I must say that Stephen & Irene's conversation at Straight Talk Radio with Robyn Murphy really was a groundbreaking event. To often, the dialogue immediately seems to break down between the gay-behavior-affirming Christian community and the Bible based Christian community which advocates that homosexual behavior is a sin that calls for the need for repentance.
In the second segment on Thursday, Stephen and Irene touched on this subject, but it is indeed a highly volatile issue that, admittedly, could possibly break down the current communication that they have established with Robyn. It is for that reason that I don't blame Stephen & Irene for not pushing these questions. Perhaps they can be re-visited at a later date when they get to speak at Robyn's church and get to know her better.
But I think that these questions are so very important and need to be addressed. I don't think that "agreeing to disagree" is satisfactory. Why? Because that attitude may lead to many lost souls due to followers of heresy and apostasy! We are warned about such things happening in the churches in the book of Jude, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Romans, and several more.
I see this gay-behavior-affirming movement as a tool of deception that leads to heresy and apostasy! Remember, subtlety is most often a tool used by satan and his demons to influence people and draw them away from God.
If we had murder-behavior-affirming church movements, it would be much more obvious to us how grievous such deception really can be. If we had lying-behavior-affirming church movements we may start to genuinely recognize the subtlety of such movements; after all, doesn't everyone lie at some time in their lives?
The Bible tells us that only REPENTANT SINNERS will enter into the kingdom of heaven! We should be ringing the alarm bells for people who are being misled by these gay-behavior-affirming churches!!
My new friend, Susan Smith, has shared several times with me the fact that she once attended a gay-behavior-affirming church in the past. Yes, Jesus can infiltrate the non-believer's heart even if they had been formerly deceived in a church that may knowingly (or unknowingly) be presenting heretical ideas. However, Susan herself admitted to me that she was led to Jesus Christ through the ministry of her loving mentor. Repentance for her past inevitably enabled her to leave her former behavior. This mentor took her to an evangelical, Bible-based church. Susan mentioned that she actually attended both at the same time!
Please know that I am not saying that God can't work all things for good for those that love Him. I have seen people who have been saved thorugh Jesus Christ despite the fact that they may have ventured through a single or multitude of religious errors in their lives. But that is a topic that can be expanded upon in another post on another day.
Back to Susan. Her story is different from Stephen's, in that she wasn't led to repentance in the same way as Stephen (Romans 1:28 had a big impact on him, personally), but the end result was confession for the sin of former homosexual behavior and repentance which led both of them to leave their former life and never to return to such a life ever again!
I am a sinner, too. Similarly, I could list all of my former heterosexual sins that required my confession and repentance. I can say that I would never EVER want to return to the way I once conducted my life in the past. But I have to tell all of you that it wasn't in my own power that this happened. Ask any Christian whether or not they were able to leave their former life of sin (ANY sin) and I think you will find that they will most often say something similar to:
Only after being born again in Jesus Christ did His power, (through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and my (our) love for Jesus Christ) enable my (our) flesh to be "crucified" and my (our) spirit(s) to DESIRE to follow Christ and keep his commandments.
Yes. No one is perfect and sinful choices can still tempt us and we can backslide and succomb to them. We have seen many a Christian believer (especially those in the public arena) do just that. But they realize the wrong they have done and turn back to Christ. They realize that their actions were a result of the flesh and because they did not "retain the knowledge of God" at that very moment where they succombed to a sin. Not allowing the Holy Spirit to guide them at that moment can lead to backsliding. However, backsliding is not the same thing as willful sinning!
Those who willfully continue to sin and haven't completely given themselves over to Christ are in danger of being told by Christ, "Go away, you evil doers, I never knew you!"
This is what is at stake my friends.
Stephen shared a Bible verse in his Romans series that tells us that the Lord is a gentleman and never forces individuals to invite him into their hearts. That would be an act that would overturn the free will he has given us. The Holy Spirit will knock at the door of the hearts of non-believers throughout their lifetimes! The Holy Spirit will compel believers to share the gospel in order to influence those who have not personally accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior to consider, then answer Jesus' question, "Who do you say that I am?"
Here is one verse that is very chilling, though. It serves it's purpose as a severe warning not to easily dismiss the grievousness of willfully sinning against God. It should serve as a wake-up call to Christians too! Those who profess to be born-again Christians, go to church on Sunday and and yet during the week are accessing internet pornography could also be in danger of turning their minds over in reprobation!
Only God knows the true heart condition of those who profess Christ as Lord and Savior. Some may claim Jesus as their Savior because they said a prayer at one time, yet every indication that is seen in their willful sinful lives strongly suggest that they have not yet given their lives totally to him as Lord!
The following Romans verse describes what happens to those who allow God to finally 'give them over' to a reprobate mind. It is a clear indication of the final free-will but God-rejecting decision of the non-believer.
Romans 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;
There are several commentaries I would like to share about that verse.
1. Chuck Smith commentary:
When men create their own god, they become like the god they serve and are rapidly degraded. God gives them up to their own base desire. Homosexuality is the result of moral depravity; people are not "born" homosexuals but have been given up to their own lusts.
2. David Guzik commentary:
The results of human guilt before God
a. In His righteous wrath and judgment, God also gave them up (Paul emphasizes the phrase three times) to the sin our evil hearts desired, allowing us to experience the self-destructive result of sin
i. Hosea 4:17 expresses the judgmental aspects of God "giving us up," leaving us to our own sin: Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone.
ii. We err when we think that it is God's mercy or kindness that allows man to continue in sin; it is actually His wrath which allows us to go on destroying ourselves with sin
b. Remember that Paul was writing from the city of Corinth, were every sort of sexual immorality and ritualistic prostitution was practiced freely; the terminology of verse 24 refers to this combination of sexual immorality and idolatrous worship
c. In every rebellion and disobedience against God we are exchanging the truth of God for the lie of our own choosing, and putting the creature before the Creator
i. Paul uses the definite article; it is not a lie, but the lie. The lie is essentially idolatry - which puts us in the place of God; it is the lie you will be like God (Genesis 3:5)
d. Paul uses homosexuality - both female and male - as an example of God giving them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves
i. Some say that the Bible nowhere condemns lesbian homosexuality, but the likewise of verse 27 makes it clear that the sin of homosexuality condemned in verse 27 is connected to the sin of women mentioned in verse 26
ii. Paul doesn't even use the normal words for man and woman here; he uses the words for male and female, using categories that describe sexuality outside of human terms, because the type of sexual sin he describes is outside of human dignity
iii. Remember that Paul was writing to a culture where homosexuality was accepted as a part of life for both men and women
e. Again, this "freedom" to disobey should be seen as God's judgment, not His kindness; those who engage in such acts are receiving in themselves the penalty of their error
f. As further judgment, God gives man over to a debased mind, so that things which are disgraceful and sickening are readily accepted and approved
i. The word debased (or, reprobate in the KJV) meant originally 'that has not stood the test'. It was used of coins that were substandard
ii. The idea is that since man did not "approve" to know God, men came to have an "unapproved" mind
iii. "The human race put God to the test for the purpose of approving Him should He meet the specifications which it laid down for a God who would be to its liking, and finding that He did not meet those specifications, it refused to approve Him as the God to be worshipped, or have Him in its knowledge." (Wuest)
iv. Our rebellion against God is not only displayed in our actions, but in our thinking; we are genuinely "spiritually insane" in our rebellion against God
g. The list in verses 29-31 gives concrete examples of the kind of things which are not fitting; notice how "socially acceptable" sins (such as covetousness, envy and pride) are included right along with "socially unacceptable" sins (such as murder, and being unloving)
i. Covetousness is literally the itch for more
ii. Envy: is it a small sin? Pilate knew that for envy they had delivered Him
h. Those who either practice or approve of these things are worthy of death; they are the worth objects of the wrath of God
i. Where does all this violence, immorality, cruelty and degradation come from? Men have abandoned the true knowledge of God, and the state of society is a reflection of God's judgment upon them for this .
*******
You may wonder why I included such detailed commentaries instead of saying it all in my own words. It is because I want to demonstrate to people that it is not only my own opinions that are being presented here in this post!
I post the hard questions and often stinging answers because I have great concern for anyone who is currently being deceived into believing the "I'm O.K., You're O.K." philosophy of relativistic post modernism that can lead people to the finality of a reprobate mind! It is such finality of the reprobate mind that takes away any hope of reconciliation with God!
Rejection of the Holy Spirit of God is the "sin unto death" that finalizes a person's choice to ultimately say to God, "I choose not to follow Your (perfect) will as commanded in the Bible to be done in my life, but I choose that only my (reprobate) will to be done in my life!"
I remember Robyn saying something on the STR broadcast that chilled me. She said something similar to (paraphrasing here), 'Those who think they know the absolute truth are what scares me. The suicide/homicide bombers that drove planes into the Towers on 9/11 thought that way and look what happened.'
The difference is that these radical Muslim extremists REJECT JESUS CHRIST as Lord and Savior and FOLLOW A DIFFERENT god...Allah! The radical Muslim fanatics who kill indescriminately and without conscience are perfect examples of those who have been "given over to a reprobate mind."
I know I might get some flak even from fellow Christians about my statement that Muslims do not worship the same God. But please read an additional post here at Talkwisdom about that topic.
For Robyn, who professes to be a Christian, to compare (even subtlely) that evangelical Christian belief based on the absolute truth of the Bible is equivalent and similar to Muslim extremism is very disturbing to me! That is exactly the mantra of the radical leftists who spew their propaganda in the news media.
Again, this valuable dialogue between STR and Robyn Murphy is a good start. However, I have many questions that I would have liked to have heard answered.
Here is my post that appeared at STR:
I have been impressed with the great dialogue you have started with Robyn Murphy. If I had the chance to ask her some questions, I would want to know: I truly wonder how such a bitter conflict between the liberal church ideologies, and the bible-based born-again evangelical church views can ever be solved?
Specifically, the homosexual-behavior-affirming views of the liberal churches vs. the homosexual-behavior-need-for-repentance views of the Bible-based, born-again evangelical churches cannot possibly both be correct.
How can we reconcile these differences?
And whose "word" should count the most?
God's Word in the Bible which unequivocably condemns such behavior but affirms the repentant individual?
Or, man's word that attempts to affirm both homosexual behavior and the individual without recognizing the need for repentance?
*******
O.K. I've got my spiritual armor on. Let the comment battles inevitably begin!
One last thing. David Guzik's commentary starts with the following comments about Augustine. I thought it was good to end this post with it.
"A. The importance and impact of Paul's Letter to the Romans
1. In the Summer of 386, a young man sat weeping in the backyard of a friend. He knew that his life of sin and rebellion against God was killing him, leaving him empty; but he just couldn't find the strength to make a final, real decision for Jesus Christ. As he sat, he heard some children playing a game, and they called out to each other these words: "Take up and read! Take up and read!"
Thinking that perhaps God was saying something to him through the words of the children, he picked up a scroll near him, opened it and began to read: not in revelling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarrelling and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires (Romans 13:13b-14).
He didn't read any further; he didn't have to. Through the power of God's word, Augustine had the faith to entrust his whole life to Jesus Christ at that moment."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
20 comments:
Boo,
There are some verses in the Bible that are absolutely clear on certain issues. Homosexuality is one of those issues. It is only with twisting of, elimination of, ignoring of, or outright dismissal of the passages that address homosexual behavior as sin that, as you put it, "everyone has different interpretations of some parts of the Bible."
Christine,
What Robyn was saying about absolute truth was correct. YOu believe you have the absolute truth. You believe that the bible says what it says and that is it. You believe that your version of the translations is the absolute truth.
That is scary and it does lead to drastic stuff. I wish you would stop, think, and look at all the sides. Understand that you don't have the absolute truth. Robyn also said the opposite of faith isn't doubt. Think about that for a few minutes. It really says something you should consider.
The bible isn't clear about homosexuality at all. Those that say it is are leaving out some drastic information. You are leaving out the the bible was put together by men, that many of the scrolls were left out and destroyed. What did those say about homosexuality?
You don't have the absolute truth and neither do I. When we can all accept that notion, we will have a real dialog.
I am overjoyed with the changees at STR. I pray that this change continues although I have a lack of faith that they will. I wrote alot about that in my three part series on this on my blog. Maybe you should read it.
Joe,
I suggest that you read this page that shares the difference between perceived Bible errors and Bible difficulties. There is also a wealth of information concerning Biblical truth and why the Bible is reliable because it is God's Word.
Unfortunately, it appears that my server for my website is down. When I return later, I will post the rest of my reply.
I will say this, though. Biblical inerrancy is crucial to Christian faith. Yes. The Bible was recorded by men who were carried along by the Holy Spirit. Do you understand what that means?
Do you know what it means that Scripture interprets Scripture? How about Sola Scriptura?
Jesus himself declared that God's Word is truth. He was refering to the Old Testament. Since God guided those prophets in their recordings why couldn't He do the same in the New Testament?
Gotta run..be back later.
Sadly, what you miss Christine is that whatever the bible says, it doesn't matter to the debate about gays and lesbian because not all people believe in the bible. Gays and lesbians come from all faiths and deminations.
You still haven't addressed the issue at hand. What is the middle ground for those who do not believe the bible, gays, and those who believe they have the absolute truth such as yourself.
You just don't want to admit, you do not have the absolute truth, you don't want to see that you are doing harm to others.
If you want to read something....read godmademegay.com
If nothing else you will understand the harm your crudade does to others.
So I read the page yu asked me to read. All I can say is that the bible cannot be the evidence of itself. You cannot prove the validity of the bible with the bible, and that is what the article asks the reader to do.
Have you ever heard of circular logic? That is where the answer to the question lies back in the question. It just sends you around and round till your dizzy. That is what you are trying to do with this article.
Christine said: "However, Susan herself admitted to me that she was led to Jesus Christ through the ministry of her loving mentor. Repentance for her past inevitably enabled her to leave her former behavior. This mentor took her to an evangelical, Bible-based church. Susan mentioned that she actually attended both at the same time!"
You may have forgotten the details of my testimony that have been shared on your blog, Christine. Please let me share once again: I accepted Jesus as my savior when I was 12-years-old. I then became in bondage to the sin of homosexuality for more than 20 years and I was a drunk for 30 years. The Lord delivered me from homosexual behavior in 1985 and from the identity of believing I was a lesbian in 1988. God then delivered me from the sin of drunkeness a number of years later. When was I saved? I do not know.
Repentance for my sins in the past did not enable me to stop my former behavior... I was delivered by the grace of God. Nothing I did or did not do delivered me from homosexuality. The power of God transformed my life. My personal testimony is all about Jesus and the power of God... not all about my repentance and me.
I appreciate the opportunity to share my personal testimony as the Lord leads. God's ways are above our ways and His thoughts are higher than ours. My mentor was used by God as a willing vessel for His love to touch my life. Love never fails. Rivers of living water flowed through her life on a daily basis as the Holy Spirit ministered to my needs. I thank God for my mentor and for you Christine as your desire to see others delivered from all sin is a blessing from God.
Much love from Jerusalem. (ss)
Boo stated: "You can't dialogue with someone and start from the position of 'I'm right and that's all there is to it.' "
That is not what I am doing. I am sharing the fact that the Bible is correct. I am agreeing with God's Word. THere is a huge difference between having a position where one claims he or she is right vs. stating the the Bible is correct in all that it states and what it records.
This is why I usually include Bible verses in my conversations. It helps to show where I am getting my information from. However, I have found that people often prefer more of a conversational response rather than just Bible verses. When I need to share a point about Scripture (like when discussing inerrancy), then it does become necessary to include the verses from where I am getting my information.
The Bible is God's Word to all mankind. It was written by human authors, under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the supreme source of truth for Christian beliefs and living. Because it is inspired by God, it is truth without any mixture of error.
2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Timothy 1:13; Psalms 12:6; 119:105, 160; Proverbs 30:5
Joe stated: "What Robyn was saying about absolute truth was correct."
How do you know? From what source have you drawn such a conclusion? If Robyn (or even you, for that matter) ever get around to admitting that there is such a thing as absolute truth, then shouldn't it be our goal to discover it?
Joe: "YOu believe you have the absolute truth."
Incorrect. I believe that Jesus Christ is the absolute truth. His life, death and resurrection proved he is who he says he is. It is up to each and every person to discover this for themselves. God left a manual for us. His Word, the Bible.
Joe: "You believe that the bible says what it says and that is it."
Correct! When dealing with absolute truth, there is no reason to go anywhere else to find it.
Joe: "You believe that your version of the translations is the absolute truth."
Differing translations do not affect certain truths as revealed in the Bible. You could compare, say, Romans 1:24-29 in several versions and they say pretty much the same thing:
(NKJV)24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, *sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, *unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
(NASB)Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
Rom 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
Rom 1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; {they are} gossips,
Rom 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.
(Webster's) Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:
Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up to vile affections. For even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one towards another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
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;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventers of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32 Who, knowing the judgment of God, that they who commit such things are worthy of death; not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
(NLT)24 So God let them go ahead and do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other's bodies. 25 Instead of believing what they knew was the truth about God, they deliberately chose to believe lies. So they worshiped the things God made but not the Creator himself, who is to be praised forever. Amen.
26 That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. 27 And the men, instead of having normal sexual relationships with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men and, as a result, suffered within themselves the penalty they so richly deserved.
28 When they refused to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their evil minds and let them do things that should never be done. 29 Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, fighting, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. 30 They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They are forever inventing new ways of sinning and are disobedient to their parents. 31 They refuse to understand, break their promises, and are heartless and unforgiving. 32 They are fully aware of God's death penalty for those who do these things, yet they go right ahead and do them anyway. And, worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too.
There are many more but that should suffice for now.
Joe: "That is scary and it does lead to drastic stuff."
Yeah. Drastic stuff like following Jesus and the Ten Commandments!
Joe: "Robyn also said the opposite of faith isn't doubt."
So...do you recall what it was that she stated actually was the opposite of faith?
Joe: "The bible isn't clear about homosexuality at all."
Oh, it's very clear. Just the cluster of verses in Romans 1:24-29 alone make it very clear.
Joe: "
You are leaving out the the bible was put together by men, that many of the scrolls were left out and destroyed. What did those say about homosexuality?"
See the last two paragraphs in my last comment to Boo. Applying what was stated there, it doesn't matter which scrolls were left out because God led man through the power of the Holy Spirit to record all that he wanted to make clear to mankind. We don't know everything (like God does, of course), but His Word supplies enough for us to know what to avoid in life and what is needed for salvation and to spend eternity with God.
The Bible is clear about the sin of homosexuality. Just like I stated previously to Boo, people can either twist, eliminate, ignore, or outrightly reject the Scriptures that deal with the subject, but they can't claim that God's Word isn't clear on this issue.
Joe: "Sadly, what you miss Christine is that whatever the bible says, it doesn't matter to the debate about gays and lesbian because not all people believe in the bible. Gays and lesbians come from all faiths and deminations."
That is true. People can reject what is written in God's Word about any subject. But that does not mean that they are following the truth. It may be the 'truth as they want to see it' because they reject God's Word and only 'do what is right in their own eyes'. But since there is such a thing as absolute truth, and they are rejecting such truth, then they are in error.
God's Word has plenty of warnings regarding such error:
Psalm 78:37 - For their heart was not right with him, neither were they stedfast in his covenant.
Proverbs 30:12 - [There is] a generation [that are] pure in their own eyes, and [yet] is not washed from their filthiness.
Isaiah 5:21 - Woe unto [them that are] wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
1 Corinthians 3:19 - For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
God's Word has plenty of acknowledgment of the truth of Scripture:
John 17:17 - Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. (Jesus speaking)
Psalms 33:4 - For the word of the LORD [is] right; and all his works [are done] in truth.
Hosea 4:1 - Hear the word of the LORD, ye children of Israel: for the LORD hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because [there is] no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land.
Colossians 1:5 - For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;
1 Thessalonians 2:13 - For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received [it] not [as] the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
Joe: "You don't have the absolute truth and neither do I. When we can all accept that notion, we will have a real dialog."
I can agree that I, personally, do not have the absolute truth (no one does) but I cannot accept the notion that God's Word isn't absolute truth because that would require me to exchange the truth for a lie. If that is your requirement in order to have a 'real dialog,' then we probably do not have anything else to say to each other...which would truly be unfortunate. But it's your decision to continue to carry on a conversation with me or not.
I would be willing to read your 3 part series at your blog to see what you have written. But, what is your goal in that? Do you think it will change my mind about the truth of the Bible? Won't happen. However, it could be valuable for me to see what influences you in your life and causes you to reject Jesus as Lord and Savior. I think I remember soome posts there where you discuss a liking for Buddhism. Is that the religion that you follow?
Joe: "If you want to read something....read godmademegay.com
If nothing else you will understand the harm your crudade does to others."
People can believe that God made them gay, but that doesn't mean that is the truth. God made them male and female. Genesis states the gender roles quite clearly. There are thousands of ex-gays who have successfully left homosexual behavior and identity. So, using your logic, does that mean that God can make someone ex-gay too?
My 'crusade' as you labeled it is not to harm anyone. It is to help people to find Jesus and live life to its fullest.
My site states that I am, "dedicated to evangelizing so that people can be saved through faith in Jesus Christ, equipped for ministry, and sent out as soul winners for the Lord. I really enjoy reading and studying the Bible. I am active in defending the faith of Biblical Christianity."
Hi Susan!
Nice to see you back here! Thanks for sharing the details of your personal conversion and salvation through Jesus Christ. I didn't mean to purposely leave out all of the important details of your personal journey to Christ. I'm glad that you were willing to post such details and clear up any misconceptions I may have assumed. I'm sorry about that!
We are all delivered by the mercy and grace of God! And when he cleanses our souls through faith and belief in the shed blood of Jesus Christ at the cross, His power is manifest in us and delivers us from the punishment we would (all!) deserve for our sins. Jesus is a fabulous Lord and Savior!
Love from the West Coast,
Christine
Boo,
How do you know that your interpretation is correct? On what do you base your belief(s) in this area?
Here is a segment from "When Critics Ask" (WCA):
"Yes. People are fallible and finite. Human beings make mistakes. And even though God's Word is perfect (Psalm 19:7), as long as imperfect human beings exist, there will be misinterpretations of God's Word and false views about His world."
Let's take a different subject. The subject of evolution. It is the current dominate view of science in the world today.
(WCA): "But based on the imperfection of human beings, should we be hasty in assuming that this currently dominant view in science is the final word on the topic?"
There is a raging controversy going on right now regarding Intelligent Design challenging Evolution. There are people on the Evolution side who are certain that what they believe is true. However, notice that prevailing views of science in the past are considered errors by scientists in the present. So, contradictions between popular opinions in science and widely accepted interpretations of the Bible can be expected. But this falls short of proving there is a real contradiction between God's world and God's Word, between God's general revelation and His special revelation. In this basic sense, science and Scripture are not contradictory. Only finite, fallible human opinions about each can be contradictory."
I propose the concept that perhaps it is you who is involved in a popular opinion interpretation (that ultimately suits your lifestyle) in order for you to have the excuse to reject widely accepted interpretations of the Bible. Widely accepted interpretations of the Bible have been around for thousands of years, verses the popular interpretation that you are currently ( I presume)indulging in.
It might help to seek out historical commentaries from Biblical scholars that have stood the test of time in their accuracy. It is precisely for this reason that it is important for you to realize that the meaning of the Bible does not change, but our understanding of its meaning does. Disagreeing with Biblical scholars (and Biblical Hermeneutics) is a far different thing than claiming that someone's interpretation is in error.
What you use in your interpretation cannot be considered an exegesis. Why? Because it is coming from your own personal opinion(s) and perspective regarding the issue of homosexuality.
Exegesis through hermeneutics is the tool which has been used by Biblical scholars through the centuries. The combination of hermeneutics and exegesis (a variation of the word exegeisthai meaning to show the way)is a powerful argument against the current gay-behavior-affirming Christian movement which cannot possibly claim as such.
As an infallible book, the Bible is also irrevocable. Jesus declared, "Truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished" (Matt. 5:18, NIV; Luke 16:17).
So, all those verses in Leviticus and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah do not pass away from the Law until ALL is accomplished. This accomplishment will occur at Jesus second coming. In his first coming, he came to fulfill the Scriptures as Savior of the world. In his second coming he will renign as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. The wrath of God shall be upon all those who rejected Christ. Why? Because either their sin is upon their own souls (unbeliever) or they have been forgiven and reconciled unto God through Jesus Christ. There is no inbetween.
(WCA): "The Scriptures also have final authority, being the last word on all it discusses. Jesus employed the Bible to resist the tempter (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10), to settle doctrinal disputes (Matt. 21:42), and to vindicate His authority (Mark 11:17). Sometimes a biblical teaching rests on a small historical detail (Heb. 7:4-10), a word or phrase (Acts 15:13-17), or even the difference between the singular and the plural (Gal. 3:16)."
Are you a Christian Boo? If so, how is your prayer life? When you die, do you know for certain where you will spend eternity?
The Bible is filled with warnings about mockers in the last days who walk after their own lusts. Gay-behavior-affirming "theology" fits that description quite well. I truly think that it is so sad, heartbreaking, and unfortunate that people are being led astray by such heresy and apostasy.
Jude 1:18 - How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
You are using an anomaly in order to argue (or, perhaps attempt to dismiss) a portion of God's Word. A defect (or, defects) in the gene pool are not something that can be used to negate God's original intention(s) and purpose for Creation. To do so would be an attempt to elevate science above the knowledge and wisdom of God. It is my own personal view that science is always trying to 'catch up to God' in that respect.
Not to get too far off topic, but you are correct that ID and Evolution are embarked in an ideological battle. Evolutionists have elevated themselves above the knowledge of God and God's account of creation appears 'foolish' to them.
There is a verse that speaks of this...similar to having become wise in their own eyes they became vain in their imaginations...
God's Wrath on Unrighteousness
Romans 1:18-23 (NKJV)
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man--and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
Naturalism is the god that macro-evolutionists worship. It's like a religion to them! Hmmm....brings this verse to mind:
1 Corinthians 2:14 - But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
Christine
Can I recommend something for you to listen to? It's a talk given by Tony Campolo on Struggling With the Gay Issue. He gave this talk to a group of pastors. Tony is a conservative on the issue, but he is willing to understand that there is some complexity involved. The "other side" (how awful is it that there are 'sides' inside the Church?) has some valid points.
You seem to make the assumption that anyone who takes a 'pro-gay behavior' stance has basically said "this is what I want to do, so how can I justify it", instead ot considering the fact that they might seriously have thought about this, sought God and read the Scriptures. This is simply not the case, no more than it is for any woman who preaches. There are more verses dealing specifically with women in the church (how they should dress, how they should behave, etc) than specifically deal with homosexuality (homosexuality is usually just mentioned in passing, if it is actually mentioned at all), and yet I doubt you would confront a female pastor the way you confront gay Christians. Any woman who feels called to preach has had to start with "this is what I feel/sense/believe God wants me to do, but the Bible says something different, let me examine it". It is not really any different for gay Christians. I say this as someone who is still examining, still trying to come to some sort of conclusion, still seeking God about this.
Anyway, I think Tony's talk will be interesting, if nothing else, for you.
Boo, I really appreciate your spirit. Thanks.
JJ,
I listened to part 1 of Tony Campolo's talk about gay issues. In one part at the beginning, he compares the abomination of homosexuality with the abomination of touching a pig's skin. Then he joked about whether or not playing football is also an abomination. Yes. I know he was just joking, but it still shows a glaring misunderstanding of the dietary laws in the OT (Kosher laws which don't need to be adhered to in modern times because of our knowledge of thorough cooking to avoid trichinosis) verses the moral laws which have never been rescinded.
I did a brief search and found the following about Campolo:
"Campolo was the subject of an informal heresy hearing in 1985 brought about by several assertions in his 1983 book A Reasonable Faith. The book became a hot button and the swirling controversy caused Campus Crusade for Christ and Youth for Christ to block a planned speaking engagement by Campolo. The Christian Legal Society empowered a "reconciliation panel", led by noted theologian J. I. Packer, to examine the issue and resolve the controversy. The panel examined the book and questioned Campolo. The panel later issued a statement saying that although it disagreed with several of Campolo's statements, it did not find them to be heretical."
He teetered on the edge of heretical teachings...not a good thing.
Also:
"Sexuality Debates
Tony Campolo and his wife, Peggy, have participated in very public debates and discussions about the place of lesbian and gay persons within church and society. In his public stance at least, Tony Campolo contends that homosexuality is a sin in practice, though not in orientation -- though he also argues that gay people living together in a committed, sexually active relationship, is morally preferable to less than monogamous relationships. Peggy Campolo argues, as an Evangelical, that the church's traditional teaching on homosexuality is mistaken -- just as the church's traditional teaching on the role of women, slavery, and divorce is also mistaken. In recent years, some have suggested that Tony Campolo's private view on homosexuality has moved in the direction of his wife's view, and that he has fudged opportunities to articulate his new thinking in public for fear of losing his conservative Christian audience."
He also incorrectly stated that the passage in 1 Corinthians is about masterbation, not homosexuality. That's just absurd. If this man can't be trusted on that issue. He does admit that the Romans passage does address the issue of homosexual behavior, but he fails when he compares the other sins listed, he attempts to say that "this sin is not any worse than any other." This is true, but society today is not trying to turn those other sins into non-sin, as the liberal left denominations are doing.
He does admit that he believes that homosexual sex is sin, but apparently he seems to think that allowing gay monogamous marriage will somehow turn it into something acceptable to God.
When he talks about improper sexual behavior, it leads to idolatry. Good, so far. However, when his wife (evidently) influences his beliefs, she tries to state that it is only the homosexual behavior in front of idols, not the same in the committed relationship.
Sorry JJ, but this is a gross twisting of the Scripture.
Campolo goes on to state that the original intention is the first rule. Being reasonable is the second rule. Let the Holy Spirit guide you is the third rule. Then, he says to take into consideration the tradition of the church(es). For 2,000 years the position has been that same-sex relations were wrong. His wife says that it is because the church fathers didn't let the mothers speak. Yikes!! Unfortunately, she appears to be a bad influence on him. If you remember my post to you at your blog, women who aren't learned in the Bible should not "teach" men. She is trying to interpret Scripture to her particular liking and thus trying to convince her husband to do the same. Sorry. That dog don't hunt...
There is a passage in Scripture where it states that people like to have "their ears tickled" and to listen to things that affirm their preconcieved beliefs, notions, proclivities and habits. That is exactly what Campolo's wife is doing. It's truly unfortunate that her husband is being turned; ever so slightly and gradually, to the leftist ideology as concerns Christianity.
I ran out of time today, but I will listen to part 2 when I can.
P.S. I was so sorry to hear about the high school student that hung himself and how guilty that Tony felt about not befriending him. Truly sad.
But that is not what Straight Talk Radio and all of the ex-gay ministries are about. But that is a topic for another day.
JJ,
I also found a webpage that describes "Open Theism" which has more recently become popularized since 1994. There are links to a description of Open Theism and why it should be avoided. There is also a link to a Tony Campolo article that is used as an example of Open Theism.
Of course it is up to you, but I would sincerely hope that you investigate the differences between this open theism movement and traditional Biblical Christianity so that you can make an informed decision on which way to go.
Being "in the middle" is a relativistic place to be. From what I have noticed at your blogspot, you have some books on homosexuality that would typically be recommended from both the left open theism ranks as well as those that would typically be considered from the right traditional Biblical Christianity side.
I will say this. God is not the author of confusion. I guess that is one of the reasons that I was attracted to your blogsite in the first place. You named your blogsite "Gay, Christian and Confused." People are often guilty of creating confusion. That is why the absolute truth of Scripture through exegesis and applied hermeneutics is essential for discerning truth from error.
I see your "middle of the road" approach as the reason for your confusion. And, as the book I own called "Relativism" says in it's subtitle, to be in such a place as that is like "having one's feet firmly planted in mid-air."
When it comes to theology, you don't want to do that or be in such a position.
Here is another detailed commentary on Tony Campolo. The following is evidence of why the liberal left gay-behavior-affirming churches like him. He does not teach the need for repentance.
"Campolo is dangerous because he does not preach repentance
The greatest need of the hour is genuine Bible repentance--on the part of sinners and Christians alike. God calls upon all sinners everywhere to repent. But most Gospel preaching today leaves out repentance, and Campolo commits this error. The Bible also calls upon Christians to repent when they are involved in sin and error. But Campolo, in fact, makes light of repentance and the sorrow over sin and error which true repentance brings. He said he did not want the ecumenical crowd to whom he was speaking to be sorrowful. He wanted no tears, no sadness, no sorrowing. He wanted them to dance and to have a party!
My friends, you will not find this kind of thing in the preaching of Christ and the Apostles. Sure, there is coming a day in which the people of God will have a banquet. But that is a future day, not this present hour. Christ was looking forward to that day when He said at the Last Supper, "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Matt. 26:29).
Campolo knows that the term "party" is something which refers to fleshly excitement. It is the common term for the wicked festivities of the world. "It's party time, man!" That's an expression we used frequently when we were lost.
But it's not party time right now for the child of God. It's serious time; it's work time; it's holiness time.
"And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness and let us put on the armour of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof." (Rom. 13:11-14)"
Hey Christine, I didn't realize you were putting your commentary here, I was wondering if you had ever listened to it... I just didn't know where to go for your thoughts.
I am insanely busy right now, with work and all, so I have read your comments very quickly, but I do have a few thoughts. First of all, Tony never "states" that the passage in Corinthians "is about masterbation"... I've listened to the talk several times... he says that that passage used to be interpreted to mean masterbation, and it is only recently that the interpretation has changed. Having done a little study myself on the word that is used in Corinthians for homosexual, I have to say that masterbation is just as likely an interpretation as homosexuality (actually, considering that the word is singular - "man/bed" as opposed to "men/bed" I'd say it's a little more likely). I just think it's unfair to misquote him.
As to Tony not calling for repentance, I don't know where the writer of that article got his ideas, but I've listened to several of Tony's sermons online (not having a good English speaking church to go to here, I get my church where I can), and he definetely calls for repentance on the issues of materialism, selfishness, not caring for the poor...
And I don't think he thinks making gay marriage legal will make it okay with God, I think he thinks it will make life better for some people. I think we can all agree that monogamy is better than promiscuity.
Oh, and as to the 'heretical' thing, I've actually heard a great deal about that, and it should be noted that he was declared not heretical. Not teetering on the edge, but theologically sound. The teaching he was confronted on was the idea that serving the poor (the ill, the infirm, the outcast, etc) was like a sacrament, because when we serve them, we serve God. The problem that people had was some termonology he used in this teaching -- specifically, that God was in every person therefore serving them was serving God. He has since explained (quite clearly) that he did not mean that everyone was a Christian, or that we are all gods or something, but that Jesus Himself said that when we do these things for people, we do them for Him.
And what the lingering disagreement was, was over the term 'sacrament', because not everyone believes in the sacraments as being anything other than symbols, whereas Tony beliefs are more in keeping with the Lutheran or Catholic beliefs -- that sacraments are actually something holy, and... well, sacred.
Okay, I've actually spent more time online now that I have. Sorry to have responded so late. As far as part 2 of that talk is concerned, he basically is just answering questions at that point, and you can't even hear all of the questions, so unless you are actually interested, I wouldn't bother.
Sorry JJ. In my opinion, Campolo is still teetering upon heresy. I wanted to give a more detailed response, but in summary, the idea that he thinks "monogamy among homosexuals is better than promiscuity" may be considered better in the secular world; however, God calls us to be holy not "happy".
I'm sure by now that you are well aware of the Scriptures in Romans that lists the kind of people who will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. It doesn't say that monogamous homosexuals will enter in. The fact is, unrepentant homosexuals (as well as any and all other kinds of sinners) who refuse to repent and turn away from their sins will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Man's laws and ideas do not trump God's Perfect Law and the way of salvation.
Some may scream "legalism" about this but in actuality, what Campolo is proposing (in his idea that homosexual monogamy is better than promiscuity) is licentiousness. We are not to make a mockery of God's mercy and grace. This is what Paul meant when he stated "God forbid" towards those who wanted to keep on in sexual immorality while professing to be born again in Christ.
If you took any other kind of sin and replaced it with the sin of homosexuality, you will see that Campolo's theological idea falls far short of God's call for Christians to be holy and righteous before God.
Stumbling because our sin nature occasionally causes us to do so is one thing; but licentious disobedience to God's call for holiness is quite another. We need to confess those daily sins that can creep into our lives and make every effort not to continue in them. But rejecting God's clear word on how a man (woman) should not lie with another man (woman) because it is detestable and an abomination does not just go away when man decides to make a new rule and call it homosexual "marriage."
I don't think Tony is saying that he thinks gay marriage isn't a sin (that he believes people will eventually be called to account for), he's just saying that it's better than promiscuity, and I can't see how that isn't true.
I also want to make it clear that Tony's beliefs regarding homosexuality were in no way related to what got him called before the heresy board. People may disagree with him, but those beliefs haven't been called heresy by any person with any real authority over him.
I just wanted to add a little something. All these people who defend gay rights and what have you it seems to me like they are just doing what they been trying to do for generations and that is prove God's word wrong. For one God does not make anyone gay so you can throw that garbage out the window. For two God is against it if you cant take his destructions of two cities as an example then you really arent understanding your Bible.
Post a Comment