gay christians?

[Ziggy]

Thanks for that opinion OR interpretation of Scripture.

The passage in John 3 that refers to being "born again" and all of John 3 at no point and no time says once you are born again (of water and Spirit) you no longer live in a state of sin. It doesn't say that.....PERIOD!! You added that to Scripture.

Show me in Scripture where it says once a person is washed from all unrighteousness they no longer live in a state of sin. I can show you Scripture that destroys what your men have taught you:

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.

1Jo 3:6
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
1Jo 3:7
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
1Jo 3:8
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
1Jo 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
1Jo 3:10
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

 

[Phoneman777]

Because being a Christian is an all consuming identity. One that precludes having an identity in a sinful practice.

According to Paul, homosexuality is a curse as the result of a sinful lifestyle as well as a sin in and of itself. It's impossible to have moral turpitude and a life inside of the Church.

I don't care what people say, I care what scriptures say. And you can either have homosexuality or Christ but you can't have both.

Well said.

 

[Phoneman777]

Since all sins are already forgiven past present and future, why do so many Christians say people that are gay cannot be saved?

I went to school with a few people that were gay and they said they were Christians.

The promise of forgiveness for past, present, future sins is for the Just Man, not the Presumptuous Man.

The Just Man sometimes stumbles and falls in the pit of sin, but cries out for deliverance.

The Presumptuous Man deliberately climbs down into the pit, sits down comfortably among the filth, swats away the uplifting hand of Jesus, and shoves his "OSAS License to Sin" in His face.

 

[Phoneman777]

1Jo 3:6
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
1Jo 3:7
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
1Jo 3:8
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
1Jo 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
1Jo 3:10
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Nice to see there's still people unafraid to stand up against ecumenical foolishness.

 

[Marymog]

And you can either have homosexuality or Christ but you can't have both.

Hey JDB,

The homosexual act is a sin. We all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit! He accepted all sinners to his table and into his church. Does your church?

Sooooo where in Scripture does it say when you accept Christ, you can't be gay (commit a sin) and He will reject you?

Curious Mary

 

[BarneyFife]

Really? The document does more to obscure the church's stand? What is obscure about this statement in the document:

'one should neither provide for nor promote a ritual for the blessings of couples in an irregular situation.' In any case, precisely to avoid any form of confusion or scandal, when the prayer of blessing is requested by a (same sex couple or) couple in an irregular situation, ......this blessing should never be imparted in concurrence with the ceremonies of a civil union, and not even in connection with them. Nor can it be performed with any clothing, gestures, or words that are proper to a wedding.

marriage is an "exclusive, stable and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to conceiving children,"

You didn't read it, did you Barny?

But your commenting about it like you did read it....Hmmmmm!!!

As with the Holy Father’s above-mentioned response to the Dubia of two Cardinals, this Declaration remains firm on the traditional doctrine of the Church about marriage, not allowing any type of liturgical rite or blessing similar to a liturgical rite that can create confusion. The value of this document, however, is that it offers a specific and innovative contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings, permitting a broadening and enrichment of the classical understanding of blessings, which is closely linked to a liturgical perspective. Such theological reflection, based on the pastoral vision of Pope Francis, implies a real development from what has been said about blessings in the Magisterium and the official texts of the Church. This explains why this text has taken on the typology of a “Declaration.”

It is precisely in this context that one can understand the possibility of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples without officially validating their status or changing in any way the Church’s perennial teaching on marriage.


"Couples in an irregular situation..."

Don't you think that's somewhat obscure compared to what the Bible says about homosexuality?

Are we to assume, perhaps, that "couples in an irregular situation" is a broader term that only partially and coincidentally includes same-sex couples?

I kind of doubt it.

Compartmentalizing the issue into separate theologies of "blessing" and "marriage" is not fooling anyone.

The ideology of LGBT~, without which this new document would not exist, only tends to confuse and obscure wherever it makes inroads.

Because IT IS confusion.

LGBT~ is currently the foremost component of the postmodern philosophy of despair, which splits humanity into the oppressed and the oppressors, rather than the Biblical model of those who serve God and those who serve Him not.

Sooooo where in Scripture does it say when you accept Christ, you can't be gay (commit a sin) and He will reject you?

If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me: (Psalms 66:18)


.

 

[amigo de christo]

What Marymog is stating has to do with the 'spin' some journalists often put on news items and then report their opinion/interpretation as fact. Maybe a particular journalist is anti-Catholic, and will spin the Pope's words just enough to get the attention of other anti-Catholics.

Best thing to do is to ignore the media and go straight to the source.

This gringo dont believe a word of media anymore . that be a fact .
I do go to the source . i went to the original writings of men to seek out what they said .
DID it with the mormon , did it with the JW , did it with the RCC , did it .
Done it . Ps , your right about spins indeed . WHEN i examined even pope francis and the speeches
people and or media were saying about him , GUESS WHERE I WENT TO SEE IF IT was SO .
TO THE CATHOLIC SOURCE . AND BOY DID HE SAY IT . WHEN EVEN the source says word for word
what he says , ITS KINDA HARD to SAY HE DIDNT SAY IT . THE MAN is demon infected . BUT he does smile a lot
so that is why so many prostestants and catholics embrace him . I read even jospeh smiths own writings .
I TOOK nothing for granted . AND I TELL US all , WE BETTER HAVE NOT A DARN THING TO DO WITH THIS
COMMON GROUND BS they all be spouting today . THE MORMON religoin IS OF THE DEVIL
so is the jw , so are many . DOCTRINE MATTERS , IT STILL MATTERS and we bess get DUG IN THE BIBLE .
THESE FOLKS DO NOT agree on doctrine , BUT THEY ALL AGREE ON THE LIE of the false love
AND THAT WILL CONNECT THEM ALL AS ONE UNDER SATAN . NOT GOD dude .

 

[amigo de christo]

So, the bible gives you a reason to be prejudiced against certain people. Good to know! Thanks for sharing.

Sorry, but judgment is up to GOD; not YOU, or anyone else.

Guess what YOU PROSTESTANT , oh wait YOUR catholic . YOU ALL AGREE ON THE LIE DUDE .
you think anyone that corrects certain sins is JUDGING . YOUALL buying into the lie dude .
THERE IS no difference at all between the catholic realm , the protestant realm ON this common ground BS crap .
ITS TAKEN A STRONG HOLD on you all . OH i know some still bicker and gripe about a few things
BUT YOU ALL BUYING INTO THE LIE . every last one .
WE REALLY SHOULD have STUCK TO THE BIBLE dude . truly we really should have .
THIS STUFF is all over christendom and it will UNITE YOU ALL more and more , YOU WILL FIND COMMON GROUND
you will all buy the lie . IN TIME every one under influence of its sway will just wear out
and begin to say , FORGET ALL THIS bickering , WE ALL GODS KIDDOS , LETS JUST BE ONE .
MARK THEM WORDS . I SHUN THAT TO HADES and will have no part in it . BIBLE TIME before its too late .

 

[Mr E]

Not playing your game kiddo......I know you got the list because I posted you in it.

Like I said....and you are making come true.......I know you won't own up to it but I am learning that is the type of person you are.

Still waiting for that list of personal insults you insist I directed at you.

You say you posted it, but at times what you say doesn’t align with truth. Are you talking about Post #211, which you addressed to @Dan Clarkston ? That’s the only “list” I could find, but your links didn’t work, and the posts you reference could hardly be considered personally insulting. I mean it’s not like I personally called you “Troll” or LIAR (all caps/bold font) the way some people personalize insults. Know anyone like that?

What you promised was this>>

You do know there is a search button on this website and I can easily quote all the personal attacks you have committed kiddo.

I don’t know how much time you spent researching, but what you came up with was laughable. Let’s look at each one….

Post 123>>>. (Not personal as it wasn’t addressed to you at all, and neither would anyone (but you) call it personally insulting- as it was merely informational.

I linked a news story and asked a question of @Illuminator , you were not personally mentioned nor addressed.

Post 136>>> You consider “Unconscious Mary” insulting? That’s a little thin-skinned. You call yourself a variety of names— “Curious Mary” or “Patient Mary”. can’t I follow suit and call ‘em as I see ‘me? I can. Don’t be so contrary Mary.

Post 160>>> This is your farthest reach yet. Again, not addressed to you and not personal in any way. Do better. You promised that it was going to be easy, but you haven’t lived up to your words. Not a good look. You’ll have to type slowly for me and show me exactly what it is in Post 160 that you found ‘personally insulting.”

Post 180>>> Again, a reply to someone else and not to you personally. It was in agreement with that person and simply an observation. Mary— your list is disappointing to say the least.

And finally, Post 187>>> Not personal— in fact it was addressed or in reply to anyone at all. Mere satire… perhaps humor is lost on you, but I kind of agree. It isn’t funny. It’s sad.

In conclusion— your “list” of my supposed personal insults directed at you doesn’t exist.

Yet, I remain willing to engage you on the subject at hand. I noticed you had much less to say about my first post in response to your demand to work from the Pope’s Declaration. It’s okay— I’m not personally offended.

 

[keltzkroz]

Since all sins are already forgiven past present and future, why do so many Christians say people that are gay cannot be saved?

I went to school with a few people that were gay and they said they were Christians.

I think it is wonderful. Let all the Christian churches become full of them.

 

[JohnDB]

Hey JDB,

The homosexual act is a sin. We all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit! He accepted all sinners to his table and into his church. Does your church?

Sooooo where in Scripture does it say when you accept Christ, you can't be gay (commit a sin) and He will reject you?

Curious Mary

1John 3:6

Homosexuality is a lifestyle and the result of sin. (Romans 1&2a)

So it's impossible (I'm forgetting the exact chapter and verse of Hebrews) to return to sin after having a personal relationship with God and tasting His Goodness.

You cannot have a publicly sinful lifestyle and expect salvation when you die. If anything you will have a God extra upset for besmirching the identity/name of God with that sinful lifestyle. (IE; Murdering babies for Jesus)

 

[St. SteVen]

You cannot have a publicly sinful lifestyle and expect salvation when you die.

Why do we single out one sin to make that claim?

--- Parody ---

Conversation between Christian protester and doughnut shop patron. (customer)

Patron: What are doing picketing a donut shop?
Protester: I'm protesting the sin of gluttony.
Patron: Why on earth would you do that?
Protester: Gluttony is a sin, this has to stop.
Patron: Not everyone who buys a donut is a glutton.
Protester: We can't say that for sure.
Patron: Don't you have gluttony at your church?
Protester: No, we kicked them all out, unless they would repent.
Patron: Wow, for eating donuts?
Protester: No, gluttony takes many forms.
Patron: Right, like a church pot-luck dinner?
Protester: Exactly, they are banned at our church.
Patron: Did you know that some people are born with
weight-gain issues they will never get ahead of?
Protester: That's no excuse. Sin is sin.
Patron: You look exhausted, can I buy you a donut.
Protester: Sure, just don't tell the church.
Patron: Your secret's safe with me.

/

 

[JohnDB]

Why do we single out one sin to make that claim

Because it's the subject of the thread.
But it's not exclusive to just homosexuality...OnlyFans cam girl, Thief, Liars, prostitutes and etc all are subject to the same thing. But these aren't exactly the subject of the thread.

 

[St. SteVen]

Because it's the subject of the thread.

Right. But it is the typical position of the church.
A church that needs to grapple with a subject that is much broader than the catch-all term "abomination".

Did you know that parents are seeing their children make gender choices as early as 3 to 5 years of age?
What's up with that?

And there is no place for these families at church. Because the church can't deal with it.

Same with teens that identify as transgender, or gay. The church waves goodbye.
Can't we do better than that?

--- PARODY ---

A straight son comes out to his gay parents.

Son: Dad, we need to talk.
Father: Sure son, what's on your mind?
Son: (gulp) I'm straight.
Father: Say what? ??? !!!
Son: That's right, I'm straight.
Father: Does your father know about this?
Son: No, I wanted to tell you first.
Father: I see. Better let me speak to him first.
Son: Thanks. I'm sorry, I don't mean to hurt either one of you.
Father: Yes, this is a disappointment. We thought we raised you right.
Son: You're fine. It's me. I can't deny my opposite sex attraction.
Father: What can I say? I remember coming out to my parents.
Son: Tell me what that was like.
Father: It was terrible. We didn't speak for years.
Son: Wow, I didn't know.
Father: I'm not going to treat you that way. I accept you as you are.
Son: (tears) Thanks, Dad. I love you.
Father: I'll speak with your father. Hopefully he will take it well too.
Son: I would like to bring my girlfriend home for Christmas.
Father: Whoa, you have a girlfriend? (gasp)
Son: Yes, of course.
Father: No worries. We'll get through this one step at a time.

/

 

[keltzkroz]

Because it's the subject of the thread.
But it's not exclusive to just homosexuality...OnlyFans cam girl, Thief, Liars, prostitutes and etc all are subject to the same thing. But these aren't exactly the subject of the thread.

Aren't you glad that the Christian churches are filling up with these wonderful Christians?

 

[BarneyFife]

Right. But it is the typical position of the church.
A church that needs to grapple with a subject that is much broader than the catch-all term "abomination".

It's not the responsibility of the church to negotiate the intricacies and sophistication of sin that people choose to involve themselves in.

Did you know that parents are seeing their children make gender choices as early as 3 to 5 years of age?
What's up with that?

What's up is that parents are humoring the sexualization of children that aren't even old enough to decide whether they want to be a doctor or a fireman when they grow up, which is bound to result in cognitive difficulties and consequences in mental health.

Problems are not solved by the over-simplification nor the over-complication of them.

And there is no place for these families at church. Because the church can't deal with it.

Folks tend to find themselves uncomfortable at church when they justify a departure from God's standards of behavior. This is nothing new, SS.

Same with teens that identify as transgender, or gay. The church waves goodbye.
Can't we do better than that?

Blanket statements about what can or can't be, or is commonly done may serve well to cast doubt on the state of hypothetical church(es), but they don't do much to solve the problems about which critics are up in arms.

None of which has to do with the topic of the thread, I guess.

The topic of sin(s) is different than the topic of charity/love or than that of church discipline, all of which come into play in these situations.

We can't alter the definitions of one to facilitate the other(s). :)

.

 

[keltzkroz]

It's not the responsibility of the church to negotiate the intricacies and sophistication of sin that people choose to involve themselves in.



What's up is that parents are humoring the sexualization of children that aren't even old enough to decide whether they want to be a doctor or a fireman when they grow up, which is bound to result in cognitive difficulties and consequences in mental health.

Problems are not solved by the over-simplification nor the over-complication of them.



Folks tend to find themselves uncomfortable at church when they justify a departure from God's standards of behavior. This is nothing new, SS.



Blanket statements about what can or can't be, or is commonly done may serve well to cast doubt on the state of hypothetical church(es), but they don't do much to solve the problems about which critics are up in arms.

None of which has to do with the topic of the thread, I guess.

The topic of sin(s) is different than the topic of charity/love or than that of church discipline, all of which come into play in these situations.

We can't alter the definitions of one to facilitate the other(s). :)

.

What do you think about Christian homosexuals? What is your opinion of them being Christians?

 

[BarneyFife]

What do you think about Christian homosexuals? What is your opinion of them being Christians?

I think it doesn't matter what I think about "Christian homosexuals."

Welcome to the forum (I think).

Why are you anxious for people to know you are a racist?

.

 

[keltzkroz]

I think it doesn't matter what I think about "Christian homosexuals."

Welcome to the forum (I think).

Why are you anxious for people to know you are a racist?

.

I guess for the same reason it doesn't matter what you think about "Christian homosexuals.
But I did not ask you if it mattered I asked you for your opinion as them being your brothers in Christ?

 

[Mr E]

It’s very much like any of the many “Woke” corporations today. They have an agenda that they follow and support and work to implement. They try to force their ideals on others, employees especially, but also thrust upon their customers and society as a whole, promoting their ideals and values through statements they make, through advertising, and so on.

The Catholic church is similarly becoming progressively woke at the behest of its “CEO” -Pope Francis. He sets the tone, the employees, who happen to be priests — tow the company line.

It’s virtually identical in action and it moves only in one direction— down a slippery slope.