Homosexuality in the Bible

[Sunstone]

No it's not cute it is the Word of God. I disagree with people calling Evil, Good and that is what sojourner did by using those words to promote homosexual sex.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

By "cute", I was referring to how you side-stepped the point: "To live as less than God created one is to live in sin." You seem to have side-stepped that point once again. Could you address it?

 

[Mister_T]

Yes when the Word of God conflicts with your own beliefs you seek to undermine it. Paul was a Holy Spirit guided prophet of God He gave the truth. You measure The Word of God by your standards and declare it false what vanity, what arrogance, what pride.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Heh. No.

I measure nothing.
It's called not taking anything at face value and questioning everything. I don't follow the masses like a mindless zombie. If something conflicts with what I believe, then yes of course I'm going to question it. It's called reasoning and intellect. The Holy Spirit guides us believers. Are we without error? No. The FACT is, the Bible was written by humans. And humans are prone to error.

I do believe it to be divinley inspired for the most part, but it is not without it's discrepencies. And there is a number of conflictions within the book itself. And Paul is questionable. Anybody can claim to be a prophet for the Holy Spirit. You could. I could. Anyone on this forum could. Does that make it so? Of course not. I question everything. It's called being intellectually honest with myself. I want to have a strong faith. Not a mindless one.

And if I recall, we were talking about your pride, arrogance, and vanity.

 

[Dentonz]

Ok. So you want to be judged. No problem. I can do that. Pointing out others sins and preaching biblical law is what Pharisee's did. You're (not you in paticular) doing the same thing they were.
I do.
Nah. I'd rather use this one.
Let's see here. Jesus condemned the Pharisee's for preaching the law and telling people how horrible, evil, and awful they were because people(the one's being preached to) were not doing and following exactley like the Pharisee's were(the law preachers). And because the people were not like them, they were not good enough to make it to Heaven. Jesus called them Hypocrites and condemned their actions.

People are preaching to homosexuals about the Biblical law of sexual relations and using the law as authority to call them derogatory names and teling them they aren't "good enough" to make it into God's kingdom and they're ruining society.

You're right. The criteria is the word of God.

Oh. I've noticed most of the passages being used against homosexuals are from Paul's letters or relation to. What was Paul before he met Jesus on the road?......A Pharisee.
There's some food for thought.

I wish more Christians would do so.
I wish they'd do that too.
Read the thread Is Christianity picked on. This is already happening.

Oh. That quote that you quoted me on; I was not being serious. I was merely trying to show how ridiculous it is to use that method as an argument.

This is for you and Pah. Jesus spoke against the Pharisees because even though they taught the law accurately, they committed the same sins by not following their own teachings. That's exactly what I'm talking about. We must confront sin. Every person reading this has to confront the sin in their life, but thanks to the grace of God we can be free from the bondage of sin. We are all sinners; just because the world accepts that it's okay to do something, doesn't make it okay if the Bible speaks against it. We are not to be conformed to this world.
I have not individually judged anyone in anything I've said except myself. But sin is to be judged by the word of God. God will pass the final judgment, and I will be judged on whether or not I sat back and allowed fellow christians to believe the lies of the world without confronting them with the truth.

His truth is eternal.

 

[Dentonz]

Heh. No.

I measure nothing.
It's called not taking anything at face value and questioning everything. I don't follow the masses like a mindless zombie. If something conflicts with what I believe, then yes of course I'm going to question it. It's called reasoning and intellect. The Holy Spirit guides us believers. Are we without error? No. The FACT is, the Bible was written by humans. And humans are prone to error.

I do believe it to be divinley inspired for the most part, but it is not without it's discrepencies. And there is a number of conflictions within the book itself. And Paul is questionable. Anybody can claim to be a prophet for the Holy Spirit. You could. I could. Anyone on this forum could. Does that make it so? Of course not. I question everything. It's called being intellectually honest with myself. I want to have a strong faith. Not a mindless one.

And if I recall, we were talking about your pride, arrogance, and vanity.

You can never understand the things of the Spirit with "reasoning and intelect". This is the number one problem with those that are conformed to the world. The "world" is not neccessarily just thing that are perceived as evil, it is anything that is controlled by the flesh. Such as human reasoning and intelect. It is those who choose to live by faith that come to the knowledge of Christ.

 

[sojourner]

The "mixed cloth" arguement has to do with physical cleanliness. Such as women being unclean seven days out of the month. If you read Leviticus you'll find numerous laws that pertain to uncleanliness. Uncleanliness is not an abomination. Everything that is an abomination to God is still an abomination. You did not get judged for uncleanliness, you were just not allowed to enter into the temple of God. Jesus opened up the temple for us Christians because we are washed clean by his blood. But we will be judged if we continue to live in sin.

Actually, the passage has nothing whatsoever to do with women's uncleanliness. Ref. Lev.19:19. You may want to rethink that shirt!
Have you touched any human uncleanliness? Blood, urine, feces, pus -- any "issue" at all? Did you confess your sin and bring a female lamb or goat, or two doves or two young pidgeons to the Lord? You might want to do that! Using your criteria, you are guilty until you do those things.

It made me think when I read the Levitican passage about homosexuality. Ref. Lev.18:22. "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."
Notice that lesbianism, by it's exclusion, is OK! It does not say that to lie with a woman as with a man is an abomination. Hmmm...maybe there's more to this cultural taboo thing than we might have thought. Otherwise, there's no reason to exclude lesbian couples from church, or from being married. GOOD NEWS, LADIES!

 

[sojourner]

Isaiah 5
20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

All Praise The Ancient Of Days

God finished God's creation and called it good. If God created some of us homosexual, are we not in violation of your passage to call homosexuals evil?

Note: homosexuality is not called "evil." Read the passages again: Lev.18:22 and I Cor. 6:9. "Abomination" and "wrongdoer" are used -- not "evil." The Isaiah passage does not apply here.

 

[Mister_T]

You can never understand the things of the Spirit with "reasoning and intelect". This is the number one problem with those that are conformed to the world. The "world" is not neccessarily just thing that are perceived as evil, it is anything that is controlled by the flesh. Such as human reasoning and intelect. It is those who choose to live by faith that come to the knowledge of Christ.

This is true to an extent. In regards to things of spiritual nature , this is true. There are things that happen in the world around us, everyday, that we can't fathom with reason and intellect. If God personally instructs me to do something (I don't classify the Bible as personal instruction), which in the past he has, then I will not follow my own logic and reasoning.

As far as following people who claim to have authority of "God's Kingdom" and claim to possess absolute knowledge and 100% accurate understaing of scripture and the nature of God; any schmuck can claim that. Humans a very succeptable to corruption. The church is no exception. Organized religion has used it's "holiness" to camoflouge not-so-holy motives. History has plenty of evidence for that. Reasoning, logic are NOT without prayer and reflection.

Intellect and reasoning are not "evil" like you're implying. The Bible encourages to examine everything and to test the spirits
If you want to throw your brain out the window and blindley follow the masses, feel free. I won't. I want a strong faith. One that can hold up to pressure and scrutiny. Not a weak mindless one that can't hold water.

Conforming to the world? James 4 describes what being of the world really is
1What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don't they come from your desires that battle within you? 2You want something but don't get it. You kill and covet, but you cannot have what you want. You quarrel and fight. You do not have, because you do not ask God. 3When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.
4You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. 5Or do you think Scripture says without reason that the spirit he caused to live in us envies intensely?[a] 6But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says:
"God opposes the proud
but gives grace to the humble."[b] 7Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. 9Grieve, mourn and wail. Change your laughter to mourning and your joy to gloom. 10Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.
11Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor? Doesn't get any simpler than that last part.

 

[Mister_T]

This is for you and Pah. Jesus spoke against the Pharisees because even though they taught the law accurately, they committed the same sins by not following their own teachings. That's exactly what I'm talking about. We must confront sin. Every person reading this has to confront the sin in their life, but thanks to the grace of God we can be free from the bondage of sin. We are all sinners; just because the world accepts that it's okay to do something, doesn't make it okay if the Bible speaks against it. We are not to be conformed to this world.
I have not individually judged anyone in anything I've said except myself. But sin is to be judged by the word of God. God will pass the final judgment, and I will be judged on whether or not I sat back and allowed fellow christians to believe the lies of the world without confronting them with the truth.

His truth is eternal.

You have not judged? Hmmm.....
judged, judg·ing, judg·es

1. To form an opinion or estimation of after careful consideration: judge heights; judging character.
2. 1. <LI type=a>Law. To hear and decide on in a court of law; try: judge a case. <LI type=a>Obsolete. To pass sentence on; condemn.
   2. To act as one appointed to decide the winners of: judge an essay contest.
3. To determine or declare after consideration or deliberation.
4. Informal. To have as an opinion or assumption; suppose: I judge you're right.
5. Bible. To govern; rule. Used of an ancient Israelite leader.

v. intr.

1. To form an opinion or evaluation.
2. To act or decide as a judge.

You tell gay people they are in sin and that they're going to Hell. Sounds like judgment to me.

Regardless of whether the law was right or wrong, Pharisee's preached the law and told others that they must follow it to get (which is another way of saying earn) into Heaven. They were telling people that they needed to work (follow the law) to get into God's Kingdom. I like what #5 says about the Bible's version of judgment.

Bible. To govern; rule. Used of an ancient Israelite leader.

The church clams to have God's authority on earthley matters. This is their reasoning for the treatment of gay people. The church says they have the authority to tell others how live their lives and what moral codes to follow. Latley, they try to impose their beliefs through politics.

What does it mean to govern?
v. gov·erned, gov·ern·ing, gov·erns
v. tr.

1. To make and administer the public policy and affairs of; exercise sovereign authority in.
2. To control the speed or magnitude of; regulate: a valve that governs fuel intake.
3. To control the actions or behavior of: Govern yourselves like civilized people.
4. To keep under control; restrain: a student who could not govern his impulses.
5. To exercise a deciding or determining influence on: Chance usually governs the outcome of the game.
6. Grammar. To require (a specific morphological form) of accompanying words.

v. intr.

1. To exercise political authority.
2. To have or exercise a determining influence.

Governing is main, key element in Biblical judgement.

Let's see. Isrealite leader governing to people the laws of God. The very act of preaching law is Biblically defined as judgment.

So by telling others that they must follow a rule (whether right or wrong) in order to be saved is to judge. Which is what the Pharisee's did. Which is what your supporting.

 

[pdoel]

All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Ahh yes, the ancient of days. When homosexuality was common and not frowned upon.

 

[Pah]

This is for you and Pah. Jesus spoke against the Pharisees because even though they taught the law accurately, they committed the same sins by not following their own teachings. That's exactly what I'm talking about. We must confront sin. Every person reading this has to confront the sin in their life, but thanks to the grace of God we can be free from the bondage of sin. We are all sinners; just because the world accepts that it's okay to do something, doesn't make it okay if the Bible speaks against it. We are not to be conformed to this world.
I have not individually judged anyone in anything I've said except myself. But sin is to be judged by the word of God. God will pass the final judgment, and I will be judged on whether or not I sat back and allowed fellow christians to believe the lies of the world without confronting them with the truth.....

God will pass the final judgement and like the Supreme Court, may even rule against a judgement from a lessor court. What you judge has no bearing on what God judges. I believe that, in God's court and since he is a jealous God, you put yourself at risk by judging in the "lower courts".

 

[Dentonz]

You have not judged? Hmmm.....
judged, judg·ing, judg·es

1. To form an opinion or estimation of after careful consideration: judge heights; judging character.
2. 1. <LI type=a>Law. To hear and decide on in a court of law; try: judge a case. <LI type=a>Obsolete. To pass sentence on; condemn.
   2. To act as one appointed to decide the winners of: judge an essay contest.
3. To determine or declare after consideration or deliberation.
4. Informal. To have as an opinion or assumption; suppose: I judge you're right.
5. Bible. To govern; rule. Used of an ancient Israelite leader.

v. intr.

1. To form an opinion or evaluation.
2. To act or decide as a judge.

You tell gay people they are in sin and that they're going to Hell. Sounds like judgment to me.

Regardless of whether the law was right or wrong, Pharisee's preached the law and told others that they must follow it to get (which is another way of saying earn) into Heaven. They were telling people that they needed to work (follow the law) to get into God's Kingdom. I like what #5 says about the Bible's version of judgment.

Bible. To govern; rule. Used of an ancient Israelite leader.

The church clams to have God's authority on earthley matters. This is their reasoning for the treatment of gay people. The church says they have the authority to tell others how live their lives and what moral codes to follow. Latley, they try to impose their beliefs through politics.

What does it mean to govern?
v. gov·erned, gov·ern·ing, gov·erns
v. tr.

1. To make and administer the public policy and affairs of; exercise sovereign authority in.
2. To control the speed or magnitude of; regulate: a valve that governs fuel intake.
3. To control the actions or behavior of: Govern yourselves like civilized people.
4. To keep under control; restrain: a student who could not govern his impulses.
5. To exercise a deciding or determining influence on: Chance usually governs the outcome of the game.
6. Grammar. To require (a specific morphological form) of accompanying words.

v. intr.

1. To exercise political authority.
2. To have or exercise a determining influence.

Governing is main, key element in Biblical judgement.

Let's see. Isrealite leader governing to people the laws of God. The very act of preaching law is Biblically defined as judgment.

So by telling others that they must follow a rule (whether right or wrong) in order to be saved is to judge. Which is what the Pharisee's did. Which is what your supporting.

Why don't you click on my user name, go to "find all posts by dentonz", and carefully read everything I've said in this thread. I've not even once mentioned the word "homosexuality". The only 'person' Ive talked about judging is myself. If a fellow Christian sees me 'in sin' I expect them to confront me about it. That very action might bring me to repentance.

But what I have said is that if the Bible says something is a sin, if we are to claim to be "Christians" in accordance with the scripture, then we must accept it as truth.
If you can, in good conscience before God, pick and choose the bits you want to believe; that's your own choice.

And if you want to quote me and say well, you said "we are to judge with the same measure we want to be judged by" : This is about evident sin. If any one of you ever know me and see me doing something against the scriptures, you have the resposibility to tell me about it so that maybe you save me from the wrath to come.
If we as Christians don't start doing this there is going to be a lot of unrepented blood on our hands, and Christ is coming back for a holy bride. The bride that he recieves will not be corrupted by the world.

 

[Pah]

Why don't you click on my user name, go to "find all posts by dentonz", and carefully read everything I've said in this thread. I've not even once mentioned the word "homosexuality". The only 'person' Ive talked about judging is myself. If a fellow Christian sees me 'in sin' I expect them to confront me about it. That very action might bring me to repentance.

If it is not a sin to you then it is borne of ignorance or justified by God. I rather doubt that that state of the soul, in a mature Christian, is determined by ignorance .

But what I have said is that if the Bible says something is a sin, if we are to claim to be "Christians" in accordance with the scripture, then we must accept it as truth.
If you can, in good conscience before God, pick and choose the bits you want to believe; that's your own choice. ...

This position puts scripture above God; it becomes idolatry. Whoever claims God's word as the word of God without confirmation from God, reduces "God" to an adjective. The "word" becomes more important than God himself.

It opens the door to the charge that the Bible is the work of men inspired, in the common sense of inspired, "toward" God instead of men writing what God says. "I am driven by Gail's love to write the sonnet of my own love" versus "I write the sonnet dedicated to Gail because of my love"

The nuances of "God's word" and "word of God" as well as the actor of "inspired" are of tremendous importance.

 

[Dentonz]

Actually, the passage has nothing whatsoever to do with women's uncleanliness. Ref. Lev.19:19. You may want to rethink that shirt!
Have you touched any human uncleanliness? Blood, urine, feces, pus -- any "issue" at all? Did you confess your sin and bring a female lamb or goat, or two doves or two young pidgeons to the Lord? You might want to do that! Using your criteria, you are guilty until you do those things.

It made me think when I read the Levitican passage about homosexuality. Ref. Lev.18:22. "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."
Notice that lesbianism, by it's exclusion, is OK! It does not say that to lie with a woman as with a man is an abomination. Hmmm...maybe there's more to this cultural taboo thing than we might have thought. Otherwise, there's no reason to exclude lesbian couples from church, or from being married. GOOD NEWS, LADIES!

According to the law, were you to be put to death for wearing mixed cloth? No. Were you put to death for touching human uncleanliness? No. However, all of the things in the law that were punishable by death, are still punishable by death today. Because the "wages of sin is death." You must die to your flesh and be born again to the Spirit. If you put your fleshly lusts above the Word of God, you make Jesus' sacrifice void for you until you repent.

The "mixed cloth" had to do with being impure. Purity is achieved through cleanliness and it leads to holiness. We can not see the kingdom of Heaven unless we are holy in God's sight. Today, we can only be cleansed unto purity unto holiness by the blood of Jesus. We are not required temporary sacrifices of animals.

 

[Mister_T]

Why don't you click on my user name, go to "find all posts by dentonz", and carefully read everything I've said in this thread. I've not even once mentioned the word "homosexuality"

My apologies if I have misunderstood you. But this is a debate about homosexuals. It seemed as though you were directing your comments towards them.

If you can, in good conscience before God, pick and choose the bits you want to believe; that's your own choice.

I don't pick and choose anything to suit my own beliefs. I go to great lengths to be as honest with myself as possible. Both spiritually and intellectually. But the FACT is, there are many conflicts within the Bible. Being honest with myself, I can't not just ignore the blatent contradictions and say "well I'll just overlook those and take someone elses word for it" Being honest with oneself is not blindley following the status quo.

This is about evident sin. If any one of you ever know me and see me doing something against the scriptures, you have the resposibility to tell me about it so that maybe you save me from the wrath to come.

Ok. But look at it from a gay persons point of view. Take away God says being gay is a sin for one second. Pretend like it was never in the Bible. Take away religion for a second. What is the "wrath" or consequences they could suffer for being gay?

The only evidence someone has for the potential "wrath" is a piece of paper that say they will not make it to heaven. I'm sorry, but for a lot of people that is not evidence.

Sin does have it's consequences. Cheating on your spouse ruins your relationship. Alcoholism can destroy relationships and you health. Drugs will do the same. What consequences do gay people face if you take the religious aspects out of gay relationships?

 

[sojourner]

According to the law, were you to be put to death for wearing mixed cloth? No. Were you put to death for touching human uncleanliness? No. However, all of the things in the law that were punishable by death, are still punishable by death today. Because the "wages of sin is death." You must die to your flesh and be born again to the Spirit. If you put your fleshly lusts above the Word of God, you make Jesus' sacrifice void for you until you repent.

The "mixed cloth" had to do with being impure. Purity is achieved through cleanliness and it leads to holiness. We can not see the kingdom of Heaven unless we are holy in God's sight. Today, we can only be cleansed unto purity unto holiness by the blood of Jesus. We are not required temporary sacrifices of animals.

We have been purified by Jesus. The Leviticus passage regarding homosexuality says nothing about death...it lists it with other sins that defile (make impure). Therefore, Jesus has put aside the impurity associated with homosexuality...

 

[Pah]

Dentonz,

I have made some theological statements concerning your predilciction to assume God's place and you have failed to answer them. I'll repeat them again and remind you that you are scriptually commanded to answer questions when put to you.

I put forward to you the question of the overweight man. Is it gluttony that you see when he walks down the street? Or is it a medical condition? Do you go up to talk with him about the cause of his being overweighgt? Or do you sit back and judge either glutton or illness. It is aborrant and anti-scriptual to make judgements when only God can see into a heart or mind from a distance.

God will pass the final judgement and like the Supreme Court, may even rule against a judgement from a lessor court. What you judge has no bearing on what God judges. I believe that, in God's court and since he is a jealous God, you put yourself at risk by judging in the "lower courts".

Of course not all are in the form of a question. Many are made as points of scripture but they have the prepositional question "Do you understand" or "Don't you believe".

 

[s2a]

Hello Adstar,

When I said:

Since you feel inclined evade my point and ply me with evangelism instead, I invite you to outline and detail what the Bible says the blessings of His victory will be for His adherents, in this REF thread:
"So what’s so great about a Christian heaven?"

What do "the winners" get (I've already heard what happens to the "losers")?

You replied:

"I am amazed you do not already know. Most athiests i have talked to have a basic idea. But anyway. We (true Believers) will have eternal existence in the presence of the God of Abraham. An existence without pain or suffering."

Your "amazement" would have been significantly lessened (especially in regards to what I already "know") had you bothered to read the referenced post firsthand. Noted within said post is plentiful quoted Scripture, all of which make only vague hints as to what Heaven actually "is", much less what makes Heaven a desirable fate for either Christians or non-Christians (or non-believers).

You are invited one more to lend your inspired wisdom in pointed answer to:
"So what’s so great about a Christian heaven?"

I prophecy that you will not.

Is an eternal (without end) existence (with God), devoid of all pain and suffering, really a good thing? Do you have any frame of reference for comparison? Is non-existence so terrifying a concept to accept, that an unwavering belief in invisible deities and places is the best available default option to embrace? A belief that demands absolute loyalty of it's adherents, with no questions or equivocation permitted? A "promise" predicated upon a "take it or leave it" ("for your own good") proposition, founded upon threats of dire consequence and intimidation (from a self-professed jealous and vengeful God), or a "reward" of (basically) sparing you from His retribution (for not loving Him, or HIs "plan").
"Love and worship me, or else I'll torture you and inflict endless pain and suffering upon you".

Ya know, in this here realm of mere mortals, we consider humans that evince that sort of menacing and absolutist behavior as...evil dictatorial tyrants. Those that align with such tyrants and despots are often rewarded with resplendent places to live, special favors, entitlements, and authorized empowerment - to regulate whatever speech, ideas, activities, or personal freethinking choices that seem counter to that tyrant's authority and rule.

Men of conscience and moral integrity reject these tyrant's "generous" offers of ''order", "peace", and (their brand of) "truth"..."for our own good". My greatest fear in life is not death (or non-existence), but a willing/enforced servitude to a "benevolent" tyrant. If that view places me as damnable in the eyes of you and your God, then I'll be pleased to accept whatever fate is in store when it's my time to check out.

When i said;
It must please your god that you retain the especial insight to determine whom is worthy of hearing Scripture in righteous justification of your faith.

You offered;

You are misguided. On the contrary i am called to share what i know with everyone.

Perhaps then, you are an ill-equipped guide.

I recall it was you that said:

"There is little point in posting scriptures to people who use the "the bible is not the word of God but the word of men" argument. You have been defeated by that lie."

There is little point in attributing unfounded claims/statements to people that have not made them. Your insubstantial strawman has fallen at your feet even before you had a chance to erect it (before taking an impotent swing at knocking it down).

That includes atheists like yourself and false Christians who deny the scripture.

Now you misunderstand. I don't "deny" Scripture. I simply don't accept the claims of Biblical scripture as unequivocal fact or "truth". Scripture "exists", and I retain no compunctions in citing it's own claims whenever applicable.

Once i have shared the truth the ball is in court of the one receiving the Message as to how they will play it. It's a simple system. Someone gives the message and others accept or reject it.

Then it's a "system" for simpletons. Are you a perfect "messenger"? No? If you are an acknowledged imperfect messenger, then how can you place accountability upon others to choose/determine the "correct" decision? How is an unbeliever to discern the "true believers" from the "false" ones, especially when there are so many self-professed Christian "messengers" that all equally proclaim an understanding of God's message, "word", and "truth"? Scripture cautions and prophecies that there are (and will be) many "false" prophets, all claiming to possess and share the "truth" of "God's Word". What especial evidence do you produce to wayward "false Christians" and skeptical unbelievers alike, verifying that you are a "true" believer? May we see your "true believer" test results and score for apt comparison?

Again, I ask. What piety test of evaluative sincerity and purist devotion to "God's Word" is readily available? Who[m] devises the test, and who grades the answers? There are plenty of consumer guides out there that evaluate and rate the quality (and claims) of restaurants, hotels, automobiles, and travel destinations. How is an unbeliever or an impious Christian to evaluate your self-assertive status as a "true" believer? Is there any objective methodology/testing available that would allow an independent observer to conclude that your "message" was of any greater or lesser merit/value than anyone else's?
[Note: If Biblical scripture was either self-evident or self-explanatory, then what would be the need or purpose for evangelists, preachers, priests, or "messengers"? Since the biblically accounted Jesus Christ (Himself) appointed/anointed His disciples to share His "Word", it's not unreasonable to conclude that reading Scripture alone can not imbibe sufficient understanding - and therefore requires an informed "interpreter" to "explain" what His Word "really" says/means. (Which seriously deconstructs the argument proffered to unbelievers to simply, "Read the Bible - aka, 'God's Word'"). Ironically, Scripture instructs that faith - in God - is impossible, absent a personally inspired revelation (and spiritual rebirth/transformation) from the Holy Ghost. Faith is a miraculous revelation - not a learned/ingested slice of doctrine, dogma, or tidbit of Scripture. If this is so...then who needs a "messenger" like you? You are nothing more than a flawed, imperfect, and confessedly sinful messenger (that, no doubt has really, really...'good intentions' at heart). Since there is no conclusive test (barring your provision of such) to measure the accuracy, merit, value, or especially conclusive "truth" of your claims - and your insistence of proffering the perspective of a "true believer" - why would anyone conclude that your claims of verity and knowledge of "truth" have any considerable validity beyond those that profess a differing understanding from your own? Is every personalized revelation of "God's Word" the same for everyone - or can it prospectively differ, while remaining "true" for them, as shared uniquely between themselves and their god?]

"Well there are the decieved who upon hearing the truth abandon their false position and come to embrace the truth. Then there are the decieved who love their decieved state and hate the truth. Two very different cats One God loves the other God hates."

Oh my. That's just too easy - like a big fat hanging curve ball, just itching to be lofted high and far into the right field cheap seats. Do i swing at the "God hates... (maybe...****?)" pitch that got away, or wait on a tougher fast ball to crack out of the ballpark? Hmmmm...

"We see in this very thread that there are decieved ones who reject the truth as pertaining to the abomination of the homosexual act. They love their decieved position and they hate the truth of the scripture. Therefore yes they will have eternity in the lake of fire. Of cource the truth offends people greatly especaly when they see the truth as being evil."

What strikes me as utterly ironic is the notion of a "perfect" deity that oversees (or is manifestly "hands-on" in) the creation of "imperfect" people, then holds them ultimately individually accountable for the imperfections that He allows them to express.

The more ones faith is put to the test by challenging questions the more one investigates the truth and the stronger one grows in knowledge of the faith. So questions are a good thing. They make my faith stronger.

Challenging questions? You've got to be kidding me. I haven't even posed one "challenging" question of you as yet. When we get to the "Double Jeopardy" round, that's when things start to get interesting..

 

[s2a]

The problem is vain minds never seek to test themselves. Vain minds seek to test everything else by the thoughts of their own minds. If anything does not align with their minds measurement of what is right then it is rejected. It matters not if the conflicting truth comes from the bible. Vain minds have declared themselves God.

OK. I'm gonna be rude here That's just a really dumb thing to say. I have no interest in that job description (the hours are endless, the pay is lousy, and quite frankly, I'm not that paranoid nor obsessed to require unconditional love from my friends), nor have I ever decalred myself as some omniscient, omnipotent deity.

Posting anything in online forums is an exercise in vanity. If you did not operate from the position that what you had to share was important or worthwhile, you would not be here. It's vanity to believe that your perspective is more relevant, or proffers greater (or penultimate) insight, to the exclusion of all others.

"I'm here to share 'THE TRUTH'!" ANY perspectives that contradict/deviate from my understanding of that "truth" are WRONG (and *snif*..."Oh well...", damned).

If you wish to disabuse yourself from any collusions/associations with vanity, I suggest you follow the advice of Jesus, renouncing all earthly possessions and temptations of the flesh, and become a monk or priest. Otherwise, I assure you, your declarations and protestations of suffering the the maladies incumbent/imposed upon "true believers" will fall upon deaf and unsympathetic ears.

"Blame the messenger"? If you continue to present yourself as the lone (or rare) truthful arbiter of "God's Word", I practically guarantee that you will turn more people away from your God, than you will ever bring unto His fold of faithful and abiding adherents. Beelzebub would be pleased...

Proverbs 11:29

I posed:
If vanity is self-deceit, and lies separate minds from "the truth", to what or whom should they turn, or trust? Perhaps to someone that already claims (or infers) for themselves to understand "the truth" (and there's certainly no vanity in that position)?

You both ironically and ineptly replied:

Well once again they will not accept the clear Word of God on a matter because they place their own intellect abouve the wisdom Of God. So it matters not a jot to them if a human comes with the truth. Because their mind tells them that anyone who disagrees with what they deem as truth is a fool.

Or maybe - and note the irony in application here - verity is circumspectly observed in that: "Because your mind tells you that anyone who disagrees with what you deem as truth is a fool".

The numbering system of the bible is just a convienent system to help one locate scriptures. Just as page numbers in any book helps one to guide others to the parts of a book one wishes to talk about. The system does not change the meacing of the words. The bible should be read without much concern with those numbers.

I never suggested that numbering of Scripture should change meaning/interpretation of Scripture itself. But, matters of "convenience" are certainly accommodations of the needs of men, not of service to or for the needs of a divine instigator, who initially chose to impart His will and Word most notably absent such references.

Duh.

I understand the "why" of C&V notations, but was His Word in need of "divine inspiration" in amending such editorial discretions? Does perfection require revision or enhancement? Are such changes divinely inspired, or are they wrought at the hands of sinful men? If man was meant to fly of his own volition, would not God have lent him wings? If the Gospels were meant to sustain human editorial discretions/refinements in subservient service to "God's Word", should not they have been written as such from the outset? Does such willingness to accommodate the wanting qualities of man allow for further "divinely inspired" changes to Scripture in the future?


I note that you carefully evaded any provision of specificity in naming a particular translation of Biblical Scripture as being the lone accurate" source of "God's Word"? Of all people, surely wayward and repentant Christians would like to know just which Biblical accountings of "God's Word" they should hold fast and dear as "the truth". Won't you at least help these lost souls find the truthful way to "God's Word"? Must I quote from more than a dozen differing translations of the same C&V, simply to earn your candid reply of (specifically) which translation of "God's Word" that you deem as "true"? Or is it your understanding and assertion that all Biblical translations are both 100% accurate and faithfully representative of "God's truthful Word"?

If it is (posited) to be understood that "God's Word" can be accurately gleaned from any English Biblical translation, then what purpose do multiple "interpretations" of the very same "message" serve in matters of divinely proscribed "truth"? Time to start naming names. Do the NKJV, NASB and/or NIV, all testify to the exact same "truth" of "God's Word"? If so, how so? If not, why not? And, if not, which version/translation should "true believers' both quote and cite as definitive expositions of "God's Word"?

This is not just a qualitative summary conclusion to be made here. "Good, Better, Best" evaluations ain't good enough. We need THE "truth".

Let's say that I have six different road maps, outlining differing routes to a specified and desired destination. Three of these maps were published predicated upon the available information of the day, back in the 1970's. One map was published in 1985. One was updated to reflect the changes to infrastructure change and enhancement as of 2005. The last map is an ancient and barely readable document that is accountably almost 2000 years old.

If you're lost, and simply wish to achieve your desired destination, which map would you rely upon? Is there any element of ancient historical record that can hope to trump (or accommodate) the veritably existent changes to our world (or necessitated journeys/travels)? Are we to summarily reject any changes in amending contemporary maps from the originals as being inherently "false"? As lies? As Satanic influence?

All I request is provision of the one, and most accurate (definitive) roadmap, to the destination of "truth". No two maps are exactly alike. Either multiple [albeit dissimilar] maps can ultimately lead to the same desired destination, or that is pragmatically (and dogmatically) impossible. All I want to know is, who publishes the road map you are following to the land of "truth"? Rand McNally? MapQuest? FMCA? MapNation? National Geographic? They all differ in some subtle to substantial way. Can they all be correct and accurate, or do they each evince some fundamental flaw in comparison to the map you wield? Nobody wants to be lost, so don't be shy. C'mon. Which version of what map is the "right" one to follow to "God's Word"?

Well, all true followers of The Messiah Jesus are called by Jesus to go out and give the truth. Some will embrace the truth and accept correction while others will reject truth and mock correction

It's far easier to mock those that claim to speak on behalf of their Savior as incorruptible prophets of His "truth". Jesus warned of many false prophets that would arise in His wake, and in His name. Your credentials as a qualified corrector seem...lacking.

The Word of God is the true tester of those who claim to be followers of The Messiah Jesus,

Indeed. Please present your authentication/certification as His endowed/blessed proctor of this test. Perhaps the version/translation of Scripture you use has an additional chapter or two that provides this alluded test.

" ...I do not think for a moment you actually believe yourself to be confused. From your sarcasm and mockery it is pretty clear that you are a true atheist indeed."

How pleasing to know that not all sarcasm and sardonics are beyond your rational capacities. It's not your evident piety that I mock, or even question - it's your manifest manipulations of your own Savior's message that is both sad, and therefore worthy of righteous ridicule.

Yet, I applaud your zealotry, vainglorious pride, and assumptive arrogance in confident assertion and subsequent conclusion that I am a "true atheist". I envy your unfettered insight and certitude in the absence of any established fact or tested hypothesis.

If you say it's so...it must be true.

 

[s2a]

Dentonz,

I have made some theological statements concerning your predilciction to assume God's place and you have failed to answer them. I'll repeat them again and remind you that you are scriptually commanded to answer questions when put to you.

Of course not all are in the form of a question. Many are made as points of scripture but they have the prepositional question "Do you understand" or "Don't you believe".

Seconded. Dentonz, I'd like to hear a cognizant and cogent rebuttal to Pah's specified (albeit) prepositonal inquiries.

 

[s2a]

You can never understand the things of the Spirit with "reasoning and intelect". This is the number one problem with those that are conformed to the world. The "world" is not neccessarily just thing that are perceived as evil, it is anything that is controlled by the flesh. Such as human reasoning and intelect. It is those who choose to live by faith that come to the knowledge of Christ.

*Sigh*

I'm no proponent of faith-based beliefs, but to hear an advocate of such beliefs declare that "reason and intellect" are impediments to faith [in] or knowledge of Christ, recalls the days of tyrannical fear and ignorance when the burning of "witches" was sanctioned, and "confession of sins" by means of "purifying" torture were righteously justified.

Why would a loving and just God burden man with capacities of both reason and intellect, if such traits would only lead men to eternal damanation and separation from His merciful love?

Is man imperfect by creation, or by choice? If "original sin" is incumbent upon us all, then God has either allowed or mandated this condition to be so (thus being, "natural"). If man chooses to separate himself from God, then such a "choice" (borne of reason and intellect), is either dynamic and subject to change, or it's pre-ordained and purposed (by God) from inception.

Why purposefully confuse man so?

Either we are to reject all empirical evidences to the contrary, and blindly accept that some invisible, omniscient, benevolent diety keeps track of some five billion souls (with a specified "plan" for each and every one), of whom may or may not interject on our piously beseeching behalf (while making the cosmos run "purposefully", exclusively for our benefit and concerns) - whilst determining the "ultimate" fate of the hundreds of thousands of "souls" that depart daily from this mortal realm - in order to reward or punish his faithful adherents...

...or...

...we are entitled to utilize the "divinely bestowed" human capacities of reason, logic, and intellect in order to question and seek more substantial "answers" beyond a 2000 year-old compilation of texts rooted in mtyh, legend, folklore, allegory, and poetic prose.

Either "make" us subserviently stupid, or allow us to be freethinking individuals. Even Genesis prompted man to subdue the earth, not to be servile and mindless sheep. Who knows? Maybe God does't want or accept adherents that reject their own divinely gifted traits of "reason and intellect". Why even create a "planet of the apes", when a "planet of the dogs" would be so much easier, and intensely (and continually) more gratifying?

God may work in mysterious ways, but the statements, declarations, claims, and actions of His most pious adherents defy any Scriptural explanation.