Naming the Name of Christ

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE

Actually my view has been in complete with the Bible and you have already conceded that I my position is correct. Which is the platform upon which everything else I have said, rests. Again, you have basically affirmed the foundation of everything else I have said.

Basicaly I've affirmed the foundation that we are in agreement on. I've not affirmed the rest of the foundation you are building off of. Are you saying that the fact that only repentace (a message given by the anointed or God) leads to salvation (by faith) is your only foundation on which you build?

It is the only fondation I am operating from for the purposes of this thread.

Furthermore, you are operating from a skewed understanding of repentance. Repentance, for the purpose of this thread and as defined by the Bible, is a repsonse to the Gospel. It is a response to the message, not the message itself. You have a bad habit of arguing from your own subjective definitions.

Oh, I didn't know that you are anointed and thereby speaking for every professing believer as judge. And no I don't think you are speaking or teaching from an anointing.

I never said I was. Honestly, I dont even know why you bring up the issue anointing anyway. It really doesn't belong in this thread.

What I'm saying is that those who seem to have not repented by the observance of their lifestlye (homesexual) alone perhaps didn't really receive the message from God and His anointed and if they had received a message from the IC (surely God's message comes forth somewhere from there) they then might have recived it only in part and not whole.

Actually, you need to go back and study the previous posts being made before you jumped in here. It is clear that you don't have a very good grasp on the issue being discussed.

What we are discussing are those who seek to redefine the Bible's definition sin. When they read that homosexuality is an abomination to God, their response is to claim that those parts of the Bible are a mistranslation or were added by errant scribes, or are no longer relevant and binding upon the believer. They seek to portray homosexuality as a normal, acceptable and valid lifestyle and completely harmonious with an expression of faith in Christ. I am in conflict with the view that a person can live as a practicing homosexual and still be a true follower of Christ.

BUT you are not correct about where every person finds themselves after having receivced 'the message' from somewhere (which alot of the time is from the IC) which is where I was speaking from the whole time.

Again, I have not been talking about any of that so as I said, you are off in la-la land on some issue of your own making. You are not on the same page with me. I am not talking about an institutionlized church or any of that. Please confine your responses to the issue at hand.

If we agree here then really what's the argumernt?

Well I don't know, as you decided to join the thread and started in on me about some nonsense about a message from the "instutionalized church" and all that. You obviously took issue with something I said and frankly don't appear to know what you are talking about.

I guess my initial disagreement with you is your objection to the view that it is not our job to show a homosexual that his lifestyle is a sin BEFORE he is saved.

[Scarletprayers]

Well I'm totally confused now........................

[firehill]

What we are discussing are those who seek to redefine the Bible's definition sin. When they read that homosexuality is an abomination to God, their response is to claim that those parts of the Bible are a mistranslation or were added by errant scribes, or are no longer relevant and binding upon the believer. They seek to portray homosexuality as a normal, acceptable and valid lifestyle and completely harmonious with an expression of faith in Christ. I am in conflict with the view that a person can live as a practicing homosexual and still be a true follower of Christ.

I see. I'm gonna have to go back and read the entire thread. I know that when I read most of the thread some days ago that I agreed with both points made by Fiosh and agreed with some of what you were saying. Yes, a claim that the biblie is mistranslated or that someone added to it etc is a false view in response to where the bible speaks on the issue.

[Guest shiloh357]

Well I'm totally confused now........................

Why are you confused?

[Fiosh]

Hi there, Shiloh......and all the rest of you beautiful people.

Let me clarify my position; you seem to have added to it. This is from my original post:

********************************************************************************

Consider I Timothy 1:12-16:

12 I am grateful to him who has strengthened me, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he considered me trustworthy in appointing me to the ministry.

13 I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and an arrogant man, but I have been mercifully treated because I acted out of ignorance in my unbelief.

14 Indeed, the grace of our Lord has been abundant, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.

15 This saying is trustworthy and deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. Of these I am the foremost.

16 But for that reason I was mercifully treated, so that in me, as the foremost, Christ Jesus might display all his patience as an example for those who would come to believe in him for everlasting life.

(Please forgive the bolding, it's only for the purpose of discussion.)

Point #1 - Paul uses the present tense in verse 15........"I am the foremost".

Point #2 - Paul states that he was treated mercifully because he "acted out of ignorance". (verse 13)

Point #3 - Jesus is amazingly patient with sinners (verse 16)

Yes, I do know several Christians who are practicing homosexuals. They love Jesus Christ and accept Him as Lord and Saviour. From what I know and observe, they are in denial of their sin--------not rebellion.

Let's face it, we ALL try to rationalize and justify our particular weaknesses.

If a homosexual admits that the homosexual lifestyle is sinful, and he/she engages in it willingly and with no desire to change. Then, yeah, I agree, they cannot also be Christian.

But, if a homosexual fails to see that their lifestyle is sinful, they are as Christian as any of us.

Will God eventually open their eyes and convict them of their sin? I believe so. He's done it to me several times about sin in my own life.

***************************************************************************

Now here's what I DID NOT say:

1. I DID NOT say that we should not teach the truth to a practicing h, showing them from Scripture that h is sin

2. I DID NOT say that they should be allowed to participate in ministry in the Church

3. I DID NOT say they they should be told their lifestyle is ok, and be "coddled" into a false sense of well-being

4. I DID NOT even say that they should be welcomed into a Church body as a member in full communion with the rest of the congregation.

*******************************************************************************

Shiloh, even you conceded the point that a h who repents but backslides into the practice again can still be a Christian.

All I'm saying is that an h who does not yet see that the lifestyle is sin can be a Christian.

God's word shows us His mercy on those who do not see their sin. This is not emotional......it is Scriptural.

"Father forgive them, for they know not what they do"

"I have been mercifully treated because I acted out of ignorance in my unbelief. "

"If you were blind, you would have no sin"

*********************************************************************

Do not put words in my mouth. And do not throw up straw men just so you can try to look like you are making points.

Stick to arguing with what I'm actually saying. [unless, of course, you are talking to someone else, but I guess that's understood. ]

Have you ever heard of "Every Man's Battle"? It's a book and also a workshop. It is widely attended---- so I hear from the author's radio show---- by pastors who struggle with porn addiction. It stands to reason that there are also many out there addicted to porn, but have not yet admitted their sin.

Admitting your problem is always the first step to recovery.

Hypothetical situation: Pastor Bob accepted Jesus when he was 18. He studied in seminary for many years and eventually achieved his Doctor of Divinity. He's got his own church and loves his congregation, and loves the Lord. There is nothing he enjoys more than preparing his weekly sermon.

One day he was sitting at his computer working on his sermon when he accidentally typed in the wrong address and up popped a porn site. He quickly closed it. Then, thinking, "what will a quick look hurt?" , he opens it again and checks it out for the educational value, of course.

The next week, he decides to take another look. Then follows a link to another site..........then another..........All the while telling himself, "I'm not hurting anyone", etc. It soon becomes a habit-----then an addiction.

There is absolutely no doubt that the second he opened that first site, the Holy Spirit began convicting him. But he pushed it aside; he didn't want to hear it. It may be a month or several months, or a year. But the Holy Spirit will bring him to the point of conviction where he will KNOW it is sin, and NEED to choose.

While Pastor Bob is viewing porn and seeing nothing sinful about it, is he a Christian?

Peace,

Fiosh

[Guest shiloh357]

Now here's what I DID NOT say:

1. I DID NOT say that we should not teach the truth to a practicing h, showing them from Scripture that h is sin

2. I DID NOT say that they should be allowed to participate in ministry in the Church

3. I DID NOT say they they should be told their lifestyle is ok, and be "coddled" into a false sense of well-being

4. I DID NOT even say that they should be welcomed into a Church body as a member in full communion with the rest of the congregation.

I don't believe attributed all of that to you, although some of it would be an accurate representation of where your ideas will lead.

I am operating from the inevitable end result of your false teaching. You are simply unwilling deal with this realistically and biblically. If you accept someone as a full Christian while they are continuing to live in the homosexual lifestyle under the belief that is homosexual lifestyle is not sinful, you are only reinforcing that belief. You will have a harder time convincing him that homosexuals cannot be ordained or participate as a full member in the Church. If he is "just as Christian as you and I" as you stated earlier, then you lack the moral ground to forbid him the full rights and privileges of you and I.

Sinners must be brought to a place of repentance. Jesus, Himself said that he came to call sinners to repentance. Repentance always proceeds salvation. Turning to Christ for salvation means to turn from sin.

Shiloh, even you conceded the point that a h who repents but backslides into the practice again can still be a Christian.

No, I said that a person who has repented of homosexuality and realizes it is sin, but continues to struggle with it is not the person about whom my remarks are directed. I said I was not challenging the faith of a Christian who is still struggling with his former lifestyle.

All I'm saying is that an h who does not yet see that the lifestyle is sin can be a Christian.

All I am saying on the authority of the Word of God is that you are dead wrong. He can mentally assent to certain parts of the Christian "religion," but he is not a brother in Christ and is not true Christian and will go to hell if he dies while practicing homosexuality.

Do not put words in my mouth. And do not throw up straw men just so you can try to look like you are making points.

Stick to arguing with what I'm actually saying.

I am arguing what you are saying. You simply do not know how to tell when I am addressing your arguments and those of others. I have not erected any strawmen. You are just willing to look at where your ideas lead.

While Pastor Bob is viewing porn and seeing nothing sinful about it, is he a Christian?

1. Your analogy is completely dissimilar to the poarticular situation I am addressing in this thread. We are not talking about someone with an "addiction." We are talking about someone who participates in a sin that God has called abomnible and refusing to accept God's moral authority on the issue.

2. You don't even know how to run a good analogy because in your analogy, Pastor Bob does not try to convince himself that it is not a sin; only that it is not hurting anyone else. Your last sentence is tries to operate from a false assumption that thinking that a particular action is excusable on the grounds that it is not hurting anyone else is the same thinking it is not sin. That assumption would be false and pretty much turns your analogy into a trainwreck.

My analogy was entirely more accurate and actually relevant to the subject at hand. You need to address the points I raised there.

God's word shows us His mercy on those who do not see their sin. This is not emotional......it is Scriptural.

"Father forgive them, for they know not what they do"

"I have been mercifully treated because I acted out of ignorance in my unbelief. "

"If you were blind, you would have no sin"

The difference is that I am not addressing what a person does in ignorance. Rather, I am addressing what a person is doing in the fulll knowledge that God has deemed it a sin and an abomination, but rejecting that because he believes he can operate from a higher moral standard than God does. He refuses to accept God judgment of the matter. Therefore, it is not a case of ignorance, but a case of open rebellion.

[eric]

Seeing that this post is directed, mainly to Shiloh, I will let him be the first to respond, but I will give my take on it later.

e.

[Fiosh]

Shiloh,

Please feel free to shred my argument all you want, but the personal insults are un-becoming and will be reported.

ex. ": Maybe you should take some reading comprehension courses so you canlearn how to tell when I am addressing the comments of others vs. yours."

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh,

Please feel free to shred my argument all you want, but the personal insults are un-becoming and will be reported.

Well Fiosh, that is pretty light compared to my true posture toward the bad teachings and "theology" you are promoting with respect to homosexuals. Trust me, I am extending far more charity toward your views than they deserve. And yes, so far you are not very good at telling when I was addressing you vs. others. I will delete remark, but feel free to report it if you like.

[firehill]

So can I it deduced, Shilo based on what you are saying that every single person who comes to repentence has full knowledge of all things that are sinful? Can I conclude from what you are saying that once one comes to repentence and accepts the gospel of Christ that they then are aware of all the sin that they are guilty of?