Frankly, FoG, I see nothing “evil” about that post. I do, however, see something a bit evil about a guy who knows he’s HIV-positive yet takes risks with his family.
So if you think that simply pointing this out is “evil,” well, then it appears you haven’t learned much by the time you’ve spent here to date.
Tris,
With a minor change of your wording above (to add: “and all others” after “faggots”), this is the exact message God gave in the Latter Day Saints’ Doctrine & Covenants when He said “Of you, I require you to forgive all.” [I think I got the quote correct.]
Monty:
I certainly wasn’t instructing Friend to love only faggots. I was hoping that my deliberate use of the harshest terms to describe one group he seems to have difficulty loving would be an attention getter. Friend doesn’t need the admonishment to love everyone, he just needs a few concrete examples of the fact that everyone includes each one.
Of course that’s only the opinion of a Ruben sandwich eatin’ covetous old sinner who has had a great deal of difficulty of late wrestling with the sin of pride and self righteousness, and really wants to see Friend get the picture as it is seen by others.
Friend:
Forgive me Friend, for my anger, and my presumption. But I want you to be comforted by the thought that Christ shall save every soul that will be saved. How he will do it is more than I can imagine, but fortunately the world does not depend on my imagination, but on the infinite love of God. Stay away from sin, if you can, Friend, but beware telling other people that that is the path of Salvation.
Tris
Trisk: thanks for the kind words and I hold nothing against you. What you said in this most recent post further confirms that what I was saying was being misunderstood in a huge way which means I must not have communicated very clearly. Just for the record, I have never believed that “staying away from sin” was the path to salvation in any way shape or form. In fact, coming to Christ IN your sin, DESPITE any of your sins, is one of the truly amazing things about salvation. Christ accepts us as we are, regardless, when we come to Him, and then He changes us into something brand new that we weren’t before.
As for having love for those who are gay … truthfully, I would not have posted anything in this topic that I did if I didn’t have a love for them. Obviously that didn’t exactly come across, which was my fault for not balancing and clarifying what I was saying enough. But you can rest assured that God’s heart, which is intertwined with mine, has a deep love and compassion for anyone. “God so loved the world…” and God lives in me. He has placed that same love in my heart.
David … forgot to respond to you in this last post.
You said “Frankly, FoG, I see nothing “evil” about that post. I do, however, see something a bit evil about a guy who knows he’s HIV-positive yet takes risks with his family. So if you think that simply pointing this out is “evil,” well, then it appears you haven’t learned much by the time you’ve spent here to date.”
I said in my response to you that I have no problem with someone disagreeing with the guy … I myself disagreed at first. My objection was to assuming he wanted to harm his family intentionally. That was the assumption made that was, in fact, coldhearted and evil.
I’ll grant you that he doesn’t have “intent” to harm. But there is a category in crime having to do with ignoring the risks. In other words, for some categories of murder (or manslaughter), it’s not necessary to actually intend to do harm, but such charges can be set up by simply failing to do what is necessary.
For example, we have had long discussions on this message board about certain religions that don’t allow types of medical intervention. Even though they don’t intend to do harm to their children, I still say they should be locked up for murder or attempted murder if they withhold necessary medical care.
The same sort of reasoning could be applied here. The guy knows he’s HIV-positive. He knows that getting HIV is usually fatal. But he is not taking the proper precautions. I think this is where the “attempted murder” statement came from.
Not evil, just a different (and, I think, much more logical) way of looking at things.
David:
I understand where you’re coming from. I think the whole “withholding treatment” because of so-called “faith” is very dangerous, and not even scriptural. And I’m saying this as someone who believes in divine supernatural healing!
And to be honest, I was somewhat concerned for my friend back in 1992 for the very same reasons. I questioned whether he was using good wisdom to get married with his HIV status. But he did it, and as I’ve been saying – so far he’s been proven right.
The thing I hate, to be honest, is the fact that the guy’s testimony was largely ignored because everyone fixated on this one point.
Triskadecamus, my friend, God will forgive you your Reuben sandwiches. But you must realize that corned beef is forbidden by His Law. It’s right here in Numbers somewhere… 
May I comment to you that that was one beautiful series of posts, and that I cannot add anything to what you have said that would do anything but detract from the purity of your message. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart.
Now, let me note quite clearly to everybody that FriendofGod, in my considered opinion, is not acting out of judgmentalism, although much of what he says is tinged by it. He is one of those whom God has placed in their hearts to act to call others to Him. And he is no more singling out homosexual activity than he would be sacrificing to idols, if there were a group that claimed sacrificing to idols could be ethically done. In his worldview, the gay people are being deluded into thinking that their behavior is acceptable under a set of laws that was handed down by God, and which forbid it. He feels that he is obliged by common decency and his love in Christ for others to warn them of the consequences of their actions. Some of his posts have sounded awfully judgmental, but that was the result of him attempting to put forth the attitudes of a judgmental God than of his own judgmentalism – though I have a feeling that he wrestles with a tendency to feel holier-than-thou himself.
As I hope has been clear through the last 15 pages of this interminable dialogue, I disagree wholeheartedly with him on those laws and on God’s attitude as regards them. However, one should not necessarily ascribe to the messenger the views of him whose message he brings, and I think that that is only fair here.
Gaudere, regarding your comment along the same lines, my reaction would be to proof-text from the First Epistle of John:
I stand confident in my attempt to follow God according to my understanding of what He expects of me, and that includes not being judgmental, and in particular to make it clear that Jesus my Lord had no grudge against people who find themselves with same sex orientation and that those who say he did are objectifying their own prejudices with the help of selective Biblical prooftexting.
Your analysis of FriendofGod’s motivations may be on target, but I hope not. God wants us to love Him, not, in the last analysis, to fear Him. (Drag out the prooftexts for “the fear of God” and he and I will shoot 'em down – that is a very specialized meaning of “fear” more akin to “awed respect” than to “dread of a monster.”)
His confidence in God is based on a traditionalist understanding of the meaning of the Bible and on the applicability of its laws to human behavior. Mine is not. But I can fully understand his, and how he interconnects the idea that the heart of Christianity is love of Jesus with the traditionalist dogmas. As that wise singer/songwriter S. Gately commented:
But, Friend, we are not called to tell others about God’s love and judgment – we are called to lead them to God’s love. The telling is a duty only where it produces useful results. To witness in such a way that others are led astray from God is, in the last analysis, sinful, whatever one’s motives may be.
Polycarp …
I really appreciate this last post. You said "He feels that he is obliged by common decency and his love in Christ for others to warn them of the consequences of their actions. " THANK YOU! I kind of had the feeling no one would ever understand this because of the intensity of the feelings people have on this issue. You stated where I am coming from more clearly than I did.
You said "Some of his posts have sounded awfully judgmental, but that was the result of him attempting to put forth the attitudes of a judgmental God than of his own judgmentalism – though I have a feeling that he wrestles with a tendency to feel holier-than-thou himself. "
Well, thanks kinda ;). As for the “judgmental” side of God … He is the ultimate judge, and the only one who is worthy to judge … but that’s not all He is, or even the main thing He is. The Bible makes it plain that God’s perfect will would be that everyone choose Him so He could be in fellowship with them and bring them to heaven. I truly believe God judges because He has to, not because He wants to.
As for ‘holier than thou’ feelings … actually my weakness is more the opposite. I have a tendency to ‘beat myself up’ when I sin rather than calmly coming to Christ and receiving His forgiveness, and grace to change. It’s not a good thing. Believe me, I am well aware of my need for Christ … without Him I would have no hope.
You said “I stand confident in my attempt to follow God according to my understanding of what He expects of me, and that includes not being judgmental, and in particular to make it clear that Jesus my Lord had no grudge against people who find themselves with same sex orientation and that those who say he did are objectifying their own prejudices with the help of selective Biblical prooftexting.”
Amen 
If my comments made you or anyone think that I thought He did have a “grudge”, I was not very clear. God loves all and is willing to receive all, regardless of the sins in the person’s background.
You said "Your analysis of FriendofGod’s motivations may be on target, but I hope not. God wants us to love Him, not, in the last analysis, to fear Him. (Drag out the prooftexts for “the fear of God” and he and I will shoot 'em down – that is a very specialized meaning of “fear” more akin to “awed respect” than to “dread of a monster.”) "
Well, you are correct that Guadere’s analysis was off. It’s almost funny watching everyone attempting to psychoanalyze my motivations and why I think the way I do. It’s actually very simple … I love God, He lives in me, He loves the world, and He wants to communicate His love through me, and through everyone who loves Him.
You are right about the ‘fear of God’. No one who knows Christ should ever have a reason to have a ‘terror’ kind of fear of God. I might have given a wrong impression that I was cowering in a corner, scared to death of God’s rules or something like that. Nope. I love God and trust Him and am very comfortable relating to Him. He’s not a God of rules at all … it’s all about relationship.
You said “But I can fully understand his, and how he interconnects the idea that the heart of Christianity is love of Jesus with the traditionalist dogmas.”
Again, thank you. I must say truthfully it’s nice to know that someone out there gets where I’m coming from.
Finally you said "But, Friend, we are not called to tell others about God’s love and judgment – we are called to lead them to God’s love. The telling is a duty only where it produces useful results. To witness in such a way that others are led astray from God is, in the last analysis, sinful, whatever one’s motives may be. "
I would say it this way … living a life for Christ on a daily basis is the tool to draw people to God’s love. Once a person is curious and wants to know more, explaining how they can have a relationship with Christ comes into play.
I agree that I should only “tell” when it produces good results … and if you’ll read my earlier post you’ll see that I am indeed questioning whether the emphasis I’ve had is producing good results.
On the flip side … if I taught the gospel flawlessly, there will still be many who reject it and don’t react positively. So just the fact that some are reacting harshly by itself doesn’t mean the gospel wasn’t preached.
In retrospect, I think part of what I was debating with Guadere in Parts I and II was a clear presentation of the gospel, but slanted in a particular direction that might have been the exact wrong slant for this bboard.
I think what God is showing me is this: for this bunch in particular, they HAVE to see the love of God in action before they will accept and understand His judgment of sin. In other words … they have to see that they can TRUST Him before they believe, because right now people on this board seem to trust God about as far as they can throw Him. I think this is the direction God is planting in my heart.
Thanks again Polycarp for seeing my heart even though you disagree. I must add that I believe you too are very sincere and desire to reach people … and I think God has given you a gift of compassion. That seems to be one of your strengths.
This thread seems to be winding down again. I must confess I’m glad part III is over at least. Amazing how one stupid statement I made back in part I led to this whole part III thread. Just goes to show that actions have consequences.
Goodnight all :).
Once upon a time, andros said:
Friend of God, do you intend to address this?
andros:
I want you to know that I did read your commentary the first time you posted it and I just re-read it. Truthfully, I didn’t (and still don’t) want to spend the time necessary to do a point-for-point rebuttal, especially now that I am really wanting to move away from this topic. If it weren’t a topic that evoked such strong emotions and distracted from my main message it would be an interesting debate, but I don’t think it’s worth it.
Just to give you something (since you were so persistant in bringing up the rather thorough commentary you made), I will tell you this. A year ago a lesbian I met online directed me to an entire website that was VERY in-depth in it’s attempt to defend homosexuality. It took every scripture reference and had paragraphs and paragraphs of points about why it didn’t apply or didn’t mean what it actually said.
While some of the points were mildly interesting, the vast majority were a convoluted attempt to wriggle around very clear and easy to understand statements. Now I will say this - a few of the passages you quoted, I’ve never even heard of as being a supposed commentary on homosexuality and I would agree that it’s stretching it to somehow apply it to that topic.
But suffice it to say, to me the Bible’s message is very clear on this subject and totally unambiguous. I’m sure you’d like to engage in a point-for-point debate and I kind of would too … but again, this topic causes so much emotional angst that I have no desire to continue discussing it at this time. Sorry andros. 
FriendOfGod
Though I believe that sin is coldness of the heart, that actions themselves are amoral events that are driven by moral and immoral decisions, I respect the opinion you hold. As you see it, if a man were forced to commit a homosexual act at the point of a gun, would his act be sinful?
Interesting one Lib. You could actually substitute any sin there – “would it be sinful if you were forced to say a curseword” or “to kiss a woman who isn’t your wife” or “to kill someone” and on and on.
The short answer is “I don’t know”. I tend to think God leans on the side of mercy in a case like this … I mean it’s all about what’s in your heart. You don’t “want” to do these things, you’re being forced. On the flip side, there are actions God deems sinful (adultery, lying, etc). And on the flip flip side (??) you really can’t be forced to do anything in this scenario. You could refuse and accept the consequences.
This reminds me of the classic scenario Christians in countries like China have faced during the last century. They literally HAVE had a gun forced in their face, but in their case it was the ultimate issue – betray God or die. In that situation, despite the fear, I think a believer would be willing to die for their faith (a la Cassie Bernall).
I know there are many who would apply this same principle to many of the issues I just listed and the one you said. In other words, they would refuse to do the act and accept the consequence of death, which, of course, isn’t much of a consequence since they’re going to heaven!
Just as a clarification – obviously there are situations where you are literally forced into things – ie, rape. Obviously in that case the victim is totally innocent.
Interesting topic Lib. What are your thoughts?
FoG said:
Is Cassie the one of “She Said Yes” fame? She was killed at Columbine?
If so, for the record, there is ample evidence that the story is untrue. If it would make any difference (I suspect it wouldn’t for you), I could look it up.
But Cassie Bernal didn’t die for her faith. Not only that, but she arguably endangered others by drawing attention to herself.
-Ben
FoG: *…I think a believer would be willing to die for their faith (a la Cassie Bernall). *
Not to sidetrack the current discussion, but just taking a flyswatter to another urban legend in passing: take a look at this discussion about misstatements about the tragic death of Cassie Bernall.
Wow, triple simulpost. Consider the fly swatted.
I haven’t seen anything quite like it since I last watched “The Heroic Trio.”
-Ben
Pardon me, but FriendofGod, would you send me an email so I can discuss with you off the board? Not for harassments, I assure you.
Just for the record I have heard some of these contradicting stories about Cassie’s death and so I’m aware that it’s not 100% certain that the exchange took place as originally reported. It’s very possible that the exchange took place with the other student (can’t recall her name). Regardless of who the individual was, however, it was a stark reminder to me as a believer that you can still have to choose between your faith and your life even in the good ole USA.
Any of you READ “She Said Yes”? I’m actually partly glad that people thought for sure it was her at first, because otherwise we wouldn’t have had the opportunity to read her rather amazing testimony. She was practically heading down the same path as her killers just two years earlier, and God totally turned her around.
backpack, I’ll send ya an email after I post this.