Sola Scriptura and Homosexual behavior

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by MikeS, Aug 9, 2003.

  1. MikeS

    MikeS
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have no doubt that Joshua has what he considers excellent arguments for his position as to the meaning of the Scriptures. So, sola Scriptura believers, who is to say he's wrong? Not just argue that he's wrong, but say so with authority?
     
  2. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Are both parties of the monogomous relationship of the same gender?

    Is sexual activity, that is, erotic stimulation of the genitals, involved between the parties of the monogomous relationship with each other?

    If YES! to either or both of these questions, then the Monogomous Relationship is strictly forbidden by God.

    The Holy Scriptures are pretty darn clear to those who are willing to see the truth! For those who are not so willing, then Jesus is correct when he said in John 3:18 that unbelievers condemn themselves.

    If Rev Joshua cannot see the truth for himself, then what is he doing with a Rev in front of his name? He is a wolf in sheeps clothing! He will steal the souls of those God is calling.
     
  3. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Bestiality is sin - EVEN when monogamous.

    Murder is WRONG EVEN if you only murder one person.

    Romans 1 DOES NOT say (as some might have hoped)


    21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing to be wise, they became fools,
    ..

    25For they exchanged the idea of sex with ONE partner and started having sex with MORE than ONE.
    26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, by choosing MORE than one Woman as their sex partner,
    27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of ONE sex partner and started having MORE than one male sex partner...and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
    28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,


    However "INSTEAD" of that mythological text - that would be so supportive of the gay agenda - What the Bible REALLY speaks to as that men and women were no longer pairing off as husband and wife - but RATHER it was Men with Men and Women with Women - Not Men with Women.

    Let us see what the "text say" (as opposed to asking that humanism infesting the Christian church).


    Romans 1


    "21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing to be wise, they became fools,
    23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.


    Already the case for the gay-agenda-in-the-clergy is defeated. The arguement Paul makes is NOT that "They had MORE THAN ONE IDOL" rather the argument is that they "EXCHANGED" worship of the ONE true God by employing the unnatural act of an Image. EVEN ONE image in that context - is sin.

    The gay-agenda seeks to wrench it around to "MORE than ONE is the sin but ONLY ONE bird, crawling creature etc would be FINE".

    (And of course Mike S argues that non-Catholics can not simply read this fact in the text and see it - NOR can they listen to THEIR clergy repeat this obvious fact, rather they need to listen to HIS clergy instead. A fascinating POV).

    Romans 1

    24 Therefore God them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.


    "Obviously" each person had ONLY "one body" but in speaking of "the group" Paul notes that EACH OF THEM is defiling his own body.


    25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
    26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions;


    This is interesting - the passion is degrading EVEN if beastiality is with only ONE beast. The passion ITSELF is degrading WITHOUT RESPECT to the number of times it is indulged. (Much to the dismay of the gay-agenda).

    Romans 1

    25.. for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,


    Here "again" the EXCHANGe is not based on "NUMBER" of occurances - it is based on the VERY ACT.

    Romans 1

    27and the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward ONE another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.


    Clearly they committed MORE than one indecent ACT - but HOW many "indecent acts" would the "gay-clergy" argue FOR in the first place?

    Clearly this is a case of gay-clergy "wanting" the text to endorse the indecent act IF committed with only ONE partner.

    So is this really "natural" even though God calls it in this chapter "unnatural" or is it simply ONE instance of a "depraved mind"?
    Romans 1
    28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

    The Fact that they were "Doing those improper things MANY times" is not the point - though the gay-clergy view is that this is the "only point".

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  4. Tazman

    Tazman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anyone that believes that homosexuallity is acceptable or not directly addressed by God, is fighting a lost battle.
     
  5. Brother Adam

    Brother Adam
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2001
    Messages:
    4,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah, but by the rules of play (sola scriptura and authority of the believer) Rev. Joshua has every right to come up with the conclusion he did, and no one has the right to say he is wrong.
     
  6. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeslew, BobRyan and Tazman, I think you've missed the issue MikeS is raising. This thread is not about homosexuality, it is about authority of interpretation. Homosexuality just happens to be the example MikeS used. Why is your interpretation any more authoritative than anyone else's, on this or any other doctrine?
     
  7. Clint Kritzer

    Clint Kritzer
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2001
    Messages:
    7,739
    Likes Received:
    4
    While I appreciate the neccessity of this particular debate in this day and time, I am obliged to close this thread in light of the policy enacted 7/20.

    http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000174

    There are currently similar threads in the private forums (at least in the men's) so rather than moving this thread, I will leave it here for a day so that everyone is aware of the policy.

    Thank you all in advance for your consideration and cooperation.

    Clint Kritzer
    Moderator
     
  8. Clint Kritzer

    Clint Kritzer
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2001
    Messages:
    7,739
    Likes Received:
    4
  9. neal4christ

    neal4christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, he doesn't. As much as you hate it, I believe the church has the authority to say he is wrong. [​IMG] Sola Scriptura does not mean that every interpretation is equal or right, no matter how much you try to make it mean that. The church has authority to enforce the clear teaching of Scripture, such as this one. Try as one may, the Bible is clear on this issue. Denial of this is willful blindness.

    In Christ,
    Neal
     
  10. Eladar

    Eladar
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2001
    Messages:
    3,012
    Likes Received:
    0
    AMEN! [​IMG]
     
  11. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    The arguement is one against another's belief, but with strong arguement.

    If the scriptures are clear regarding sexual immorality among male-female relationships, such relationships are just as wrong among male-male and female-female relationships.

    If it is wrong for single persons to have physical sexual relationships, and scriptures do say that, it is wrong for homosexuals whom the law prohibits to marry to have physical sexual relationships.

    We find nowhere in scripture where God intended that there be an Adam-Steve coupling relationship. Yet we find throughout scriptures where God's plan for man is to have monagomous, loving relationships in the manner of Adam and Eve.

    In every example of "man knew woman and she bore him a child", there never has been even one example where Adam and Steve bore a child through the natural process of conception, gestation, labor and birth. The male organ simply does not stretch that far regardless of what some of you men may brag about. It is not possible for the male of any mammalian species to give birth to a child.

    So any attempt of two males to act out or to simulate the conception process is sin, an abhorant behavior, in the eyes of God. There is no way around that simple truth. And Scriptures make it clear that unnatural affections between women is just as sinful.

    If it is sexual activity outside bonds of marriage, it is immoral sexual activity, and a sin in the Eyes of God.
     
  12. MikeS

    MikeS
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, he doesn't. As much as you hate it, I believe the church has the authority to say he is wrong. [​IMG] Sola Scriptura does not mean that every interpretation is equal or right, no matter how much you try to make it mean that. The church has authority to enforce the clear teaching of Scripture, such as this one. Try as one may, the Bible is clear on this issue. Denial of this is willful blindness.

    In Christ,
    Neal
    </font>[/QUOTE]Tell me the mechanism by which the invisible church of believers (a) determines the true interpretation, and (b) exerts its authority to insist on the true interpretation.
     
  13. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Really? How? Which church? Why aren't they doing so? What if two Protestant churches disagree (which they do), which is more authoritative? Is doctrine determined by majority vote across all denominations?

    Seriously, how?
     
  14. neal4christ

    neal4christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where and how were problems dealt with in the first century church? Who was responsible for dealing with heretics and false teachings? Some headquarters in a far off city? Or was it somewhere else? ;)

    God Bless,
    Neal
     
  15. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    The instructions, and authority, were clearly given, in Matthew and through out Paul's writings, to the local congregations.
     
  16. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Probably both. If it was *only* the local congregation, the we go back to my immediately previous question: What if two "local congregations" disagreed, which is more authoritative? Is each equally authoritative unto itself? How can one determine which one is right? How can one local congregation then criticize another - by doing so, you're criticizing that congregation's local authority.
     
  17. MikeS

    MikeS
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    0
    Indeed, the Fathers of the Church came together in Councils (sometimes in far-off cities). In these Councils the promise of Christ was upheld and they were led inerrantly into truth by the grace of the Holy Spirit.
     
  18. neal4christ

    neal4christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    So how did Paul deal with heresies? Who did he instruct to deal with heretics? Who is responsible to make sure heresies were not taught?

    Try as you will, I don't have this "authority" problem that you do. There are clear teachings in Scripture and some not so clear ones. It is on many of the clear teachings that many disagree. There is no room for authority or someone's opinion here. As for others, yes, it would be nice if we all agree, but it is not essential. We are humans. We still have indwelling sin. As long as we have that we will never agree on everything. Like it or not, I see mankind as totally depraved and basically evil. That gets in the way, even in churches.

    Sorry guys, I am not getting into a long discussion on this. I don't have the problem with it that you do, so I am not going to invest the time with it. I already said I was not going to get involved in Catholic debates and issues for a while, and this is where this discussion is headed. [​IMG]

    God Bless You,
    Neal :cool:
     
  19. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Neal, do you really not understand the argument we are making?

    Who get's to determine who is a heretic in the first place? Which church, when two churches disagree, is authoritative?
     
  20. MikeS

    MikeS
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree 100%, on many "clear" teachings in Scripture, many disagree! But is that really what you meant to say?

    Maybe you should go defend the "clear" teaching of the Trinity to Ricky. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...