The Gospel for a Gay Friend

[EnochBethany]

I believe that people can call themselves of Christ and be gay at the same time. Christ loved all.

People can call themselves "of Christ" and be any kind of practicing vile sinner to be sure.  Hypocrites abound.

 

And in general all Christians can be properly gay, that is happy & carefree. The Lord says to rejoice in the Lord always.

 

"9 Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men,  10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.  11 And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God."

 

Yet what one believes is irrelevant for the truth.  What God's Word says is relevant.

 

"be gay"?

Being happy & carefree is fine.

 

"be homosexual"?

preferring the company of one's sex is no sin.

 

"be a sodomite"?

Acting like the citizens of Sodom?

That merits God's destruction.

 

be a man who "lies with men"? mimicking men lying with women ?

That is an abomination, a particularly vile & disgusting & abusive form of fornication.

It led to nations being vomited our of their land -- see Lev 18.

 

Of course the vilest sinner can be cleansed by the Blood of the Lord Jesus & made a transformed Child of God.

 

Of course Christ loves all:  "Thou shalt call His name Jesus; for He shall save His people from their sin."  Loving His people, He saves them from their sin.

[EnochBethany]

 

Well if it were true that the hatred is from the homosexual community, then how do,you explain gay people committing suicide out of being bullied, more often than not in the Bible Belt, and being bullied by people who would generally call themselves Christians?

 

The suicide rate among homosexuals is high, but not because of being bullied.  Drug abuse, sexually transmitted disease and utter hopeless are all part of the homsoexual experience.   Much of the problems the gay community has are self-inflicted.

 

I would also add that your information isn't really all tha accurate.   Gays are persecuted but they are persecuted higher in nonChristian communities than anywhere in America.   Historically, fascist, nazi and communist countries have always been the worst persecutors of gay people.  Gays are far more accepted in western, Christian nations.

 

I think part of the problem is that when a person living in the Bible persecutes a gay person, that person is assumed to be a Christian simply by virtue of the fact that that it happened in the Bible Belt.    I would also add that there is a tendency to portray all Christians as hating gays only because of the actions of a few pockets of haters.

 

When a government outlaws wicked & abusive behavior & punishes the behavior, that is no persecution.

[EnochBethany]

 

 

 

I don't think you can be a gay Christian but isn't God forgiving?

only if you stop the action that he would forgive you for.

But then technically, that's not an all loving God. I thought that God forgave even if you still repeated the same mistake over and over again.

 

Well first of all,   God is NOT all loving.  The Bible never claims God to be all-loving.   There are things that God hates and the homosexual lifestyle is one of those things.

 

Secondly,  God does forgive, but to appropriate God's forgiveness, we must truly repent.   Nowhere in the Bible is any provision made for thinking that you can live in sin, go to Gdo for forgiveness, fully expecting to continue living the same sin over and over. If you continue to live in sin, there is non genuine repetnance, and  God does not honor insincere repentance. 

 

The only repentance that saves is metanoia, a change of mind; in particular a change of mind from not trusting Christ as Savior to trusting Him as Savior.   Saving repentance is not being sorry for sin primarily, nor turning over a new leaf.  But indeed, we who died to sin, how shall we live therein?  Salvation has a content, & that is salvation from sin.  You can't be saved without being saved!

[EnochBethany]

 

 

For many of my Christian friends who love Jesus and struggle with same-sex attraction, the beauty of the gospel is that it addresses every area of their life, not just one expression of the fall. All believers know this truth. Whether we were once atheists, liars, Muslims, or self-righteous church attenders, there's no magical gospel just for "our sin." At the foot of the cross we are all equally in need of God's amazing grace.

Read the entire article here.

 

The gospel is the same for all sinners:  Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved.  You are right that there is not a special gospel just for our sin.  The flesh lusts vs the Spirit & vice versa in the Christian life.

[EnochBethany]

 

"Gay" means happy & carefree.

 

One is advancing the propaganda-vocabulary purpose of those who practice sodomy by calling them "gay," just as one may advance fornication by calling it, "being sexually active."  I recommend using Biblical terminology.

 

A word can only have one meaning?  And why do you get to decide who uses it and in what context?  I think you are taking a little too much on yourself there.

 

Using the word "gay" does not mean that anyone is advancing some form of homosexual propaganda.  That assertion is ridiculous.  It is not necessary to brand homosexuals as sodomites every time the subject is discussed.  In a forum such as this, when the word "gay" is used, people are quite familiar with the term, what it means, and the actions it denotes.

 

Those who have an agenda use vocabulary to advance their POV.  For the Christian the proper vocab is the Bible's vocab.  Truth is distorted by unbiblical, humanistic rhetoric.  I don't claim that Chrs intend to advance the enemy's propaganda by using rhetoric sympathetic to sin; probably most are unaware of being duped.

 

We won't brand homosexuals as sodomists; for they are not necessarily. The term homosexual confuses the issue, since the issue is not preference for one's own sex, but men "lying with"

men; women "lying with" women.

 

Using the term gay puts a positive blessing on the abominable action & obscures the issue.  It does not focus the mind on the abominable actions done.  Sodomist calls to mind the sinners of sodom, a Biblical sinful city.  Using gay is a way to avoid the abominable activity in one's mind.  There is nothing gay about it.

[EnochBethany]

 

IMHO:

I don't mean to insinuate that the poster of the topic meant to advance the sodomist agenda.  But I do call attention to the importance of the vocabulary we use.  The sodomist wants to use a certain vocabulary to advance his ends (gay & homophobe).  The vocabulary is important in the cultural war.  As to "homosexual," that is another confusing term, which should be avoided.  One should not oppose the idea that some men prefer the company of their own sex -- that is not an issue.  To keep the issue in proper focus requires Biblical terms.  The issue regarding men is "men lying with men" and behavior typical of the city of Sodom. 

 

 

To call them gay is a misnomer.

 

 

A couple of problems:  First off, simply because the homosexual community uses terms with the calculating goal of furthering a certain agenda, that does mean that everyone who uses those words is doing the same thing.  That is a false dichotomy.  On a forum such as this, when we use the term "gay" everyone understands that this term, for us, refers to two people, of the same sex, involved in a physical, i.e. sexual relationship.  Keeping the issue in proper "focus" does not require the strict use of biblical terms.  You don't get the option of determining what terms we have to use in a discussion and no Christian that I know of uses biblical terms exclusively when discussing any subject.  That makes no sense.  Not to mention that the repeated use of the term sodomy, sodomite or sodomist makes you appear to be a backwards hick.

 

We are not talking about "men preferring the company of their own sex."  Who knows what that means and the statement makes no sense in it's current form in relation to this discussion.  Sex between people of the same sex, whether they are men or women, is a sin in every single case.  Whether one uses the terms, "gay," "homosexual," or "same-sex" the assumption, from a biblical standpoint is that the root action of this relationship is sex. 

 

"A couple of problems:  First off, simply because the homosexual community uses terms with the calculating goal of furthering a certain agenda, that does mean that everyone who uses those words is doing the same thing."

 

The fact is the fact.  "Gay" is a positive term put on abominable activity.  I don't say that all who use "gay" have the intent of furthering the propaganda, but they are duped into so doing that.

 

 "On a forum such as this, when we use the term "gay" everyone understands that this term, for us, refers to two people, of the same sex, involved in a physical, i.e. sexual relationship."

 

But it also obscures the issue & puts a positive term on it.

 

 

"Keeping the issue in proper "focus" does not require the strict use of biblical terms."

 

The use of Biblical terms helps keep the issue in proper focus.  Hold to the Pattern of Sound Words (2 Timothy).

 

Yes, I have the option of asserting the truth about the terms used.  You are free to accept or reject what I say on this & all other issues.

 

Yes, it makes sense to use Biblical terms instead of pro-sin rhetoric.

 

"Not to mention that the repeated use of the term sodomy, sodomite or sodomist makes you appear to be a backwards hick."

 

Now you introduce an insult word.  I don't judge tho; perhaps you sincerely think you are advising me well.  Actually use of the term "sodomist" is anything but hickish -- the use of "sodomist" connotes knowledge of jurisprudence, a term hicks are unlikely to know.  I won't be intimidated into using the wrong rhetoric by an insult slur word.

 

We are not talking about "men preferring the company of their own sex."

 

Yes, that connotation is read into "homosexuality."

 

"the assumption, from a biblical standpoint is that the root action of this relationship is sex."

 

But the adoption of the term "gay," came from no Biblical standpoint whatsoever.

 

Rethink your rhetoric, Bro.

[EnochBethany]

 

 

 

Humans are not capable of not committing sin.  So, what are the criteria for giving yourself to Christ but still sinning?  Anyone here who says a gay person should not get into the kingdom needs to cast the first stone – there is but one judge, he was sinless, and he is judging you as well…

 

We are not saying that.  God says that.  Everyone sins.  But there is a huge difference between making a mistake in judgement or a momentary weakness and in living a life of willful, habitual sin.  When people say that a person can be "gay" and still be "Christian," then they totally remove repentance from Christianity.  They discard it completely, meaning that you could now repetitively commit anything God calls a sin until the day you die with complete impunity, and more to the point, without repenting and turning away from it.

 

Homosexuality is a sin.  There is no credible debate, from a biblical standpoint, that it is not a sin, because the Bible states very clearly that it is a sin in both the Old and New Testament.  It doesn't have to repeat that it is a sin in every chapter of every book for those statements that it is a sin to have validity.  The expectation when one becomes a Christian is always that gross repetitive and willful sin will cease.  If one is committing a sin such as homosexuality or adultery over and over and over again, and saying it is perfectly acceptable to do so, they are not repentant, and they are not sorry for the sin. 

 

My bro, "homosexuality" is not a sin.  Neither does the Bible use such language.  Probably you & I don't disagree on the substance, but the vocabulary.  "Homosexual" confuses the issue.  Psychologists might call boys at a certain age homosexual, because they prefer to play with boys instead of with girls.  Preference of company is not the issue.  Loving (agape) persons of the same sex, is not the issue.  The proper terms are "men lying with men" and Sodomite.  If you describe precisely the abominable practice, you will probably find yourself censored here.  But it is by describing precisely what is done that the abomination appears.

 

Fornication comes in many varieties, and it is a sin characteristic of heading to the Lake of Fire.

 

It doesn't matter what you call it.   Homosexuality is a sin.

 

Well think about it. The rhetoric used is important.  If you get into arguing about homosexuality, the focus is likely to change to the right of people to love each other.  But when you get into the actual behavior of men lying with men, then the abomination appears.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

 

 

Humans are not capable of not committing sin.  So, what are the criteria for giving yourself to Christ but still sinning?  Anyone here who says a gay person should not get into the kingdom needs to cast the first stone – there is but one judge, he was sinless, and he is judging you as well…

 

We are not saying that.  God says that.  Everyone sins.  But there is a huge difference between making a mistake in judgement or a momentary weakness and in living a life of willful, habitual sin.  When people say that a person can be "gay" and still be "Christian," then they totally remove repentance from Christianity.  They discard it completely, meaning that you could now repetitively commit anything God calls a sin until the day you die with complete impunity, and more to the point, without repenting and turning away from it.

 

Homosexuality is a sin.  There is no credible debate, from a biblical standpoint, that it is not a sin, because the Bible states very clearly that it is a sin in both the Old and New Testament.  It doesn't have to repeat that it is a sin in every chapter of every book for those statements that it is a sin to have validity.  The expectation when one becomes a Christian is always that gross repetitive and willful sin will cease.  If one is committing a sin such as homosexuality or adultery over and over and over again, and saying it is perfectly acceptable to do so, they are not repentant, and they are not sorry for the sin. 

 

My bro, "homosexuality" is not a sin.  Neither does the Bible use such language.  Probably you & I don't disagree on the substance, but the vocabulary.  "Homosexual" confuses the issue.  Psychologists might call boys at a certain age homosexual, because they prefer to play with boys instead of with girls.  Preference of company is not the issue.  Loving (agape) persons of the same sex, is not the issue.  The proper terms are "men lying with men" and Sodomite.  If you describe precisely the abominable practice, you will probably find yourself censored here.  But it is by describing precisely what is done that the abomination appears.

 

Fornication comes in many varieties, and it is a sin characteristic of heading to the Lake of Fire.

 

It doesn't matter what you call it.   Homosexuality is a sin.

 

Well think about it. The rhetoric uses is important.  If you get into arguing about homosexuality, the focus is likely to change to the right of people to love each other.  But when you get into the actual behavior of men lying with men, then the abomination appears.

 

That will happen no matter what term you use.  You are really making much ado about nothing.   It doesn't matter what you call it.  It is a sin.   "A rose by any other name..."

[EnochBethany]

 

 

 

IMHO:

I don't mean to insinuate that the poster of the topic meant to advance the sodomist agenda.  But I do call attention to the importance of the vocabulary we use.  The sodomist wants to use a certain vocabulary to advance his ends (gay & homophobe).  The vocabulary is important in the cultural war.  As to "homosexual," that is another confusing term, which should be avoided.  One should not oppose the idea that some men prefer the company of their own sex -- that is not an issue.  To keep the issue in proper focus requires Biblical terms.  The issue regarding men is "men lying with men" and behavior typical of the city of Sodom. 

 

 

To call them gay is a misnomer.

 

 

A couple of problems:  First off, simply because the homosexual community uses terms with the calculating goal of furthering a certain agenda, that does mean that everyone who uses those words is doing the same thing.  That is a false dichotomy.  On a forum such as this, when we use the term "gay" everyone understands that this term, for us, refers to two people, of the same sex, involved in a physical, i.e. sexual relationship.  Keeping the issue in proper "focus" does not require the strict use of biblical terms.  You don't get the option of determining what terms we have to use in a discussion and no Christian that I know of uses biblical terms exclusively when discussing any subject.  That makes no sense.  Not to mention that the repeated use of the term sodomy, sodomite or sodomist makes you appear to be a backwards hick.

 

We are not talking about "men preferring the company of their own sex."  Who knows what that means and the statement makes no sense in it's current form in relation to this discussion.  Sex between people of the same sex, whether they are men or women, is a sin in every single case.  Whether one uses the terms, "gay," "homosexual," or "same-sex" the assumption, from a biblical standpoint is that the root action of this relationship is sex. 

 

"A couple of problems:  First off, simply because the homosexual community uses terms with the calculating goal of furthering a certain agenda, that does mean that everyone who uses those words is doing the same thing."

 

The fact is the fact.  "Gay" is a positive term put on abominable activity.  I don't say that all who use "gay" have the intent of furthering the propaganda, but they are duped into so doing that.

 

 "On a forum such as this, when we use the term "gay" everyone understands that this term, for us, refers to two people, of the same sex, involved in a physical, i.e. sexual relationship."

 

But it also obscures the issue & puts a positive term on it.

 

 

"Keeping the issue in proper "focus" does not require the strict use of biblical terms."

 

The use of Biblical terms helps keep the issue in proper focus.  Hold to the Pattern of Sound Words (2 Timothy).

 

Yes, I have the option of asserting the truth about the terms used.  You are free to accept or reject what I say on this & all other issues.

 

Yes, it makes sense to use Biblical terms instead of pro-sin rhetoric.

 

"Not to mention that the repeated use of the term sodomy, sodomite or sodomist makes you appear to be a backwards hick."

 

Now you are insulting.  What make you think that insults commend the rationality of your discourse?

 

We are not talking about "men preferring the company of their own sex."

 

Yes, that connotation is read into "homosexuality."

 

"the assumption, from a biblical standpoint is that the root action of this relationship is sex."

 

But the adoption of the term "gay," came from no Biblical standpoint whatsoever.

 

Rethink your rhetoric, Bro.

 

 

Not so much, because I am not using "rhetoric."  And your approach could use some work.  

 

You do not have the ability, or the mandate, or the right to simply assign values to words simply because you think they have a certain meaning, to you.

 

To me, the words "gay" and "homosexual" have a decidedly negative connotation, so to use them is not being "pro-sin."  To use them is not furthering some gay agenda that you feel is being furthered by their use.  All those assertions have a name, and they are known as projection.  And they apply not at all when those behaviors are not being practiced on the other end.

 

I am quite well aware of what the gay agenda is and how it is furthered.  No one is putting positive terms on anything.  That is simply a value you keep trying to place on others.  It isn't accurate, and it isn't constructive.

 

The use of "backwards hick" was not meant as an insult.  Would I have wished to insult you, I would have done so with a great deal more finesse, or directness depending on the situation.

 

In my experience, anyone who was enamored with the frequent use of the word "sodomite" had some severe problems, and an extremely draconian vision of what we should do with it's practitioners.  Does this describe you?

 

The vocabulary used by proponents of this movement includes propagandistic rhetoric.

 

We all have problems.  But Christians, despite any problems, have this special ability to love neighbor as self.

The topic of this thread is  not me & you -- it is the topic.

Let's leave out the ad hominems and accusations.

 

I suggest you review my comments; eat the fish & spit out any bones.

[EnochBethany]

 

 

 

 

 

Humans are not capable of not committing sin.  So, what are the criteria for giving yourself to Christ but still sinning?  Anyone here who says a gay person should not get into the kingdom needs to cast the first stone – there is but one judge, he was sinless, and he is judging you as well…

 

We are not saying that.  God says that.  Everyone sins.  But there is a huge difference between making a mistake in judgement or a momentary weakness and in living a life of willful, habitual sin.  When people say that a person can be "gay" and still be "Christian," then they totally remove repentance from Christianity.  They discard it completely, meaning that you could now repetitively commit anything God calls a sin until the day you die with complete impunity, and more to the point, without repenting and turning away from it.

 

Homosexuality is a sin.  There is no credible debate, from a biblical standpoint, that it is not a sin, because the Bible states very clearly that it is a sin in both the Old and New Testament.  It doesn't have to repeat that it is a sin in every chapter of every book for those statements that it is a sin to have validity.  The expectation when one becomes a Christian is always that gross repetitive and willful sin will cease.  If one is committing a sin such as homosexuality or adultery over and over and over again, and saying it is perfectly acceptable to do so, they are not repentant, and they are not sorry for the sin. 

 

My bro, "homosexuality" is not a sin.  Neither does the Bible use such language.  Probably you & I don't disagree on the substance, but the vocabulary.  "Homosexual" confuses the issue.  Psychologists might call boys at a certain age homosexual, because they prefer to play with boys instead of with girls.  Preference of company is not the issue.  Loving (agape) persons of the same sex, is not the issue.  The proper terms are "men lying with men" and Sodomite.  If you describe precisely the abominable practice, you will probably find yourself censored here.  But it is by describing precisely what is done that the abomination appears.

 

Fornication comes in many varieties, and it is a sin characteristic of heading to the Lake of Fire.

 

It doesn't matter what you call it.   Homosexuality is a sin.

 

Well think about it. The rhetoric uses is important.  If you get into arguing about homosexuality, the focus is likely to change to the right of people to love each other.  But when you get into the actual behavior of men lying with men, then the abomination appears.

 

That will happen no matter what term you use.  You are really making much ado about nothing.   It doesn't matter what you call it.  It is a sin.   "A rose by any other name..."

 

Well, at this point we could check scripture on "calling things,"  to see if it makes a difference what people call things.   Ye Olde Verbal label.  I gave my opinion.  If ain't heresy if you disagree.  At least we agree on the substance of this issue, I think.