply not try this approach and come
down hard on other males or females. They don't realize that it
just hurts themselves also, in the long run and is not the way
we're taught by Jesus. Jesus must have been touched in His
heart by the adulteress and forgave her, telling to go and sin
no more. He accomplished a lot for her and all of us by
revealing such actions and words. It gives us all a heads up on
how we should respond to sinners.
Jesus gets all of His ways from His Father, our God. So with
the both of them loving us regardless of the sinning is quite an
admirable, yet unexpected, action. I long to be with God ASAP
so that I can ask even more questions about everything. And
just to love Him and Jesus, His Son. I must have TONS of
patience. It is like a monkey on my back. Do I explain this
okay?
Yes, the world will not be as white, soon, if the sins & evil
are not beaten out of the nations. God wants to give Jesus an
Earth that is in great shape and it will be a wonderful present.
See Rev. 19:7KJV. BR, the righteous, clean Earth and it's
people will BE the bride offered to the Lamb. You don't have to
believe me now, but go and read it again.
O well, I should get going from here now and go on Twitter for
awhile. It's 3 a.m. here already and it will be 4 a.m. or so
before I get to go to bed. Will chat again soon and I hope that
all is very well with you and yours today. You take good care
and enjoy the week.
God's Very Best, Full Of His And Jesus' Love & Understanding,
MichaelC
[/font]
#Post#: 28397--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: guest8 Date: April 13, 2021, 8:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28312#msg28312
date=1618222666]
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=85.msg28310#msg28310
date=1618195017]
[quote author=MichaelC link=topic=85.msg28250#msg28250
date=1618127677]
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love
each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do
that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and
take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He
was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done,
just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes,
but don't become totally like them just because you should love
them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not
the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away
from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put
myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through.
Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't
mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's
okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should
treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love
towards each other without being derided about it by some
others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their
feelings of love for each other just because they are looked
down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not
talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm
trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you
can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well,
this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I
should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should
hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your
Lives,
MichaelC
[/quote]
Michael, the Lord wants us to love the person not the sin as you
say, yet if we do not tell it like it is, is that really loving
them. Not telling the truth about faces them is not loving
them....Not telling them what the judgement will be is not
loving them.
Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms what awaits the LGPTQ?????
person unless the repent and turn toward HIM in both testaments.
It is not judging them that is the problem. It is seeing the sin
for what it is and not telling them the truth.
Blade
[/quote]
[font=andale mono]
Dear Blade,
It is really good to hear from you so soon! It will help me in
trying to explain it to others on Twitter. I do favor your
reply here and agree with you. We should identify which areas
of being gay are sins and, perhaps, help them find a way to
overcome them. BR, of course I plan to fill the Internet with
disdains towards what actions to cease from if they are having
anal or oral sex with other men or women. I believe that the
oral sex is less volatile than anything else. I want to let
them know that such sex is not necessary in order to show them
that you love them tons as an excellent friend.
In this way, I can also warn them why they should put wrong
actions away from them and just instead live in love, which is
so good for the heart, mind and soul. Of course, telling other
LGBTQ persons will help them with their lives and the world as a
whole.
Love is tricky sometimes. I would also tell them to refrain
from wearing a dress if you are serious about it and get rid of
the prissy sound of their voices which some gay men have. It is
very unpleasant listening to it, to say the least.
Some people have very big hearts and I am one of them. I love
just about everybody, but sometimes each have a way or more that
I don't like, yet I still love the person they are, despite
their sins. I know it seems unlikely plausible. It's not so
hard to do, but at times, I know it can be. I guess you are the
same way as me.
Some "macho" guys will simply not try this approach and come
down hard on other males or females. They don't realize that it
just hurts themselves also, in the long run and is not the way
we're taught by Jesus. Jesus must have been touched in His
heart by the adulteress and forgave her, telling to go and sin
no more. He accomplished a lot for her and all of us by
revealing such actions and words. It gives us all a heads up on
how we should respond to sinners.
Jesus gets all of His ways from His Father, our God. So with
the both of them loving us regardless of the sinning is quite an
admirable, yet unexpected, action. I long to be with God ASAP
so that I can ask even more questions about everything. And
just to love Him and Jesus, His Son. I must have TONS of
patience. It is like a monkey on my back. Do I explain this
okay?
Yes, the world will not be as white, soon, if the sins & evil
are not beaten out of the nations. God wants to give Jesus an
Earth that is in great shape and it will be a wonderful present.
See Rev. 19:7KJV. BR, the righteous, clean Earth and it's
people will BE the bride offered to the Lamb. You don't have to
believe me now, but go and read it again.
O well, I should get going from here now and go on Twitter for
awhile. It's 3 a.m. here already and it will be 4 a.m. or so
before I get to go to bed. Will chat again soon and I hope that
all is very well with you and yours today. You take good care
and enjoy the week.
God's Very Best, Full Of His And Jesus' Love & Understanding,
MichaelC
[/font]
[/quote]
sounds like you got a plan Michael.....thank you.
Blade
#Post#: 33279--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: patrick jane Date: July 13, 2021, 11:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/124236.jpg?w=940[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/july-august/conversion-therapy-bans-ex-gay-global-lgbt-laws.html
‘Pray Away the Gay’ Has Gone Away. Why Are Governments Trying to
Stop It?
Nations around the globe are pushing bans on conversion therapy,
some without defining what it is.
When the Evangelical Alliance of the United Kingdom wrote Prime
Minister Boris Johnson about the country’s push to ban
conversion therapy, its first request was that lawmakers define
the term.
Conversion therapy has become a vague catchall that can refer to
abusive and even violent efforts to change someone’s sexual
orientation but also can be construed to mean any religious act
that doesn’t affirm LGBT identities. In addition to proposals in
the UK and Canada, bans have been enacted in Malta, Germany,
Spain, Ecuador, Brazil, Taiwan, Australia, and 20 US states—some
carefully defining conversion therapy, some not.
The term often evokes the most extreme attempts to eliminate
unwanted same-sex attraction: shock therapy, exorcisms, forced
heterosexual marriages, and even rape. More commonly, conversion
therapy ministries have promised that people could overcome
their desires through prayer, discipleship, and counseling.
In the past decade, however, even that kind of conversion
therapy has mostly disappeared. Exodus International,
evangelicalism’s flagship ex-gay ministry, shut down in 2013
after former leader Alan Chambers said it had caused pain and
harm to too many people and that more than 99 percent of those
who’d sought help there hadn’t actually experienced an
orientation change. No major organization has emerged to take
its place, and conversion therapy has fallen out of practice.
Psychologist Mark Yarhouse, director of Wheaton College’s Sexual
and Gender Identity Institute, said that while some smaller
organizations persist in prayer ministries aimed at changing
people’s sexual orientation, he’s not aware of any major groups,
mainstream evangelical ministries, or professional Christian
counselors who practice any version of conversion therapy.
And yet, as the practice itself has all but disappeared, public
campaigns to ban it are growing around the world. Some
Christians worry that new regulations with poor definitions will
take aim at what the UK Evangelical Alliance calls “everyday
aspects” of church life.
A new law in Victoria, Australia, for example, will ban
“religious practices, including but not limited to a
prayer-based practice” aimed at “changing or suppressing the
sexual orientation.” The government also says conversion therapy
is illegal “with or without the person’s consent.” It is not yet
clear how the law, which goes into effect in February 2022, will
be applied, but it could criminalize praying for people who ask
for prayer.
Australian pastor and writer Stephen McAlpine says the law is
intended to challenge Christian teachings on sexuality.
“They’re looking for churches to self-censor,” he said. “It’s
not like there’s churches doing lots of conversion therapy. It’s
prayer groups where someone comes to you and says, ‘I’ve got
unwanted same-sex desires. Could you pray for me?’ ”
McAlpine worries that Victoria’s new law will prompt pastors to
say no. “Churches are going to actually pastor people less,” he
said.
While ministries including Exodus International and Focus on the
Family used to preach that homosexual desire should be
eliminated, most evangelical churches, pastors, and mental
health professionals today emphasize chastity amid desires that
might last a lifetime. “Conversion” is no longer the
goal—faithfulness is.
“There’s a greater proportion [of Christians] today that see it
as more of an enduring reality,” Yarhouse said. “The person may
experience same-sex sexuality, but now it’s, ‘How do I live with
it?’ ”
Even the Nashville Statement, a 14-point manifesto by the
complementarian Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood,
maintains that homosexual desire may never change. “We affirm
that people who experience sexual attraction for the same sex
may live a rich and fruitful life pleasing to God through faith
in Jesus Christ, as they, like all Christians, walk in purity of
life,” it reads.
Licensed counselor Jen Simmons says she has counseled clients
and walked alongside friends who are same-sex attracted but have
chosen celibacy or to marry someone of the opposite sex. She
doesn’t try to change their orientation, but helps them develop
skills to cope with unwanted same-sex attraction.
Simmons says therapy that promises to change a person’s sexual
orientation is unethical, harmful, and simply impossible.
“Just like if someone has a genetic and biological propensity to
anxiety, and they came in saying, ‘I want you to make my anxiety
go away,’ ” she said. “I could never promise that.”
Still, Simmons is concerned about conversion therapy bans, since
some of them, such as Australia’s, could target her work and
prohibit “even just introducing a biblical ethic or talking
about the biblical view of marriage,” she said.
Jayne Ozanne, founder of the Ozanne Foundation and the Global
Interfaith Commission on LGBTQ+ Lives, which advocates for a
national conversion therapy ban in the UK, said such a law is
necessary to curb self-harm and suicide among those who identify
as LGBT. A 2019 government survey found that only 2 percent of
LGBT people in the UK had undergone conversion therapy, but she
believes it still happens widely.
Ozanne, a lesbian evangelical, says she was repeatedly told
while growing up in church that God would change her orientation
if she prayed hard enough. When it didn’t happen, she not only
felt shamed, but it shook her faith.
She pushes back on concerns that conversion therapy bans would
muzzle therapists, but she has confirmed some evangelicals’
fears: She believes the bans need to focus on what’s going on
inside churches. She says that prayer ministry teams “aren’t as
regulated as we’d like to think they are” and untrained
professionals, like pastors or lay ministers, shouldn’t be
talking to people about things like sexual orientation. Ozanne
hopes the conversion therapy ban in Victoria, Australia, will be
used as a model in the rest of the world.
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/124248.jpg?h=1173&w=300[/img]
In the US, where there are lots of protections for speech,
federal courts have struck down bans in two Florida cities on
First Amendment grounds. The bans that have withstood challenges
have been more narrowly focused: In Virginia and other
jurisdictions, the therapy is banned only for minors.
Most bans in the US also explicitly exempt churches and pastors,
though they can still threaten Christian professionals,
according to Matt Sharp, an attorney with Alliance Defending
Freedom.
At the same time, licenced counselors are rarely trying to
change orientation. Simmons said that when issues of sexuality
come up, she is more likely to appeal to the science of trauma
and attachment than she is to cite Scripture.
“We can rely on what’s true,” she said. “We can rely on a lot
that’s being discovered in science...all truth is God’s truth.”
Maria Baer is a contributing writer for CT and is based in
Columbus, Ohio.
#Post#: 35324--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homosexuality - Is it a Sin?
By: patrick jane Date: October 13, 2021, 7:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/125606.jpg?w=940[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/october/lgbt-homosexual-identity-what-comes-after-ex-gay-movement.html
What Comes After the Ex-Gay Movement? The Same Thing That Came
Before.
Old-school evangelical leaders once knew the value of “care”
over “cure.”
“You know, Mike, I used to be gay,” I said.
Mike stopped moving his paintbrush as the words fell clumsily
from my mouth. He was painting the St. Louis apartment I called
home in the summer of 1997 as I began working toward my PhD in
historical theology.
He’d asked me about my schooling, and we got to talking about
faith. Mike had explained to me how he felt he could never go to
church because he was gay.
“I know they say that’s not supposed to happen,” I went on,
after dropping the bombshell. “But that’s my story.” Mike stared
at me with interest as he set the paint can down, gently
balancing his brush on its edge.
Looking back on this encounter, I can see that it had all the
trappings of what became known as the ex-gay movement, of which
I was once an eager proponent. Most notable is my use of the
ex-gay script: “I used to be gay.” The phrase implied that I
wasn’t gay anymore. I had a testimony, a story to tell about
leaving homosexuality behind.
To be clear, my sexual attractions at that moment were drawn as
exclusively to other men as ever. I was still at the top of the
Kinsey scale that researchers since the 1940s have used to
classify sexual orientation. What made me ex-gay was that I used
the ex-gay script. I was trying to convince myself that I was a
straight man with a disease—a curable one—called homosexuality.
A condition that was being healed.
My terminological maneuver was an integral component of
conversion therapy. Alan Medinger, the first executive director
of Exodus International, described it as “a change in
self-perception in which the individual no longer identifies
him- or herself as homosexual.” It was all about identity. The
testimony made the man. And, within my ex-gay framework, I
wasn’t lying; I was claiming my new reality.
I was an ex-gay.
The emergence of Exodus International in 1976 had set
evangelicals on a hopeful path toward curing homosexuality.
Founder Frank Worthen explained, “When we started Exodus, the
premise was that God could change you from gay to straight.”
What followed was a decades-long experiment on hundreds of
thousands of human test subjects. The movement collapsed after
Exodus president Alan Chambers’s 2012 statement that more than
99 percent of Exodus clients had not experienced a change in
their sexual orientation.
Although the paradigm of cure failed, it still walks undead
among us, as some within major denominations try to
institutionalize its approach. Recent debates among conservative
Anglicans and Presbyterians over whether someone can claim a
“gay identity” are only the latest round of similar disputes
that have echoed in church corridors for years. After all,
renouncing a homosexual self-perception was an essential first
step in conversion therapy.
One effect of this approach was that it mandated that
non-straight believers hide behind a mask, pretending to be
anything but gay. It was part of the reparative process.
But this theological innovation was a relatively recent
development. Before there was an ex-gay paradigm of cure, there
was an older orthodoxy that included a Christian paradigm of
caring for believers who aren’t straight.
I’ve wondered whether Henri Nouwen had his own homosexuality in
mind when he wrote of the difference between care and cure. In
the biography Wounded Prophet, Michael Ford documents how Nouwen
discussed his experience as a celibate gay man with his close
circle of friends. Nouwen had tried psychological and religious
methods of orientation change, but to no avail. He knew that out
of obedience to God, he couldn’t let himself engage in sexual
relationships. But his path was filled with loneliness and
unfulfilled longings and many tears.
In Bread for the Journey, he wrote, “Care is being with, crying
out with, suffering with, feeling with. Care is compassion. It
is claiming the truth that the other person is my brother or
sister, human, mortal, vulnerable, like I am.”
“Often we are not able to cure,” he insisted, “but we are always
able to care.”
Evangelical leaders, including John Stott, helped lay a
foundation for a pastoral paradigm of care. Stott—the theologian
and writer labeled the “Protestant Pope” by the BBC—argued that
sexual orientation remains a part of one’s constitution. As
Stott wrote in Issues Facing Christians Today back in 1982, “In
every discussion about homosexuality we must be rigorous in
differentiating between this ‘being’ and ‘doing,’ that is,
between a person’s identity and activity, sexual preference and
sexual practice, constitution and conduct.”
For Stott, a homosexual orientation was part of the believer’s
identity—a fallen part, but one that the gospel doesn’t erase so
much as it humbles.
This posture runs even further back than Stott. C. S.
Lewis spoke in a 1954 letter to Sheldon Vanauken of a “pious
male homosexual” with no apparent contradiction. Lewis’s
lifelong best friend Arthur Greeves was gay. Lewis called him
his “first friend” and made it clear to him that his sexual
orientation never would be an issue in their friendship. They
vacationed together. The compilation of letters Lewis sent to
Greeves, collected under the title They Stand Together, reaches
592 pages.
In the United States, as the 1969 Stonewall riots in New York
announced the birth of the gay rights movement, orthodox
Protestants were already asking what positive vision Scripture
gives for people who are gay. The 1970 pseudonymous InterVarsity
Press book The Returns of Love: Letters of a Christian
Homosexual mapped out a path of care and was promoted by Stott.
The book’s celibate gay Anglican author explained that he was
still a virgin at the time he wrote it.
Evangelicalism’s leaders knew there was a history of abuse with
which to reckon. In a 1968 letter to a European pastor, Francis
Schaeffer lamented the church’s complicity in marginalizing gay
people. The pastor had seen no fewer than six gay people commit
suicide, and he sought Schaeffer’s counsel. “The homophile tends
to be pushed out of human life (and especially orthodox church
life) even if he does not practice homosexuality,” lamented
Schaeffer. “This, I believe, is both cruel and wrong.” Indeed,
Schaeffer’s ministry became a magnet for gay people wrestling
with Christianity.
Such leaders saved their disgust for abusive religious leaders.
When Jerry Falwell Sr. brought up the challenge of gay people
with Schaeffer in private, Schaeffer commented that the issue
was complicated. As Schaeffer’s son, Frank, recounted in an
interview with NPR and also in his book Crazy for God, Falwell
then shot back a rejoinder: “If I had a dog that did what they
do, I’d shoot it.” There was no humor in Falwell’s voice.
Afterward, Francis Schaeffer said to his son, “That man is
really disgusting.”
“Sexual sins are not the only sins,” Stott wrote in Issues, “nor
even necessarily the most sinful; pride and hypocrisy are surely
worse.”
In 1980, Stott convened a gathering of Anglican evangelicals to
map out a pastoral approach to homosexuality. They led with
public repentance for their own sins against gay people. In a
statement, these leaders declared, “We repent of the crippling
‘homophobia’ … which has coloured the attitudes toward
homosexual people of all too many of us, and call our fellow
Christians to similar repentance.”
It was a staggering confession at a time when popular opinion
was still biased strongly against gay people. This was not the
21st century, when many Christian leaders repent in order to
look relevant and inclusive in a culture that celebrates all
things fabulous. Stott and these evangelical leaders must have
been truly grieved for the ways they had injured their neighbors
and siblings in Christ. The statement called specifically for
qualified nonpracticing gay people to be received as candidates
for ordination to ministry.
Five years earlier, many were shocked by Billy Graham’s similar
comments in a news conference, some of which were reported in
1975 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Graham had been asked
whether he would support the ordination of gay men to the
Christian ministry. Graham had replied that they “should be
considered on individual merit” based on certain qualifications.
Specifically, the article mentioned “turning away from their
sins, receiving Christ, offering themselves to Christ and the
ministry after repentance, and obtaining the proper training for
the job.”
The gospel of Jesus Christ offers a positive vision for gay
people. “In homosexuality,” Lewis explained to Vanauken, “as in
every other tribulation, [the works of God] can be made
manifest.” He continued: “Every disability conceals a vocation,
if only we can find it, which will ‘turn the necessity to
glorious gain.’ ”
Lewis asked, “What should the positive life of the homosexual
be?” That’s the question any gay person who comes to faith in
Jesus will ask.
Too often the answer we hear is simply “No.”
No sex. No dating. No relationships. Often, no leadership roles.
That leaves people like me hearing that we have, as Eve Tushnet
explained in a 2012 piece in The American Conservative, a
“vocation of No.”
What is a calling of “Yes”? What is the positive Christian
vision the gospel gives for gay people?
When I look at the lives and ministries of Lewis, Schaeffer,
Graham, and Stott, what stands out most clearly is that they
bring a vision of Jesus: Jesus, in his saving power. Jesus, who
washes us and makes us clean. Jesus, who brings us into God’s
family. Jesus, who covers shame and forgives sin. Jesus, who
calls us by name. Jesus, who sees us all the way down and still
wants to be in relationship with us. Jesus, who suffers with and
for us. Jesus, who challenges us to live for his kingdom. Jesus,
who gives new life with all its joy. Jesus, who is that treasure
in a field for which we sold everything. Jesus, who is that
treasure that can never be taken from us.
This is Jesus, whose inbreaking kingdom sweeps us up into
something he is doing in the cosmos, something larger than
ourselves. In Christ, we find ourselves in a larger narrative.
This is not Jesus as a means to an end of heterosexual
functioning and comfortable family life. This is God himself as
the end for which we were made. With this real God, the locus of
hope is found not in this life with heterosexuality, but in the
coming age, when we shall stand before our Savior.
Without that relationship with a Savior, there is no point in
speaking of a biblical sexual ethic, either to straight or gay
people. No gay people are going to embrace such an ethic unless
they fall in love with Jesus. A heart smitten by grace is not
only willing but also eager to follow the one who died for us.
Schaeffer, Stott, and Graham all stated on occasion their shared
belief that some people are born gay. All of these Christian
leaders also held to the historical understanding of the
biblical sexual ethic. This certainly meant committing to a life
in line with God’s creational pattern—his design. Not one of
them supported sexual unions for believers outside of a
monogamous marriage between two people of different sexes. But
they approached gay people from a posture of humility.
Their vision did not flatten people into our unwanted sexual
urges. Instead, they recognized that a same-sex-oriented
believer’s biggest struggle may be not with sexual sin but with
the ability to give and receive love. So they emphasized the
need for the community of the church; for deep, long-term
friendships; for brotherhood, to be known even in celibacy.
Stott, himself celibate, explained: “At the heart of the
homosexual condition is a deep and natural hunger for mutual
love, a search for identity and a longing for completeness. If
gay people cannot find these things in the local ‘church
family,’ we have no business to go on using that expression.”
Lewis, Schaeffer, Graham, and Stott also viewed the homosexual
condition as an unchosen orientation with no reliable
expectation of a change in this life. They showed great concern
for the emotional and relational needs of gay people. Schaeffer
insisted in his 1968 letter that the church needed to be the
church and help “the individual in every way possible.”
In his NPR interview, Frank Schaeffer described his father’s
Swiss ministry, L’Abri, as a place “where homosexuals—both
lesbians and gay men—are welcomed.” He added: “No one’s telling
them they’ve got to change or that they’re horrible people. And
they go away, you know, having found my father wonderfully
compassionate and Christlike to them.”
Schaeffer foresaw significant cultural changes when, in 1978, an
Orthodox Presbyterian Church congregation in San Francisco found
itself sued for releasing a gay employee who had violated the
church’s code of conduct. In The Great Evangelical Disaster,
Schaeffer said it would be silly for other churches to think
they might not face the same challenge.
Still, Schaeffer and Graham didn’t recommend us-verses-them
approaches. Just weeks before the 1964 presidential election, a
gay sex scandal rocked the nation. President Lyndon Johnson’s
top adviser, Walter Jenkins, was arrested a second time for
having gay sex in a YMCA restroom. Graham called the White House
to intercede for Jenkins.
In the recorded phone call, Graham charged Johnson to show
compassion to Jenkins.
Asked about homosexuality at a 1997 San Francisco crusade,
Graham remarked to reporters, “There are other sins. Why do we
jump on that sin as though it’s the greatest sin?” He added, “I
have so many gay friends, and we remain friends.” Speaking to a
crowd of 10,000 that night in the Cow Palace, Graham declared,
“Whatever your background, whatever your sexual orientation, we
welcome you tonight.”
As Stott emphasized so passionately in Issues, the gay person
who follows Jesus must live by faith, hope, and love: Faith in
both God’s grace and in his standards. Hope to look beyond this
present life of struggle to our future glory. But the love by
which we must live, he explained, is the love we must receive
from Christ’s spiritual family, the church. We must depend upon
love from the very churches that have historically failed to
give it to people like us.
Church historian Richard Lovelace’s 1978 book Homosexuality and
the Church garnered hearty endorsements from evangelical
luminaries Ken Kantzer (a former CT editor), Elisabeth Elliot,
Chuck Colson, Harold Ockenga, and Carl F. H. Henry. The
book might seem radical in today’s climate, but in the 1970s it
represented a transatlantic neoevangelical vision. In contrast
to homophobia on the right and sexual compromise on the left,
Lovelace laid out the gospel challenge:
There is another approach to homosexuality which would be
healthier both for the church and for gay believers, and which
could be a very significant witness to the world. This approach
requires a double repentance, a repentance both for the church
and for its gay membership. First, it would require professing
Christians who are gay to have the courage both to avow
[acknowledge] their orientation openly and to obey the Bible’s
clear injunction to turn away from the active homosexual
life-style. … Second, it would require the church to accept,
honor, and nurture nonpracticing gay believers in its
membership, and ordain these to positions of leadership for
ministry.
The church’s sponsorship of openly avowed but repentant
homosexuals in leadership positions would be a profound witness
to the world concerning the power of the Gospel to free the
church from homophobia and the homosexual from guilt and
bondage.
Only the gospel can open up the humility for such a dual
repentance. Yet this was the Christian vision of Lovelace and
Henry, Ockenga and Elliot, Kantzer and Colson, Lewis and Graham,
Schaeffer and Stott, and a young gay evangelical Anglican who
felt too afraid to use his own name, even though he was still a
virgin.
Christian fathers and mothers like these had it right.
Tragically, I write this as a lament for a road not traveled on
this side of the Atlantic.
Already by the late 1970s, a hard shift had begun. As ex-gay
ministries in North America multiplied with their expectation of
orientation change, they shifted the locus of hope to this life.
As the AIDS crisis devastated gay communities in the 1980s,
evangelicals embraced the promise of heterosexuality. The
secular reparative therapists added a semblance of clinical
respectability. The new path to cure pushed out the older path
to care.
And then the conservative side in a culture war discovered that
we ex-gays were useful. We were proof that gay people could
choose to become straight if they really wanted to. And if we
could become straight, then there really wasn’t so much need for
the church to repent of its homophobia. It just required people
like me to maintain the illusion that we had changed.
In the aftermath of that lost culture war that radically
transformed the sexual mores of the West, there is much for
Christians to grieve. Transactional relationships. Disposable
marriages. Vastly changed assumptions about sexuality and
gender.
But the conservative church’s hesitancy to repent has not
dissipated. As I watch evangelical churches and denominations
fumble their way through discussions of sexual orientation and
identity, often enforcing the language and categories of a
failed ex-gay movement, we’re missing the real battle: The
surrounding culture has convinced the world that Christians hate
gay people.
Our calling is to prove them wrong.
The world is watching. Our children and grandchildren are
watching. They are already second-guessing their faith because
they hear all around them that Christians hate gay people, and
they can’t point to anyone in their congregation who is gay, is
faithful, and is loved and accepted as such. Maybe they can
point to someone who uses the language of same-sex attraction.
But even that is rare. It’s still not safe to do so.
I am not saying we are at risk of losing Christians who are
attracted to members of the same sex; that’s a given.
I am saying we are at risk of losing the next generation.
For those who are listening, an older generation of Christians
is still willing and able to help us understand.
Greg Johnson is lead pastor of Memorial Presbyterian Church in
St. Louis and author of Still Time to Care: What We Can Learn
from the Church’s Failed Attempt to Cure Homosexuality.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page