tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post4502786719894856755..comments2023-05-26T07:41:53.109-05:00Comments on Afterthoughts On A Whirlwind Journey: This Is For ScottUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger50125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-57819405567945184782008-01-02T16:14:00.000-06:002008-01-02T16:14:00.000-06:00One more thing, I responded to your last comments ...One more thing, I responded to your last comments in the comments section of the new post. I won't look at the comments of this post anymore, but will go to the other one, on account that it's taking forever for this page to load on my outdated computer. So, please don't comment under this post anymore. Just go to the new post and comment.Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-34468872445537100082008-01-02T15:18:00.000-06:002008-01-02T15:18:00.000-06:00Fellas,We're going to have to continue our convers...Fellas,<BR/><BR/>We're going to have to continue our conversation in another place. The number of comments here is literally bogging down my computer so that I can't bring up these pages. So, I'll title a new Post "Comments Continued" and we continue the conversation there. Sorry for any inconvenience.<BR/><BR/>BrandonBrendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-47259507929353356722008-01-02T14:42:00.000-06:002008-01-02T14:42:00.000-06:00Romans 8:9You, however, are controlled not by the ...Romans 8:9<BR/>You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-75293347956694128652008-01-02T14:23:00.000-06:002008-01-02T14:23:00.000-06:00Feetxxl thanx for the suggestion. I might be movin...Feetxxl thanx for the suggestion. I might be moving from La Jolla to San Fransico. I'll check out their website. But, do YOU consider me a Christian?<BR/><BR/>- AndrewAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-25990675552360525642008-01-02T09:46:00.000-06:002008-01-02T09:46:00.000-06:00dear brandon given your difficulty, what do you ...dear brandon<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/> given your difficulty, what do you believe your options are? im praying for you now, but have you considered a healing ministry within a church where you could find fellowship and healing prayer?<BR/><BR/>having been raised in an extremely disfunctional family, i found it healing just to be able to share my pain with a group of believers.......... to be able to speak it out verbally in a group that accepted me just the way i was without judgement,(holding what i spoke in confidence) or trying to fix me............. that in itself was cathartic. <BR/><BR/>there is also the serenity prayer ministry.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-11855264492534937272008-01-02T09:13:00.000-06:002008-01-02T09:13:00.000-06:00do you think you would accept them as a mormon.......do you think you would accept them as a mormon.............they all have websites.......goggle them and find out.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-86490633707007929522008-01-02T08:31:00.000-06:002008-01-02T08:31:00.000-06:00I don’t want to interrupt or be rude but as a gay ...I don’t want to interrupt or be rude but as a gay member of the LDS church I find this dialogue to be very interesting. I have the same sort of experience in the LDS church that Feetxxl says he has in the MCC, except my church does not know that I am gay. Would either of you accept me as a fellow christian and do you think the MCC would accept me as a fellow Christian even though I am a Mormon?<BR/><BR/>- AndrewAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-49502604599845844322008-01-02T01:49:00.000-06:002008-01-02T01:49:00.000-06:00Feetxxxl,I realize not all people have had the sam...Feetxxxl,<BR/><BR/>I realize not all people have had the same life experiences that I have. I don't claim to speak for everyone, but for myself. My conviction is that homosexual behavior is sin. My life experiences tell me this. Even if I were in a committed and loving relationship with another man, I'd still feel the same. You talk about people being affirmed in their homosexual orientation and no longer having to live a lie. Well, if you call being a man and thinking of yourself as something other than male not living a lie, then you certainly have me stumped. Like I already said, I see homosexuality as a lie. For me, I'm not trying to pretend to be straight. Nor would I encourage anyone else to pretend to be straight. I'm simply trying to live a Godly life, free of sin. If my attractions change, then great. If not, I can live with my attractions. My interest is in not acting out on my attractions, because to do so, I believe, would be to sin against God. My goal is to first seek the kingdom of God in all things.<BR/><BR/>I will agree with you about the priest scandle. Bad example on my part. But what I was trying to show was that no sin is good just because it's committed by people who otherwise live Godly lives. All sin is bad. You know, some men may not have any problem at all being with another man. Frankly, that doesn't bother me either, except in knowing that it's sinful behavior and in knowing that it causes me to think and act effiminate and to question myself and God. But just because someone isn't bothered by it, still does not make it okay. If a person can reconcile homosexuality with their faith, then, as we've said before, they're under God's grace and that'll be a matter between them and God in the end. I just simply cannot reconcile the two for myself. And anytime I've tried to be okay with acting out homosexually, it's just really bothered me. I feel dirty about it even if I am in love. And there again, that's because acting out homosexually makes me feel more feminine, and causes me to question my gender and as well my relationship with God. It's happened every single time I've tried to be okay with homosexuality. So, that's where I'm at and where I'm coming from.Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-59379241472221709662008-01-02T01:05:00.000-06:002008-01-02T01:05:00.000-06:00dear brandoni am impressed with the sincerity of y...dear brandon<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>i am impressed with the sincerity of your words and my heart goes out to your suffering.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>but my life experiences are different than yours. <BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>when i fellowship with those a mcc, i see male faces that are obviously attracted to the same sex, and in knowing them, i see not a shred of possibility of ever being attracted to the opposite sex. i am reminded of the testimonies, i have witnessed by those who after coming out of the closet, spoke of the affirmation they experienced. tan affirmation that came from no longer living a lie. giving the impression of being of one orientation while actually being of another. i look at them and i thank god that they an affirming committed relationship with someone.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>ithe difference between the homosexual relationships and the deviant ones of the priests, is that the ones of the priests were not affirming in their deviancy, but instead were destructive.. and were of ,and engendered in others, self hatred and self loathing, these acts were shame based and lust ridden and done in secrecy. they violated the vows of the position they were given.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>i am also reminded of how its of common agreement, that the highest form of sexual intimacy is when it is an expression, and an affirmation of a committed shared relationship founded on mutual love, respect, trust,devotion, and attraction. a relationship, that is covered by vows of marriage, and is in agreement that jesus is lord.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>yes, it is obvious that you are suffering. but in your suffering, you appear to be unable to acknowledge that the 320 million gays in the world and an the 12 million in this country might have life experiences about being gay, that are different from your own.. <BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>that is why i suggested your attending a church that supports homosexuality. however after hearing your testimony i no longer offer that suggestion.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>you give a testimony of sin. can you explain what that sin is, of what spirit is it of?<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>can the love of christ be limited to one orientation over another.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-91890324534593573092008-01-01T19:23:00.000-06:002008-01-01T19:23:00.000-06:00Feetxxxl,That would make more sense to me if I bel...Feetxxxl,<BR/><BR/>That would make more sense to me if I believed people were born gay, but I do not. I don't think anyone is born gay. I see homosexuality as something the devil uses to attempt to do away with God's goodness meant for mankind. As I've said before, there are lies that go along with homosexuality and those lies go against the goodness of God. He made me male, so I should see myself as male--fully. Anything to the contrary is separate and apart from God's truth. And even if someone did eventually find a gay gene or was able to indisputably prove that homosexuality is genetic, that still wouldn't change my view, because our genetic makeup still wouldn't excuse us to sin. For example, some people are born with certain genes that make them prone to addictive behavior, such as gambling and drinking. But we do not condone those two things, do we? We do not condone people who drink themselves to death or who gamble away everything they have, do we? Even if they have genetic genes making them prone to such behavior?<BR/><BR/>On a different subject, I do not doubt that homosexuals of any kind can fellowship and worship in Christ, and can do a great good for each other. However, the same thing can be said of child sex offenders. Look at the Catholic priest scandles a few years back. Here you have pedophiles worshipping God, fellowshipping with other believers, and probably doing a lot of good for a lot of people. But at the same time they were sinning against God by abusing all those children. It's the same thing with homosexuality. Any homosexual can go to church, fellowship with each other, love each other, and build each other up, but when they engage in homosexual activity, they sin against each other and God by abusing their bodies and doing what God defines as unnatural. God did not make men for having sex with other men, or women for having sex with other women.<BR/><BR/>And as far as testing. I don't have to attend a church full of homosexuals to form an opinion. I know in my heart, in my mind, and in my soul that homosexual acts are sinful. Yes, homosexuals can love each other, fellowship with each other, worship God together, and all of that. But when they have sex, that is sin. It doesn't take away from the rest, but it does add a stain to it. Just as the good that was in those priests isn't taken away by the fact that they abused those children, but those acts certainly did put a stain on the Catholic church now, didn't it.Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-6920180116246605682008-01-01T18:10:00.000-06:002008-01-01T18:10:00.000-06:00dear brandonthis is my understanding: we are crea...dear brandon<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>this is my understanding: we are created thru the spirit of christ. therefore we are of the same essence as the essence of the life that is christ.(god called us, our essence very good, genesis) that is why in romans 1, paul says we able to recognize the goodness of god, what is of him, thru what he created. in additon,(jeremiah31) he has put his laws in our minds and written them on our hearts. so we are intimately bonded to god's spirit of the law of life.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>that is why i said there was no spirit of delusion, denial, and deceit in the worship.<BR/><BR/> it is my understanding, that given what is written scripture, any worship of anything that comes against god requires the presence of at least one of these negative spirits, regardless of the awareness of the worshippers.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>that is why it was so important that i fellowship with homosexual believers. to witness the spirit of their worship. what else in christ would have been a credible witness, than to have experienced........................"that which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched(1john1).....................to determine if what is being affirming is of christ.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-88492480212375352752008-01-01T16:43:00.000-06:002008-01-01T16:43:00.000-06:00One more thought,You say: "thank you for your inti...One more thought,<BR/><BR/>You say: "thank you for your intimate sharing. i worship at an mcc 300 member church. i have never heard testamonies of that nature.<BR/>and have never detected a spirit of denial, deceit or delusion in the worship and fellowship."<BR/><BR/>The reason you have never heard a testimony like mine at your church is because the members have chosen to accept their homosexuality and to believe in the lies of the devil. They have embraced it to the point where they cannot see the truth. I say that not to belittle the members of your church, or you, but to explain that a person with their eyes closed, naturally, won't see such things as I've been talking about. A few years ago, I think I could have felt really at ease attending an MCC church. Because at the time, I thought much as you seem to think now. That it would be okay for me to be homosexual and to engage in homosexual acts if I found a guy who I could be in love with and have a committed relationship with. But, I can see now where I was believing lies. I was looking for ways, perhaps subconciously more than anything else, to make homosexuality okay.Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-74644403583538867472008-01-01T16:32:00.000-06:002008-01-01T16:32:00.000-06:00Feetxxxl,As I've already mentioned, to do as you s...Feetxxxl,<BR/><BR/>As I've already mentioned, to do as you suggest, I'd have to believe in those lies about myself. I'd have to accept that I'm different from most other guys. I'd have to reject what I believe God's word tells me about right and wrong. I would see myself as effiminate, rather than masculine. And anytime I have ever tried that in the past--to accept those things--it has bothered me so terribly. My feelings of self-worth become diminished. I feel distanced from God. I begin acting and thinking about myself more as a girl, rather than as a man, and that always has torn me up. It confuses me. I know I'm male, but it's like I'm not male. And I can't make those two feelings coincide. I can't act out homosexually and feel manly or masculine at the same time. But to distance myself from homosexuality, I feel closer to God, more masculine, and more confident in myself as being male. And I find it's easier for me to make male friends in that regard.<BR/><BR/>You say: "have you ever worshipped in a church with other believers who happened to be gay, and who shared your inheritance in christ. believers who thought their orientation was of christ ,rather that against him?"<BR/><BR/>No, I haven't. Although I have communicated with other people who have felt as though their orientation was of Christ, and not against him. I assume you're meaning that it's okay for them to be both homosexually oriented as well as to engage in homosexual acts inside a committed, loving, relationship. I don't believe homosexuality was something of God's doing. As I've already said, there are lies to it, and I don't believe God would want people to experience such things. I do, however, believe that homosexuality is something created by the devil in an attempt to confuse people about how God TRULY made them. Having said that, I don't believe God holds a persons attractions against them, but only the acting out on those attractions.<BR/><BR/>Happy New Year! :)<BR/><BR/>BrandonBrendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-573412208155657382008-01-01T03:38:00.000-06:002008-01-01T03:38:00.000-06:00brandon this may sound too simplistic. but being ...brandon <BR/><BR/> this may sound too simplistic. but being a believer, it is my understanding that those of us who have a relationship with the holy spirit, have only to pray and ask whether it is of christ to marry a particular person. because there is nothing between ourselves and the other person, that the healing power of the holy spirit cant bring us thru.<BR/><BR/><BR/>"First off, homosexuality in itself is all one big lie. Lie number one: that I'm not a true male--that I'm not like other men, I'm different, as if something between woman and man, but neither being woman or man. Physically male, but mentally female, so to speak. That is a lie. A man is a man, and when he questions that, or believes he is not fully male, either mentally or physically, he is believing a lie." <BR/><BR/>thank you for your intimate sharing. i worship at an mcc 300 member church. i have never heard testamonies of that nature.<BR/>and have never detected a spirit of denial, deceit or delusion in the worship and fellowship. <BR/><BR/>what you are experiencing must be extremely taxing and my heart goes to you and your difficulty.<BR/><BR/>have you ever worshipped in a church with other believers who happened to be gay, and who shared your inheritance in christ. believers who thought their orientation was of christ ,rather that against him?<BR/><BR/>the thing that mistifies me that even after 400 years sexuality is still a mystery.<BR/><BR/>why is it that we cannot freely talk about this. just trying to find the words to explain my own sexuality is extremely difficult. <BR/><BR/>i dont understand my own attractions. there were periods of my life when i believed my sexuality was a curse. the only thing i can say now that any sexual relations i have in the future i want to be with someone i can embrace as a committed life pardner. i have no use for anything that resembles promiscuity.<BR/><BR/>the best marriages that i have been witness to in my life are those that evolved out of a previous period of solid friendship.<BR/><BR/>and in order for those friendships to evolve in sexually intimate committed relationships, both persons had to proactively agree to engage in a dating period, where both were openly frank about the feelings. and they embarked on the process without preconceived expectations, but only as a test to identify the nature and possibilities of their relationship beyond friendship. intercourse was withheld, to first discover if their was any intimate emotional romantic connection.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-51904336554969427932008-01-01T01:40:00.000-06:002008-01-01T01:40:00.000-06:00Feetxxxl,As for the word Paul used, "arsenokoitai,...Feetxxxl,<BR/><BR/>As for the word Paul used, "arsenokoitai," that word is derived from two other words as have been mentioned. But the article you found on the internet fails to mention that that was a referrence back to the original texts in Leviticus relating to the prohibition of homosexual acts. Paul himself was trying to translate what he was reading from Leviticus. I'll allow you to research that for yourself. But I will again suggest that you buy and read the book "Desires In Conflict" by Joe Dallas. He explains most all of your questions pretty thoroughly in that book.<BR/><BR/>When you ask: "WHAT LIE WAS EXCHANGED FOR WHAT TRUTH, AND HOW WAS THE CREATED WORSHIPPED AND SERVED SO THAT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WERE GIVEN OVER TO HOMOSEXUALITY."<BR/><BR/>First off, homosexuality in itself is all one big lie. Lie number one: that I'm not a true male--that I'm not like other men, I'm different, as if something between woman and man, but neither being woman or man. Physically male, but mentally female, so to speak. That is a lie. A man is a man, and when he questions that, or believes he is not fully male, either mentally or physically, he is believing a lie. I have believed that lie. Because of that lie, I have envied other men. I have looked at them and longed for what I felt they had, but I did not. Because of that envy, I gradually, began lusting after other men. I was attracted to other men. And out of the attraction, I've given into homosexual acts. I exchanged the truth that I was male for a lie that I was something other than male. I then envied other men and put more focus on my attractions and lust on them than on God. And because of that, I gave into my homosexual temptations, disregarding God's teachings. I think all that goes along very well with what Romans 1 says. Don't you?<BR/><BR/>Apart from everything else, I will just say that I'm glad to move away from homosexuality. I really am. I've never found any happiness in it. And that's mostly because of the lies I talked about. But I've thought a lot about the concepts of love regarding a homosexual relationship. I've wondered if love would make things different, but I don't think that it would. I have a friend that I met a little over a year ago who also struggles with homosexuality. And I've grown to love him. I do love him. But that's as a friend. I think he's just a terrific person. And it has crossed my mind on occasion the possibility of us being together in the romantic sense. I've thought about that. But the thing is, deep down inside, I do feel that if we ever did become sexually involved with each other, even in a committed relationship, it would destroy our entire friendship. I can't explain that really, because if I were ever going to seek out a boyfriend, I know he'd make a really good one for me. But I just don't think it would ever work. I'd have to believe all those lies in order for it to work. I'd have to accept myself as a sort of feminine figure, and knowing that I'm physically male, there would always be a conflict for me. Personally, I'd much rather love my friend as a friend. I enjoy him so much as a friend. Thing is, I don't think I'd enjoy having him in my life in any other way. The greatest way I know of loving him is as a friend. And I feel more love from him in that way, than I know I ever could if we were in a sexual relationship with each other. Reason is, I've chosen not to believe in those lies and to live in the truth instead. Those lies don't do anything but tear me apart, and I'm so tired of believing in them.Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-21891857282214675662007-12-31T12:32:00.001-06:002007-12-31T12:32:00.001-06:00i pulled this from the internet. if there is even ...i pulled this from the internet. if there is even a shred of truth to this article it shows the importance of...................... 1thess 5:21 test everything, keep the good. <BR/><BR/><BR/>THE QUESTION IS........... WHAT IS OUR TEST?<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>Rest assured that I'm no expert in the Greek language. The truth of the matter is there are days when fluent English escapes me. While studying the languages of the Bible are clearly helpful to a richer and more educated understanding of what lies within its pages, it's just as beneficial if you have the heart of an explorer. With that in mind, cast aside the studious burrows etched across your forehead and open your eyes wide to an adventure with words.<BR/>The first appearance of the word arsenokoitai in any ancient Greek literature is found in I Corinthians 6:9. While it might have been a word common in Paul's time, it can't be found anywhere else in material dated prior to or current with Paul that has already been discovered. It only begins to make its appearance in literature following Paul. An important tool in discovering the meaning of a word is to trace how it's been used previously but because arsenokoitai is invisible prior to I Corinthians this means of defining the word is missing. The times arsenokoitai is used following Paul seem dependent on Paul's usage of the word. In the Latin Vulgate that follows Paul some 500 years later, Jerome translates it as a male concubine although nothing in the word specifies whether the concubine was involved with a same-sex or opposite-sex individual. What we do know is at the time Paul was writing there were terms common for persons involved in homoeroticism and Paul chose to not use those words but to instead use a word that remains mysterious to us. What this means is that Greek scholars and theologians (among which you and I don't count ourselves) come to arsenokoitai with no previous context for understanding it's meaning and so the best that anyone, whether pro-gay or anti-gay can reason is a guess. In the early work the "New Testament and Homosexuality" Robin Scroggs comes to an understanding of arsenokoitai by looking at the two separate words it combines; arseno (men) and koitai (bed). From this Scroggs concluded that the literal meaning of arsenokoitai was "male bed" which he understood as descriptive of the active male (penetrator) in same-sex intercourse. The problem with this method of interpretation can be seen with examples in English like "lady-killer", "manhole" or "butterfly." You don't arrive at the true meaning of the word "butterfly" by defining the words "butter" and "fly" anymore than it's possible to define the accurate meaning of arsenokoitai by combining "male" and "bed." <BR/>malakoi is a word common to the Greek language which means "soft." Jesus uses the word malakoi when speaking of "a man dressed in soft (malakoi) raiment" (Matthew 11:8). <BR/>Historically, church tradition has often understood malakoi to imply a moral weakness. In antiquity however, malakoi was sometimes used as a descriptive word of eromenos. If you check back to the discussion on pederasty, you'll be reminded that eromenos was the passive partner in the pederastic relationship between an older mentor and the younger boy or the beloved. It was also used in a much broader sense than exclusive to a homoerotic relationship. malakoi also described those men who had too much sex with women. In ancient Rome, the effeminate looking man often presented himself that way to attract women rather than men because a feminine man would have been a turn off to men. In the ancient world being effeminate including such behavior as bathing frequently, shaving, frequent dancing or laughing, wearing cologne, eating too much or wearing fine undergarments! Effeminate is the best understanding of the word and in its cultural context was threatening to the whole structure of society by crossing the fragile line between man and woman in a world where to be male was to be superior and to be woman was to be intrinsically inferior. While being effeminate might have been deemed a sin in antiquity we would never consider preaching against the "sin of femininity" in a world where men are encouraged to get in touch with their more gentle side and where good hygiene, a pair of silk briefs and Old Spice After Shave would catapult the male populace in most churches into this category.<BR/>MALAKOI AND ARSENOKOITAI ON THE MAP<BR/>Some scholars would argue that where malakoi and arsenokoitai are located in these passages should be considered when attempting to understand their meaning. I Corinthians 6:9-10 and I Timothy 1: 9-10 are lists of vices. Vice lists appear through Paul's writings (Romans 1:29-31, Galatians 5:19-23, Colossians 3:18-4:1, Ephesians 5:21-6:9 and 2 Timothy 3:15) and was a common literary style in both Greco-Roman and Jewish literature (Homoeroticism in the Biblical World, page 113). Rather than being a random tossing together of sins, vice lists often appear to be in a categorical order as would seem apparent in both I Corinthians 6 and I Timothy 1. <BR/>I Corinthians 6 orders the vices as: fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, malakoi,arsenokoitai, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners. <BR/>I Timothy 1 orders the vices as: murderers, manslayers, whoremongers, arsenokoitai, menstealers (slave traders), liars, perjurers.<BR/>In the essay Arsenokoites and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences, included in Biblical Ethics and Homosexuality: Listening to Scripture, Dale Martin proposes that most vice lists, both in the Christian Testament and in ancient contemporary writings, separate vices in three categories: sexual sins, sins of violence and economic or injustice sins and he proposes that with this in mind, arsenokoitai, if referring to homosexuality doesn't normally appear in the category of sexual sins but is in, or on the edge of, the economic category. Though uncertain as to the date of this particular oracle, Martin provides a reading from Sibylline Oracle 2.70-77 that is labeled under the heading "On Justice."<BR/>"(Never accept in your hand a gift which derives from unjust deeds.) Do not steal seeds. Whoever takes for himself is accursed (to generations of generations, to the scattering of life.) (Do not arskenokoitein, do not betray information, do not murder.) Give one who has labored his wage. Do not oppress a poor man. Take heed of your speech. Keep a secret matter in your heart. (Make provision for orphans and widows and those in need.) Do not be willing to act unjustly, and therefore do not give leave to one who is acting unjustly." (page 120).<BR/>No sexual sin is listed in the above writing but all the sins are of economic injustice, whether through the oppression of the poor, the withholding of wages or accepting gifts from unjust deeds. It seems a possibility that in this context arskenokoitein refers to money earned through sexual behavior, which would also appear to make sense in that it follows prostitution (whoremongers, pornos) in I Timothy. Perhaps it has nothing to do with sex. It remains uncertain. Whether arsenokoitai is defined by this source in the same way as defined by Paul is equally uncertain. What is certain is that there seems sufficient evidence, or the lack thereof, to leave this word and it's appearance in I Corinthians 6 and I Timothy 1 as ambiguous in meaning. With so much uncertainty surrounding these words it's of painful concern that it's been used by some within the church with absolute rigidity to condemn gays and lesbians.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-60950599780048108462007-12-31T05:07:00.000-06:002007-12-31T05:07:00.000-06:00brandonrik couldnt handle the one on one confronta...brandon<BR/><BR/>rik couldnt handle the one on one confrontation. here is the last exchange. feel free to ask any questions or make any comments and if possible annotate.<BR/><BR/>my comments are in capitol letters, rik's are regular size.<BR/>feel free to delete the entire email.<BR/><BR/><BR/>This will be my final post on this debate and I will disengage the comments section thereafter. It is not that I am unwilling to continue a dialogue, but this is not the purpose of this journal and Feetxxl needs to do his own homework and read the other works that I have mentioned. I am more than happy to continue this discussion via e-mail. <BR/><BR/>“Feetxxl” claims in a recent response, “my standard for love is 1cor13”<BR/><BR/>The problem is he takes his definition of “love” and then pours it into this text because he is reading this text along with his second claimed text “for loving one another is romans 12” to the exclusion of the rest of the Bible. Anybody can take one or two texts, slap them together and ignore the rest of the New Testament moral laws (not to mention the Old Testament moral law which the New Testament endorses and enforces repeatedly) and then come up with their definition of “love.” The fact is 1 Corinthians 12 and Romans 12 are not the “end all” or “all there is to say” about love. I have repeatedly cited Jesus and the apostle’s endorsement and enforcement of Old Testament moral laws which include all the commandments regarding sex acts but he ignores these. This is how I know he is not defining “love” according to the Bible but according to his own definition.<BR/><BR/> <BR/>THE POINT WAS THAT 1COR13 AND ROMANS 12 WERE THE ESSENCE OF LOVE AND LOVING ONE ANOTHER , NOT NECESSARILY THE END, BUT THAT ALL THAT IS ADDED SUPPORTS AND ALIGNS WITH THESE 2 SOURCES.<BR/><BR/>Feetxxl then quotes a text regarding the doctrine of justification:, “romans 3: 20Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.”<BR/><BR/>I absolutely agree that no one is justified (declared righteous) because of accruing any merit by doing good works (contra Roman Catholicism), being circumcised (the issue at hand in Acts 15 and Paul epistles) as the Pharisees taught for they were Jesus’ and Paul’s opposition. But neither shall anyone be justified without any good works and those who continue in sin and want to claim grace as a license to do sin will not inherit the kingdom of God:<BR/><BR/>WHERE IN SCRIPTURE DOES IT SAY THIS?<BR/> <BR/>"But neither shall anyone be justified without any good works"<BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/>“Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor men who have sex with other men, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)<BR/><BR/>“Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?" THAT'S RIGHT THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD THRU THE NEW COVENANT, "GRACE THRU FAITH", NOT THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF MAN OF THE OLD COVENANT THRU FOLLOWING THE LAW.<BR/> <BR/>ROMANS 3:28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith(ARE YOU SAYING THAT FAITH IS WORKS) apart from observing the law.<BR/><BR/> <BR/>Paul enforces the law regarding incest from Leviticus chapters 18 and 20 in 1 Corinthians chapter 5, then denounces those acts which are prohibited in Leviticus 18 and 20 in 1 Corinthians 6 and then teaches the Biblical-creation view of marriage and sex in 1 Corinthians chapter 7. Paul’s use of the Old Testament moral law (which at the time was the only Bible the Christians had until the canon was complete just before 70 A.D.) for instructing the church could not be any clearer.<BR/> <BR/>WHATEVER HE TEACHES, HE DOES FROM AN ESSENCE OF A SPIRIT MENTALITY OF HOW SUCH ACTIONS COME AGAINST LOVING YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF..............RATHER THAN A BIBLE SAYS" MENTALITY.<BR/> <BR/> <BR/> YOU HAVE NEVER SAID HOW THE SPIRIT OF THE ESSENCE OF HOMOSEXUALITY COMES AGAINST THE SPIRIT ESSENCE OF LOVING YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.<BR/> <BR/>NO ACT CAN BE A SIN UNLESS THE SPIRIT OF THE ESSENCE OF THAT ACT IS A SIN. UNDER THE OLD COVENANT IT WAS MERELY THE ACT ITSELF THAT WAS JUDGED.<BR/> <BR/>UNDER THE NEW COVENANT EVEN IF A MAN MURDERS ANOTHER, A SIN IS DETERMINED BY THE SPIRIT OF THE ACT.......................THE SAME WAY THAT COURTS ASSUAGE GUILT OR INNOCENCE BY DETERMINING THE SPIRIT OF INTENT.<BR/><BR/>Those who merely HEAR God’s law will not be justified. It is those who hear, believe and seek to obey God’s law because they have true faith will be justified, “for not the hearers of the Law are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.” (Romans 2:13)<BR/><BR/>"Those who merely HEAR God’s law will not be justified. It is those who hear, believe and seek to obey God’s law because they have true faith will be justified, "<BR/> <BR/>WHERE IS THIS IN SCRIPTURE AND WHAT IS ITS RELATIONSHIP TO 1COR6:11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.<BR/> <BR/> <BR/>ROMANS 2: 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares."<BR/> <BR/>PAUL IS MAKING A COMPARISON BETWEEN THOSE WHO HAVE THE LAW TO OBEY AND THOSE WHO DONT. THAT EVEN THOSE WHO DONT HAVE THE LAW BUT LIVE ACCORDING TO WHAT HAS BEEN WRITTEN ON THEIR HEARTS THEY WILL BE JUDGED ACCORDINGLY. THE RIIGHTEOUSNESS PAUL IS REFERING TO THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE OLD COVENANT, NOT THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE NEW COVENANT THAT IS APART FROM THE LAW<BR/> <BR/>DEUT 6:25And if we are careful to obey all this law before the LORD our God, as he has commanded us, that will be our righteousness." (MOSES'S WORDS)<BR/><BR/> <BR/>If you are actively living in sin as a fornicators, an idolaters, an adulterer, a male prostitutes, a man who have sex with another man and so forth you will not inherit the Kingdom of God. <BR/><BR/>Those who have been born of God CANNOT continue to practice sin. <BR/><BR/>“No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in <BR/>him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.” (1 John 3:9)<BR/><BR/>BELOW IS THE WHOLE SCRIPTURE................................<BR/> 9No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. 10This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother.<BR/> <BR/>DO SUPPOSE YOU CAN CLAIM THE LOVE OF CHRIST WITHOUT THE FELLOWSHIP OF ROMANS 12 OR 1JOHN1<BR/> <BR/>You cannot continue to live in heterosexual or homosexual sin and think that you will not suffer the consequences, “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.” (Galatians 6:7)<BR/><BR/>MY PREMISE IS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY HAS NEVER BEEN DECLARED BY SCRIPTURE TO BE A SIN. YES THERE ARE TRANSLATIONS THAT HAVE TRANSPOSED A 19TH CENTURY TERM INTO A 2000YEAR OLD TEXT, BUT THIS TRANSPOSITION IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GREEK THAT IS TRANSLATED. <BR/> <BR/> <BR/>AND IN LEV NOT ALL PROHIBITONS OF THEMSELVES WERE SINS. AND SURELY THE CONDONING OF SLAVERY, IN FACT SLAVERY FOR LIFE, IS PART OF THE MORAL CODE.<BR/> <BR/> <BR/>MY PREMISE DOES NOT STAND ON THE MISTRANSLATIONS SO MUCH AS ON THE ESSENCE OF HOMOSEXUALITY ITSELF. AND I SAY THIS HAVING FELLOWSHIPPED WITH BELIEVERS THAT HAPPEN TO BE HOMOSEXUAL. THERE IS NO "OBVIOUS" (GAL5) SPIRIT OF THE ESSENCE OF SAME SEX BONDING OR ORIENTATION THAT IS ANY DIFFERENT FROM THE SPIRIT ESSENCE OF BONDING AND ORIENTATION OF HETEROSEXUALITY............ OR THE SPIRIT OF THESSENCE OF IT AGAINST CHRIST OR THE SUMMATION OF THE LAW.................."LOVING YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF" <BR/> <BR/>IF IT IS.......... THEN TELL ME HOW..<BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/>In Romans 3-4 Paul is building a case that we are justified by faith just as Abraham was BEFORE he was circumcised (Genesis 15:6). Read the context! All have sinned and come short of the glory of God and we know this because that though the law is good and holy from it comes the knowledge of sin (because it is good and we are evil cf. Romans 7:7). But no where does the New Testament tell us that once the moral law has declared to us that we are a sinner that we can then throw the moral law away because it no longer remains a standard for right living. In fact, the very next text Feetxxl quotes proves my point:<BR/><BR/>I HAVE NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THROWING AWAY THE LAW, WHICH PAUL SAYS IS HOLY. THAT IS YOUR PREMISE ......YOU KEEP ATTEMPTING TO MAKE.<BR/> <BR/> <BR/>“romans 13:9 The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself."”<BR/><BR/>The summary of the law does not do away with the list of commandments which Paul is himself listing. In fact, he is saying that if you truly love you will obey the commandments which he is listing as well as the other moral commandments (which includes those concerning sex acts) which are summed by the law of love. I have already stated over and over again that it is fallacious to use a law from an Old Testament “thou shalt not” list which tells us to love as a means to then get rid of the other moral laws which both Jesus and the apostles fully endorse and enforce. <BR/><BR/>HERE AGAIN THE SUMMATION OF THE LAW IS THE SPIRIT ESSENCE OF THE LAW, JUST AS THE SPIRIT OF THE FULFILLMENT OF THE LAW IS LOVE. SHOW HOW THE ESSENCE OF THOSE RULES IS NOT ABOUT LOVING YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF<BR/> <BR/>DIDNT YOU AGREE THAT IF DAVID LOVED HIS NEIGHBOR THINGS WOULD HAVE COME OUT DIFFERENTLY IN HIS DEALINGS WITH BATHSHEBA?<BR/> <BR/>Feetxxl then states, “therefore the law is for conscious, conscious about loving your neighbor as yourself.:<BR/><BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/>"THEREFORE THE LAW IS FOR OUR BEING CONSCIOUS OF WHETHER WE ARE LOVING OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELF<BR/><BR/> <BR/>The law is for conscious? Here is what the word “conscious” means: “aware of one's own existence, sensations, thoughts, surroundings, etc.” A person who is awake is conscious and a person who is asleep or in a comma is unconscious. Can you tell me what the law has to do with being awake or asleep? Can you tell me where the Bible says anything about the law having to do with being awake or asleep? I have already pointed out that you are misusing this word and yet you continue to do so. The fact that I have to keep repeating myself demonstrates that you really aren’t taking the time to read what I have written, think about it and then think through the issues at hand. Please re-read all my previous posts slowly and carefully. Think about them and pray about them with the Bible in hand.<BR/><BR/> <BR/><BR/>Feetxxl then asks, “in your final comments please include comments about the relationships between laws and covenants. what is the relationship of the law to the covenants that come after them.”<BR/><BR/>First, do you even know what a covenant is? I seriously doubt that you do and so to rightly answer this question would take hundreds of pages. But for the sake of answering your question here goes...<BR/><BR/>There are two overarching covenants in history: <BR/><BR/>The first overarching covenant was made with Adam whose name means “man.”. This covenant made in the Garden of Eden required that he believe God’s Word and obey His commands to do such things as take dominion over the earth, be fruitful and multiply and not eat from the the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam failed to take dominion over the serpent and the result was his wife was deceived, she then gave him the forbidden fruit which he ate which then plunged himself and all of creation into sin.<BR/><BR/>The second overarching covenant covenant is like this one. God told the serpent that he would be crushed by another man (another Adam) who would be of the seed of the woman. (Genesis 3:15) This covenant is then developed over thousands of years from Noah, to Abraham, to Moses, to David and then finally in Christ. The righteousness of the second Adam (Jesus Christ) and His one act atoned for the first Adam so that all of those who are in the second Adam are now no longer in the first Adam .(Romans 5; 1 Corinthians 15:22, 45) The New Covenant is the telos, the consummation, the goal of the Noahic Covenant, the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, and the Davidic Covenant. <BR/><BR/>All the post-fall covenants were designed to lead us to the New Covenant in Christ. This is the entire thesis of the Epistle to the Hebrews. This epistle then tells us that because of Christ things such as the temple, the priesthood, the sacrifices and so forth are no longer binding because they were mere types and shadows. But no where does it tell us that the moral requirements of the law are no longer binding. <BR/><BR/>All of these covenants developed through redemptive-history have requirements: Faith, obedience to the revealed law of God, and they they have have promises and warnings along with accompanying signs (sacraments and feast days). <BR/><BR/>None of the covenants do away with the moral laws from the preceding covenant. The ONLY thing that changes are the types, shadows and signs (sacraments and feast days). <BR/>HERE AGAIN YOU KEEP ON THIS DOING AWAY WITH THE LAW......................THAT WAS NEVER PART OF THE DISCUSSION. THE DISCUSSION WAS WHAT DID PAUL MEAN WHEN SAID IN ROMANS 7.......................<BR/> <BR/>5For when we were controlled by the sinful nature,[a] the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. 6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code<BR/> <BR/>. ROMANS6.......................<BR/> <BR/>13Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. 14For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace<BR/> <BR/><BR/>What I have said here would take a great deal of time to spell out and defend. What you need to do is read good books on covenant theology and the law. When you are done come back and ask more questions. Here is a free book that I would recommend titled “By This Standard”:<BR/><BR/>http://www.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/html/gbbs/gbbs.html<BR/><BR/>Feetxxl then states, “its agreed that jesus never participated in a stoning, but the laws of all the covenants up to christ, directed believers that stoning was an act of holiness.”<BR/><BR/>Have you not read what I already stated? No, you have not. Nor have you paid one iota of attention to what Christ says. The Pharisees did away with God’s laws with their traditions. In contrast Jesus upheld God’s law which INCLUDED the penal sanction, such as the putting to death the rebellious child (Mark 7: 9-13)<BR/><BR/>Feetxxl then states, “witchcraft was included in as a moral sin, part of the sin nature in gal 5. were all the witches burned at the stake after christ against christ? they were following the law, when did such a practice come against christ. the point im making is that after christ, everything is judged thru the spirit which you refuse to discuss thru your continued attempt to put yourself and others under the law. the law and the spirit are 2 masters in that (you're going to have a field day misquoting this) you cannot not serve UNDER the law and serve OF the spirit....................you will love one and despise the other.”<BR/><BR/>I have already discussed what it means and does not mean to be “under the law.” You have not read or have not comprehended what I have already written. Nor do you understand what it means to be lead by the spirit. You cannot justifiably say you are being lead by the Holy Spirit to live in sin. The Holy Spirit breathed out God’s moral law in both Testaments as Paul says:<BR/><BR/>“All Scripture is inspired of God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 timothy 3:16-17)<BR/><BR/>Feetxxl then complains, “case and point i clearly mentioned 1cor 13 in regards to love, but you spent half your disertation saying how my understanding of love was to do what feels good. it wasnt just an attempt to misquote, you were really expressing your negative feelings for those who talk about love, and try use it as guide to follow the righteousness that is apart from the law.”<BR/><BR/>Notice how he is pitting his feelings against my argument from the text but attributes my arguments to my feelings? I have no negative feelings about those who talk about love. I do think negatively and does God concerning those who want to justify their sin by calling it love which they define by their own autonomous reasoning and then isolate two texts from the entirety of Scripture to justify their definition. You cannot commit adultery, fornication or homosexuality and justify it with 1 Corinthians 13 or Romans 12. By the way, merely citing a text is not an argument. You need to explain why the text proves your point.<BR/> MY UNDERSTANDING IS EVERY HUMAN ACT IS OF AN UNDERLYING SPIRIT. IN TRUTH WE SIN BECAUSE OF THE SINFUL SPIRIT THAT IS IN US. THE ACT IS MERELY AN EXPRESSION OF THE SPIRIT THAT WE ARE GIVEN OVER TO.<BR/> <BR/>DOES NOT SCRIPTURE SAY OUR BATTLE IS NOT AGAINST FLESH AND BLOOD BUT POWERS AND PRINCIPALITIES? <BR/> <BR/>WHEN WE CONFESS WE NOT ONLY TO THE ACT BUT THE SPIRIT IN HEARTS THAT LED US TO COMMIT THE ACT.<BR/> <BR/>ROMANS 8: 9You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. 10But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.<BR/> <BR/>SINCE IT IS THE SPIRIT THAT PRESIDES BEFORE THE ACT THAT IT INITIATES IT IS THE SPIRIT THAT IS OUR FIRST CONCERN. BECAUSE WITHOUT THE SPIRIT THE ACT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.<BR/> <BR/>IN THE CASE OF THE SIN OFOMISSION, WE ALLOW ANOTHER SPIRIT TRANSPOSE THE LOVE OF CHRIST IN US.<BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/>1 JOHN 3.................. 21Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22and receive from him anything we ask, because we obey his commands and do what pleases him. 23And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24Those who obey his commands live in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.<BR/> <BR/>IF YOU KNOW THE ABOVE IS TRUE WHY DO YOU REFUSE TO DISCUSS THE SPIRIT. <BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/>.Romans 12:9-21 and 1 Corinthians is not all there is to say about love or how to live. To do so is to “cherry pick” which texts you want to obey and which ones you do not. In faith I want to obey EVERY moral command and avoid EVERY sin in the New Testament - not just a few texts that don’t talk about the sins I want to commit.<BR/><BR/>PICK NOTHING......IF THOSE SCRIPTURES ARE ABOUT LOVE AND LOVING ONE ANOTHER ANYTHING ADDED WILL BE IN ACCORD WITH THE ESSENCE OF THOSE SCRIPTURES<BR/>Feetxxl complains, “you still refuse to explain how any words of any scripture, apart from lev, says homosexuality is a sin. because they dont say it that clearly?<BR/>MY APOLOGIES. THEY SAY IT VERY CLEARLY IN ALL THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION, ALL THE AMERICAN STANDARD VERSIONS,ALL THE ENGLISH AND ENGLISH STANDARD VERSIONS, AND HOLMAN VERSIONS. BUT IN THESE IT WAS ONLY DONE BY TRANSPOSING A NINETENTH CENTURY TERM INTO A 2000 YEAR OLD TEXT. THIS IS PARTICULARLY DISQUIETING WHEN KNOWING THE HOMOPHOBIA THAT WAS EXISTING AT THE TIME. IN OTHER WORDS IT APPEARS TO BE AN UNCONSCIOUS ATTEMPT BY THOSE WHO WERE HOMOPHOBIC THEMSELVES TO PERPETUATE THEIR OWN BIAS.<BR/><BR/>How am I homophobic? I have discussed the meaning of Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 from the original language not just an English translation. I never merely quote an English translation without taking into consideration the original languages. I have painstakingly done so which is very evident if you have paid any attention to what I have written. What is funny is how a man who wants to have sex with another man (post 19th century English translation” homosexual”) wants to call anyone who says that homosexual sex a sin a “homophobe.” I have no fear of fornicators, adulterers or homosexuals. I myself struggle with homosexual temptations but I do not define myself by my temptations. The problem is you have classified “homosexual” as a natural alternative to heterosexual and claimed it as your identity. Then, once someone speaks against the homosexual sex act you take it personally because you feel like they are attacking your identity. <BR/>ALREADY ANSWERED<BR/>I completely understand how you feel! <BR/><BR/>I too am angered by true homophobes who have no love for those enslaved to sin and instead just hold up signs that say, “God hates fags” and teach that there is no repentance for them. You ought to go back to the very beginning of my blog and read it from May 2007 onward as I address this very issue. Honestly, if I could justify having a homosexual lifestyle with the Bible I probably would. But it can’t be justifiably done without dismissing the authority and inerrancy of Scripture or seriously violating the basic tenants of hermeneutics. <BR/><BR/>I have read 29 books on Gay Theology and just received 5 more in the mail. I will probably read another 30 or so in the next year. I have done my homework. Have you?<BR/><BR/>I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THE ANTI-GAYS REFUSE TO HAVE ANY PART IN DISCUSSION OF THE ESSENCE OF HOMOSEXUALITY. THE LIMIT OF THEIR ABILITY TO DISCUSS IT, IS "THE BIBLE SAYS" APPROACH. AND IM JUST TALKING ABOUT JUST DISCUSSION. VERY FEW HAVE HAD FELLOWSHIP IN CHRIST WITH HOMOSEXUALS, LET ALONE A RELATIONSHIP WHERE THEY COULD HAVE AN EXCHANGE OF UNDERSTANDINGS...................YOU KNOW LIKE HONORING EACH OTHERS LIFE EXPERIENCES...........AT A PARTICULAR TIME IN MY LIFE I FELT, EXPERIENCED, SAW ETC THIS.<BR/><BR/>When you say, “YOU KNOW LIKE HONORING EACH OTHERS LIFE EXPERIENCES...........AT A PARTICULAR TIME IN MY LIFE I FELT, EXPERIENCED, SAW ETC THIS.” You are essentially making an existential argument for how you define love and justify your homosexual sin. This is EXACTLY the situational ethics of Joseph Fletcher. You want to disregard the clear teaching of Scripture on the basis of your existential experience. This is EXACTLY what the Gay apologist Dan Via does and so he repeatedly disregards what the ENTIRETY of Scripture teaches on this issue at hand. Our experiences do not define love nor are they an epistemologically justifiable means of defining morality, ethics or love.<BR/> <BR/>OF COURSE BUT HONORING EACH OTHERS LIFE EXPERIENCES IS. ITS NOT A MATTER OF THE TRUTH, ONLY THAT THE ONE WHO GIVES WITNESS BELIEVES THAT IT BE TRUE, THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE HONORING. THAT DOESNT TAKE AWAY YOUR DISCERNMENT AS TO WHETHER IT IS TRUE OR NOT ...................YOU ARE QUITE FREE TO DISAGREE AS ITS TRUTH.<BR/> <BR/>THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT YOUR DISAGREEMENT COMES FROM THE SPIRIT OF THE WITNESS, NOT FROM DISAGREEMENT WITH YOUR BELIEF SYSTEM...................REMEMBER........LED BY AND SERVEOF THE SPIRIT. <BR/><BR/>Sir, you are very ignorant in regards to what “anti-gays” (as you call them) have done in the discussion of the “essence of homosexuality.” <BR/><BR/>Sir, I know Christians who have come out of homosexuality and are living happy lives as changed men with a wife and family. I also know the pain of a man with AIDS who repented of his homosexuality and was abandoned by the homosexual community and was loved by the church. Sadly, I also know the pain of a man with AIDS who was abandoned by the church and cared for by he homosexual community. I was a member of a church where the pastor minister to men with AIDS in the hospital and his church was fire bombed by people from the surrounding gay community. There has been much sin and a lack of love (defined by God’s Word) on both sides. I urge you to take the time to listen to and read the book “Loving Homosexuals as Jesus Would” by Chad Thompson. There is a link on the margin of my web site.<BR/><BR/>I know that my strong pronouncements against the folly of homosexuality sounds harsh and unloving. But I do love you. I love you enough to tell you the truth! <BR/><BR/>The Bible in Romans 1:26-27 calls homosexual sex a “degrading passion” “contrary to nature” an “indecent act” which “receives a due penalty” for what? For their “error.” The word “error” is “planehs” it means to deviate from what is right. What does the word “sin” mean? The Greek word for “sin” is “harmartia.” What does this word mean? Its root meaning is the same as “planehs” which is an “error in judgment.” In both cases the words are used to mean to err in relation to morality and ethics - to deviate from God’s order and standard for holiness. Therefore, “planehs” is a synonym for “harmartia.” Homosexual sex is clearly a sin regardless of your feelings, experiences and so forth.<BR/>I HAVE NO DISAGREEMENT THAT BEHAVIOR 0F 26-27 IS SINFUL.....IT IS AN ABANDONMENT OF WHAT WAS GIVEN IN THE SPIRIT...........AN ABANDONMENT MOTIVATED BY SHAME BASED LUST..............<BR/> <BR/>THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT SINS TAKE PLACE IN THE COMMISSION OF SAME SEX ACTS, NO MORE THAN THAN SINS IN THE COMMISSION OF OPPOSITE SEX ACTS. BUT IF THE SINS IN 1 AND 2 SAMUEL DONT CONDEMN HETEROSEXUALITY, WHY SHOULD THE SINS OF ROMANS1 CONDEMN HOMOSEXUALITY.<BR/> <BR/>THE SHAME BASED LUST IS ABOUT RELATIONS, NOT RELATIONSHIPS(LOVING ONE ANOTHER) BECAUSE THE SPIRIT OF LUST TRANSPOSES THE SPIRIT OF LOVE. THERE IS NO COMMITMENT TO A PERSON, THE OTHER PERSON IS APPRECIATED ONLY FOR THE SAKE SATIATING THE LUST. A LUST MOST LIKELY OF OBSESSION OBSESSION AND OBSESSION WITH SEXUAL PLEASURE.<BR/> <BR/>WHAT RESEMBLANCE COULD THIS HAVE TO HUMAN BONDING OF COMMITMENT BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE MOTIVATED BY MUTUAL RESPECT ATTRACTION, LOVE ,DEVOTION, AND TRUST............................THE SAME SPIRIT OF HETEROSEXUAL BONDING THAT IS AFFIRMED BY THE HETEROSEXUAL COMMUNITY.<BR/> <BR/>IS THAT WHY YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT SPIRIT, BECAUSE THE SPIRIT OF BONDING IS THE SAME. THINGS EQUAL TO THE SAME THING ARE EQUAL TO EACH OTHER.<BR/> <BR/>I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH EXODUS OR SIMILAR MINISTRIES. I WOULD NEVER PUT A LIMIT ON THE SPIRIT. BUT ALL I HEAR ARE ABOUT ARE LIVES INDULGING IN PROMISCUITY AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE. WOULD NOT SPIRITUAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE BE THE SAME IF IT WAS ABOUT HETEROSEXUALS.<BR/> <BR/> <BR/> <BR/>WHAT I HAVE NOT HEARD IS ABOUT ANYONE WHO HAD A COMMITTED RELATIONSHIP,AND LIVED AN ADDICTIVE FREE LIFE,.<BR/> <BR/> <BR/><BR/>I also very clearly state that I too have been a fool and have committed a lot of homsexual-related sin. I do not write hypocritical judgments or fail to hold myself to the same standard. But I also will not soften the language of the Bible which calls fornication, adultery and a man having sex with another man a “sin” and condone the words and actions of a person who wants to use the Bible to justify his sin.<BR/><BR/>YET, IS THIS NOT THE ESSENCE OF FELLOWSHIP. AND CHRIST SAYS THAT IF WE WALK IN THE LIGHT, AS HE IS IN THE LIGHT, WE HAVE FELLOWSHIP WITH ONE ANOTHER. IS PROACTIVELY DENYING FELLOWSHIP....................... OF CHRIST?<BR/><BR/>Sir, you are not walking in the light. You are walking in the depravity of your sin. You want to call darkness “light,” sin “love” and evil “good.”<BR/><BR/>Finally, why is it that you do not use proper punctuation? Why do you not use upper case letters when it is appropriate to do so? Why do you use words if you do not know what they mean? Why do you have very strange “......” in your sentences? We all make typoes, but have you ever thought of using a spell checker? You need to learn how to write proper English, how to formulate a logical argument, amd how to read a text of Scripture. You would be much more clear if you did so.<BR/><BR/>You also need to become more aware of what has already been written on this subject. I would like to recommend to you that you read the following books. After you do so, then feel free to send me an e-mail and we can continue this discussion.<BR/><BR/>LET ME REQUEST AGAIN. IN ROMANS 1:24- 27 WHAT LIE WAS EXCHANGED FOR WHAT TRUTH, AND HOW WAS THE CREATED WORSHIPPED AND SERVED SO THAT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WERE GIVEN OVER TO HOMOSEXUALITY.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-50793081855451507162007-12-28T01:13:00.000-06:002007-12-28T01:13:00.000-06:00just as in romans 1 i knew that my anger and bitte...just as in romans 1 i knew that my anger and bitterness was against christ. but yet even knowing it, felt compelled to nurse my anger because he had acted out his alcoholism against me.<BR/><BR/>it wasnt until he confronted me that i felt compelled to own, what i knew to be of christ.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-17741899196381903752007-12-28T00:50:00.000-06:002007-12-28T00:50:00.000-06:00Feetxxxl,What exactly do you mean by "essence"? W...Feetxxxl,<BR/><BR/>What exactly do you mean by "essence"? What do you want to know?<BR/><BR/>You say: "i really dont think about sin much. what i do concern myself with is being of christ and of the spirit and of the fruit of the spirit. its more a glass half full approach." That's not a bad thing really. In fact, it's good that you keep your mind on God like that. But you should also know God's word as well, and you should always strive to live as Christ did. How can we call ourselves Christians if we don't do our best to live our lives as He did?<BR/><BR/>As for judgement, pointing out someone else's sin is not judging them. It is simply bringing attention to their sin so that they recognize it and will hopefully repent of it. Now, if you were brought to anger and was throwing your friend's sin in his face and treating him harshly because of it, then yeah, you were judging him. That's trying to look inside your friend's heart, and only God can do that. But to simply point out someone's sin is not judging them. It's pointing out the noticable.<BR/><BR/>I am glad you made ammends with your friend. :)Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-4364756009456636972007-12-28T00:38:00.000-06:002007-12-28T00:38:00.000-06:00the last time i dealt with the issue of sin was 2 ...the last time i dealt with the issue of sin was 2 days ago. a friend of mine, is an alcoholic accused me of judging him for his alcoholism. <BR/><BR/>after a discussion i admitted i had and that it was wrong and i apologized. we hugged. i felt a great weight had been lifted from me and that our relationship had been restored.<BR/><BR/>i had become stuck in my own anger and frustration and had allowed it become an obstacle to our fellowship.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-4009632772136909722007-12-28T00:21:00.000-06:002007-12-28T00:21:00.000-06:00im looking for essence and you think i want the so...im looking for essence and you think i want the sordid details. what would that do? you can sin as a homosexual just as you as a heterosexal.<BR/><BR/><BR/>i really dont think about sin much. what i do concern myself with is being of christ and of the spirit and of the fruit of the spirit. its more a glass half full approach.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-49427690709785377612007-12-27T22:26:00.000-06:002007-12-27T22:26:00.000-06:00Feetxxxl,You say: "how is it you have not followed...Feetxxxl,<BR/><BR/>You say: "how is it you have not followed up on any of your comments or my questions about your being gay." What are you talking about? If you want me to be specific about my past sex life, I'm sorry, but you're not going to get detail accounts of that. If you're interested in knowing some of my past, read some of my past posts.<BR/><BR/>And now I ask you, Why have you not answered my question about what you consider to be sin? I have asked you to explain that two or three times now and you seem to refuse to do so. I have also asked you many other things which you have refused to answer. I, to my knowledge and to the best of my ability, have tried to answer EVERY question you have asked me. Why do you not return the favor?<BR/><BR/>You say: "i have never spoken with anyone who so focused on sin. obviously you didnt 1cor13..............why, i have know idea. i also gave you romans 12 you obviously didnt read that either.<BR/><BR/>that is what you have in common with those who are so focused on sin...............a very low opinion of love."<BR/><BR/>I personally take offense at this. Have you completely ignored everything I have told you. My focus is not nearly on sin as it is on love. My love for God is so great that I choose not to sin. I choose Him over the lies that the devil has fed me. I choose Him over the desires of my sinful flesh. And that is out of love. My main focus IS on love--love for God, which Jesus tells us is the greatest of all commandments. Do you not see that? And even Jesus himself was concerned about the sin in peoples lives. People do sin and people are expected to rid their lives of sinful behavior. Do you disregard all of the passages in which Jesus pushed people not to sin? I'll be honest with you, from our conversations I have to conclude that your concept of love is sex and sex alone. You have an altered view of what love is. And I believe you must think that nothing a Christian does can be called sin. You are foolish to think such things. And you clearly do not understand the Spirit either. The Spirit will never lead a person to sin. If the "Spirit" as you say makes you believe that homosexual sex is okay, then you're clearly listening to something other than the Spirit. The Spirit is given to help people NOT sin and to guide them. Not to think that sin is okay.Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-62825871164139131532007-12-27T22:00:00.000-06:002007-12-27T22:00:00.000-06:00how is it you have not followed up on any of your ...how is it you have not followed up on any of your comments or my questions about your being gay.<BR/><BR/><BR/>is it your intention to deal with an issue by dancing around it.<BR/><BR/>yes....... there might be a conflict between agape and philio(friendship love) or agape and eros (sexual attraction love) but not agape love of god and agape love of loving one another(as called by christ).........because both are of the same spirit. and where they are of the same spirit one reenforces the other.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-31179350436619302262007-12-27T21:50:00.000-06:002007-12-27T21:50:00.000-06:00i have never spoken with anyone who so focused on ...i have never spoken with anyone who so focused on sin. obviously you didnt 1cor13..............why, i have know idea. i also gave you romans 12 you obviously didnt read that either.<BR/><BR/>that is what you have in common with those who are so focused on sin...............a very low opinion of love.<BR/><BR/>even though 1cor13 says that anything without love is nothing. all knowledge..............<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>i mentioned godly sadness of 2cor7<BR/>ill mention it again. the guilt of this world leads to death. <BR/><BR/><BR/>do you think that guilt leads us to be of the spirit?please annotate, if you know of a scripture that says it does<BR/><BR/>my own understanding is that we cannot serve the law and the serve of the spirit. the spirit being about love. 1john4 god is love. they are two masters........inevidibly we will love one and dispise the other.feetxxxlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09931575208523991190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6319921527453210584.post-78944114404512265622007-12-27T20:51:00.000-06:002007-12-27T20:51:00.000-06:00Feetxxxl,One more thing about love. Here is what ...Feetxxxl,<BR/><BR/>One more thing about love. Here is what Jesus said is the greatest of the commandments: "Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the girst and greatest commandment. And the secon is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." (Matthew 22:34-40)<BR/><BR/>If we are to love God first and foremost, then shouldn't an expression of our love for Him, come before our love for others? Shouldn't we always, first and foremost express our love for him by following his teachings and doing our best not to sin against him? And secondly, how are we loving others if we bring them to sin against God? It takes two to tango, so both help each other sin in that regard. How is that loving someone, or God, when you help them do things which hurts God?Brendonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248268499428066786noreply@blogger.com