Gay couples 'to get equal rights' in the UK

It's not a question of "IF", "IT IS SIN"!

As a matter of fact, IT IS AN ABOMINATION!

And abominations, shouldn't have anything to do with children!

And a so called Christian, shouldn't promote abominations, even if the law says it's legal or not!

Merry CHRISTmas to all!

[ December 14, 2002, 08:38 PM: Message edited by: Justified ]

 

Kelly.
, thanks for your reply. I genuinely was concerned,whatever differences may appear in these threads we must all learn that we should still express christian love for each other. That can be forgotten too often.

It is after midnight here and therefore I doubt that I can give you the best response. Two things I would say, however:

1)Reference to amendments will not mean much to those of us who live outside of USA, especially in the UK where this legislation is taking place.

2)In accordance with our baptistic understanding, not only do others have the right to express their view, but likewise we also have a right to express what we beleive has been taught to us from the scriptures. Our democratic process can not be at its best if, with an imbalanced understanding of tolerance, we feel we need to devote our time to presenting the views of others but not a thought of our christian voice.

yours, Jon.

 

According to Lev., where you draw the "abomination" term, eating shrimp, lobster, tuna, catfish and other scaleless fish, are also an abomination. Are you saying that we should also spare children from adults that would tempt our younger innocents with such sinful desires of the Devil?

 

Post-it...when you read the book of Acts...you will learn that Peter has a dream. It is revealed to him that it ok to eat anything as long as it was not offered to the pagan gods.

You'll need a new arguement.

Sherrie

[ December 15, 2002, 01:37 AM: Message edited by: Sherrie ]

 

I agree Sherrie, ABOMINATIONS seem to come and go. What is an abomination at one time may not be at another time. Since it wasn't Peter that changed this abomination from bad to good, it must have been God that changed, unless God doesn't change. If it is somehow Man that is the source in some way of Changing God's dictates, then what would keep man from having God change other Godly Mandates?

If it is established that Man has a position of changing original Godly Mandates, then the Catholics might be right, the Mormons might be right.

Or it could be that eating Shrimp and tuna or being homosexual is still an Abomination.

 

Post-it, there is a very distinct difference in the sets of laws given in the Old Testament.

The first law that we read of (after Adam) was given to Noah, as the father of the future humans on earth: capital punishment for murder. This has nothing to do with any special time or ethnic group -- it is a universal command, and the only one having to do with a specific punishment. All other commanded punishments are given for the theocracy of ancient Israel.

It is also the only universal command with a reason: because man is created in the image of God.

The next laws we read are the Ten Commandments. They are also universal, as they do not require a political or social organization to keep them. Any individual can obey them or not, without official sanction or support.

The rest of the laws in the Torah, or first five books of the Bible (the Law) are specifically for the theocracy of Israel, requiring a public recognition of them and political set-ups to deal with them.

So it is best not to use laws given to the Israelites as a challenge to people today, as that is totally inapplicable now.

As far as homosexual behavior is concerned, we do not know when it first appeared in the human race. We do know that the laws to the Israelites specifically demanded the death sentence for it. So it was around then.

It would be easy to say, then, that it was a law specific to the theocracy of Israel except for the fact that Paul brings it up in Romans 1 and links it with all the other results of the hardened, sin-filled heart at the end of that chapter.

This not only removes it from a specific application to the laws of ancient Israel, but makes it something which, if approved of, may well also condemn the approver to the mention of Paul as 'one deserving death.'

So I guess what I am trying to do is warn you and others here to be very, very careful about what you choose to support and defend. It is far better for any Christian to point others toward Christ and to stand up for and defend the hope you have within you regarding Christ Himself rather than to try to stand up for and defend any particular human behavior, deviant or not.

As far as Cain and Abel are concerned, their sisters' births are not mentioned and we don't know when they were. There could have been girls between Cain and Abel. We are only told the birth of the males, and only three of them at that. To extrapolate from this that Cain and Abel may have had a homosexual relationship is exegetically, logically, and biblically absurd in the highest degree. It is the desperate move by homosexuals themselves to try to legitimize what they are doing in terms of morality.

And yes, to whomever mentioned it, except for taxes and defense, the vast majority of laws are legistated morality. The accepted morality of a culture is the basis for its system of laws and punishments. To try to separate the legal from the moral on any of these issues is an exercise in futility -- the laws are expressions of a moral stand which that society has chosen to make legally enforceable.

===========

edit: by the way, post-it, tuna is from fish with scales and fins. It was never banned by God.

[ December 15, 2002, 10:19 AM: Message edited by: Helen ]

 

Thank you Sherrie and Helen.

That argument keeps getting tried over and over in the hopes (I guess) that some uninformed individual might come here, read the argument, and say to themselves, "Hmmm... I guess nothing is an abomination anymore, I'll just do want I want".

This is why we must always be vigilant and always have an answer for the hope that is in us.

I thank God for this board, and for allowing us to openly discuss issues and shine His light into the darkness. May His name ever be praised and His truth ever be proclaimed. Amen.

 

Shall I also put as much weight on your other claims about homosexuality and the Bible as you are expecting with this statement?

The last Bonita tuna fish I caught had only skin and fins, not scales and fins.

 

Post,

I see that your false teachings and abominable heresies are still alive and well!

Homo's and their beliefs and teachings and life style, go against the very holiness of God!

And trying to use a dietary law to JUSTIFY your stand for JUSTIFING sodomy, is clear evidence of "man's morality will dictate his theology"

Merry CHRISTmas to all!

 

Wow... this is way off subject, but here we go

Many questions arise about the local foods and fish of Hawaii. Since Hawaii is such an exciting multi-cutural society, there are a great many foods and dishes that are frequently asked about....are they allowable for us to eat by Biblical standards? While this page will not be a know-all, tell-all comprehensive glossary of every food, dish or fish, it will give a description of a few of the more widely known and more popular foods and fish, and their "status".

AHI--THE TUNA FAMILY:

AKU. aka Skipjack Tuna. Has fins and scales.

BIGEYE AHI. aka Bigeye Tuna. Has fins and scales.

TOMBO. aka Albacore Tuna. Has fins and scales.

YELLOWFIN AHI. aka Yellowfin Tuna. Has fins and scales.

It would seem that Helen is right about Tuna having fins and scales.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/roemer/localfoo.htm

Bonita is not mentioned, perhaps it has no scales.
When I'm fishing off Galveston over the CHRISTmas holiday, I'll try to catch one.

[ December 15, 2002, 03:14 PM: Message edited by: JamesJ ]

 

Ok. First. I think that we, as christians, should be tolerant of Gays, because they are people. We are called to love sinners, though we should hate the sin. To show them love, perhaps we should give them rights equal to those of married couples. It should be purely legal, and I would strongly oppose churches blessing these unions. Oh. One more thought: I really don't think any gay or lesbian I know would appreciate being called a homo, it would be very a very christian thing to give them some respect.

Matt

 

Hi Matt,

We should not re-define what God has already designed for His creation. We should not allow any more de-volution of society. It has gone too far already. Children are not to be used as pawns and trophies in some P.C. game.

We, as Christians, ARE tolerant in the correct usage of the word. We, however, should not let that word be re-defined to mean "acceptance".
I fully agree that we all should witness the hope that all sinners might obtain forgivness of their sins by acknowledging to God that they are sinners in need of salvation, and that they now choose to turn away from their sins (repent) and let the shed blood of Jesus cleanse them from their iniquity.

To be accepting, or "affirming" anyone's sin is not being loving, it is letting them continue on the wide way to destruction.

We don't judge. God has already judged as it is recorded in His written Word. We call sin, sin.

Even Jesus told the woman caught in adultry, "go and sin no more".

[ December 15, 2002, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: JamesJ ]

 

Ok for record sake...eating certain foods in bibical times and not eating certain foods was because of the climate and storage.

Example: When pork is not cooked is has worms. When certain meats are not stored properly they all cause worms. Some animals carry natural diseases, that are not fit for that era for comsumption.

The rule for food was merely for our own protection. Also non-Hebrew peoples worshipped pagan gods and gave sacrifices of certain meats to them.

Finally man learned different ways of perserving things...due to a new era....and God said, I do not change what is an abomination, but now that you people are a little smarter, and you are no longer wandering in the wilderness, you can eat these foods. Even the foods in the market place. BUT, not the meats that are offered to these pagan gods. The Abomination is eating sacrifices to false gods.

So lets get off the food thing and lets get back to the question. I find this to be just a detour away from the real question.

Sherrie

 

Shall I also put as much weight on your other claims about homosexuality and the Bible as you are expecting with this statement?

</font>[/QUOTE]Why yes, I would appreciate that!

P.S. edit -- these folk say bonita have scales and fins:
http://www.cgi.org/sky/meats2.html

[ December 15, 2002, 06:23 PM: Message edited by: Helen ]

 

Dang... I wanted to catch one to find out.

Let me tell about the one I got the other day, it snapped my line 3 times and...

 

Kelly, I am glad you are open to other suggestions.

It might help you to bear in mind that in the uk, the legal system has historically been based upon the 10commandments and the moral presentaion therein. It has still been democratic. The vast majority still accept the moral codes presented therein even if they are not neccesarily christian. (consider Helens statement ref the relationship between legislation and the accepted moral code in a nation) You must therefore appreciate the concerns expressed here when political correct aspects have been pushed through by the present government.
To consider legislation in other countries you will need to forget the amendments that only have significance in USA.

yours, Jon.

 

Matt,

Call people what they are. If they don't like it, well then, change what you are.

Being an American citizen, I have been called everything you can imagine, and I accept that. That is a choice I made, to remain an American.

Now being a Born Again Christian, is another story. Once you are saved, you are always saved, and can't ever not be Born Again. Even if you denouce it.

Your ethnic back round can't be changed either. But your sexual desires and orientation can be changed. It was all based on a decission made in their life time.

So, if they don't like being called: Gay, homosexual, homo, lesbian, sodomite, pervert, or what ever some one might call them, then that was a choice they made.

If they want to sit down and seriously talk about change through Christ, then I will treat them with respect!

Merry CHRISTmas to all!

[ December 15, 2002, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: Justified ]

 

Dang... I wanted to catch one to find out.

Let me tell about the one I got the other day, it snapped my line 3 times and... </font>[/QUOTE]I don't want to spoil it for you because I catch Bonita just South of where you will be fishing. Just one hint, if your fish has scales, don't call it a tuna cuz the other fishermen will know you're a yankee!

Gotta go decorate the Christmas Tree with the family bye.

[ December 15, 2002, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: post-it ]

 

Thanks post-it!

Shoot man, I'd be happy with a Sheepshead or a Sand Trout right about now.

After livin' in Houston for 13 years, I've learned how to fish with them boys and live to see another day.