Homosexuality: Is it the way a person is born?

[ATP]

Hello DogLady19,

Possibly you would care to comment on the following:

1 Samuel 15:2-3 KJV, “2 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. 3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”

Malachi 1:3 KJV, “And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.”

Romans 9:13 KJV, “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”

Matthew 12:31 KJV, “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.”

I don't know about you, but as an Amalekite, or an Esau, or as a blasphemer (God forbid) of the Holy Ghost, I'm not feeling the love right now.

Zeke25

You're actually taking the term "hate" out of context. God loving Jacob and hating Esau has nothing to do with the human emotions of love and hate.

 

[zeke25]

Respectfully, I will disagree with you on both counts. The Supreme Court's ruling IS final. And marriage IS a RIGHT, not a privilege. The following attorney speaks to that and his information is well worth noting.

Is marriage a fundamental right, or is it a privilege?
David Raynor, Startup Attorney at Accelerate Legal

http://www.quora.com/Is-marriage-a-fundamental-right-or-is-it-a-privilege

Hello LightMessenger,

Perhaps you would entertain another perspective on the US Constitution and SCOTUS rulings. Here is an excerpt from http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/04/nullification-is-a-natural-right-the-rightful-remedy-for-unconstitutional-laws/

HERE is Madison's "Report of 1799-1800 on the Virginia Resolutions." He said under his discussion of the 3rd Resolution [I'm condensing]:

• The States, in their sovereign capacity, are the parties to the constitutional compact; and are thus the final authority on whether the federal government has violated the Constitution. There can be no tribunal above the authority of the States to decide whether the compact made by them has been violated by the federal government. (p 192)
• That if, when the federal government usurps power, the States don't stop the usurpation, and thereby preserve the Constitution; there would be no relief from usurped power. This would subvert the Rights of the People as well as betray the fundamental principle of our Founding. (p195)
• That the Judicial Branch is as likely to usurp as are the other two Branches. Thus, the Sovereign States have as much right to judge the usurpations of the Judicial Branch as they do the Legislative and Executive Branches. (p196)
• That all 3 Branches of the federal government obtain their delegated powers from the Constitution; and they may not annul the authority of the States. And if the Judicial Branch connives with other Branches in usurping powers, our Constitution will be destroyed. (p196)
• So the Judicial Branch does not have final say as to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact. Otherwise, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of the judicial branch with the other branches in usurping powers, would subvert the Constitution forever. (p196)

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/04/nullification-is-a-natural-right-the-rightful-remedy-for-unconstitutional-laws/#bSCl7hQMkKsMMPWG.99

Zeke25

You're actually taking the term "hate" out of context. God loving Jacob and hating Esau has nothing to do with the human emotions of love and hate.

ATP,

Can't say as I disagree completely, I was merely baiting the conversation. But your comments do not cover the Amalekites nor the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost.

Zeke25

 

[LightMessenger]

Hello LightMessenger,

Perhaps you would entertain another perspective on the US Constitution and SCOTUS rulings. Here is an excerpt from http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/04/nullification-is-a-natural-right-the-rightful-remedy-for-unconstitutional-laws/

HERE is Madison's "Report of 1799-1800 on the Virginia Resolutions." He said under his discussion of the 3rd Resolution [I'm condensing]:

• The States, in their sovereign capacity, are the parties to the constitutional compact; and are thus the final authority on whether the federal government has violated the Constitution. There can be no tribunal above the authority of the States to decide whether the compact made by them has been violated by the federal government. (p 192)
• That if, when the federal government usurps power, the States don't stop the usurpation, and thereby preserve the Constitution; there would be no relief from usurped power. This would subvert the Rights of the People as well as betray the fundamental principle of our Founding. (p195)
• That the Judicial Branch is as likely to usurp as are the other two Branches. Thus, the Sovereign States have as much right to judge the usurpations of the Judicial Branch as they do the Legislative and Executive Branches. (p196)
• That all 3 Branches of the federal government obtain their delegated powers from the Constitution; and they may not annul the authority of the States. And if the Judicial Branch connives with other Branches in usurping powers, our Constitution will be destroyed. (p196)
• So the Judicial Branch does not have final say as to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact. Otherwise, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of the judicial branch with the other branches in usurping powers, would subvert the Constitution forever. (p196)

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/04/nullification-is-a-natural-right-the-rightful-remedy-for-unconstitutional-laws/#bSCl7hQMkKsMMPWG.99

Zeke25

ATP,

Can't say as I disagree completely, I was merely baiting the conversation. But your comments do not cover the Amalekites nor the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost.

Zeke25

Hello Zeke, Thank you for your posting. However, as to the U.S. Constitution and SCOTUS rulings, what you have presented cannot be correct simply because if it was there would be no need for a U.S. Supreme Court. That is the bottom line on that.

 

[DogLady19]

Respectfully, I will disagree with you on both counts. The Supreme Court's ruling IS final. And marriage IS a RIGHT, not a privilege. The following attorney speaks to that and his information is well worth noting.

Is marriage a fundamental right, or is it a privilege?
David Raynor, Startup Attorney at Accelerate Legal

http://www.quora.com/Is-marriage-a-fundamental-right-or-is-it-a-privilege

Thanks for the link... it states that the right to marry is somewhat open to interpretation, which is what states have the authority to do, not the supreme Court.

But here is what I think is even more important: God's equality under His laws. You have the same right to inherit the Kingdom of God as any other human being on this earth. Whether you avail yourself of that right is entirely up to you.

Man's sense of justice is often different from God's. If two gay people decide to get married under the laws of this land, they are still required to obey God's direction for their lives if they intend to be His children. You can't have it both ways.

Homosexuality is a sin whether human laws say you can marry or not. Be careful not to defend a sinful life while you defend a person's earthly right to practice homosexuality.

Hello DogLady19,

Possibly you would care to comment on the following:

1 Samuel 15:2-3 KJV, “2 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. 3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”

Malachi 1:3 KJV, “And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.”

Romans 9:13 KJV, “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”

Matthew 12:31 KJV, “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.”

I don't know about you, but as an Amalekite, or an Esau, or as a blasphemer (God forbid) of the Holy Ghost, I'm not feeling the love right now.

Zeke25

1 Samuel 15:2-3: God's judgment is just... it is not motivated by hatred.

Malachi 1:3: Taken out of context. The word "hated" is not the opposite of love. It is saying that the descendants of Esau were rejected in favor of Jacob's line. Esau and his descendants actually received many blessings and protections from God... so even if He hated Esau in the human sense of the word (which he didn't), God didn't punish them for it (see Genesis 33 and 36). Paul clarified the meaning of "hate" towards Esau in Hebrews 12:17 God's rejection of Esau was because of Esau's own rejection of God.

Matthew 12:31: Judgment again... not motivated by hatred.

Do you think all justice is a form of hatred? Do you punish your children because you hate them?
Love is not always a soft cuddly bear hug by someone who is blind to your faults.

 

[LightMessenger]

Thanks for the link... it states that the right to marry is somewhat open to interpretation, which is what states have the authority to do, not the supreme Court.

But here is what I think is even more important: God's equality under His laws. You have the same right to inherit the Kingdom of God as any other human being on this earth. Whether you avail yourself of that right is entirely up to you.

Man's sense of justice is often different from God's. If two gay people decide to get married under the laws of this land, they are still required to obey God's direction for their lives if they intend to be His children. You can't have it both ways.

Homosexuality is a sin whether human laws say you can marry or not. Be careful not to defend a sinful life while you defend a person's earthly right to practice homosexuality.

Yet the bottom line is that Jesus Christ spoke not one word against homosexuals or homosexuality even as important as that may have been to some for Him to address. And it is by His precious blood that we are saved. Let's leave all of the judgment to Jesus if there is any judging to do. He is in a much better position to judge everyone than we are. Let's just Love one another without conditions as Jesus would have us do. However, since God gave you free will choice you may do as you wish on that but I personally choose to Love my fellow man and leave all judgment to God.

 

[StanJ]

Let's also look at that last statement you made. Since every country has a different high court and different interpretations of "equality" who is to say which one is "under God's direction"?

Indeed, and I'd have to say those who believe in "American Exceptionalism" would be the ones.

 

[zeke25]

Hello Zeke, Thank you for your posting. However, as to the U.S. Constitution and SCOTUS rulings, what you have presented cannot be correct simply because if it was there would be no need for a U.S. Supreme Court. That is the bottom line on that.

LightMessenger,

So, what is our remedy when SCOTUS has clearly violated the US Constitution. They ruled that the Affordable Care Act was a tax. But the Affordable Care Act originated in the Senate. The Constitution states that tax laws must originate in the House. Therefore, SCOTUS should have finished their ruling and said that the ACA was unconstitutional. But they did not. Now we have an unconstitutional law that has been upheld by SCOTUS.

LightMessenger said: "Yet the bottom line is that Jesus Christ spoke not one word against homosexuals or homosexuality even as important as that may have been to some for Him to address."

Zeke25 response: It hardly seems relevant to point out what Christ did not speak about and ignore the rest of the NT. Romans 1:27 KJV, " 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." This verse makes it clear that homosexuality is a sin. Do you consider it judgmental for Christians to point out sin? Let me be a little more plain. Do you want impressionable young children to be exposed to homosexuals in the movies, on TV, and on the streets performing vile acts of love making and having oral to oral contact? This has been going on continuously for decades in this country now. Do you consider it judgmental to describe this type of behavior as sinful and take steps to protect the young and the innocent from it? How about bank robbers? Should they flaunt their behavior and teach the young and the innocent that this type of behavior is okay? Are you being judgmental if you point it out as sin and unacceptable in a civilized society?

Zeke25

 

[StanJ]

Yet the bottom line is that Jesus Christ spoke not one word against homosexuals or homosexuality even as important as that may have been to some for Him to address. And it is by His precious blood that we are saved. Let's leave all of the judgment to Jesus if there is any judging to do. He is in a much better position to judge everyone than we are. Let's just Love one another without conditions as Jesus would have us do. However, since God gave you free will choice you may do as you wish on that but I personally choose to Love my fellow man and leave all judgment to God.

You've been challenged about this before LM, many times, and you ALWAYS avoid, obfuscate or deflect, but never answer the challenge. Jesus did NOT speak on many issues but that does not negate their sinfulness.
You either believe what the other authors of the Bible write or you don't, and if you don't, then you have no common ground with Christians and sadly not a foot to stand on. Jesus DID speak about the ONLY marriage that He recognized, in Matthew 5:32 & 9:19, which clearly does NOT include same sex relationships. What the world does in terms of recognizing/condoning them is the world and not the BOC. We may live in the world but we are NOT of it. That you presume to judge those who don't accept their lifestyle IN the BOC as unloving is YOUR judgement, but happily we are not subject to your judgement, only God's. Doing and following His laws is what is important, not condoning worldly acceptance. BTW, if you think the world loves gays any more than Christians do, you are very sadly deceived. Being politically correct does NOT mean loving your neighbour.

 

[pom2014]

Yes when my children are disobedient I destroy them for all eternity.

Yes that's unconditional love.

Unconditional means there are NO conditions on loving. God sets conditions, obedience. They don't obey they die.

That's not unconditional love. This idea of unconditional love IS humans ideal not reality. It is yet another utopian thought.

You can't love anyone if you destroy them utterly.
This is not a time out, this is total destruction.

Love can only go so far before it must end once its taken advantage of. If you don't have limits to love then people will abuse your love.

God will not let you abuse his love, he'll cut you off, he will end that love.

 

[DogLady19]

Yet the bottom line is that Jesus Christ spoke not one word against homosexuals or homosexuality even as important as that may have been to some for Him to address. And it is by His precious blood that we are saved. Let's leave all of the judgment to Jesus if there is any judging to do. He is in a much better position to judge everyone than we are. Let's just Love one another without conditions as Jesus would have us do. However, since God gave you free will choice you may do as you wish on that but I personally choose to Love my fellow man and leave all judgment to God.

Jesus spoke many words about homosexuality being a sin. If it is in the Bible, Jesus said it. Jesus IS the Word of God, and He never changes. Jesus also said that he did not come to abolish Moses' Law, which clearly condemns homosexuality.

In Romans 1:27, Jesus warns those who commit the sin of homosexuality that if they continue to do it, he will turn them over to their own shameful and depraved mind. Those that practice it will have a hard time hearing the truth and will begin to justify their actions.

In 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Paul commends some ex-homosexual church members for their transition into obedience to God. He made it clear that those who continue to practice homosexuality will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:10, it clearly states that Moses' Law against homosexuality is still valid for those who practice it. The penalty is death.

There is no doubt that Christians are to love everyone... from the liars and thieves to the homosexuals and murderers and everyone in between...

But loving someone does not mean that their sin is no longer sin. Part of love is telling the Truth so that person can be set free from their sin.

God will not let you abuse his love, he'll cut you off, he will end that love.

You keep saying that. But there are no scriptures to back to it up.

God doesn't cut us off from Him. We cut ourselves off. It's our choice. And God's justice is not motivated by hatred. Justice is not the "end of love"...

"he will end that love"... Show me in the Bible where He promises to end His love for us if we abuse His love...

We all abuse His love every day, every time we sin. Every time we turn back to our own ways and refuse to let Him lead us.

 

[LightMessenger]

Jesus spoke many words about homosexuality being a sin. If it is in the Bible, Jesus said it. Jesus IS the Word of God, and He never changes. Jesus also said that he did not come to abolish Moses' Law, which clearly condemns homosexuality.

In Romans 1:27, Jesus warns those who commit the sin of homosexuality that if they continue to do it, he will turn them over to their own shameful and depraved mind. Those that practice it will have a hard time hearing the truth and will begin to justify their actions.

In 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Paul commends some ex-homosexual church members for their transition into obedience to God. He made it clear that those who continue to practice homosexuality will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:10, it clearly states that Moses' Law against homosexuality is still valid for those who practice it. The penalty is death.

There is no doubt that Christians are to love everyone... from the liars and thieves to the homosexuals and murderers and everyone in between...

But loving someone does not mean that their sin is no longer sin. Part of love is telling the Truth so that person can be set free from their sin.
===============================================================
In your posting #370 on this thread you said:

"How is God's love not unconditional? He does not hate us because we sin. He does not hate us if we mock Him, blaspheme, molest children, kill babies, or worship the devil..."

For one, such as yourself, who obviously doesn't believe that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is an UNFORGIVABLE Sin condemned by God, when it is so plain in Scripture that it is, you have offended a great many of us. Therefore, further conversation with you on this board is hereby terminated. I hope that you repent for what you have said.

"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." -- MATTHEW 12:31 (KJV)​

You've been challenged about this before LM, many times, and you ALWAYS avoid, obfuscate or deflect, but never answer the challenge. Jesus did NOT speak on many issues but that does not negate their sinfulness.
You either believe what the other authors of the Bible write or you don't, and if you don't, then you have no common ground with Christians and sadly not a foot to stand on. Jesus DID speak about the ONLY marriage that He recognized, in Matthew 5:32 & 9:19, which clearly does NOT include same sex relationships. What the world does in terms of recognizing/condoning them is the world and not the BOC. We may live in the world but we are NOT of it. That you presume to judge those who don't accept their lifestyle IN the BOC as unloving is YOUR judgement, but happily we are not subject to your judgement, only God's. Doing and following His laws is what is important, not condoning worldly acceptance. BTW, if you think the world loves gays any more than Christians do, you are very sadly deceived. Being politically correct does NOT mean loving your neighbour.

And you have been called on the carpet before by some for much of what you are saying here. Therefore, it is just another one of your usual holier than thou diatribes to be ignored.

 

[DogLady19]

And you have been called on the carpet before by some for much of what you are saying here. Therefore, it is just another one of your usual holier than thou diatribes to be ignored.

I am in no way holier than anyone. I battle with my own sins. I work daily to resist temptation and be more like Jesus... and I fail daily...

1) UNFORGIVEABLE is not the same as HATE

2) Blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is an insolent rejection of God's call to forgiveness and salvation. He only forgives those who want it and ask for it.

3) For whatever reason, you think that God's justice is motivated by hatred. Yet, you refuse to cough up any scriptures to prove that.

 

[zeke25]

Thanks for the link... it states that the right to marry is somewhat open to interpretation, which is what states have the authority to do, not the supreme Court.

But here is what I think is even more important: God's equality under His laws. You have the same right to inherit the Kingdom of God as any other human being on this earth. Whether you avail yourself of that right is entirely up to you.

Man's sense of justice is often different from God's. If two gay people decide to get married under the laws of this land, they are still required to obey God's direction for their lives if they intend to be His children. You can't have it both ways.

Homosexuality is a sin whether human laws say you can marry or not. Be careful not to defend a sinful life while you defend a person's earthly right to practice homosexuality.

1 Samuel 15:2-3: God's judgment is just... it is not motivated by hatred.

Malachi 1:3: Taken out of context. The word "hated" is not the opposite of love. It is saying that the descendants of Esau were rejected in favor of Jacob's line. Esau and his descendants actually received many blessings and protections from God... so even if He hated Esau in the human sense of the word (which he didn't), God didn't punish them for it (see Genesis 33 and 36). Paul clarified the meaning of "hate" towards Esau in Hebrews 12:17 God's rejection of Esau was because of Esau's own rejection of God.

Matthew 12:31: Judgment again... not motivated by hatred.

Do you think all justice is a form of hatred? Do you punish your children because you hate them?
Love is not always a soft cuddly bear hug by someone who is blind to your faults.

DogLady19,

Malachi 1:3. Perhaps you could enlighten me. It certainly appears that the word hated means just that, that God hated Esau. Now the fact that hate is not the opposite of love is immaterial. Indifference is the opposite of love.

Also on Romans 9:13. It certainly appears to be a solid understanding that hate means just that, it is hate. What do you know about this word that could make me reconsider my understanding.

This is a sincere inquiry.

Zeke25

And you have been called on the carpet before by some for much of what you are saying here. Therefore, it is just another one of your usual holier than thou diatribes to be ignored.

LightMessenger,

I know you are preoccupied with answering others at this point. But I was hoping you would still give me your take on my post #387 that I made to you.

Thank you,
Zeke25

 

[StanJ]

And you have been called on the carpet before by some for much of what you are saying here. Therefore, it is just another one of your usual holier than thou diatribes to be ignored.

Only Jesus will judge me LM, as He will YOU, and YOU have no right to call anyone on the carpet, as you are not part of the BOC based on your words and acceptance of a sinful lifestyle. If we were to follow Paul's admonition here, we should kick you out of this forum, but that is not MY call. There is none Holy like God...1 Sam 2:2, but then you would know that IF you actually knew the Bible.

 

[DogLady19]

DogLady19,

Malachi 1:3. Perhaps you could enlighten me. It certainly appears that the word hated means just that, that God hated Esau. Now the fact that hate is not the opposite of love is immaterial. Indifference is the opposite of love.

Also on Romans 9:13. It certainly appears to be a solid understanding that hate means just that, it is hate. What do you know about this word that could make me reconsider my understanding.

This is a sincere inquiry.

Zeke25

LightMessenger,

I know you are preoccupied with answering others at this point. But I was hoping you would still give me your take on my post #387 that I made to you.

Thank you,
Zeke25

Exegesis:

1) The word "hate" in this instance is a Hebrew commoner's term for "love less".. which is a much different connotation than our modern use of the word "hate"... God loved Esau, but not as much as He loved Jacob. The same word is used in Genesis 29:30 when it says Jacob loved Rachel more than he loved Leah. It literally says, "Jacob loved Leah less than Rachel."

2) When God said he hated Esau, he was saying that he rejected him as the line that would produce God's Chosen, Israel. The rejection of Esau is temporal, not eternal.

3) The subject in Romans 9 is not about our salvation. It's about Israel. Read Romans 11 and it is made more clear the context in which Paul quoted Malachi.

 

[LightMessenger]

LightMessenger,

So, what is our remedy when SCOTUS has clearly violated the US Constitution. They ruled that the Affordable Care Act was a tax. But the Affordable Care Act originated in the Senate. The Constitution states that tax laws must originate in the House. Therefore, SCOTUS should have finished their ruling and said that the ACA was unconstitutional. But they did not. Now we have an unconstitutional law that has been upheld by SCOTUS.

LightMessenger said: "Yet the bottom line is that Jesus Christ spoke not one word against homosexuals or homosexuality even as important as that may have been to some for Him to address."

Zeke25 response: It hardly seems relevant to point out what Christ did not speak about and ignore the rest of the NT. Romans 1:27 KJV, " 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." This verse makes it clear that homosexuality is a sin. Do you consider it judgmental for Christians to point out sin? Let me be a little more plain. Do you want impressionable young children to be exposed to homosexuals in the movies, on TV, and on the streets performing vile acts of love making and having oral to oral contact? This has been going on continuously for decades in this country now. Do you consider it judgmental to describe this type of behavior as sinful and take steps to protect the young and the innocent from it? How about bank robbers? Should they flaunt their behavior and teach the young and the innocent that this type of behavior is okay? Are you being judgmental if you point it out as sin and unacceptable in a civilized society?

Zeke25

1) Zeke, I did not make those laws nor did I write the U.S. Constitution. I am however, showing you what a lawyer, who obviously knows the law, has said about the SCOTUS rulings in that they are the Final Word and the Law of the Land. Enough said.

2) About the quotations you have presented trying to make it appear that they condemn homosexuality. Please be informed that they do not. God would not turn around and play that type of cruel game with the people whom He created with that sexual orientation knowing full well that they will be attracted to members of their own sex and thereby want to become intimate with them just as heterosexuals find a similar attraction within their own orientation.

Scores of expert scholars in the Holy Bible speak to what is meant in Romans 1:27 (KJV) as it making reference to idolatry and shrine prostitution not homosexuality. You need to read that to see what the professors are saying. And I do consider it as being very judgmental when Christians use inappropriate Scriptures to try to "point out sin" when clearly that is not what those Scriptures talk about or make reference to.

And about young children that you insert into this conversation and somehow allege that they are being exposed to homosexual acts, etc. You are going into an unnecessary panic by saying that they are being exposed to sexual acts, oral, etc. when there is absolutely no proof that that is happening. Why do you want to lash out at and accuse innocent Gay and Lesbian people in that manner, Zeke? Why do you feel that you need to do that when none of what you are saying is actually happening. Again, the kids of today are very knowledgeable on this subject matter. Perhaps due to the fact that there are young Gay and Lesbian children already around them whom they see as normal and as their friends who pose no real threat to them. You could sure learn from that.

If you want to talk about vile acts that impressionable children see, you need go no father than to what they see Heterosexual Straight couples doing both at home and in public many times, as well as on TV. There are far more vile acts being committed by Straights in today's world than by Gays. They are routinely shown nowadays having sex on TV almost completely naked and the simulation of intercourse and french kissing. Now that to me is VILE! But it is not being done by Gays or Lesbians but by Straight people. You need to go after them first before you accuse innocent Gay people of doing something wrong.

I think if you really want to point out what is truly sinful in this country you should point out ABORTIONS that are taking place that take the life of the unborn child and being done by Heterosexual, Straight women. You should also talk about DIVORCE that is a sin according to the Bible. That is what you should be talking about as that poses a much greater threat to the youth of this country. And you must also remember that there is a copious amount of Straight people committing more heinous sex acts than there are Gays and Lesbians simply because there are more Heterosexuals in the world than there are Homosexuals. Enough said.

Romans 1 - What historical and religious context did Paul address
in first century Rome?
Romans 1 is about idolatry,
not homosexuality.

http://www.gaychristian101.com/Romans-1.html

 

[zeke25]

1) Zeke, I did not make those laws nor did I write the U.S. Constitution. I am however, showing you what a lawyer, who obviously knows the law, has said about the SCOTUS rulings in that they are the Final Word and the Law of the Land. Enough said.

2) About the quotations you have presented trying to make it appear that they condemn homosexuality. Please be informed that they do not. God would not turn around and play that type of cruel game with the people whom He created with that sexual orientation knowing full well that they will be attracted to members of their own sex and thereby want to become intimate with them just as heterosexuals find a similar attraction within their own orientation.

Scores of expert scholars in the Holy Bible speak to what is meant in Romans 1:27 (KJV) as it making reference to idolatry and shrine prostitution not homosexuality. You need to read that to see what the professors are saying. And I do consider it as being very judgmental when Christians use inappropriate Scriptures to try to "point out sin" when clearly that is not what those Scriptures talk about or make reference to.

And about young children that you insert into this conversation and somehow allege that they are being exposed to homosexual acts, etc. You are going into an unnecessary panic by saying that they are being exposed to sexual acts, oral, etc. when there is absolutely no proof that that is happening. Why do you want to lash out at and accuse innocent Gay and Lesbian people in that manner, Zeke? Why do you feel that you need to do that when none of what you are saying is actually happening. Again, the kids of today are very knowledgeable on this subject matter. Perhaps due to the fact that there are young Gay and Lesbian children already around them whom they see as normal and as their friends who pose no real threat to them. You could sure learn from that.

If you want to talk about vile acts that impressionable children see, you need go no father than to what they see Heterosexual Straight couples doing both at home and in public many times, as well as on TV. There are far more vile acts being committed by Straights in today's world than by Gays. They are routinely shown nowadays having sex on TV almost completely naked and the simulation of intercourse and french kissing. Now that to me is VILE! But it is not being done by Gays or Lesbians but by Straight people. You need to go after them first before you accuse innocent Gay people of doing something wrong.

I think if you really want to point out what is truly sinful in this country you should point out ABORTIONS that are taking place that take the life of the unborn child and being done by Heterosexual, Straight women. You should also talk about DIVORCE that is a sin according to the Bible. That is what you should be talking about as that poses a much greater threat to the youth of this country. And you must also remember that there is a copious amount of Straight people committing more heinous sex acts than there are Gays and Lesbians simply because there are more Heterosexuals in the world than there are Homosexuals. Enough said.

Romans 1 - What historical and religious context did Paul address
in first century Rome?
Romans 1 is about idolatry,
not homosexuality.
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Romans-1.html

After you just got through slimming me I need to go take a physical bath and a spiritual one. You're one sick puppy. Now I know why you call yourself "Light" Messenger. It goes back to an old, old term that used to be a very common expression in our society. Don't bother to write back, I'm real good at skipping over and not reading things from people that cast offense each time they write.
Zeke25

Exegesis:

1) The word "hate" in this instance is a Hebrew commoner's term for "love less".. which is a much different connotation than our modern use of the word "hate"... God loved Esau, but not as much as He loved Jacob. The same word is used in Genesis 29:30 when it says Jacob loved Rachel more than he loved Leah. It literally says, "Jacob loved Leah less than Rachel."

2) When God said he hated Esau, he was saying that he rejected him as the line that would produce God's Chosen, Israel. The rejection of Esau is temporal, not eternal.

3) The subject in Romans 9 is not about our salvation. It's about Israel. Read Romans 11 and it is made more clear the context in which Paul quoted Malachi.

DogLady19,

You haven't convinced me yet. The Hebrew "sane" (Strong's H8130) is in Malachi 1:3, but it does not appear in Genesis 29:30 as you claim. Did I miss something?

Not convinced on Romans 9:13 either. Esau made the wrong choices, actually despised his birthright. I find nothing in Romans 11 that gives Esau salvation, however, plenty is there to indicate that he did not attain to it.

I would suggest that your ever present goal of denying Almighty God the range of emotions and feelings that He is entitled to exercise and still remain righteous, is little more than wishful thinking on your part. God choosing to hate some, choosing to disown some, choosing to bring judgment upon some, does not equate to Him becoming unrighteous. God is love, He is righteous, He is long-suffering, and many more, but it is also a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the Living God. He Who can rip soul and spirit asunder in Hell. Are you a universalist?

Have a nice day.

Zeke25

 

[StanJ]

Exegesis:

1) The word "hate" in this instance is a Hebrew commoner's term for "love less".. which is a much different connotation than our modern use of the word "hate"... God loved Esau, but not as much as He loved Jacob. The same word is used in Genesis 29:30 when it says Jacob loved Rachel more than he loved Leah. It literally says, "Jacob loved Leah less than Rachel."

2) When God said he hated Esau, he was saying that he rejected him as the line that would produce God's Chosen, Israel. The rejection of Esau is temporal, not eternal.

3) The subject in Romans 9 is not about our salvation. It's about Israel. Read Romans 11 and it is made more clear the context in which Paul quoted Malachi.

I totally agree with you here.

1. The Hebrew is from a primary word μῖσος misos (hatred); to detest (especially to persecute); by extension to love less: - hate (-ful). Apparently Zeke didn't even read the Strong's definition?
2. That is exactly what is being conveyed.
3. Yes, that is exactly what it conveys as v2-3 states; For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel.

 

[DogLady19]

"it does not appear in Genesis 29:30 as you claim." My bad. It's the very next verse, Genesis 29:31 that uses the word "hate" (Strong's 8130)

"I find nothing in Romans 11 that gives Esau salvation" I didn't say it did. In fact, I said it had nothing to do with salvation. Read point #3 again in my post.

"I would suggest that your ever present goal of denying Almighty God the range of emotions and feelings that He is entitled to exercise and still remain righteous, is little more than wishful thinking on your part." Shame on you for such an arrogant comment. I thought we were discussing scripture, not me.

I totally agree with you here.

1. The Hebrew is from a primary word μῖσος misos (hatred); to detest (especially to persecute); by extension to love less: - hate (-ful). Apparently Zeke didn't even read the Strong's definition?
2. That is exactly what is being conveyed.
3. Yes, that is exactly what it conveys as v2-3 states; For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel.

Thank you.

I'm new here, and I get the feeling there are some really nasty people here... they start off all polite, then BAM! They start attacking their fellow posters!

I'm looking for a place to discuss God's Word with others... what a shame that what I see on secular political blogs is also prevalent on a Christian blog...

I've been reading your posts, and I'm sure we can have some good lively discussion seeking the Truth. Thanks for staying on topic.

 

[StanJ]

Shame on you for such an arrogant comment. I thought we were discussing scripture, not me.

I would NOT worry about Zeke's responses DL19, He pretty much attacks most people who don't agree with him, so count yourself in good company.