Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
Being Gay isn't a rebellion against God. That's absurd.
If one is an evangelical Christian, then one acknowledges the Bible as God's verbally inspired, inerrant Word. The Bible makes it clear that homosexual behavior is detestable to God.
"Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin." [Leveticus 19:22/NLT]
Given your position, it is obvious you do not subscribe to biblical authority. Nevertheless, Christians are absolutely serious when we say that sexual sin, including homosexual sin, constitutes rebellion against God.
Originally posted by Tim Rout
I realize American evangelicals sometimes become preoccupied with their favorite sin -- whether it be homosexuality, abortion, drunk driving, or something else -- but as a Canadian evangelical who sits outside the ebb and flow of American politics, I nevertheless agree with my brothers and sisters that rebellion against God brings judgment."The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness...." [Romans 1:18/NIV]
When our governments make laws and engineer extraordinary "rights" that legalize evil, we can and should expect God to respond. That response might be immediate, or delayed. It might involve a natural disaster, or a disease, or economic adversity, or something else. While it is impossible to accurately predict how God will respond to sin, we can be sure that He will respond -- both temporally and eternally.
Which "extraordinary" rights are you talking about exactly?
Last time I read the Bible, it said something along the lines that God was done punishing men on earth after he flooded it and killed every single living person except Noah and his crew. But now he's shaking things up because people aren't outside condemning gays more? Bible-Thumper, please.
Word to the evangelical: be careful not to "preach" to anyone, and try not to act like you have a strangle-hold on teh truth. The forum won't take kindly to you, and they'll either make existence annoying for you or ignore you. Discussion is fine, but in the past most people who post an endless stream of Bible passages have been known to be close-minded and condescending. Chances are, you won't listen to reason (Tectonic plate movements creating earthquakes?! Nonsense! It was sinners!) but don't expect others to do the same.
Originally posted by Tim Rout
If one is an evangelical Christian, then one acknowledges the Bible as God's verbally inspired, inerrant Word. The Bible makes it clear that homosexual behavior is detestable to God."Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin." [Leveticus 19:22/NLT]
Given your position, it is obvious you do not subscribe to biblical authority. Nevertheless, Christians are absolutely serious when we say that sexual sin, including homosexual sin, constitutes rebellion against God.
If you're going to take the Bible as "God's inerrant Word", then why not use the oldest version of the text, where it doesn't say anything about Homosexuality; just men laying with men?
How can it be "inerrant", if it's been revised so many times? A perfect example would be the Liviticus you quoted.
Also, it's Liviticus 18:22; not 19:22
Originally posted by Robtard
Which "extraordinary" rights are you talking about exactly?Last time I read the Bible, it said something along the lines that God was done punishing men on earth after he flooded it and killed every single living person except Noah and his crew. But now he's shaking things up because people aren't outside condemning gays more? Bible-Thumper, please.
Perhaps you need to read the Bible a bit more carefully. Following the events of Noah's time, God promised never again to destroy the whole earth with a flood [Genesis 9:11]. Next time, He will use fire [2 Peter 3:5-7].
And by extraordinary rights, I am referring to the right of gays and lesbians to marry, the right of women to murder their unborn babies, the right of schools to hand out condoms to my kids no matter what I think about it, and a countless string of other offenses God will judge our leaders for.
Originally posted by Robtard
If you're going to take the Bible as "God's inerrant Word", then why not use the oldest version of the text, where it doesn't say anything about Homosexuality; just men laying with men?How can it be "inerrant", if it's been revised so many times? A perfect example would be the Liviticus you quoted.
Also, it's Liviticus 18:22; not 19:22
18:22 Thank-you. My typo.
And it's LEviticus, not LIviticus. 🙂
If by the oldest version you are referring to the King James, you would be mistaken. The Wycliffe Bible predates it by more than two centuries.
If by the oldest version you mean the original Hebrew, I'm afraid I took Greek at Bible College, so you're out of luck.
And yes, the text literally translates (as the New American Standard puts it): "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." [Leviticus 18:22/NASB]
But the point remains unchanged. God detests the act of one man having sex with another. He reiterates this in Leviticus 20:13, where He adds a death penalty to the offense. Romans 1:26-27 adds lesbian sex to the list of sins, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 makes it clear that sinners -- including unrepentant homosexuals -- cannot gain entrance into God's heavenly kingdom.
As to the doctrine of verbal inspiration: Inerrancy flows from the idea that God is perfect; therefore, as the ultimate author of the Bible, His work is perfect. That said, we attribute verbal inspiration and inerrancy only to the autographs. Subsequent manuscripts and translations can only be substantively inspired in relation to how well they represent the original meaning of a given text.
So then, since Leviticus 18:22 was originally written in Hebrew, any English version I quote cannot be verbally inspired. Nevertheless, any number of translations can accurately represent the meaning of the original. While the New Living Translation renders Leviticus 18:22 somewhat differently than the New American Standard and other formal translations, its meaning is still on point. Homosexuality is sin.
Originally posted by Tim Rout
If one is an evangelical Christian, then one acknowledges the Bible as God's verbally inspired, inerrant Word. The Bible makes it clear that homosexual behavior is detestable to God."Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin." [Leveticus 19:22/NLT]
Given your position, it is obvious you do not subscribe to biblical authority. Nevertheless, Christians are absolutely serious when we say that sexual sin, including homosexual sin, constitutes rebellion against God.
You don't get it.
Gays aren't gay for the sake of rebelling against a fictional deity. So no, it's not a rebellion at all. You are trying to pass off your opinion as truth, and that's where your going to lose credibility in anything you say further on.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Word to the evangelical: be careful not to "preach" to anyone, and try not to act like you have a strangle-hold on teh truth. The forum won't take kindly to you, and they'll either make existence annoying for you or ignore you. Discussion is fine, but in the past most people who post an endless stream of Bible passages have been known to be close-minded and condescending. Chances are, you won't listen to reason (Tectonic plate movements creating earthquakes?! Nonsense! It was sinners!) but don't expect others to do the same.
I appreciate what you're saying and I have been careful to respect the rules KMC has stipulated. As I understand it, I am free to debate the issues as long as I do not attack the person. If they wish to penalize me for preaching God's Word, so be it. I do so without shame or fear.
Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
You don't get it.Gays aren't gay for the sake of rebelling against a fictional deity. So no, it's not a rebellion at all. You are trying to pass off your opinion as truth, and that's where your going to lose credibility in anything you say further on.
Certainly, you are free to disagree with anything I share. But let me be clear that I am not here to push a personal position. As an evangelical Christian, I am here to present the message of the Bible in practical, relevant ways. Since the Bible speaks on a variety of issues, some of which run across the toes of social propriety, I present my case as carefully as I can from the pages of Scripture. I stand on God's authority, not my own.
Now I know...you don't believe the Bible is God's Word. In fact, it is clear you don't believe in God at all -- or so I gather from your use of the adjective "fictional". Nevertheless, each of us brings a perspective to this discussion and it is my privilege to bring an evangelical viewpoint.
Originally posted by Robtard
If you're going to take the Bible as "God's inerrant Word", then why not use the oldest version of the text, where it doesn't say anything about Homosexuality; just men laying with men?How can it be "inerrant", if it's been revised so many times? A perfect example would be the Liviticus you quoted.
Also, it's Liviticus 18:22; not 19:22
how can it be inerrant if it was written by flawed men?
Originally posted by Tim Rout
Certainly, you are free to disagree with anything I share. But let me be clear that I am not here to push a personal position. As an evangelical Christian, I am here to present the message of the Bible in practical, relevant ways. Since the Bible speaks on a variety of issues, some of which run across the toes of social propriety, I present my case as carefully as I can from the pages of Scripture. I stand on God's authority, not my own.
Yeah, but it kinda seems like you think you are the only religious person who has presented his case. We already know what most Evangelical Christians beleive, and ultamately they only say the same thing over and over.
It's like every time a new fundamental Christian joins the forum, he tells us things he thinks we didn't already hear from the last hundred evangelical posters before him.
So for us, it's like "Oh boy, here we go again" 🙄
No offense to you though. I'm sure you have your reasons for why you beleive what you beleive and I respect that. But it's annoying when another new member simply repeats the same stuff someone beforehand did.
And we already know that you won't change your mind, and you should know that neither will we. No one on KMC has been converted to Christianity by discussion. So I don't really know what you think you will accomplish here, but whatever it is, good luck.
Originally posted by Tim Rout
Now I know...you don't believe the Bible is God's Word. In fact, it is clear you don't believe in God at all -- or so I gather from your use of the adjective "fictional". Nevertheless, each of us brings a perspective to this discussion and it is my privilege to bring an evangelical viewpoint.
I do beleive in God, but not the way you do.
Re: Re: Re: Israeli ultra-Orthodox MP blames earthquakes on gays
Originally posted by Tim Rout
Linking natural disasters to God is biblical [Deuteronomy 31:29].Linking belief in the Bible to ignorance is typical of the lost [Psalm 119:156-158; 2 Timothy 4:3-5].
"The bible is ignorance."
"No it's not."
"How do you know?"
"The bible says so."
Your logic is almost hilarious in how circular it is.
Originally posted by Tim Rout
18:22 Thank-you. My typo.And it's LEviticus, not LIviticus. 🙂
If by the oldest version you are referring to the King James, you would be mistaken. The Wycliffe Bible predates it by more than two centuries.
If by the oldest version you mean the original Hebrew, I'm afraid I took Greek at Bible College, so you're out of luck.
And yes, the text literally translates (as the New American Standard puts it): "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." [Leviticus 18:22/NASB]
But the point remains unchanged. God detests the act of one man having sex with another. He reiterates this in Leviticus 20:13, where He adds a death penalty to the offense. Romans 1:26-27 adds lesbian sex to the list of sins, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 makes it clear that sinners -- including unrepentant homosexuals -- cannot gain entrance into God's heavenly kingdom.
As to the doctrine of verbal inspiration: Inerrancy flows from the idea that God is perfect; therefore, as the ultimate author of the Bible, His work is perfect. That said, we attribute verbal inspiration and inerrancy only to the autographs. Subsequent manuscripts and translations can only be substantively inspired in relation to how well they represent the original meaning of a given text.
So then, since Leviticus 18:22 was originally written in Hebrew, any English version I quote cannot be verbally inspired. Nevertheless, any number of translations can accurately represent the meaning of the original. While the New Living Translation renders Leviticus 18:22 somewhat differently than the New American Standard and other formal translations, its meaning is still on point. Homosexuality is sin.
I'm out of luck because you took Greek? Great, another KMC scholar.
I'll spell it Liviticus if I like, you worry about getting your passage numbers correct.
Well of course it can represent whatever you like, when you're taking any liberty you like in translation. When you translate the Hebrew passage from 'man with man' to 'homosexuality', as an all emcompassing word, that right there is a flaw, but how can it be flawless if it's God's word you will say. Easy, human error, your human error.
It would seem to me, that if the Bible is truly God's word and inerrant, it wouldn't need to be reworded, no?
Originally posted by Robtard
There's a fire, an earthquake or a kid skins his knee, "God did it because of the gays".
LOL...I find this post rather funny because its true! I live in Oklahoma so I hear shit like that sometimes.
Originally posted by Robtard
Bible-Thumper, please.
I see what you did there? 😉
Originally posted by Tim Rout
Romans 1:26-27 adds lesbian sex to the list of sins..
That's it...I just can't believe in God anymore after that one....that is just TOO far! 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠
Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
Yeah, but it kinda seems like you think you are the only religious person who has presented his case. We already know what most Evangelical Christians beleive, and ultamately they only say the same thing over and over.
It's like every time a new fundamental Christian joins the forum, he tells us things he thinks we didn't already hear from the last hundred evangelical posters before him.
So for us, it's like "Oh boy, here we go again" 🙄No offense to you though. I'm sure you have your reasons for why you beleive what you beleive and I respect that. But it's annoying when another new member simply repeats the same stuff someone beforehand did.
And we already know that you won't change your mind, and you should know that neither will we. No one on KMC has been converted to Christianity by discussion. So I don't really know what you think you will accomplish here, but whatever it is, good luck.
I do beleive in God, but not the way you do.
You know, in all the years I've spent chatting online and sharing a biblical perspective with others, there have only been a handful that have come to know Christ as a result. I still think it was worth it. Who knows what the Holy Spirit will do in the silence of someone's heart as they read His Word?
As for you having an exhaustive understanding of evangelical theology, it is clear you don't. At least, the words you speak seem to indicate a certain degree of presumptive comprehension. Nevertheless, I am not here to represent all evangelicals, or ANY evangelicals for that matter. I am simply a Christian -- plain and ordinary -- here as an ambassador of my Lord, Jesus Christ. Just as Shakyamunison is free to bring his Buddhist perspective to these discussions, I also bring a different flavor to the conversation.
Originally posted by dadudemonThat's it...I just can't believe in God anymore after that one....that is just TOO far! 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠
Now before someone accuses me of misquoting...this is the only part of the above citation actually directed at ME.
"Instead of believing what they knew was the truth about God, they deliberately chose to believe lies. So they worshiped the things God made, but not the Creator Himself, who is to be praised forever. A-men. That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men and, as a result, suffered within themselves the penalty they so richly deserved." [Romans 1:25-27/NLT]
The Bible is often a stumbling block for non-believers. They find some of its contents interesting and even satisfying, but when they run across a passage that rubs them the wrong way, it can be a real turn off. However, that's part of the Bible's function. It reveals the sinfulness of the human heart and helps to separate the repentant from those who have no genuine interest in the things of God [Hebrews 4:12].