gobear, kindly get off your moral high horse. I did not mean to imply that gay Christians (see, I can write it without the quoes, too ) are extremely repugnant or distasteful. Self-hatred and repression of one’s desire to love aren’t heartwarming in the least. But don’t twist my words into something else.
That said, I’ve heard from my friends that gays do seem to be more friendly than straights. I haven’t had the opportunity to experience that for myself, though. So I can’t say whether it’s true or not from my experience.
Homebrew, JuanitaTech, iampunha: Well, I just posted my clarification. Don’t know if it’s what you were looking for, but it’s my opinion.
Mockingbird: No idea what Soylent Green is. Therefore, I can’t comment on your desire to (presumably) make mincemeat out of everyone who’s the slightest bit misunderstanding about homosexuality.
Story about the lady caught in adultary, under this creed:
3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4 they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5 Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such. What do you say about her?But it’s ok.” 6 This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” * Since all were without sin, they immediately started throwing rocks, but each missed, so they didn’t kill her, and left*. 8 And once more he bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 9 But when they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the eldest, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10 Jesus looked up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11 She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again.”
Oh, my html codes are off, so just delete all parts in between the and all parts between the ** just tilt your head to read.
I must admit to be confused myself here… what exactly is difficult to understand about this “whole homosexuality” thing? Or to misunderstand? Could someone please elaborate on what’s so complicated?
In the interest of fair play (one response deserves another), I am going to reply to Svt4him despite the fact that I see he has brought in “proof” that was already set aside as being … well, less than completely reliable.
I should warn, though, that should you fail to understand and/or incorporate this into your response, Svt4him, I make absolutely no promises regarding the polite tone of future responses of mine after this. I have no qualms debating or eduating. I have serious problems with people weaseling, lying, misrepresenting and generally being jerks.
I have already said in direct response to you, and you have raised no disagreement (being given at least two opportunities for such by responding to me as well your ability to post of your own original thought), that one cannot determine to a complete, total or perfect certainty regarding what the Bible says or said about, among other things, what it means to be Christian. As such you either missed my point (stated several times) or you now disagree with me.
Urge to say something about those who believe they are going (and around whom I would be particularly uncomfortable spending an eternity) aside, I do not believe it is theologically consistent to say that anyone who wants to go to Heaven is going to Hell instead. Regardless I do not see that implication being borne out of an intelligent (i.e. being able to parse the sentence) reading of my statement “And if that’s the case, you can have your God and I’ll take a being with compassion regardless of faults of His/Her/Its/Their followers:mad:”. What I meant by that was that I have no desire to spend eternity with someone who damns people despite their wishes to be with Him.
Er, so? What is your point? Is your basis for saying whether or not, IYO (in your opinion) a religion is compatible with Christianity contingent upon their having no book as important as the Bible nor one (or more) they assert to be more correct than the Bible? Otherwise I don’t see any relevance here to the topic.
Okay, good for him. Do you then believe that one must hold no book above the Bible in any sense in order to be Christian? If so, why? If not, why do you cite this?
BTW, this quote lacks clear context re: “most correct book”.
When you raised the points you made here and you saw multiple people posting in disagreement, a superior manner of response might have been taking one or two to email. However I do recognize the point you raise, although I do have to say I don’t see the argument’s validity in the context of what I said. You said “There’s stuff on this about my point, go find it and read it.” If you are so swamped that you are unable to find a reference/cite for what you say, a better course of action would be either to say “I will get a cite for this later” or drop the point/reduce it to opinion. There are, of course, other options:)
Hmm? Please expand on this re: “while neglecting to do the same”. Do you mean, for example, that you want people to elucidate your argument on your behalf? Maybe it’s just a personal hang-up, but if I knew someone disagreed with me I don’t think I’d allow them to do my argumentation for me:D If, OTOH, you mean that they do not confirm every little thing they said (when requested to do so, I add for context), show me, for example, where I have not done so here where it has been requested of me, and I will try to do so to the best of my abilities:) I don’t generally say stuff I can’t back up, and if I am unable to find a cite I qualify it as being my opinion.
You have presented something as fact. I do not see the gross insult in being asked to clarify and ask questions. The same would be required of anyone here. If this method of response is undesirable to you, you are not required to remain posting here or even remain at all. You are here of your own volition (unless someone is holding a gun to your head or something).
Perhaps it is the haste of your re-typing that words this such that I am unable to discern what you mean.
Dude, this is a three-page-long thread. Your point remains dubious. I do not see the error in requesting clarification.
NO. That is fallacious and incorrect. The thread is about gay CHRISTIANS vs. straight CHRISTIANS, not people in general. If you’re going to cite some random gay guy, then I’m going to cite the straight children who threw rocks and sticks (among other things) at me merely because I asserted that my sexuality was not their concern. Your point, to re-iterate, about the gay guy who expressed hostility and some desire for physical retaliation, is utterly and completely irrelevant here if he is not Christian because this thread is about the behavior of Christians.
I suggest typing up responses in some sort of word processor. Much more difficult to lose things that way:) I believe your wording re: Homebrew’s question on the man’s religion was “I never said he was Christian.” If the man was not Christian, of ir you are unsure of that, then it is entirely irrelevant to this discussion.
Right, then. Putting this as simply as I can:
Do you have proof that he was gay?
Do you have proof that he was Christian?
Rather (to borrow from another poster in this thread), are you uncomfortable with the idea that a gay person could be christian, and thus because he is gay you have some difficulty in saying that he is christian?
What we were doing was handing out tracts like these ones:
Do you agree with the sentiment and religious beliefs and teachings in those tracts? If not, which do you disagree with?
Meanwhile there is something I find to be in egregious error:
I seem to have received a faulty set of Ten Commandments, because I don’t recall ANY proscription against extramarital intercourse or desire.
Exodus 20:3-17, in fact:
KJV, of course, but I rather doubt it makes a difference.
Witnessing to those who are minding their own business has nothing to do with perfection:mad:
Your analogy is flawed, again.
Regardless of what YOU believe, if someone sees the same thing and they disagree with the notion that it says X, and someone who has perfect-enough knowledge of it says otherwise (a cop in this case; I don’t know what kind of qualification one could have on Earth), THEN they’re justified in giving a fine. But you cannot prove that God has EVER punished ANYONE for being gay, having gay sex, etc. I await, of course, your proof to the contrary.
Other than someone who believes God does not exist (and so would have little reason in particular to spend time with Him)…and really, if you don’t want to go to Heaven, I don’t see the great insult in going to Hell. Judging by the people some of your cohorts believe are, there it’s probably a fun place;)
Lastly, regarding a “just God”, I don’t believe that one who would send someone to damnation who does not desire damnation would do so. If you do, then you are welcome to Him. I see no purpose in worshipping such a God because there is fuck-all to guarantee that God will give two shits about having anyone “up there” i.e. Heaven.
Lest Flam_X feel neglected, I’ll post a response to her assuming one in my way of thinking (i.e. addressing her post in detail) hasn’t already been posted. This reply has taken a bit of time;)
Would that several other people did this from time to time:D
Fortunately they can deal with you being straight, too. Lovely, ain’t it, that you should have to rely on people accepting … er … who you are. Do you see how this comment could also cause anger?
I think you might want to remember that some people are assholes. Sexuality/gender has nothing to do with it (despite some fervent claims to the contrary).
As rjung astutely pointed out, this is probably the source of your discomfort/ignorance (not always a bad word).
Then he is not a former homosexual at ALL. He has trained himself not to act on thought that, by definition, identify him as a homosexual. I praise the same (or so I’m told) God that I don’t have to fight to overcome those same urges; they are intrinsic to me.
Short answer: he didn’t. He’s still gay, just celibate. In that sense there’s no difference between him and any other gay man who isn’t in a relationship or otherwise involved with a man in a sexual way (or even non-sexual, remembering that sexuality involves more than genitalia and such things).
What is there about being gay and being christian that seems contradictory to you? Perhaps better to ask this way:
Put into words what you believe constitutes a homosexual
Same for christian
Not in person. You’ve been on this MB long enough to have run into people who weren’t straight but who were Christian (myself up until a year and a half ago or so). There have also been plenty of discussions on this subject (gay christians) and if nothing else, The Priam Creed may serve to help you better understand that it’s really quite simple (despite the five-paragaph essay nature of his post:D).
See above:)
Intolerance, though heavily frowned upon, is acceptable inasmuch as one is willing to examine it, and if necessary, change it. Intolerance of that which is different (simply because it is different and ignoring any merits it has) goes in direct defiance of the purpose of this MB. So if that’s the case with you, I suggest finding another board;)
I’m not a member of any church. Polycarp, for his part, is a member of an episcopalian church (as is Siege). Esprix, IIRC, is a Unitarian Universalist.
I and others do not deal well with being told that we are not as we believe to be, especially given the profundity of the lack of evidence you shamelessly put forth.
Right, then. Better now. How about you describe, for us, your understanding of “the lifestyle”?
That is incongruent with basic models of human learning (with the exception of those who are incapable of learning beyond a certain point. These seem to have been quarantined, mercifully, to a few religious denominations).
I did. Link. Warning: vile. I have also told you more times than I really want to count (cf. GAAAH:mad: etc) that this belief that there is a certain gay lifestyle is incorrect and is propagated by those who A) don’t know what it is, B) make invalid and incorrect assumptions (and demonize things that are perfectly acceptable to rational humans), and C) do so further for the purpose of subjugating those (GLBT) people.
Given what you know about me, I would hope my previous angry response is understood. I would be off by an order of at least one magnitude if I said that I had heard what you have said about “the lifestyle” re: not accepting it 100 times.
This is good. Willingness to learn and admit shortcomings is an important thing and lacking in far too many people.
I don’t have an intolerance to that which is different… or if I did, I’d hope to examine it. So does examining the causes of my supposed intolerance make me fit for this MB?
As for a gay lifestyle, I’m not saying that all gay people do the same thing… I don’t make those kinds of sweeping generalizations. I’m certainly not saying that they all go down to Davie St. and have unprotected sex in gay bathhouses! (even I know that’s not true) But perhaps that was a bad choice of words. I’m sure gay people do all the same things that straight people do, but I just don’t get it. (not the fact that their sexual orientation is different than mine, but is there anything they do that’s different?)
Read your link: I definitely don’t subscribe to the Fred Phelps model of thinking.
There may have been plenty of discussion on this subject, but I haven’t actually seen much of it till now. (I stay out of GD most of the time, y’know?)
A homosexual: one that is attracted to others of the same sex.
A Christian: one that believes in God, and acts out His love to all people. I’d say that most Christians are straight, though some might have homosexual urges that they may act on from time to time. (of course, given what I know of people on this board… that may not be true)
I didn’t mean to step all over your beliefs or anything else. So you praise your God that you don’t have to overcome those urges? That’s good for you, and I respect that. And as for my “dealing” with people being gay: if I assume they’re straight (unless obviously otherwise), then find out they’re gay… that might be a bit of a shock. But even before the shock (and after, I might add), I’d like to think that I treat them with the civility and dignity that I treat all fellow human beings.
rjung, note that I did NOT say “oh, thank goodness I never really met many of those gay people… I don’t like them anyhow.” Having said that, what do you think I should do? Go out to Davie St. and the gay bars? I’d certainly meet more of them there.
Priam, thanks for your explanation.
Esprix, I do recall reading some of the ATGG threads.
Wish I could put more, but I have to leave now. Maybe later.
Okay, I don’t really want to waste much time here so I’ll just say this: Flam, you’re ignorent, vile and hateful. You don’t have the slightest clue about gays so please cease your endless assumptions about them.
Also, I don’t see how you’re getting into heaven when all you’re doing is sitting back shouting “I hate ragheads! I hate faggots! I hate lesbians!” etc and that these gays who have shown wonderful acts of kindness even when confronted by wankers like you are going to go to hell just for fancying the fellas. You’re a right silly git, you know that?
I did a vanity search and this thread came up and was really curious how my name got mentioned.
I won’t try to hijack this thread other than to comment on what Polycarp said; I think he’s being monotheisitically myopic (Gods, I’ve wanted to use that phrase on the 'Dope for sometime!). By that, I mean he’s confusing the color of the light for the source of light, itself, to draw on the analogy that I’ve used in the past. In the same way that the light given off by a point source can be broken up into myraid colors thru a prism, so our perception of the numen is divided into myraid concepts of deity.
This strikes me as far more heart-breaking than heart-warming. To think of the self-loathing and guilt this person must deal with every day breaks my heart. I can’t imagine how this person can deal with that kind of thing. Had I been raised in the culture of homophobia that some kinds of Christianity create and realized I was gay, I would probably have killed myself. I don’t want to imagine how many young gay men and women have already. How can someone possibly reconcile these kinds of beliefs with their natural feelings, very likely feelings they’ve had since they were too young to know what sin is? I can only imagine they must feel, at some level, a huge amount of horror that God would create them to love men (or women) and then threaten to punish them for it, forcing them into celibacy or sexual intercourse with someone they feel no sexual attraction for… shudder
Flamsterette, I have followed your postings since you joined the SDMB (not to be a stalker or anything–you post a lot) and you never struck me as a deliberately malicious or hateful person. I can only assume your comments are caused by ignorance. I strongly urge you to read some of the threads about various topics started by our fellow gay posters here. Not just the Ask the Gay Guy stuff, but the ones that demonstrate that gay men and women are just as full of love, heartbreak, and anger as straight human beings. Maybe then you will see that the only difference is the gender of the person that one is attracted to.
What is there to get, here? Gay men are sexually attracted to other men! Gay women are sexually attracted to other women! That is the only thing they “do” that is exclusive to homosexuality. I don’t really understand this.
BTW–hey, iampunha, as well as Polycarp and others? Thanks for fighting the good fight. I usually lose patience around sentence four, but someone’s gotta do it (if only so I don’t feel the need to…)
lying and misrepresenting? Wow. ok, I then went back to the guy who wanted to punch me, too see the relevance. Here is my quote:
To answer the question, was I down in cedar springs telling the homosexuals they were going to hell because they were gay? Nope. As a matter of fact I don’t think I once mentioned Homosexual or gay unless I was asked. For instance, one guy I was talking to for about 20 min looked at me and said “I want to punch you.” When I asked why he said because I was there telling them all homosexuals go to hell. My response to him was the first time the word homosexual was used when when he said that I said all homosexuals go to hell, and that I hadn’t mentioned it once before that.
So then I went to the question that this was in response to:
Or did you go to protest against the gay churchmembers, like the people in the article linked to by the OP? I infer the latter from your post. If i’m wrong, then your usage is simply rather ambiguous; if i’m right, then it’s downright disingenuous.
So I fail to see how a conversation with someone who accused me of doing the same as above is irrelevant.
I don’t mind if you disagree, nor do I mind if you are mad about it. But you ask for references but then say that you can’t trust references as we can only trust what we think we know based on what we may be reading? If you want me to use actual scriptural references, I don’t mind. Let me start by the one you just mentioned about sex…
The Holy Bible, New King James Version Galations 5
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
forniation: From Thayer’s Greek Definition
Total KJV Occurrences: 26
fornication, 24
Matt 5:32, Matt 19:9, John 8:41, Acts 15:20, Acts 15:29, Acts 21:25, Rom 1:29, 1 Cor 5:1 (2), 1 Cor 6:13, 1 Cor 6:18, 1 Cor 7:2, 2 Cor 12:21, Gal 5:19, Eph 5:3, Col 3:5, 1 Thess 4:3, Rev 9:21 (2), Rev 14:8, Rev 17:2, Rev 17:4, Rev 18:3, Rev 19:2
πορνεία porneia
Holman Bible Dictionary
As a whole, the New Testament uses porneia, most often translated fornication, in at least four ways:
Voluntary sexual intercourse of an unmarried person with someone of the opposite sex (1 Cor. 7:2; 1 Thess. 4:3).
A synonym for adultery (Matt. 5:32; 19:9). See Adultery; Divorce.
Harlotry and prostitution (Rev. 2:14, 20).
Various forms of unchastity (John 8:41; Acts 15:20; 1 Cor. 5:1).
Now other questions that I may have avoided, although I think to be fair, I really do read a lot of different posts so I try and answer as quick as I can. I in no way was trying to avoid answering, and if I was a jerk, I’m sorry.
Now about being a Christian:
Acts 11:
25 Then Barnabas departed for Tarsus to seek Saul. 26 And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for a whole year they assembled with the church and taught a great many people. And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.
Christian- Christianos khris-tee-an-os’ From G5547; a Christian, that is, follower of Christ:—Christian.
CHRISTIAN (khrihs’ tyan) The Greek Christianos originally applied to the slaves belonging to a great household. It came to denote the adherents of an individual or party. A Christian is an adherent of Christ; one committed to Christ; a follower of Christ. The word is used three times in the New Testament. 1. Believers “were called Christians first in Antioch” because their behavior, activity, and speech were like Christ (Acts 11:26). 2. Agrippa responded to Paul’s witness, “Almost thou persuade me to be a Christian” (Acts 26:28). He spoke of becoming an adherent of Christ. 3. Peter stated that believers who “suffer as a Christian” are to do so for the glory of God (1 Pet. 4:16). A Christian is one who becomes an adherent of Christ, whose daily life and behavior facing adversity is like Christ.
So what did Jesus say about those who wanted to follow Him?
Well, part of it was said in the post about the sheep and the goats. Another is found in 1 John 2:
1 My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.
3 Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him. 6 He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked.
7 Brethren, I write no new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which you heard £from the beginning. 8 Again, a new commandment I write to you, which thing is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away, and the true light is already shining.
9 He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now. 10 He who loves his brother abides in the light, and there is no cause for stumbling in him. 11 But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
Now by this you can see that there are those who think they know God, but have deceived themselves. The story of the wise and unwise builders who built their houses on different foundations is a good example. Both built houses, both experienced storms, only one lasted.
Now for sin:
1 john 3
4Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. 5And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin. 6Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him.
Romans 6
19I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.
20For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. 23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Matthew 24
12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved.
Matt. 13
41 The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, 42 and will cast them into the furnace of fire.
Now that was in regards to another post, but back to a statement regarding other religions, and what is true. Truth is truth, no matter how much I agree or disagree with it. So if the Bible is truth, it is irrelevant what I agree or disagree with. Now I’m going off track, but take Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons for example. They can not claim to be Bible believing religions if they do things that the Bible says not to do. Mormonism then elevates the BoM to be the most correct book, while the Bible is correct as long as it’s translated correctly. Well, then I look at their claims to see what they’ve said, and if it’s changed. Now I’m going to jump to JW’s for a sec. In 1924 Jan 1 issue of Watchtower, they made a claim that Jesus’ kingdom was to be established on earth in the late 1800’s, then it was changed (I posted this somewhere), so then did they prophecy something and it not come true? If so, then according to the Bible they believe (KJV) they are false prophets. Now Mormonism has extra books, and also their 12 apostles can speak as inspired by God, and their words have the same authority as scripture. That is also why you have a lot of their writtings. So I looked at some of those teachings.
This is from http://www.mrm.org/multimedia/text/no-salvation.html
In the fourteenth chapter of John, Jesus tells His disciples that He would be leaving them but that they should not be troubled. “If I go,” He said, “I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.”
Jesus’ statement puzzled Thomas, who asked how it was possible to know how to get where Christ was going. To this Jesus replied, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6).
Christians throughout the centuries have pointed to Jesus Christ as the only way to salvation. If you desire to spend eternity in the presence of the Father, you must come to faith in Jesus Christ. It is imperative to understand that, as a sinner, you cannot possibly work your way into His presence. Jesus likened salvation to passing through a narrow gate and declared that few were going to find themselves passing through it (Matthew 7:14). Despite Jesus’ clear affirmation, Marion Romney, a former member of the LDS First Presidency, perverted the words of our Lord when he said, “This Church is the ensign on the mountain spoken of by the Old Testament prophets. It is the way, the truth, and the life” (Conference Report, April, 1961, pg. 119).
Jesus warned that others would come proclaiming that salvation could be obtained by some other means. He warned that thieves and robbers would come who would claim that salvation can be obtained by “some other way” (John 10:1). He added that only those who enter through the door of the “sheepgate” are truly His own.
Any individual, group, or church claiming that salvation can be found only within their little circle must be viewed with suspicion. Mormonism certainly qualifies. What is amazing is that LDS leaders don’t even try to hide the fact that salvation can only be secured through their organization. In the words of 13th LDS President Ezra Taft Benson, “This is not just another Church. This is not just one of a family of Christian churches. This is the Church and kingdom of God, the only true Church upon the face of the earth…” (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p.164-165).
In a conference speech delivered on April 8, 1973, LDS Apostle Mark E. Petersen proclaimed that salvation “comes only through the Church itself as the Lord established it… Therefore it was made clearly manifest that salvation is in the Church, and of the Church, and is obtained only through the Church.”
The problem with Petersen’s assessment is that salvation comes by faith in Jesus Christ, not membership in a church. It is our faith in Christ which makes us a member of Christ’s Body, or in other words, the Church. This church is not, nor ever has been, an organization. Rather, the Church, or Body of Christ, is made up of individuals throughout the world who have placed their total trust in Jesus Christ for their salvation. Despite this biblical truth, Joseph Fielding Smith, Mormonism’s tenth president, went on record as saying that there is “no salvation without Joseph Smith.” (Doctrine of Salvation 1:189).
In his article entitled “Joseph Smith Among the Prophets” printed in the June 1994 issue of “Ensign” magazine, Mormon writer Robert L. Millet quoted second LDS Prophet Brigham Young, who, in 1859, stated, “From the day that the priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding up things of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are – I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent” (Journal of Discourses 7:238. See also Search These Commandments, 1984, pg. 133).
Along those same lines Brigham Young also taught, “How are you going to get your resurrection? You will get it by the President of the resurrection pertaining to this generation, and that is Joseph Smith Jun. Hear it all ye ends of the earth; if ever you enter into the kingdom of God it is because Joseph Smith let you go there. This will apply to Jews and Gentiles, to the bond, and the free; to friends and foes; no man or woman in this generation will get a resurrection and be crowned, without Joseph Smith saying so. The man who was martyred in Carthage Jail, State of Illinois, holds the keys of life and death to this generation. He is the President of the resurrection in this dispensation, …” (An unpublished Discourse given October 8, 1854. Also found on page 99 of Eugene E. Campbell’s book entitled, “The Essential Brigham Young”).
I’m sure I haven’t addressed everything, sorry about that. I’m not use to typing this much, and my hands actually hurt.
13“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
21“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
24“Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: 25and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.
26“But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand: 27and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. And great was its fall.”
37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets
And how do you know if you love the LORD your God?
1 John 2 addresses this.
And why not throw in what love is, since that is important.
1 Corinthians 13
1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.
4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.
13 And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
Honestly I believe if there was a bit more love in some Christians hearts, you wouldn’t have a situation like the start of this thread. At the same time, love would require people to share truth, but I think if it’s shared in arrogance, it is a banging cymbal.
Did you post this story in this thread because you feel it has relevance re: gay christians vs. straight christians, or for some other reason? I asked this once and I’m asking it again:)
Now then. If the “Let me start by the one you just mentioned about sex…” is my comment about there being no proscription dealing with extramarital (excluding adulterous) intercourse, no verse other than those I quoted apply, I think, since they (non-Exodus 3-18) aren’t the Ten Commandments. Unless you’d like to make a case that The Ten are also found in Galatians:D
I am unable to place this comment of yours in the context of what has been said so far. Are you able to?
I don’t know about you, but to me there’s a difference between pre-marital sex, having sex with someone who’s married to someone else (and without that someone else’s permission), being paid to have sex and “various forms of unchastity”, which could be nothing more than masturbation. That’s an awfully big brush to paint with, dude. I wouldn’t go trying to paint flies with that thing the way I think you’re trying to.
1 John you bring up. This is the first time I’ve seen this particular passage, and it rather disturbs me:
Um. Now I may be reading this wrong (hope to Hell-er, Heaven;) I am), but someone who sins is the child of the devil?
You cite 1 John 2, which I believe can be adequately summed up (feel free to disagree:)) thusly:
His commandments being: Love God as much as you can, and love your neighbor as you love yourself (IE do unto others etc).
Now. If I ask you not to, say, punch me in the face, and I punch YOU in the face, I am not living my neighbor as myself. Conversely, while you may not object to being punched in the face and so not mind me doing so, you must think to yourself what my wishes are.
This is one reason why I believe that those who believe they are doing God’s work in telling homosexuals (among other things and other groups) “You’re going to Hell” or who try to tell them what they’re doing (which, unless they’ve been using periscopes to look into the bedrooms involved, they don’t know) is going against God’s word. He says lots of things about counseling your neighbor against sin, but he also says to love your brother as yourself. And the way to reach someone, to show them God’s love, is not to do what they don’t want but to show them God’s love. Because ultimately He’s the one who’s going to show them what they’re doing is wrong (or not, or whatever). We are all, at our best, fallible. That is why my belief is that those whose ministries try more to counsel against sin than for developing a deeper relationship with Christ/God (which, IMO, will lead to an understanding of sin that entails not being a busybody) are erring.
John 18:38: “…“What is truth?”…” One of my favorite quotes in the entire work, and although badly taken out of context here I still think its meaning is valid. The issue, as I see it, is not how much you disagree with it but how it can be proven that it is, in fact, truth. To that end,
Yes, IF the Bible is complete, total and perfect truth in each instance where you cite it is (because quite honestly I don’t think that partial truth regarding the things we’re discussing is going to do much good). You might have a hard time proving that to a few people on this board;)
Let me make this argument to you: I have a book in my hand. I assert that it is the Truth because I believe it. I believe it with all my heart. Lots of other people believe it.
Do those beliefs render the necessary conclusion that it is Truth? I hold that it does not, and this is why I think that arguing from the Bible as though it were Truth is faulty. Too, consider the fact that we’re discussing this in a language that is vastly different from the one it was written in, and that the verse markings weren’t there, and the punctuation wasn’t there, and etc. The margin of error with the Bible is simply too much for me to place importance in it above that of the life of a friend. If my refusal to treat the Bible as the Truth you hold it to be means that we are at an impasse, so be it.
And who is saying what the Bible says not to do? You have already said that you are no more an authority on the Bible than anyone else. Who among any of us (in the world) is qualified to say for sure what the Bible says not to do? Let that being come here and clarify all this for us. Until then it is not ours to judge who is not a Christian if they say they are. If you believe they aren’t, live your life such that others will know how to live as Christ and God intended, to the best of your abilities:)
I’ve yet to see one translated correctly. YMMV:D
Not even going to expound on this at any length. I’ve covered my disagreement with this before. Unless you’d care to try to answer my argument, I see no reason to dignify comments like “The Bible says” and “according to the Bible” because they imply something I do not accept.
These days entirely too many tend to be pointing toward belief in the Bible as required for salvation:rolleyes: (at them, not you). I don’t think you’ve quite presented a Bibliolatrist POV.
This is sloppy if you believe that God is present on Earth. Do you?
To you. I stand by my previous assessment re: complete knowledge and the Truth of the Bible.
And this is the main disagreement I have with every singly religious organization that claims this, including the vast majority of Christian ones. They claim to have some Perfect Knowledge of ANYTHING religious, such as how you know you’re going to Heaven (particularly amusing are those who claim you can know you’re saved, or that someone isn’t, or is going to Hell).
In other words, I agree with you. Just not in the way I think you’d hoped:D
You think it’s amazing, I think it’s them being honest (as they see honesty). Hell, I’d rather have someone tell me upfront what they think than lead me through a song and dance, quoting bits and pieces of scripture as it fits their beliefs, and push God as The Judger rather than The Lover. Again, YMMV. I’ve become a bit fed up with the image of God as The Judger inasmuch as so many who profess to follow Him think He has given them mini gavels.
And this is so different from Christianity/religion in general? Can you name, for me, a sufficiently large denomination of any religion that does not believe salvation comes from professing faith in its beliefs? Salvation is the whole fucking thing that keeps the Church going! It sells salvation! It says “Hey, come with us if you want to live! Here! Give us money! We’ll help you! See this book we have? It says to give us money, and it’s true because God says it is! How do we know that? Because it says so!”
Sorry, dude. Circular logic ain’t where it’s at for me.
And who has Christ? You guys have Christ! So by agreeing with your beliefs, I have faith in Christ! ::insert circular logic::
Same ducking feel.
Gee, that’s so unlike what you just described. Change the name and it’s, in fact, EXACTLY the same:
No salvation without Smith
No salvation without Christ
I’m not seein’ a marked difference here.
Your further citations referring to salvation being found in Smith fall under, IMO, the analogy I use above in re: names.
This, IIRC, is one of the arguments used to support the idea that salvation lies not in faith alone but in works. IMO it is not an untenable position especially given some of the actions of those who profess a belief in God but do not live a life I would necessarily say has anything to do with His will. However, again, it ain’t my place to say for sure. Just MHO.
I appreciate the legwork you’ve done here, which appears to be the work of a good bit of research on your part. I know it must frustrate you to some amount that I disagree with your premises, though in all fairness I told you that well before you posted above as you did. Nevertheless I do feel some guilt that you have wasted your time, at least with respect to my disagreement with you.
Lastly, I appreciate your apology a good deal. You are in many ways more honest and forthright than many who have come to this MB trying to convert the heathens instead of merely sitting down to talk. If you are able to maintain that honesty while addressing the points made by myself and others, it will do you considerable good (even if you are unable to rebut what I say, it’s still better than ignoring what I say:)).
I think we’ve all heard “truth” here before. The first time, it’s a good thing to share. The second time, it’s annoying, like a banging cymbal. The hundredth time, it’s annoying like thousands of untrained monkeys banging cymbals.
If we haven’t heard “truth” before, we’ve been sticking our fingers in our ears and going “la la la” for a long time.
It is my considered opinion that there are many who use what they perceive to be some form of righteousness (mostly the "we think that’s a sin and they don’t, so we’re right and they’re bad) as a form of (premature, IMO) self-congratulation, AKA a banging cymbal.
And Truth, as lel intimates (and here come the puns…and more, even, now!), is not an objective reality regarding religion.
) are extremely repugnant or distasteful. Self-hatred and repression of one’s desire to love aren’t heartwarming in the least. But don’t twist my words into something else.
