Truth - Is the Board Dirty?

The man who commits the lust in his heart only sins againist himself. He is guilty of adultry because if he will commit the sin in his heart then he will commit the sin for real.

The man who commits the actual adultry causes another to sin and has the other person's blood on his hands.

The same applies to the homosexual who lust after other men. If he will think it, then he will commit the act.

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

God does tell us to abstain from fleshly lusts!

It would seem we ALL can speak like the pharisee's very well. This is againist the Law, this is not againist the Law. But nobody understands the Spirit? Who is the temptor?

 

"And we have another person who see sin as sin only in action and not thought. You are in conflict with Jesus on this, not me. It was Christ who said to lust in your heart is the same as acting on it. "

You rahter duplictously turn my words into something they never meant. Te context of course is that no one insists on sinlessness n order to be saved.

It is no wonder you convince no one with your arguments, you argue with so little respect fro what people actually say.

 

Let's look again at your words and it's meaning. If you would like to correct what you stated and make it more clear, it may help.

In the first sentence you admit, that the mind (thoughts of being with same sex) WILL NOT necessarily CEASE when a homosexual converts to Christianity. I believe this is the implication you wanted to make, but in actual text with the beginning of your next sentence you now indicate that you disagree with the the first sentence. Perhaps this is where you feel, I twisted your words. You were not clear in the statement, but since you brought it up as an issue against my issue, I finally decided that you agree that it normal to continue to "sin" in thought. That would further match the rest of your statement since you went on to state in the second sentence that you agreed that new Christians should show "signs" of not sinning in "behavior appearance". This lead me to believe that you are ok with a person that may still continue to sin in his mind as long as he "shows" signs of not acting on them outwardly via behavior.

You finally sum it up by stating blankly that you judge someone’s most likely not saved if they don't show outward signs of not sinning.

My argument has been that even the person without outward signs of sinning, continue to sin and that they are just as guilty as someone who continues to sin outwardly. It further states that there is no difference in the degree of sin.

To sin in thought is equal to sin in action. What the difference is, is that some sins are illegal under State law and those acts are punished by the law, not God. A forgiven, Christian who continues to sin, which is all of us, whether outwardly or inwardly will not be held responsible if we are doing our best to curb those sins, but it is hypocritical to expect certain sins to stop while others are acceptable.

No one here can fool God by claiming he doesn’t sin in his mind. Since thought sin is equal to behavior sin and each punishable by death, only by the blood will each of us including practicing homosexuals enter into the kingdom. For we all continue to sin daily.

 

Murph, are you now saying that you don't have natural (fleshly) desires?

I do, and I think everyone else on the board does. Those desires which are sin will not stop in this lifetime. You were correct in your original statement that you and every other Christian has Fleshly desires.

If you have somehow stopped having fleshly desires, then I see your point on how it could mean what you claim and would then apologize. Let me know.

 

Post,

I am not really interested in how you justify twisting my words.

Please take the challenge to heart to cease being contentious and strive to be a conscience here in the context of the consensus.

Your logic and exegesis have been shown to be most shallow. Most reently you tried to say that unless Christians are perfect, then sinners may remain in their sin. As if God would excuse a homosexual's sin becuase of the flaws of christians. Its specious reasoning.

Now, will you be contentious or christian? Its up to you.

 

First of all Post-it I could understand if you say that a repentant homosexual can make a mistake and become weak and may sin just like any one of us sins. That is reality. Yet to say they will continue in sin is not acceptable.

We all make mistakes and sin. This is true but that does not allow us to daily and continually commit the same sin. This should be the case with homosexuality. We cannot tell them it is alright to continue daily to live in this sin. Yes we know people slip and fall but taking the stand that is being taken is telling them it is ok to live in the sin. Go ahead and sin.

Someone said this sin had nothing to do with environment or surroundings but that is not true.
A male who is raised effeminate can and usually turns homosexual. Men who do not have a strong role model from their dads can turn homosexual also seeking to have the void filled by the male.
This is truth. Does this justify the sin? No!
Again Homosexuality is a lifestyle that many choose because of their upbringing. Yet no matter the Why it is still sin.

 

Medical science has not definitively answered the question as to how or why a person becomes homosexual. There is a lot of speculation, and some have settled the issue in their own minds based on the study presented by a scientist who happens to be a homosexual himself and had a specific agenda.

I am not certain that it is a choice or genetic; influenced by circumstance and the need to be accepted. What I do know, is that God can change the entire person and make them whole. This might take a moment, and then it might take time. In the interim, I am quite prepared to wait for His time, and continue to feed the lambs, whether they be naughty or nice.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Could you please give me the verses that support this faux doctrine of committing the "same sin is wrong" but committing a "variety of sins" is acceptable idea?

You have contradicted yourself here, either one becomes homosexual by choice or they "turn" homosexual at some point. Your argument that if a Father role is missing causes one to become homosexual eliminates choice in the matter.

[ October 29, 2002, 11:34 AM: Message edited by: post-it ]

 

Forgive me, but is there even a point to this thread except to argue some more about something that Post it and just about everyone else here is not going to agree about no matter what? I am really honestly tired of seeing threads like this. And honestly, SheEagle, although we agree about a lot of things, I am tired of you starting threads where you cast aspersions on this board and the way it is run. I am offended that you would call this board dirty. If it is so dirty then why do you stay here? You have your fundamentalist only forum. But that isn't good enough for you. You want to get rid of anyone who doesn't 100% agree with you. And am tired of it. Please stop it!!!!!!

Joseph Botwinick

 

This would be why I am encouraging folks who hold pro-gay views such as Post and joshua to take a different tack in this.

As I note there is aconsensus of belief here on the issue of homosexuality, at least as to whether it is a sin.

I have been trying to get Post and Josh to acknowledge and respect that consensus, as well as to find a new constructive role within it. They can function as a conscience to ensure that those of us who hate the sin of homosexuality do so christianly (still loving homosexuals, and not making singling them out for negative treatment etc.).

I believe that if they do that then we stand a good chance of seeing les of board-critical threads, as well as seeing more constructive discussions about hoosexuality, like how do we minister to them the love of Christ.

 

There is no consensus on this issue. Most regular posters share the same (or at least very similar) opinion on the matter, but that does not consensus make. If anything. I'd say we're trying to come to consensus, rather than break up what consensus that exists already (particularly as there is none). There may be general agreement, but there is no consensus.

With such major contention -- as there is about the sinfulness of homosexuality, among myriad other issues related to homosexuality -- there is no consensus here.

[ October 29, 2002, 01:12 PM: Message edited by: stubbornkelly ]

 

You have your liberal, moderate and conservative. They are not going to agree and homosexuality is only one of the issues. For instance, Rev. Joshua and I have debated over the literalness of the creation account in Gensis, we disagree. The bottom line is, whether or not the board is willing to draw lines as to whether or not the literalness of the Bible is an issue. It is NOT interpretation, it is a debate over whether or not the Bible should be taken literally on these issues. Liberals do not take certain portions literally and it this will always be a point of contention for those who do. So, whether we like it or not, the board has the right to draw its lines and people calling themselves Baptist, but are very liberal are obviously within those boundaries. The board is not condoning their opinion by letting them debate because as stated above they are 'right' in their minds. Where the problem lies is, how liberal do you allow things to change? Do we start serving beer at youth fellowships because that is the only way to get youth to come to church functions today? That is my opinion of the way liberal churches are headed, but I do not have a problem debating them because God's Word stands for itself and you either accept it or you don't and if you don't then God will deal with you and not man. I think if the debates are going to occur, a board such as this is the best place for it to happen since there are REAL disagreements and my 'truth' is not necessarily your 'truth'; only God's truth will remain constant. This is the reason I personally feel that homosexuality is a sin, but so is adultry and lying. This issue is so polarized that the believers in homosexuality have a real right to believe there are homosexual 'hate mongers'. I agree, I have met them, but not all Christians hate homosexuals any more than they hate drug addicts. They see them as sinners, like we all are without the blood of Christ.

 

Phillip

Excellent post. Thanks for writing it.

This weekend we had a fellow who came to church as we were gathering for Saturday meeting. He came up on the porch where we were all admiring the lady bugs and said "I'm a drunk, preach hard and pray for me." And then he left, -- he didn't stay for meeting. We had a similar thing happen about a month before happen but a different alcoholic. From his statement, we surmised that God was working in him. Elder Darrell Davis then went on to preach about loving thy neighbor as thyself, and similar things - beautiful discourse. The fact is we don't know when God is working in someone. Be kind to everyone, rank sinners included, you never know when you may be calling them brother or sister.

[ October 29, 2002, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Weaver ]

 

Here is something for all to consider... You probably all know this old indian saying... Never judge a person until you have walked a mile in their moccasins!... I let God who knows all about us judge and not me!... Like the brother said we are all sinners and without Christ none better than the rest!... Brother Glen

 

I am temporarily locking this thread pending the results of consultation with the other moderators.

It has run its course and when this happens, often the threads get off course and bad things are bound to happen.

My word on the Baptistboard: It is a relatively open board for discussion for all baptists and a provision made for others. We have differing opinions on many subjects, and surely this too is an integral part of Baptist polity: the right to interpret scripture as an individual. It was this idea that led Mr. Spurgeon to object to the Baptist Union when they wanted to adopt a Baptist Confession. Certainly he left the Union finally over Modernism, but it began on this point.

We ought to entertain each others ideas, weigh them in the balance and see if they fit into the plans of God as we know them. This we ought to do with charity, for who knows, we may ourselves be caught in the balance one day and found wanting, and we might appreciate some of that charity.

God bless all, and keep looking up.....He cometh!

Jim

moderator

 

The thread is re-opened without further comment. You can have it on as much as you please.

Regards,

Jim

 

And I thought only women could change their minds. At least that is what my wife tells me.
Now that you unlocked it, nobody will have anything to say.
Personally, I don't think the board is dirty at all, I use windex every week on my computer screen and the board looks just as spic-n-span as it could ever be.

--------oh well, guess you had to be there------