patrick jane forums
Philosophy - Apocrypha - Video Ministries => Tattooed Theist Ministry => Topic started by: patrick jane on September 03, 2018, 10:30:07 am
-
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/user-media.venngage.com/202b8f0faf764e6059c112ce177252f7.jpg)
Answers #26 | Does Trauma Cause Homosexuality?
There's no scientific evidence that anyone is born gay but there is a lot of evidence that homosexuality is linked to emotional trauma and psychological scarring in developmental years. In this Answers video we take a look at famous examples.
[/color]
12 minutes
https://youtu.be/THmTwM3JuZs
Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/patrick_jane3169
PayPal Donations : https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
-
Is Homosexuality a Sin? | Can Christians be Gay?
13 minutes
https://youtu.be/zJa-AiAM86Q
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
-
What The Bible Really Says About Being Gay
8 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leIcLYj3I3U
What The Bible Really Says About Being Gay (Part II)
5 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frGJH3-4UFA
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
-
Is Homosexuality a Sin? | Can Christians be Gay?
13 minutes
https://youtu.be/zJa-AiAM86Q
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
It appears that JOE is telling us that scripturally, Homosexuality is a sin but then in the next sentence he tells us it is the same as his sins. Thus as a Christian, (sins are forgiven) including Homosexuality.
I have a problem with that. If a Homosexual repent and turns away from this sin and finds Jesus, OK.... However, it going to be hard to live in 24 hour sin and be a true Christian. I do not believe in Carnal Chrisitans. In a OSAS scenario, homosexuality could not be part of ones life.
Joe also touched on Marriage of Homosexuals and it seems He is OK with it. WOW....We were designed to be one man and one woman. Marriage is where one Man and One Woman become ONE!.
To me this is 'Sticking it to GOD' and placing Man's sovereignty over that of GOD's.
Think of it this way for all of you that think this way. GOD did not destroy Sodom because of Homosexuality itself but because EVERY MAN in the town condoned it. I live with 9it around me because I cannot go anywhere it is not. As far as condoning it, I DO NOT!
Blade
-
Is Homosexuality a Sin? | Can Christians be Gay?
13 minutes
https://youtu.be/zJa-AiAM86Q
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
It appears that JOE is telling us that scripturally, Homosexuality is a sin but then in the next sentence he tells us it is the same as his sins. Thus as a Christian, (sins are forgiven) including Homosexuality.
I have a problem with that. If a Homosexual repent and turns away from this sin and finds Jesus, OK.... However, it going to be hard to live in 24 hour sin and be a true Christian. I do not believe in Carnal Chrisitans. In a OSAS scenario, homosexuality could not be part of ones life.
Joe also touched on Marriage of Homosexuals and it seems He is OK with it. WOW....We were designed to be one man and one woman. Marriage is where one Man and One Woman become ONE!.
To me this is 'Sticking it to GOD' and placing Man's sovereignty over that of GOD's.
Think of it this way for all of you that think this way. GOD did not destroy Sodom because of Homosexuality itself but because EVERY MAN in the town condoned it. I live with 9it around me because I cannot go anywhere it is not. As far as condoning it, I DO NOT!
Blade
I'm with you 100% on this. Homosexuality is an abomination as far as I'm concerned. You may like the other two short videos "What the Bible says about" - Very good study in those vids. The use of Homosexual in the Bible and what the word originally means, as well as the word "unnatural".
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
.
-
If it’s a choice and it’s described as a sin, then yeah it’s a sin. I definitely agree that it is not this gigantic unforgivable salvation threatening sin. One of those videos seemed to imply that homosexuality may be a sort of “side effect” of trauma and abuse, if you go that route you’ve got to bring psychology into the discussion in a larger capacity than just a passing mention, we would have to look into obsession/compulsion, cognitive function, any disorders that would get lumped into a similar category, maybe even a few more relevant things within that field of study.
-
It appears that JOE is telling us that scripturally, Homosexuality is a sin but then in the next sentence he tells us it is the same as his sins. Thus as a Christian, (sins are forgiven) including Homosexuality.
I have a problem with that. If a Homosexual repent and turns away from this sin and finds Jesus, OK.... However, it going to be hard to live in 24 hour sin and be a true Christian. I do not believe in Carnal Chrisitans. In a OSAS scenario, homosexuality could not be part of ones life.
Joe also touched on Marriage of Homosexuals and it seems He is OK with it. WOW....We were designed to be one man and one woman. Marriage is where one Man and One Woman become ONE!.
To me this is 'Sticking it to GOD' and placing Man's sovereignty over that of GOD's.
Think of it this way for all of you that think this way. GOD did not destroy Sodom because of Homosexuality itself but because EVERY MAN in the town condoned it. I live with 9it around me because I cannot go anywhere it is not. As far as condoning it, I DO NOT!
Blade
I’m not sure I agree with homosexuality as being a thing that is all encompassing in a persons existence. I’m not consciously checking up on my own heterosexuality all day. I’m not thinking about or engaging in sex all of the time. I think the homosexual thoughts and actions are what do it as far as sinning goes, unless you hold a belief that gay people will always be gay and it is outside of their control.
I’m no advocate for gay marriage, I believe a religious leader has the right to turn away people who are gay and want to be officiated by them. If it is legal for them to be married in whatever state they live in, federal and state employees are required to grant them the request if they qualify and should not let bias impede their duty. If you cannot carry out your job because of religious convictions, then state and federal agencies are not the best place to work for you. In those places, the law of the land is what you are hired to carry out, even when it contradicts the law of God. God wins out over state and country to me.
-
It appears that JOE is telling us that scripturally, Homosexuality is a sin but then in the next sentence he tells us it is the same as his sins. Thus as a Christian, (sins are forgiven) including Homosexuality.
I have a problem with that. If a Homosexual repent and turns away from this sin and finds Jesus, OK.... However, it going to be hard to live in 24 hour sin and be a true Christian. I do not believe in Carnal Chrisitans. In a OSAS scenario, homosexuality could not be part of ones life.
Joe also touched on Marriage of Homosexuals and it seems He is OK with it. WOW....We were designed to be one man and one woman. Marriage is where one Man and One Woman become ONE!.
To me this is 'Sticking it to GOD' and placing Man's sovereignty over that of GOD's.
Think of it this way for all of you that think this way. GOD did not destroy Sodom because of Homosexuality itself but because EVERY MAN in the town condoned it. I live with 9it around me because I cannot go anywhere it is not. As far as condoning it, I DO NOT!
Blade
I’m not sure I agree with homosexuality as being a thing that is all encompassing in a persons existence. I’m not consciously checking up on my own heterosexuality all day. I’m not thinking about or engaging in sex all of the time. I think the homosexual thoughts and actions are what do it as far as sinning goes, unless you hold a belief that gay people will always be gay and it is outside of their control.
I’m no advocate for gay marriage, I believe a religious leader has the right to turn away people who are gay and want to be officiated by them. If it is legal for them to be married in whatever state they live in, federal and state employees are required to grant them the request if they qualify and should not let bias impede their duty. If you cannot carry out your job because of religious convictions, then state and federal agencies are not the best place to work for you. In those places, the law of the land is what you are hired to carry out, even when it contradicts the law of God. God wins out over state and country to me.
You said:"unless you hold a belief that gay people will always be gay and it is outside of their control."
Jon, in answer to your question above, I do not KNOW?
What I believe is GOD's WORD (KJV) and Mankinds Medical Science.
With Science there is no proof whatsoever including DNA that would legitimize Homosexuality.
God's WORD is sovereign above all else. I think you already know the verses that are associated with this behavior.
Here is an article I found... (ex-GAY) http://www.khouse.org/enews_article/2007/1224/print/
I do know that you are taking a terrible chance. For everyone has a Rapture date(death). After that time has passed, no further choices can be made. It will be too late and what if you and your assumptions are wrong?
Blade
-
You said:"unless you hold a belief that gay people will always be gay and it is outside of their control."
Jon, in answer to your question above, I do not KNOW?
What I believe is GOD's WORD (KJV) and Mankinds Medical Science.
With Science there is no proof whatsoever including DNA that would legitimize Homosexuality.
God's WORD is sovereign above all else. I think you already know the verses that are associated with this behavior.
Here is an article I found... (ex-GAY) http://www.khouse.org/enews_article/2007/1224/print/
I do know that you are taking a terrible chance. For everyone has a Rapture date(death). After that time has passed, no further choices can be made. It will be too late and what if you and your assumptions are wrong?
Blade
I’m quicker than a good many people to admit the possibility that I could be wrong about something. I may not have come off as clearly as I intended (i’m Not always the clearest speaker), but I was sure that I stated my belief that homosexuality is a choice and a sin. I believe it carries the same repercussions in a Christians life as any other sin.
I’m unsure what chance I am taking, if I speak with a homosexual on the subject I will make it abundantly clear to them that God has the only authority on the matter and that to look for all answers within Him and His will, just like everybody else. I appreciate your concerns, and I will tell you that I am aware that nothing is negotiable with God. I am well aware that a salvific error means my condemnation if I will not accept the truth. I’ve accepted the possibility of condemnation, I have acknowledged to the Lord that I may misunderstand something that is salvific and that I will raise no fuss with God about the outcome. I don’t worry about my salvation, I make sure that people know how to find theirs.
-
You said:"unless you hold a belief that gay people will always be gay and it is outside of their control."
Jon, in answer to your question above, I do not KNOW?
What I believe is GOD's WORD (KJV) and Mankinds Medical Science.
With Science there is no proof whatsoever including DNA that would legitimize Homosexuality.
God's WORD is sovereign above all else. I think you already know the verses that are associated with this behavior.
Here is an article I found... (ex-GAY) http://www.khouse.org/enews_article/2007/1224/print/
I do know that you are taking a terrible chance. For everyone has a Rapture date(death). After that time has passed, no further choices can be made. It will be too late and what if you and your assumptions are wrong?
Blade
I’m quicker than a good many people to admit the possibility that I could be wrong about something. I may not have come off as clearly as I intended (i’m Not always the clearest speaker), but I was sure that I stated my belief that homosexuality is a choice and a sin. I believe it carries the same repercussions in a Christians life as any other sin.
I’m unsure what chance I am taking, if I speak with a homosexual on the subject I will make it abundantly clear to them that God has the only authority on the matter and that to look for all answers within Him and His will, just like everybody else. I appreciate your concerns, and I will tell you that I am aware that nothing is negotiable with God. I am well aware that a salvific error means my condemnation if I will not accept the truth. I’ve accepted the possibility of condemnation, I have acknowledged to the Lord that I may misunderstand something that is salvific and that I will raise no fuss with God about the outcome. I don’t worry about my salvation, I make sure that people know how to find theirs.
Now this is out of the way, we can continue to debate other pressing agendas of the Bible.
Blade
-
You said:"unless you hold a belief that gay people will always be gay and it is outside of their control."
Jon, in answer to your question above, I do not KNOW?
What I believe is GOD's WORD (KJV) and Mankinds Medical Science.
With Science there is no proof whatsoever including DNA that would legitimize Homosexuality.
God's WORD is sovereign above all else. I think you already know the verses that are associated with this behavior.
Here is an article I found... (ex-GAY) http://www.khouse.org/enews_article/2007/1224/print/
I do know that you are taking a terrible chance. For everyone has a Rapture date(death). After that time has passed, no further choices can be made. It will be too late and what if you and your assumptions are wrong?
Blade
I’m quicker than a good many people to admit the possibility that I could be wrong about something. I may not have come off as clearly as I intended (i’m Not always the clearest speaker), but I was sure that I stated my belief that homosexuality is a choice and a sin. I believe it carries the same repercussions in a Christians life as any other sin.
I’m unsure what chance I am taking, if I speak with a homosexual on the subject I will make it abundantly clear to them that God has the only authority on the matter and that to look for all answers within Him and His will, just like everybody else. I appreciate your concerns, and I will tell you that I am aware that nothing is negotiable with God. I am well aware that a salvific error means my condemnation if I will not accept the truth. I’ve accepted the possibility of condemnation, I have acknowledged to the Lord that I may misunderstand something that is salvific and that I will raise no fuss with God about the outcome. I don’t worry about my salvation, I make sure that people know how to find theirs.
Now this is out of the way, we can continue to debate other pressing agendas of the Bible.
Blade
Yes
-
Joe does a good video on on this
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytPAHkNR5Tc&list=WL&index=4&t=0s
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
Controversial.
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's. Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His words...
Blade
-
****: Is it REALLY a Bad Habit? | Louder with Crowder
Steven Crowder delves into the very real problems pornography has dealt out. On just about everyone...
18 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WWRJBvw6Q4
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xfu70qKNqW8
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
Controversial.
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's. Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His words...
Blade
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul, traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord, being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus. Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous. He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced, and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will. The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset, and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother. Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead, God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
Controversial.
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's. Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His words...
Blade
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul, traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord, being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus. Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous. He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced, and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will. The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset, and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother. Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead, God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
Good evening Michael....Thanks for the info and I agree and disagree with different parts.. The two parts are Sin and the ten commandments.
Sin.... I agree sin is in all of us. We lose our ability to chose between sin and Jesus when our bodies die the 1st death. If we have not chosen to Believe in His Gospel (according to scripture), we will be condemned to live eternally away from Him in the Lake of Fire. Therefore the only unforgivable Sin is "Unbelief"
The Ten Commandments.. were KNOWN most likely known long before Exodus was written. It is obvious that Cain and Abel knew about the Sacrifice ritual which is the reason why GOD did not find favor with Cain.
Jesus in the NT repeated seven commandments from the original ten. These were given to us by our Apostle, Paul. The other three commandments were
ceremonial in nature and with the end of Laws of Moses, they could not be properly followed.
It is good to converse with you my friend...Pray you have a very blessed week.
Blade
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
Controversial.
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's. Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His words...
Blade
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul, traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord, being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus. Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous. He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced, and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will. The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset, and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother. Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead, God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
Good evening Michael....Thanks for the info and I agree and disagree with different parts.. The two parts are Sin and the ten commandments.
Sin.... I agree sin is in all of us. We lose our ability to chose between sin and Jesus when our bodies die the 1st death. If we have not chosen to Believe in His Gospel (according to scripture), we will be condemned to live eternally away from Him in the Lake of Fire. Therefore the only unforgivable Sin is "Unbelief"
The Ten Commandments.. were KNOWN most likely known long before Exodus was written. It is obvious that Cain and Abel knew about the Sacrifice ritual which is the reason why GOD did not find favor with Cain.
Jesus in the NT repeated seven commandments from the original ten. These were given to us by our Apostle, Paul. The other three commandments were
ceremonial in nature and with the end of Laws of Moses, they could not be properly followed.
It is good to converse with you my friend...Pray you have a very blessed week.
Blade
Dear Blade,
Hey Buddy,
Thanks for your pleasant reply. I don't usually get time to respond this soon, but I've got a dentist appt. after this, so I had to get up early. I wonder if blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is not the most unforgivable sin. Disbelief is a real bummer and you can't really get much taught to you because of it.
So, did Cain actually know what he was doing when he struck Abel with a rock and killed him. Get back to me and let me know more about it.
Dying the first death is dying during this next resurrection, as far as I know. Dying the second death is after this first resurrection to come when Jesus returns for us. If you are taken during the first resurrection, you don't have to be concerned with the 2nd.
It was made known to me that the meek shall inherit the Earth after this 1st resurrection and they will populate the Earth one last time. Note that the 'rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were fulfilled.' During those thousand years, those who die during this 1st resurrection will rule with Jesus over the people still on Earth. See Rev. 20:5KJV.
From what I understand, the 2nd death will culminate with the lack of our present Earth and a new Earth provided. See Rev. 21:1. There will be a new Heaven and no sea. As far as I know, there will be a great explosion, possibly of the sun, and it shall dissolve the elements. I don't know too much about it because God doesn't tell me things that can wait until some other time later. I have had enough to deal with and it has often not been easy. There will be two nations: Gog & Magog.
Blade, you are one of the closest of friends that I know here on FEF. I would love to be on this forum a lot more often, but so far, I have been having tasks and medical predicaments that keep me busy. It now takes me a long time just to do a load of laundry. I was in the hospital for 2 months at once and I only weigh 124 lbs. now. Perhaps it's soon time to give up the ghost. Only God knows when. I used to weigh 173 lbs. a while back. I'm glad to lose some weight, but Whoa!
If the Lord had not visited me often, I would not know all of the things that I've learned from Him. I have had a few overwhelming visions also, but they were worth it. I knew about the CA fires back in 1982. Now, that was a tremendous vision -- not the most pleasant, but the most heavy. I saw a great, massive earthquake after the brush fires burned there for quite a while. It is written about in my book which was published in 1999. I'd best shut up now and get going.
May Jesus Hold Your Hands & Heart. Looking forward until we speak again.
With Much Love For A Wonderful Brethren,
MichaelC
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
Controversial.
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's. Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His words...
Blade
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul, traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord, being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus. Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous. He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced, and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will. The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset, and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother. Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead, God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
Good evening Michael....Thanks for the info and I agree and disagree with different parts.. The two parts are Sin and the ten commandments.
Sin.... I agree sin is in all of us. We lose our ability to chose between sin and Jesus when our bodies die the 1st death. If we have not chosen to Believe in His Gospel (according to scripture), we will be condemned to live eternally away from Him in the Lake of Fire. Therefore the only unforgivable Sin is "Unbelief"
The Ten Commandments.. were KNOWN most likely known long before Exodus was written. It is obvious that Cain and Abel knew about the Sacrifice ritual which is the reason why GOD did not find favor with Cain.
Jesus in the NT repeated seven commandments from the original ten. These were given to us by our Apostle, Paul. The other three commandments were
ceremonial in nature and with the end of Laws of Moses, they could not be properly followed.
It is good to converse with you my friend...Pray you have a very blessed week.
Blade
Dear Blade,
Hey Buddy,
Thanks for your pleasant reply. I don't usually get time to respond this soon, but I've got a dentist appt. after this, so I had to get up early. I wonder if blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is not the most unforgivable sin. Disbelief is a real bummer and you can't really get much taught to you because of it.
I stand corrected..according to Mat 12:31.."Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men."
Yet without unbelief, blasphemy would not be possible!
So, did Cain actually know what he was doing when he struck Abel with a rock and killed him. Get back to me and let me know more about it.
I am sure that Cain knows what killing was. Yet, His jealousy was great because GOD chose Abel's offering over his......did He really know what He was doing or did unrestrained evil take over?
I will say this; I believe that we will see Cain in Heaven when we get there!
Dying the first death is dying during this next resurrection, as far as I know. Dying the second death is after this first resurrection to come when Jesus returns for us. If you are taken during the first resurrection, you don't have to be concerned with the 2nd.
It was made known to me that the meek shall inherit the Earth after this 1st resurrection and they will populate the Earth one last time. Note that the 'rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were fulfilled.' During those thousand years, those who die during this 1st resurrection will rule with Jesus over the people still on Earth. See Rev. 20:5KJV.
The first resurrection ended at the beginning of the millennium. Rev 20:5.."But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."
From what I understand, the 2nd death will culminate with the lack of our present Earth and a new Earth provided. See Rev. 21:1. There will be a new Heaven and no sea. As far as I know, there will be a great explosion, possibly of the sun, and it shall dissolve the elements. I don't know too much about it because God doesn't tell me things that can wait until some other time later. I have had enough to deal with and it has often not been easy. There will be two nations: Gog & Magog.
Blade, you are one of the closest of friends that I know here on FEF. I would love to be on this forum a lot more often, but so far, I have been having tasks and medical predicaments that keep me busy. It now takes me a long time just to do a load of laundry. I was in the hospital for 2 months at once and I only weigh 124 lbs. now. Perhaps it's soon time to give up the ghost. Only God knows when. I used to weigh 173 lbs. a while back. I'm glad to lose some weight, but Whoa!
If the Lord had not visited me often, I would not know all of the things that I've learned from Him. I have had a few overwhelming visions also, but they were worth it. I knew about the CA fires back in 1982. Now, that was a tremendous vision -- not the most pleasant, but the most heavy. I saw a great, massive earthquake after the brush fires burned there for quite a while. It is written about in my book which was published in 1999. I'd best shut up now and get going.
May Jesus Hold Your Hands & Heart. Looking forward until we speak again.
With Much Love For A Wonderful Brethren,
MichaelC
Thank youi Michael for the conversation.
Blade
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
Controversial.
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's. Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His words...
Blade
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul, traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord, being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus. Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous. He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced, and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will. The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset, and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother. Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead, God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
Good evening Michael....Thanks for the info and I agree and disagree with different parts.. The two parts are Sin and the ten commandments.
Sin.... I agree sin is in all of us. We lose our ability to chose between sin and Jesus when our bodies die the 1st death. If we have not chosen to Believe in His Gospel (according to scripture), we will be condemned to live eternally away from Him in the Lake of Fire. Therefore the only unforgivable Sin is "Unbelief"
The Ten Commandments.. were KNOWN most likely known long before Exodus was written. It is obvious that Cain and Abel knew about the Sacrifice ritual which is the reason why GOD did not find favor with Cain.
Jesus in the NT repeated seven commandments from the original ten. These were given to us by our Apostle, Paul. The other three commandments were
ceremonial in nature and with the end of Laws of Moses, they could not be properly followed.
It is good to converse with you my friend...Pray you have a very blessed week.
Blade
Dear Blade,
Hey Buddy,
Thanks for your pleasant reply. I don't usually get time to respond this soon, but I've got a dentist appt. after this, so I had to get up early. I wonder if blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is not the most unforgivable sin. Disbelief is a real bummer and you can't really get much taught to you because of it.
I stand corrected..according to Mat 12:31.."Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men."
Yet without unbelief, blasphemy would not be possible!
So, did Cain actually know what he was doing when he struck Abel with a rock and killed him. Get back to me and let me know more about it.
I am sure that Cain knows what killing was. Yet, His jealousy was great because GOD chose Abel's offering over his......did He really know what He was doing or did unrestrained evil take over?
I will say this; I believe that we will see Cain in Heaven when we get there!
Dying the first death is dying during this next resurrection, as far as I know. Dying the second death is after this first resurrection to come when Jesus returns for us. If you are taken during the first resurrection, you don't have to be concerned with the 2nd.
It was made known to me that the meek shall inherit the Earth after this 1st resurrection and they will populate the Earth one last time. Note that the 'rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were fulfilled.' During those thousand years, those who die during this 1st resurrection will rule with Jesus over the people still on Earth. See Rev. 20:5KJV.
The first resurrection ended at the beginning of the millennium. Rev 20:5.."But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."
From what I understand, the 2nd death will culminate with the lack of our present Earth and a new Earth provided. See Rev. 21:1. There will be a new Heaven and no sea. As far as I know, there will be a great explosion, possibly of the sun, and it shall dissolve the elements. I don't know too much about it because God doesn't tell me things that can wait until some other time later. I have had enough to deal with and it has often not been easy. There will be two nations: Gog & Magog.
Blade, you are one of the closest of friends that I know here on FEF. I would love to be on this forum a lot more often, but so far, I have been having tasks and medical predicaments that keep me busy. It now takes me a long time just to do a load of laundry. I was in the hospital for 2 months at once and I only weigh 124 lbs. now. Perhaps it's soon time to give up the ghost. Only God knows when. I used to weigh 173 lbs. a while back. I'm glad to lose some weight, but Whoa!
If the Lord had not visited me often, I would not know all of the things that I've learned from Him. I have had a few overwhelming visions also, but they were worth it. I knew about the CA fires back in 1982. Now, that was a tremendous vision -- not the most pleasant, but the most heavy. I saw a great, massive earthquake after the brush fires burned there for quite a while. It is written about in my book which was published in 1999. I'd best shut up now and get going.
May Jesus Hold Your Hands & Heart. Looking forward until we speak again.
With Much Love For A Wonderful Brethren,
MichaelC
Thank you Michael for the conversation.
Blade
Oh Blade,
I don't know what to tell you. The first resurrection happens when the Lord Jesus raises up the elect into the sky or Heaven during the last days and they are seen by many. The 1st resurrection happens before the 1,000 years that Christ will reign. See Rev. 4-6KJV. A resurrection means some one or more is raised up to Heaven. God {Jehovah/ Yahweh} is reigning now. Jesus will reign after Armageddon for 1,000 years. The Lord God said to the Lord Jesus, 'Sit thou on my right hand until I make your enemies become your footstool.'
Google the word 'resurrection.' It is that time when Christ returns to the Earth for the Rapture. The first. Those who take part in the 1st need not worry about the '2nd death' because they are already judged and saved, whereas those who are not judged and saved yet have to wait until this 2nd death to find out if they are saved after God judges them. See Rev. 20:13.
The elect can not be deceived during the Last Days. The elect are those who are predetermined to be saved and they are raised to Heaven first. The 1st resurrection written of in Rev. 20:5 is not referring to the initial raising of Christ right after His death on the cross.
How else could the millennium's beginning have to deal with those who did not receive the mark of the beast Rev. 20:4KJV. That is during the last days, not the 1st millennium. When Jesus first was resurrected on Easter, it was not during the time that some were supposed to avoid the mark of the beast.
Satan shall be let loose again after the thousand years were fulfilled {See Rev. 20:2KJV}. The beginning of the 1st millennium is not the same time as during the latter days 2,000 years later. It refers to 1,000 years after Christ was on Earth. Satan shall go out to deceive the nations of Gog and Magog. They aren't established until after Jesus' second coming.
Have I explained this well enough so that you can see what I mean? Let me know and I will try harder to convince you, if necessary. I do know what Google says. This is sort of a tough one, I must admit. If you can't agree with me, BR, then that is fine. Just tell me that you feel or think differently about it. I will not bite your head off, of course. I do suppose there are others who may interpret it the way that you do. No big deal really, for we shall find out later in Heaven. These things are written so that Satan and other evil people will not understand.
I'll get going for now. May you rest your head on the Lord God's shoulder!
MichaelC
[/size][/color][/font]
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPYRXop7aPA&list=WL&index=27&t=78s
Controversial.
Yes, it is a sin.. and GOD has placed the whole world under judgement.
Rom 1: 24-25..".Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
Notice the words "gave them up to) for three times you will read this in three different judgements.
This first judgement is about sexuality and the sexual revolution that started sometime in the late 80's to early 90's. Homo sexuality came out of the closets and hit the streets.
Rom 1:25-26.."For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Again we see the words "gave them up" and again another judgement that began in the early two thousands.... STD's became rampant and the homosexual group was now in full swing. GOD's Bow (rainBOW) a convenant to mankind yet, those who practice homosexuality fly a rainbow colored flag. Is it a sin?
In the final Judgement which started around 2014-15, The final step of letting mankind lose his mind.
Rom 1:28...."And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Here GOD "gave them over to" to
Rom 1:29-31.."Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
Are these sins......If you (the reader) thinks NOT, it is because God has "given you over to "; well you have read His words...
Blade
Dear blade,
Please keep this in mind. I am in no wise claiming that homosexuality is not a sin. That's been my stand since I began here. There are many sins that God and Jesus forgives, and they love the sinners in spite of their errors. Note that Saul, traveling on the road to Damascus, was visited by the Lord, being forgiven of all of the Christians he had killed. If Jesus forgave him for those killings, you might understand that there are other circumstances that the Lord considers, also. Paul was a killer of Christians and the woman whom Jesus forgave for adultery was also a sinner.
BR, the Lord has had to forgive a lot of sins in continuing to love us sinners regardless. We are ALL sinners, except Jesus. Jesus was sent to the sinners primarily, but also the righteous. He has forgiven sinners that have stolen, lied to, divorced, and more, but His love remains for anyone who is suffering from these problems or ways.
Wise it is if you can quit from each sin and do the Lord's will. The Lord does try to show us how He wants us to live, by certain commandments, like thou shall not kill, or steal, bear false witness {lying}, etc. If the Lord does not show us each sin, we would not know how to not do it {avoid it}. Can you understand? We all know that sin is wrong, but first we must know what is sin and what is not.
When Cain slew Abel, he most likely did not know that hitting his brother with a rock would kill him. He was angry, upset, and didn't know it would make his brother become nonexistent or dead. If Cain did not do this horrible thing, we would not know what we were not supposed to do, re killing his brother. Someone had to kill someone to realize what kind of malice it caused. This all could happen either way, no matter which sin I addressed. The secret is to hate the sin, but love the sinner. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, not necessarily their sins, too.
In the Ten Commandments, God Himself said, "Thou shalt not kill." It did not come from a disciple or apostle, but instead, God Himself. Yet it did not stop people to keep from killing others, for the most part. If a disciple or apostle says to not kill, should we hear it from them first, before God. In general, if a man does not know what IS a sin, then he will then not know what to keep from doing unless it is at least explained to or shown him, first.
I guess I will just try to quit explaining. Most of all sins are forgivable. It is good if it ends with a victory, of course, and a sinner is redeemed/saved. Jesus loves sinners and the righteous. Be sure to leave the judging of a soul to God Himself. It's best that way. He knows more details about the subject. He loves us, so God bless you.
MichaelC
Good evening Michael....Thanks for the info and I agree and disagree with different parts.. The two parts are Sin and the ten commandments.
Sin.... I agree sin is in all of us. We lose our ability to chose between sin and Jesus when our bodies die the 1st death. If we have not chosen to Believe in His Gospel (according to scripture), we will be condemned to live eternally away from Him in the Lake of Fire. Therefore the only unforgivable Sin is "Unbelief"
The Ten Commandments.. were KNOWN most likely known long before Exodus was written. It is obvious that Cain and Abel knew about the Sacrifice ritual which is the reason why GOD did not find favor with Cain.
Jesus in the NT repeated seven commandments from the original ten. These were given to us by our Apostle, Paul. The other three commandments were
ceremonial in nature and with the end of Laws of Moses, they could not be properly followed.
It is good to converse with you my friend...Pray you have a very blessed week.
Blade
Dear Blade,
Hey Buddy,
Thanks for your pleasant reply. I don't usually get time to respond this soon, but I've got a dentist appt. after this, so I had to get up early. I wonder if blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is not the most unforgivable sin. Disbelief is a real bummer and you can't really get much taught to you because of it.
I stand corrected..according to Mat 12:31.."Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men."
Yet without unbelief, blasphemy would not be possible!
So, did Cain actually know what he was doing when he struck Abel with a rock and killed him. Get back to me and let me know more about it.
I am sure that Cain knows what killing was. Yet, His jealousy was great because GOD chose Abel's offering over his......did He really know what He was doing or did unrestrained evil take over?
I will say this; I believe that we will see Cain in Heaven when we get there!
Dying the first death is dying during this next resurrection, as far as I know. Dying the second death is after this first resurrection to come when Jesus returns for us. If you are taken during the first resurrection, you don't have to be concerned with the 2nd.
It was made known to me that the meek shall inherit the Earth after this 1st resurrection and they will populate the Earth one last time. Note that the 'rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were fulfilled.' During those thousand years, those who die during this 1st resurrection will rule with Jesus over the people still on Earth. See Rev. 20:5KJV.
The first resurrection ended at the beginning of the millennium. Rev 20:5.."But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."
From what I understand, the 2nd death will culminate with the lack of our present Earth and a new Earth provided. See Rev. 21:1. There will be a new Heaven and no sea. As far as I know, there will be a great explosion, possibly of the sun, and it shall dissolve the elements. I don't know too much about it because God doesn't tell me things that can wait until some other time later. I have had enough to deal with and it has often not been easy. There will be two nations: Gog & Magog.
Blade, you are one of the closest of friends that I know here on FEF. I would love to be on this forum a lot more often, but so far, I have been having tasks and medical predicaments that keep me busy. It now takes me a long time just to do a load of laundry. I was in the hospital for 2 months at once and I only weigh 124 lbs. now. Perhaps it's soon time to give up the ghost. Only God knows when. I used to weigh 173 lbs. a while back. I'm glad to lose some weight, but Whoa!
If the Lord had not visited me often, I would not know all of the things that I've learned from Him. I have had a few overwhelming visions also, but they were worth it. I knew about the CA fires back in 1982. Now, that was a tremendous vision -- not the most pleasant, but the most heavy. I saw a great, massive earthquake after the brush fires burned there for quite a while. It is written about in my book which was published in 1999. I'd best shut up now and get going.
May Jesus Hold Your Hands & Heart. Looking forward until we speak again.
With Much Love For A Wonderful Brethren,
MichaelC
Thank you Michael for the conversation.
Blade
Oh Blade,
I don't know what to tell you. The first resurrection happens when the Lord Jesus raises up the elect into the sky or Heaven during the last days and they are seen by many. The 1st resurrection happens before the 1,000 years that Christ will reign. See Rev. 4-6KJV. A resurrection means some one or more is raised up to Heaven. God {Jehovah/ Yahweh} is reigning now. Jesus will reign after Armageddon for 1,000 years. The Lord God said to the Lord Jesus, 'Sit thou on my right hand until I make your enemies become your footstool.'
Hi Michael...The 1st resurrection would include His Church (body of Christ)and will culminate in the removal of all those believers during the Rapture. Yes, Jesus will reign 1,000 years after Daniel's 70 th week has been completed
Google the word 'resurrection.' It is that time when Christ returns to the Earth for the Rapture. The first. Those who take part in the 1st need not worry about the '2nd death' because they are already judged and saved, whereas those who are not judged and saved yet have to wait until this 2nd death to find out if they are saved after God judges them. See Rev. 20:13.
The elect can not be deceived during the Last Days. The elect are those who are predetermined to be saved and they are raised to Heaven first. The 1st resurrection written of in Rev. 20:5 is not referring to the initial raising of Christ right after His death on the cross.
I agree with you on the deceiving part however, the elect were not all taken at the Rapture. There were many elect left behind (I believe) who will become the Tribulation Saints. These Saints are also of the 1st Resurrection which ends right before the Great Tribulation (the 2nd half of Daniel's 70th week). For at this time there will be no believers left on earth including the 144,000 Jewish Evangelist. I might add, it is apparent the 144,000 and the tribulation saints will have to die in their faith of Jesus. Rev 20:4
The 1st resurrection did indeed begin with the initial resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Church, 144,000 and the Tribulations Saints will be considered in the 1st Resurrection.
How else could the millennium's beginning have to deal with those who did not receive the mark of the beast Rev. 20:4KJV. That is during the last days, not the 1st millennium. When Jesus first was resurrected on Easter, it was not during the time that some were supposed to avoid the mark of the beast.
When Jesus was resurrected it is considered the 1st resurrection. In fact, I believe the 144,000 Jewish evangelist may also have been resurrected during this time. We know that those in Abram's Bosom (Old Testament Saints) were take to heaven (Paradise) to await the Rapture. This would include the Apostles as well.
After the 144,000 and Tribulation saints are removed from the earth, there are no believers remaining on earth and the "Bowels"/ "Vials are yet to come. Those who survive (some in all nations)will be the Gentiles that will live during the Millennium. Of course, those who Jewish believers who fled Judah during the Abomination of Abomination will also live and rule Israel during the Millennium.
Satan shall be let loose again after the thousand years were fulfilled {See Rev. 20:2KJV}. The beginning of the 1st millennium is not the same time as during the latter days 2,000 years later. It refers to 1,000 years after Christ was on Earth. Satan shall go out to deceive the nations of Gog and Magog. They aren't established until after Jesus' second coming.
The beginning of the millennium or the 1,000 years of Jesus Christ's (physical) Reign on earth will indeed begin soon. The previous 2,000 years after the resurrection of Christ should not be considered any part of the Millennium.
Have I explained this well enough so that you can see what I mean? Let me know and I will try harder to convince you, if necessary. I do know what Google says. This is sort of a tough one, I must admit. If you can't agree with me, BR, then that is fine. Just tell me that you feel or think differently about it. I will not bite your head off, of course. I do suppose there are others who may interpret it the way that you do. No big deal really, for we shall find out later in Heaven. These things are written so that Satan and other evil people will not understand.
I'll get going for now. May you rest your head on the Lord God's shoulder!
MichaelC
[/size][/color][/font]
MichaelC, you have explained thing very well and Yes, we will find the truth out in Heaven. May God Bless you Michael. good evening to you.
Blade
-
THis has been a very excellent discussion. Thank you both for all the information and viewpoints you have posted. I have learned from this.
-
THis has been a very excellent discussion. Thank you both for all the information and viewpoints you have posted. I have learned from this.
Hi Mark , Yes Michael always has many interesting points.
Have a great evening....won't be long before it is too hot to sit outside and listen to the wonderful sounds of creation.
Blade
-
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done, just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes, but don't become totally like them just because you should love them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through. Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love towards each other without being derided about it by some others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their feelings of love for each other just because they are looked down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well, this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your Lives,
MichaelC
-
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done, just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes, but don't become totally like them just because you should love them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through. Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love towards each other without being derided about it by some others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their feelings of love for each other just because they are looked down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well, this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your Lives,
MichaelC
Michael, the Lord wants us to love the person not the sin as you say, yet if we do not tell it like it is, is that really loving them. Not telling the truth about faces them is not loving them....Not telling them what the judgement will be is not loving them.
Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms what awaits the LGPTQ????? person unless the repent and turn toward HIM in both testaments. It is not judging them that is the problem. It is seeing the sin for what it is and not telling them the truth.
Blade
-
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done, just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes, but don't become totally like them just because you should love them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through. Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love towards each other without being derided about it by some others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their feelings of love for each other just because they are looked down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well, this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your Lives,
MichaelC
Michael, the Lord wants us to love the person not the sin as you say, yet if we do not tell it like it is, is that really loving them. Not telling the truth about faces them is not loving them....Not telling them what the judgement will be is not loving them.
Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms what awaits the LGPTQ????? person unless the repent and turn toward HIM in both testaments. It is not judging them that is the problem. It is seeing the sin for what it is and not telling them the truth.
Blade
Dear Blade,
It is really good to hear from you so soon! It will help me in trying to explain it to others on Twitter. I do favor your reply here and agree with you. We should identify which areas of being gay are sins and, perhaps, help them find a way to overcome them. BR, of course I plan to fill the Internet with disdains towards what actions to cease from if they are having anal or oral sex with other men or women. I believe that the oral sex is less volatile than anything else. I want to let them know that such sex is not necessary in order to show them that you love them tons as an excellent friend.
In this way, I can also warn them why they should put wrong actions away from them and just instead live in love, which is so good for the heart, mind and soul. Of course, telling other LGBTQ persons will help them with their lives and the world as a whole.
Love is tricky sometimes. I would also tell them to refrain from wearing a dress if you are serious about it and get rid of the prissy sound of their voices which some gay men have. It is very unpleasant listening to it, to say the least.
Some people have very big hearts and I am one of them. I love just about everybody, but sometimes each have a way or more that I don't like, yet I still love the person they are, despite their sins. I know it seems unlikely plausible. It's not so hard to do, but at times, I know it can be. I guess you are the same way as me.
Some "macho" guys will simply not try this approach and come down hard on other males or females. They don't realize that it just hurts themselves also, in the long run and is not the way we're taught by Jesus. Jesus must have been touched in His heart by the adulteress and forgave her, telling to go and sin no more. He accomplished a lot for her and all of us by revealing such actions and words. It gives us all a heads up on how we should respond to sinners.
Jesus gets all of His ways from His Father, our God. So with the both of them loving us regardless of the sinning is quite an admirable, yet unexpected, action. I long to be with God ASAP so that I can ask even more questions about everything. And just to love Him and Jesus, His Son. I must have TONS of patience. It is like a monkey on my back. Do I explain this okay?
Yes, the world will not be as white, soon, if the sins & evil are not beaten out of the nations. God wants to give Jesus an Earth that is in great shape and it will be a wonderful present. See Rev. 19:7KJV. BR, the righteous, clean Earth and it's people will BE the bride offered to the Lamb. You don't have to believe me now, but go and read it again.
O well, I should get going from here now and go on Twitter for awhile. It's 3 a.m. here already and it will be 4 a.m. or so before I get to go to bed. Will chat again soon and I hope that all is very well with you and yours today. You take good care and enjoy the week.
God's Very Best, Full Of His And Jesus' Love & Understanding,
MichaelC
-
Dear Blade {& Chaplain Mark},
I want to jot a note to you both to clarify that you should love each other as you love yourselves, for Jesus taught us to do that. This does not mean that you should love their sins and take them to be your own, also. Jesus did not tell Paul that He was going to kill some Christians, too, like he {Paul} had done, just because He forgave him.
Homosexuals should be forgiven; thieves, and adulterers, yes, but don't become totally like them just because you should love them. Do you know what I mean here?? Anal intercourse is not the answer here whatsoever, and I would be inclined to stay away from oral intercourse, too. One might lead to another.
I love man very much, but not having sex with them. I put myself in their shoes, and can know what they are going through. Some men like to dress up like women, too, but that doesn't mean that I have to do it. Too many of us need love and that's okay. God is there for us to learn about love and how we should treat others fairly.
It's so easy to make such a mistake. We men can have love towards each other without being derided about it by some others. It is a travesty for other men to have to hide their feelings of love for each other just because they are looked down upon or it might be thought that they are gay. I'm not talking about sex, so don't get mixed up on me.
Often, it is what is unsaid that causes the problems. I'm trying to find the best words to explain this. I hope that you can understand all of this without misunderstanding me. Well, this is short for tonight, but it really hit home tonight that I should be more explicit. It is now almost 1 a.m., so I should hit the sack. May God Bless Your Journeys To Him During Your Lives,
MichaelC
Michael, the Lord wants us to love the person not the sin as you say, yet if we do not tell it like it is, is that really loving them. Not telling the truth about faces them is not loving them....Not telling them what the judgement will be is not loving them.
Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms what awaits the LGPTQ????? person unless the repent and turn toward HIM in both testaments. It is not judging them that is the problem. It is seeing the sin for what it is and not telling them the truth.
Blade
Dear Blade,
It is really good to hear from you so soon! It will help me in trying to explain it to others on Twitter. I do favor your reply here and agree with you. We should identify which areas of being gay are sins and, perhaps, help them find a way to overcome them. BR, of course I plan to fill the Internet with disdains towards what actions to cease from if they are having anal or oral sex with other men or women. I believe that the oral sex is less volatile than anything else. I want to let them know that such sex is not necessary in order to show them that you love them tons as an excellent friend.
In this way, I can also warn them why they should put wrong actions away from them and just instead live in love, which is so good for the heart, mind and soul. Of course, telling other LGBTQ persons will help them with their lives and the world as a whole.
Love is tricky sometimes. I would also tell them to refrain from wearing a dress if you are serious about it and get rid of the prissy sound of their voices which some gay men have. It is very unpleasant listening to it, to say the least.
Some people have very big hearts and I am one of them. I love just about everybody, but sometimes each have a way or more that I don't like, yet I still love the person they are, despite their sins. I know it seems unlikely plausible. It's not so hard to do, but at times, I know it can be. I guess you are the same way as me.
Some "macho" guys will simply not try this approach and come down hard on other males or females. They don't realize that it just hurts themselves also, in the long run and is not the way we're taught by Jesus. Jesus must have been touched in His heart by the adulteress and forgave her, telling to go and sin no more. He accomplished a lot for her and all of us by revealing such actions and words. It gives us all a heads up on how we should respond to sinners.
Jesus gets all of His ways from His Father, our God. So with the both of them loving us regardless of the sinning is quite an admirable, yet unexpected, action. I long to be with God ASAP so that I can ask even more questions about everything. And just to love Him and Jesus, His Son. I must have TONS of patience. It is like a monkey on my back. Do I explain this okay?
Yes, the world will not be as white, soon, if the sins & evil are not beaten out of the nations. God wants to give Jesus an Earth that is in great shape and it will be a wonderful present. See Rev. 19:7KJV. BR, the righteous, clean Earth and it's people will BE the bride offered to the Lamb. You don't have to believe me now, but go and read it again.
O well, I should get going from here now and go on Twitter for awhile. It's 3 a.m. here already and it will be 4 a.m. or so before I get to go to bed. Will chat again soon and I hope that all is very well with you and yours today. You take good care and enjoy the week.
God's Very Best, Full Of His And Jesus' Love & Understanding,
MichaelC
sounds like you got a plan Michael.....thank you.
Blade
-
(https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/124236.jpg?w=940)
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/july-august/conversion-therapy-bans-ex-gay-global-lgbt-laws.html
‘Pray Away the Gay’ Has Gone Away. Why Are Governments Trying to Stop It?
Nations around the globe are pushing bans on conversion therapy, some without defining what it is.
When the Evangelical Alliance of the United Kingdom wrote Prime Minister Boris Johnson about the country’s push to ban conversion therapy, its first request was that lawmakers define the term.
Conversion therapy has become a vague catchall that can refer to abusive and even violent efforts to change someone’s sexual orientation but also can be construed to mean any religious act that doesn’t affirm LGBT identities. In addition to proposals in the UK and Canada, bans have been enacted in Malta, Germany, Spain, Ecuador, Brazil, Taiwan, Australia, and 20 US states—some carefully defining conversion therapy, some not.
The term often evokes the most extreme attempts to eliminate unwanted same-sex attraction: shock therapy, exorcisms, forced heterosexual marriages, and even ****. More commonly, conversion therapy ministries have promised that people could overcome their desires through prayer, discipleship, and counseling.
In the past decade, however, even that kind of conversion therapy has mostly disappeared. Exodus International, evangelicalism’s flagship ex-gay ministry, shut down in 2013 after former leader Alan Chambers said it had caused pain and harm to too many people and that more than 99 percent of those who’d sought help there hadn’t actually experienced an orientation change. No major organization has emerged to take its place, and conversion therapy has fallen out of practice.
Psychologist Mark Yarhouse, director of Wheaton College’s Sexual and Gender Identity Institute, said that while some smaller organizations persist in prayer ministries aimed at changing people’s sexual orientation, he’s not aware of any major groups, mainstream evangelical ministries, or professional Christian counselors who practice any version of conversion therapy.
And yet, as the practice itself has all but disappeared, public campaigns to ban it are growing around the world. Some Christians worry that new regulations with poor definitions will take aim at what the UK Evangelical Alliance calls “everyday aspects” of church life.
A new law in Victoria, Australia, for example, will ban “religious practices, including but not limited to a prayer-based practice” aimed at “changing or suppressing the sexual orientation.” The government also says conversion therapy is illegal “with or without the person’s consent.” It is not yet clear how the law, which goes into effect in February 2022, will be applied, but it could criminalize praying for people who ask for prayer.
Australian pastor and writer Stephen McAlpine says the law is intended to challenge Christian teachings on sexuality.
“They’re looking for churches to self-censor,” he said. “It’s not like there’s churches doing lots of conversion therapy. It’s prayer groups where someone comes to you and says, ‘I’ve got unwanted same-sex desires. Could you pray for me?’ ”
McAlpine worries that Victoria’s new law will prompt pastors to say no. “Churches are going to actually pastor people less,” he said.
While ministries including Exodus International and Focus on the Family used to preach that homosexual desire should be eliminated, most evangelical churches, pastors, and mental health professionals today emphasize chastity amid desires that might last a lifetime. “Conversion” is no longer the goal—faithfulness is.
“There’s a greater proportion [of Christians] today that see it as more of an enduring reality,” Yarhouse said. “The person may experience same-sex sexuality, but now it’s, ‘How do I live with it?’ ”
Even the Nashville Statement, a 14-point manifesto by the complementarian Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, maintains that homosexual desire may never change. “We affirm that people who experience sexual attraction for the same sex may live a rich and fruitful life pleasing to God through faith in Jesus Christ, as they, like all Christians, walk in purity of life,” it reads.
Licensed counselor Jen Simmons says she has counseled clients and walked alongside friends who are same-sex attracted but have chosen celibacy or to marry someone of the opposite sex. She doesn’t try to change their orientation, but helps them develop skills to cope with unwanted same-sex attraction.
Simmons says therapy that promises to change a person’s sexual orientation is unethical, harmful, and simply impossible.
“Just like if someone has a genetic and biological propensity to anxiety, and they came in saying, ‘I want you to make my anxiety go away,’ ” she said. “I could never promise that.”
Still, Simmons is concerned about conversion therapy bans, since some of them, such as Australia’s, could target her work and prohibit “even just introducing a biblical ethic or talking about the biblical view of marriage,” she said.
Jayne Ozanne, founder of the Ozanne Foundation and the Global Interfaith Commission on LGBTQ+ Lives, which advocates for a national conversion therapy ban in the UK, said such a law is necessary to curb self-harm and suicide among those who identify as LGBT. A 2019 government survey found that only 2 percent of LGBT people in the UK had undergone conversion therapy, but she believes it still happens widely.
Ozanne, a lesbian evangelical, says she was repeatedly told while growing up in church that God would change her orientation if she prayed hard enough. When it didn’t happen, she not only felt shamed, but it shook her faith.
She pushes back on concerns that conversion therapy bans would muzzle therapists, but she has confirmed some evangelicals’ fears: She believes the bans need to focus on what’s going on inside churches. She says that prayer ministry teams “aren’t as regulated as we’d like to think they are” and untrained professionals, like pastors or lay ministers, shouldn’t be talking to people about things like sexual orientation. Ozanne hopes the conversion therapy ban in Victoria, Australia, will be used as a model in the rest of the world.
(https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/124248.jpg?h=1173&w=300)
In the US, where there are lots of protections for speech, federal courts have struck down bans in two Florida cities on First Amendment grounds. The bans that have withstood challenges have been more narrowly focused: In Virginia and other jurisdictions, the therapy is banned only for minors.
Most bans in the US also explicitly exempt churches and pastors, though they can still threaten Christian professionals, according to Matt Sharp, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom.
At the same time, licenced counselors are rarely trying to change orientation. Simmons said that when issues of sexuality come up, she is more likely to appeal to the science of trauma and attachment than she is to cite Scripture.
“We can rely on what’s true,” she said. “We can rely on a lot that’s being discovered in science...all truth is God’s truth.”
Maria Baer is a contributing writer for CT and is based in Columbus, Ohio.
-
(https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/125606.jpg?w=940)
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/october/lgbt-homosexual-identity-what-comes-after-ex-gay-movement.html
What Comes After the Ex-Gay Movement? The Same Thing That Came Before.
Old-school evangelical leaders once knew the value of “care” over “cure.”
“You know, Mike, I used to be gay,” I said.
Mike stopped moving his paintbrush as the words fell clumsily from my mouth. He was painting the St. Louis apartment I called home in the summer of 1997 as I began working toward my PhD in historical theology.
He’d asked me about my schooling, and we got to talking about faith. Mike had explained to me how he felt he could never go to church because he was gay.
“I know they say that’s not supposed to happen,” I went on, after dropping the bombshell. “But that’s my story.” Mike stared at me with interest as he set the paint can down, gently balancing his brush on its edge.
Looking back on this encounter, I can see that it had all the trappings of what became known as the ex-gay movement, of which I was once an eager proponent. Most notable is my use of the ex-gay script: “I used to be gay.” The phrase implied that I wasn’t gay anymore. I had a testimony, a story to tell about leaving homosexuality behind.
To be clear, my sexual attractions at that moment were drawn as exclusively to other men as ever. I was still at the top of the Kinsey scale that researchers since the 1940s have used to classify sexual orientation. What made me ex-gay was that I used the ex-gay script. I was trying to convince myself that I was a straight man with a disease—a curable one—called homosexuality. A condition that was being healed.
My terminological maneuver was an integral component of conversion therapy. Alan Medinger, the first executive director of Exodus International, described it as “a change in self-perception in which the individual no longer identifies him- or herself as homosexual.” It was all about identity. The testimony made the man. And, within my ex-gay framework, I wasn’t lying; I was claiming my new reality.
I was an ex-gay.
The emergence of Exodus International in 1976 had set evangelicals on a hopeful path toward curing homosexuality. Founder Frank Worthen explained, “When we started Exodus, the premise was that God could change you from gay to straight.” What followed was a decades-long experiment on hundreds of thousands of human test subjects. The movement collapsed after Exodus president Alan Chambers’s 2012 statement that more than 99 percent of Exodus clients had not experienced a change in their sexual orientation.
Although the paradigm of cure failed, it still walks undead among us, as some within major denominations try to institutionalize its approach. Recent debates among conservative Anglicans and Presbyterians over whether someone can claim a “gay identity” are only the latest round of similar disputes that have echoed in church corridors for years. After all, renouncing a homosexual self-perception was an essential first step in conversion therapy.
One effect of this approach was that it mandated that non-straight believers hide behind a mask, pretending to be anything but gay. It was part of the reparative process.
But this theological innovation was a relatively recent development. Before there was an ex-gay paradigm of cure, there was an older orthodoxy that included a Christian paradigm of caring for believers who aren’t straight.
I’ve wondered whether Henri Nouwen had his own homosexuality in mind when he wrote of the difference between care and cure. In the biography Wounded Prophet, Michael Ford documents how Nouwen discussed his experience as a celibate gay man with his close circle of friends. Nouwen had tried psychological and religious methods of orientation change, but to no avail. He knew that out of obedience to God, he couldn’t let himself engage in sexual relationships. But his path was filled with loneliness and unfulfilled longings and many tears.
In Bread for the Journey, he wrote, “Care is being with, crying out with, suffering with, feeling with. Care is compassion. It is claiming the truth that the other person is my brother or sister, human, mortal, vulnerable, like I am.”
“Often we are not able to cure,” he insisted, “but we are always able to care.”
Evangelical leaders, including John Stott, helped lay a foundation for a pastoral paradigm of care. Stott—the theologian and writer labeled the “Protestant Pope” by the BBC—argued that sexual orientation remains a part of one’s constitution. As Stott wrote in Issues Facing Christians Today back in 1982, “In every discussion about homosexuality we must be rigorous in differentiating between this ‘being’ and ‘doing,’ that is, between a person’s identity and activity, sexual preference and sexual practice, constitution and conduct.”
For Stott, a homosexual orientation was part of the believer’s identity—a fallen part, but one that the gospel doesn’t erase so much as it humbles.
This posture runs even further back than Stott. C. S. Lewis spoke in a 1954 letter to Sheldon Vanauken of a “pious male homosexual” with no apparent contradiction. Lewis’s lifelong best friend Arthur Greeves was gay. Lewis called him his “first friend” and made it clear to him that his sexual orientation never would be an issue in their friendship. They vacationed together. The compilation of letters Lewis sent to Greeves, collected under the title They Stand Together, reaches 592 pages.
In the United States, as the 1969 Stonewall riots in New York announced the birth of the gay rights movement, orthodox Protestants were already asking what positive vision Scripture gives for people who are gay. The 1970 pseudonymous InterVarsity Press book The Returns of Love: Letters of a Christian Homosexual mapped out a path of care and was promoted by Stott. The book’s celibate gay Anglican author explained that he was still a virgin at the time he wrote it.
Evangelicalism’s leaders knew there was a history of abuse with which to reckon. In a 1968 letter to a European pastor, Francis Schaeffer lamented the church’s complicity in marginalizing gay people. The pastor had seen no fewer than six gay people commit suicide, and he sought Schaeffer’s counsel. “The homophile tends to be pushed out of human life (and especially orthodox church life) even if he does not practice homosexuality,” lamented Schaeffer. “This, I believe, is both cruel and wrong.” Indeed, Schaeffer’s ministry became a magnet for gay people wrestling with Christianity.
Such leaders saved their disgust for abusive religious leaders. When Jerry Falwell Sr. brought up the challenge of gay people with Schaeffer in private, Schaeffer commented that the issue was complicated. As Schaeffer’s son, Frank, recounted in an interview with NPR and also in his book Crazy for God, Falwell then shot back a rejoinder: “If I had a dog that did what they do, I’d shoot it.” There was no humor in Falwell’s voice.
Afterward, Francis Schaeffer said to his son, “That man is really disgusting.”
“Sexual sins are not the only sins,” Stott wrote in Issues, “nor even necessarily the most sinful; pride and hypocrisy are surely worse.”
In 1980, Stott convened a gathering of Anglican evangelicals to map out a pastoral approach to homosexuality. They led with public repentance for their own sins against gay people. In a statement, these leaders declared, “We repent of the crippling ‘homophobia’ … which has coloured the attitudes toward homosexual people of all too many of us, and call our fellow Christians to similar repentance.”
It was a staggering confession at a time when popular opinion was still biased strongly against gay people. This was not the 21st century, when many Christian leaders repent in order to look relevant and inclusive in a culture that celebrates all things fabulous. Stott and these evangelical leaders must have been truly grieved for the ways they had injured their neighbors and siblings in Christ. The statement called specifically for qualified nonpracticing gay people to be received as candidates for ordination to ministry.
Five years earlier, many were shocked by Billy Graham’s similar comments in a news conference, some of which were reported in 1975 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Graham had been asked whether he would support the ordination of gay men to the Christian ministry. Graham had replied that they “should be considered on individual merit” based on certain qualifications. Specifically, the article mentioned “turning away from their sins, receiving Christ, offering themselves to Christ and the ministry after repentance, and obtaining the proper training for the job.”
The gospel of Jesus Christ offers a positive vision for gay people. “In homosexuality,” Lewis explained to Vanauken, “as in every other tribulation, [the works of God] can be made manifest.” He continued: “Every disability conceals a vocation, if only we can find it, which will ‘turn the necessity to glorious gain.’ ”
Lewis asked, “What should the positive life of the homosexual be?” That’s the question any gay person who comes to faith in Jesus will ask.
Too often the answer we hear is simply “No.”
No sex. No dating. No relationships. Often, no leadership roles.
That leaves people like me hearing that we have, as Eve Tushnet explained in a 2012 piece in The American Conservative, a “vocation of No.”
What is a calling of “Yes”? What is the positive Christian vision the gospel gives for gay people?
When I look at the lives and ministries of Lewis, Schaeffer, Graham, and Stott, what stands out most clearly is that they bring a vision of Jesus: Jesus, in his saving power. Jesus, who washes us and makes us clean. Jesus, who brings us into God’s family. Jesus, who covers shame and forgives sin. Jesus, who calls us by name. Jesus, who sees us all the way down and still wants to be in relationship with us. Jesus, who suffers with and for us. Jesus, who challenges us to live for his kingdom. Jesus, who gives new life with all its joy. Jesus, who is that treasure in a field for which we sold everything. Jesus, who is that treasure that can never be taken from us.
This is Jesus, whose inbreaking kingdom sweeps us up into something he is doing in the cosmos, something larger than ourselves. In Christ, we find ourselves in a larger narrative.
This is not Jesus as a means to an end of heterosexual functioning and comfortable family life. This is God himself as the end for which we were made. With this real God, the locus of hope is found not in this life with heterosexuality, but in the coming age, when we shall stand before our Savior.
Without that relationship with a Savior, there is no point in speaking of a biblical sexual ethic, either to straight or gay people. No gay people are going to embrace such an ethic unless they fall in love with Jesus. A heart smitten by grace is not only willing but also eager to follow the one who died for us.
Schaeffer, Stott, and Graham all stated on occasion their shared belief that some people are born gay. All of these Christian leaders also held to the historical understanding of the biblical sexual ethic. This certainly meant committing to a life in line with God’s creational pattern—his design. Not one of them supported sexual unions for believers outside of a monogamous marriage between two people of different sexes. But they approached gay people from a posture of humility.
Their vision did not flatten people into our unwanted sexual urges. Instead, they recognized that a same-sex-oriented believer’s biggest struggle may be not with sexual sin but with the ability to give and receive love. So they emphasized the need for the community of the church; for deep, long-term friendships; for brotherhood, to be known even in celibacy.
Stott, himself celibate, explained: “At the heart of the homosexual condition is a deep and natural hunger for mutual love, a search for identity and a longing for completeness. If gay people cannot find these things in the local ‘church family,’ we have no business to go on using that expression.”
Lewis, Schaeffer, Graham, and Stott also viewed the homosexual condition as an unchosen orientation with no reliable expectation of a change in this life. They showed great concern for the emotional and relational needs of gay people. Schaeffer insisted in his 1968 letter that the church needed to be the church and help “the individual in every way possible.”
In his NPR interview, Frank Schaeffer described his father’s Swiss ministry, L’Abri, as a place “where homosexuals—both lesbians and gay men—are welcomed.” He added: “No one’s telling them they’ve got to change or that they’re horrible people. And they go away, you know, having found my father wonderfully compassionate and Christlike to them.”
Schaeffer foresaw significant cultural changes when, in 1978, an Orthodox Presbyterian Church congregation in San Francisco found itself sued for releasing a gay employee who had violated the church’s code of conduct. In The Great Evangelical Disaster, Schaeffer said it would be silly for other churches to think they might not face the same challenge.
Still, Schaeffer and Graham didn’t recommend us-verses-them approaches. Just weeks before the 1964 presidential election, a gay sex scandal rocked the nation. President Lyndon Johnson’s top adviser, Walter Jenkins, was arrested a second time for having gay sex in a YMCA restroom. Graham called the White House to intercede for Jenkins.
In the recorded phone call, Graham charged Johnson to show compassion to Jenkins.
Asked about homosexuality at a 1997 San Francisco crusade, Graham remarked to reporters, “There are other sins. Why do we jump on that sin as though it’s the greatest sin?” He added, “I have so many gay friends, and we remain friends.” Speaking to a crowd of 10,000 that night in the Cow Palace, Graham declared, “Whatever your background, whatever your sexual orientation, we welcome you tonight.”
As Stott emphasized so passionately in Issues, the gay person who follows Jesus must live by faith, hope, and love: Faith in both God’s grace and in his standards. Hope to look beyond this present life of struggle to our future glory. But the love by which we must live, he explained, is the love we must receive from Christ’s spiritual family, the church. We must depend upon love from the very churches that have historically failed to give it to people like us.
Church historian Richard Lovelace’s 1978 book Homosexuality and the Church garnered hearty endorsements from evangelical luminaries Ken Kantzer (a former CT editor), Elisabeth Elliot, Chuck Colson, Harold Ockenga, and Carl F. H. Henry. The book might seem radical in today’s climate, but in the 1970s it represented a transatlantic neoevangelical vision. In contrast to homophobia on the right and sexual compromise on the left, Lovelace laid out the gospel challenge:
There is another approach to homosexuality which would be healthier both for the church and for gay believers, and which could be a very significant witness to the world. This approach requires a double repentance, a repentance both for the church and for its gay membership. First, it would require professing Christians who are gay to have the courage both to avow [acknowledge] their orientation openly and to obey the Bible’s clear injunction to turn away from the active homosexual life-style. … Second, it would require the church to accept, honor, and nurture nonpracticing gay believers in its membership, and ordain these to positions of leadership for ministry.
The church’s sponsorship of openly avowed but repentant homosexuals in leadership positions would be a profound witness to the world concerning the power of the Gospel to free the church from homophobia and the homosexual from guilt and bondage.
Only the gospel can open up the humility for such a dual repentance. Yet this was the Christian vision of Lovelace and Henry, Ockenga and Elliot, Kantzer and Colson, Lewis and Graham, Schaeffer and Stott, and a young gay evangelical Anglican who felt too afraid to use his own name, even though he was still a virgin.
Christian fathers and mothers like these had it right. Tragically, I write this as a lament for a road not traveled on this side of the Atlantic.
Already by the late 1970s, a hard shift had begun. As ex-gay ministries in North America multiplied with their expectation of orientation change, they shifted the locus of hope to this life. As the AIDS crisis devastated gay communities in the 1980s, evangelicals embraced the promise of heterosexuality. The secular reparative therapists added a semblance of clinical respectability. The new path to cure pushed out the older path to care.
And then the conservative side in a culture war discovered that we ex-gays were useful. We were proof that gay people could choose to become straight if they really wanted to. And if we could become straight, then there really wasn’t so much need for the church to repent of its homophobia. It just required people like me to maintain the illusion that we had changed.
In the aftermath of that lost culture war that radically transformed the sexual mores of the West, there is much for Christians to grieve. Transactional relationships. Disposable marriages. Vastly changed assumptions about sexuality and gender.
But the conservative church’s hesitancy to repent has not dissipated. As I watch evangelical churches and denominations fumble their way through discussions of sexual orientation and identity, often enforcing the language and categories of a failed ex-gay movement, we’re missing the real battle: The surrounding culture has convinced the world that Christians hate gay people.
Our calling is to prove them wrong.
The world is watching. Our children and grandchildren are watching. They are already second-guessing their faith because they hear all around them that Christians hate gay people, and they can’t point to anyone in their congregation who is gay, is faithful, and is loved and accepted as such. Maybe they can point to someone who uses the language of same-sex attraction. But even that is rare. It’s still not safe to do so.
I am not saying we are at risk of losing Christians who are attracted to members of the same sex; that’s a given.
I am saying we are at risk of losing the next generation.
For those who are listening, an older generation of Christians is still willing and able to help us understand.
Greg Johnson is lead pastor of Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis and author of Still Time to Care: What We Can Learn from the Church’s Failed Attempt to Cure Homosexuality.
-
(https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/125606.jpg?w=940)
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/october/lgbt-homosexual-identity-what-comes-after-ex-gay-movement.html
What Comes After the Ex-Gay Movement? The Same Thing That Came Before.
Old-school evangelical leaders once knew the value of “care” over “cure.”
“You know, Mike, I used to be gay,” I said.
Mike stopped moving his paintbrush as the words fell clumsily from my mouth. He was painting the St. Louis apartment I called home in the summer of 1997 as I began working toward my PhD in historical theology.
He’d asked me about my schooling, and we got to talking about faith. Mike had explained to me how he felt he could never go to church because he was gay.
“I know they say that’s not supposed to happen,” I went on, after dropping the bombshell. “But that’s my story.” Mike stared at me with interest as he set the paint can down, gently balancing his brush on its edge.
Looking back on this encounter, I can see that it had all the trappings of what became known as the ex-gay movement, of which I was once an eager proponent. Most notable is my use of the ex-gay script: “I used to be gay.” The phrase implied that I wasn’t gay anymore. I had a testimony, a story to tell about leaving homosexuality behind.
To be clear, my sexual attractions at that moment were drawn as exclusively to other men as ever. I was still at the top of the Kinsey scale that researchers since the 1940s have used to classify sexual orientation. What made me ex-gay was that I used the ex-gay script. I was trying to convince myself that I was a straight man with a disease—a curable one—called homosexuality. A condition that was being healed.
My terminological maneuver was an integral component of conversion therapy. Alan Medinger, the first executive director of Exodus International, described it as “a change in self-perception in which the individual no longer identifies him- or herself as homosexual.” It was all about identity. The testimony made the man. And, within my ex-gay framework, I wasn’t lying; I was claiming my new reality.
I was an ex-gay.
The emergence of Exodus International in 1976 had set evangelicals on a hopeful path toward curing homosexuality. Founder Frank Worthen explained, “When we started Exodus, the premise was that God could change you from gay to straight.” What followed was a decades-long experiment on hundreds of thousands of human test subjects. The movement collapsed after Exodus president Alan Chambers’s 2012 statement that more than 99 percent of Exodus clients had not experienced a change in their sexual orientation.
Although the paradigm of cure failed, it still walks undead among us, as some within major denominations try to institutionalize its approach. Recent debates among conservative Anglicans and Presbyterians over whether someone can claim a “gay identity” are only the latest round of similar disputes that have echoed in church corridors for years. After all, renouncing a homosexual self-perception was an essential first step in conversion therapy.
One effect of this approach was that it mandated that non-straight believers hide behind a mask, pretending to be anything but gay. It was part of the reparative process.
But this theological innovation was a relatively recent development. Before there was an ex-gay paradigm of cure, there was an older orthodoxy that included a Christian paradigm of caring for believers who aren’t straight.
I’ve wondered whether Henri Nouwen had his own homosexuality in mind when he wrote of the difference between care and cure. In the biography Wounded Prophet, Michael Ford documents how Nouwen discussed his experience as a celibate gay man with his close circle of friends. Nouwen had tried psychological and religious methods of orientation change, but to no avail. He knew that out of obedience to God, he couldn’t let himself engage in sexual relationships. But his path was filled with loneliness and unfulfilled longings and many tears.
In Bread for the Journey, he wrote, “Care is being with, crying out with, suffering with, feeling with. Care is compassion. It is claiming the truth that the other person is my brother or sister, human, mortal, vulnerable, like I am.”
“Often we are not able to cure,” he insisted, “but we are always able to care.”
Evangelical leaders, including John Stott, helped lay a foundation for a pastoral paradigm of care. Stott—the theologian and writer labeled the “Protestant Pope” by the BBC—argued that sexual orientation remains a part of one’s constitution. As Stott wrote in Issues Facing Christians Today back in 1982, “In every discussion about homosexuality we must be rigorous in differentiating between this ‘being’ and ‘doing,’ that is, between a person’s identity and activity, sexual preference and sexual practice, constitution and conduct.”
For Stott, a homosexual orientation was part of the believer’s identity—a fallen part, but one that the gospel doesn’t erase so much as it humbles.
This posture runs even further back than Stott. C. S. Lewis spoke in a 1954 letter to Sheldon Vanauken of a “pious male homosexual” with no apparent contradiction. Lewis’s lifelong best friend Arthur Greeves was gay. Lewis called him his “first friend” and made it clear to him that his sexual orientation never would be an issue in their friendship. They vacationed together. The compilation of letters Lewis sent to Greeves, collected under the title They Stand Together, reaches 592 pages.
In the United States, as the 1969 Stonewall riots in New York announced the birth of the gay rights movement, orthodox Protestants were already asking what positive vision Scripture gives for people who are gay. The 1970 pseudonymous InterVarsity Press book The Returns of Love: Letters of a Christian Homosexual mapped out a path of care and was promoted by Stott. The book’s celibate gay Anglican author explained that he was still a virgin at the time he wrote it.
Evangelicalism’s leaders knew there was a history of abuse with which to reckon. In a 1968 letter to a European pastor, Francis Schaeffer lamented the church’s complicity in marginalizing gay people. The pastor had seen no fewer than six gay people commit suicide, and he sought Schaeffer’s counsel. “The homophile tends to be pushed out of human life (and especially orthodox church life) even if he does not practice homosexuality,” lamented Schaeffer. “This, I believe, is both cruel and wrong.” Indeed, Schaeffer’s ministry became a magnet for gay people wrestling with Christianity.
Such leaders saved their disgust for abusive religious leaders. When Jerry Falwell Sr. brought up the challenge of gay people with Schaeffer in private, Schaeffer commented that the issue was complicated. As Schaeffer’s son, Frank, recounted in an interview with NPR and also in his book Crazy for God, Falwell then shot back a rejoinder: “If I had a dog that did what they do, I’d shoot it.” There was no humor in Falwell’s voice.
Afterward, Francis Schaeffer said to his son, “That man is really disgusting.”
“Sexual sins are not the only sins,” Stott wrote in Issues, “nor even necessarily the most sinful; pride and hypocrisy are surely worse.”
In 1980, Stott convened a gathering of Anglican evangelicals to map out a pastoral approach to homosexuality. They led with public repentance for their own sins against gay people. In a statement, these leaders declared, “We repent of the crippling ‘homophobia’ … which has coloured the attitudes toward homosexual people of all too many of us, and call our fellow Christians to similar repentance.”
It was a staggering confession at a time when popular opinion was still biased strongly against gay people. This was not the 21st century, when many Christian leaders repent in order to look relevant and inclusive in a culture that celebrates all things fabulous. Stott and these evangelical leaders must have been truly grieved for the ways they had injured their neighbors and siblings in Christ. The statement called specifically for qualified nonpracticing gay people to be received as candidates for ordination to ministry.
Five years earlier, many were shocked by Billy Graham’s similar comments in a news conference, some of which were reported in 1975 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Graham had been asked whether he would support the ordination of gay men to the Christian ministry. Graham had replied that they “should be considered on individual merit” based on certain qualifications. Specifically, the article mentioned “turning away from their sins, receiving Christ, offering themselves to Christ and the ministry after repentance, and obtaining the proper training for the job.”
The gospel of Jesus Christ offers a positive vision for gay people. “In homosexuality,” Lewis explained to Vanauken, “as in every other tribulation, [the works of God] can be made manifest.” He continued: “Every disability conceals a vocation, if only we can find it, which will ‘turn the necessity to glorious gain.’ ”
Lewis asked, “What should the positive life of the homosexual be?” That’s the question any gay person who comes to faith in Jesus will ask.
Too often the answer we hear is simply “No.”
No sex. No dating. No relationships. Often, no leadership roles.
That leaves people like me hearing that we have, as Eve Tushnet explained in a 2012 piece in The American Conservative, a “vocation of No.”
What is a calling of “Yes”? What is the positive Christian vision the gospel gives for gay people?
When I look at the lives and ministries of Lewis, Schaeffer, Graham, and Stott, what stands out most clearly is that they bring a vision of Jesus: Jesus, in his saving power. Jesus, who washes us and makes us clean. Jesus, who brings us into God’s family. Jesus, who covers shame and forgives sin. Jesus, who calls us by name. Jesus, who sees us all the way down and still wants to be in relationship with us. Jesus, who suffers with and for us. Jesus, who challenges us to live for his kingdom. Jesus, who gives new life with all its joy. Jesus, who is that treasure in a field for which we sold everything. Jesus, who is that treasure that can never be taken from us.
This is Jesus, whose inbreaking kingdom sweeps us up into something he is doing in the cosmos, something larger than ourselves. In Christ, we find ourselves in a larger narrative.
This is not Jesus as a means to an end of heterosexual functioning and comfortable family life. This is God himself as the end for which we were made. With this real God, the locus of hope is found not in this life with heterosexuality, but in the coming age, when we shall stand before our Savior.
Without that relationship with a Savior, there is no point in speaking of a biblical sexual ethic, either to straight or gay people. No gay people are going to embrace such an ethic unless they fall in love with Jesus. A heart smitten by grace is not only willing but also eager to follow the one who died for us.
Schaeffer, Stott, and Graham all stated on occasion their shared belief that some people are born gay. All of these Christian leaders also held to the historical understanding of the biblical sexual ethic. This certainly meant committing to a life in line with God’s creational pattern—his design. Not one of them supported sexual unions for believers outside of a monogamous marriage between two people of different sexes. But they approached gay people from a posture of humility.
Their vision did not flatten people into our unwanted sexual urges. Instead, they recognized that a same-sex-oriented believer’s biggest struggle may be not with sexual sin but with the ability to give and receive love. So they emphasized the need for the community of the church; for deep, long-term friendships; for brotherhood, to be known even in celibacy.
Stott, himself celibate, explained: “At the heart of the homosexual condition is a deep and natural hunger for mutual love, a search for identity and a longing for completeness. If gay people cannot find these things in the local ‘church family,’ we have no business to go on using that expression.”
Lewis, Schaeffer, Graham, and Stott also viewed the homosexual condition as an unchosen orientation with no reliable expectation of a change in this life. They showed great concern for the emotional and relational needs of gay people. Schaeffer insisted in his 1968 letter that the church needed to be the church and help “the individual in every way possible.”
In his NPR interview, Frank Schaeffer described his father’s Swiss ministry, L’Abri, as a place “where homosexuals—both lesbians and gay men—are welcomed.” He added: “No one’s telling them they’ve got to change or that they’re horrible people. And they go away, you know, having found my father wonderfully compassionate and Christlike to them.”
Schaeffer foresaw significant cultural changes when, in 1978, an Orthodox Presbyterian Church congregation in San Francisco found itself sued for releasing a gay employee who had violated the church’s code of conduct. In The Great Evangelical Disaster, Schaeffer said it would be silly for other churches to think they might not face the same challenge.
Still, Schaeffer and Graham didn’t recommend us-verses-them approaches. Just weeks before the 1964 presidential election, a gay sex scandal rocked the nation. President Lyndon Johnson’s top adviser, Walter Jenkins, was arrested a second time for having gay sex in a YMCA restroom. Graham called the White House to intercede for Jenkins.
In the recorded phone call, Graham charged Johnson to show compassion to Jenkins.
Asked about homosexuality at a 1997 San Francisco crusade, Graham remarked to reporters, “There are other sins. Why do we jump on that sin as though it’s the greatest sin?” He added, “I have so many gay friends, and we remain friends.” Speaking to a crowd of 10,000 that night in the Cow Palace, Graham declared, “Whatever your background, whatever your sexual orientation, we welcome you tonight.”
As Stott emphasized so passionately in Issues, the gay person who follows Jesus must live by faith, hope, and love: Faith in both God’s grace and in his standards. Hope to look beyond this present life of struggle to our future glory. But the love by which we must live, he explained, is the love we must receive from Christ’s spiritual family, the church. We must depend upon love from the very churches that have historically failed to give it to people like us.
Church historian Richard Lovelace’s 1978 book Homosexuality and the Church garnered hearty endorsements from evangelical luminaries Ken Kantzer (a former CT editor), Elisabeth Elliot, Chuck Colson, Harold Ockenga, and Carl F. H. Henry. The book might seem radical in today’s climate, but in the 1970s it represented a transatlantic neoevangelical vision. In contrast to homophobia on the right and sexual compromise on the left, Lovelace laid out the gospel challenge:
There is another approach to homosexuality which would be healthier both for the church and for gay believers, and which could be a very significant witness to the world. This approach requires a double repentance, a repentance both for the church and for its gay membership. First, it would require professing Christians who are gay to have the courage both to avow [acknowledge] their orientation openly and to obey the Bible’s clear injunction to turn away from the active homosexual life-style. … Second, it would require the church to accept, honor, and nurture nonpracticing gay believers in its membership, and ordain these to positions of leadership for ministry.
The church’s sponsorship of openly avowed but repentant homosexuals in leadership positions would be a profound witness to the world concerning the power of the Gospel to free the church from homophobia and the homosexual from guilt and bondage.
Only the gospel can open up the humility for such a dual repentance. Yet this was the Christian vision of Lovelace and Henry, Ockenga and Elliot, Kantzer and Colson, Lewis and Graham, Schaeffer and Stott, and a young gay evangelical Anglican who felt too afraid to use his own name, even though he was still a virgin.
Christian fathers and mothers like these had it right. Tragically, I write this as a lament for a road not traveled on this side of the Atlantic.
Already by the late 1970s, a hard shift had begun. As ex-gay ministries in North America multiplied with their expectation of orientation change, they shifted the locus of hope to this life. As the AIDS crisis devastated gay communities in the 1980s, evangelicals embraced the promise of heterosexuality. The secular reparative therapists added a semblance of clinical respectability. The new path to cure pushed out the older path to care.
And then the conservative side in a culture war discovered that we ex-gays were useful. We were proof that gay people could choose to become straight if they really wanted to. And if we could become straight, then there really wasn’t so much need for the church to repent of its homophobia. It just required people like me to maintain the illusion that we had changed.
In the aftermath of that lost culture war that radically transformed the sexual mores of the West, there is much for Christians to grieve. Transactional relationships. Disposable marriages. Vastly changed assumptions about sexuality and gender.
But the conservative church’s hesitancy to repent has not dissipated. As I watch evangelical churches and denominations fumble their way through discussions of sexual orientation and identity, often enforcing the language and categories of a failed ex-gay movement, we’re missing the real battle: The surrounding culture has convinced the world that Christians hate gay people.
Our calling is to prove them wrong.
The world is watching. Our children and grandchildren are watching. They are already second-guessing their faith because they hear all around them that Christians hate gay people, and they can’t point to anyone in their congregation who is gay, is faithful, and is loved and accepted as such. Maybe they can point to someone who uses the language of same-sex attraction. But even that is rare. It’s still not safe to do so.
I am not saying we are at risk of losing Christians who are attracted to members of the same sex; that’s a given.
I am saying we are at risk of losing the next generation.
For those who are listening, an older generation of Christians is still willing and able to help us understand.
Greg Johnson is lead pastor of Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis and author of Still Time to Care: What We Can Learn from the Church’s Failed Attempt to Cure Homosexuality.
Nobody uses the word "Homosexual" anymore....Now days its the Alphabet people.
Blade
-
(https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/126431.jpg?h=393&w=700)
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2021/november/christian-florist-settles-legal-battle-with-same-sex-couple.html
Christian Florist Settles Legal Battle With Same-Sex Couple
After eight years, the 77-year-old Washington state grandmother is retiring from her business and her religious liberty fight.
A florist in Washington state who was in an eight-year legal battle that reached the US Supreme Court will retire after settling with the same-sex couple whose wedding job she refused.
Barronelle Stutzman of Richland, Washington, announced the settlement Thursday, saying she has paid $5,000 to Robert Ingersoll, The Tri-City Herald reported.
She said Jesus “walked with me every step of the way” through her legal journey and also wished Ingersoll, who had been her customer at Arlene’s Flowers for almost a decade, “the very best.”
Ingersoll and his husband, Curt Freed, plan to donate the settlement payment to a local PFLAG chapter, and personally match the $5,000.
The agreement allows Stutzman to “preserve her conscience” by not forcing her to act against her Southern Baptist religious beliefs, according to a news release from her attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom. They reached the settlement with the American Civil Liberties Union.
It also prevents Stutzman from having “to pay potentially ruinous attorneys’ fees,” the release said.
“I am willing to turn the legal struggle for freedom over to others. At age 77, it’s time to retire and give my business to someone else,” Stutzman said.
“I wish the culmination of all that I’ve been through could result in a new respect, culturally and legally, for freedom of conscience in our country,” Stutzman said. “From the beginning, I have asked no more than the freedom to act in accordance with my religious beliefs and personal convictions. I have treated those who persecuted me with respect, and with the assurance that I want for them the same freedom that I ask for myself.”
Alliance Defending Freedom has also defended fellow Christian wedding vendors who have cited their conscience in turning down business for same-sex ceremonies. The team represented a Christian baker in his 2018 Supreme Court victory and is continuing to argue on behalf of a Christian web designer, both challenging Colorado’s application of its anti-discrimination law.
The settlement by Stutzman leaves in place two unanimous decisions by the Washington state Supreme Court that the Constitution does not grant a license to discriminate against LGBTQ people, the ACLU of Washington said.
“We took on this case because we were worried about the harm being turned away would cause LGBTQ people,” Freed and Ingersoll said Thursday in a statement. “We are glad the Washington Supreme Court rulings will stay in place to ensure that same-sex couples are protected from discrimination and should be served by businesses like anyone else.”
The ACLU brought the anti-discrimination lawsuit against Stutzman in 2013 on behalf of Ingersoll and Freed.
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson sued separately, saying the floral artist violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act by declining to provide services based on sexual orientation.
A Benton County Superior Court judge in 2015 ruled that Stutzman must pay $1 in attorneys’ fees and costs to the state, along with a $1,000 civil penalty, for discriminating against the couple. That judgment still stands.
“We are pleased to hear that Arlene’s Flowers and Barronelle Stutzman have reached a settlement agreement with the couple they refused to serve,” Ferguson said in an email to the Tri-City Herald.
The two cases through appeals by Stutzman wen to the state Supreme Court, and then to the US Supreme Court.
The country’s highest court vacated Washington state’s previous ruling and sent it back to the lower court in 2018 for another review. The Washington Supreme Court in 2019 ruled unanimously that state courts did not act with animosity toward religion when they ruled Stutzman broke the state’s anti-discrimination laws by refusing on religious grounds to provide wedding flowers.
Stutzman and Alliance Defending Freedom—in their second attempt to get the case before the US Supreme Court—filed a petition for review in September 2019.
The Supreme Court in July declined to take up the case. Stutzman responded with a petition for rehearing, but she will withdraw it as part of her settlement.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjnF6luy-VY
-
1 hour 27 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv8DvdlDYss&t=39s
-
(https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/127326.jpg?h=528&w=940)
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2022/january-web-only/complementarians-egalitarians-gender-compromise-culture.html
Gender Questions Should Send Us to Scripture
When it comes to the topic of gender roles, it all comes down to biblical interpretation.
Many questions have recently been raised about complementarianism. We are keenly aware of the many stories of pastoral and spousal abuse—some of whom are noted complementarians. Such stories make many people wonder if complementarianism is simply a form of power grab, an attempt to hold onto male authority in order to exercise their selfish will.
Cultural questions have been raised as well. Is the complementarian vision merely a product of white western culture—deriving from a patriarchal ethos and an American vision of the good life, entirely sundered from biblical witness?
Or others have suggested the complementarian view solely represents the worldview of the Republican party, constituting a backlash to societal changes in the 1960’s. Or as one historian initially proposed, perhaps we have been more influenced by John Wayne than Jesus of Nazareth?
All of the questions posed above are excellent, and we need to be open to critique and revision. I hope none of us would claim that we are perfect in our interpretation or implementation of what the scriptures teach on the relationship between men and women.
There is always a danger that we have reacted to or imitated the society around us. We are all influenced by culture and should receive any critique that returns us to scriptural witness in good faith. We should listen charitably to brothers and sisters who view things differently—and none of us should be above reforming and nuancing our views.
The matter is complex, however, and egalitarians must also be able to answer the questions that are posed to them. They are not immune to cultural forces either.
The feminism of the 1960’s has shaped society in profound and enduring ways—both for good and for ill. The sexual revolution has transformed our culture’s conception of what it means to be a man and a woman. This shows up in the acceptance of same-sex marriage and transgender identity, among other things.
Nor can we discount the influence of the mainstream media and major universities, many of which are guided chiefly by leftist ideology. Those who relax the complementarian norm are often celebrated in these spaces as open-minded by a social elite.
In other words, there are social and cultural forces operating on both sides. No one is exempt, and no one inhabits a neutral space when it comes to gender dynamics.
Every argument for every perspective should send us back to the biblical witness. The word of God still pierces our darkness and can reshape how we think and live. The Bible can and should still be heard, believed, and followed—even though we are all fallible and culturally situated.
Of course, every reading of the biblical text on male-female issues represents an interpretation and is subject to critique. But since there are cultural arguments, forces and pressures on every side, we must always return to the scriptures to decipher their meaning—and I believe that meaning can be retrieved.
At the end of the day, it should come down to whoever offers the most plausible and persuasive reading of the biblical texts in question. The complementarian view isn’t nullified by saying Trump and Republicanism and the egalitarian reading isn’t contradicted by crying out feminism and liberalism.
Yet I worry that in some circles, cultural arguments receive precedence over scriptural ones—as if they alone have the final say on the truth or falsity of a particular biblical interpretation.
Thomas Schreiner is the James Buchanan Harrison Professor of New Testament Interpretation at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
Speaking Out is Christianity Today’s guest opinion column and (unlike an editorial) does not necessarily represent the opinion of the publication.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oy_CNc8Bqbg