Posted on 09/09/2009 5:41:46 AM PDT by fwdude
Four billboards along Interstate 30 are sparking a debate over whether gays should be welcomed at local churches. A coalition of five churches that are part of a larger congregation of prodominatly gay Christians have put up four billboards on I-30 between Grand Prairie and Fort Worth with messages urging Christians to accept gays. One billboard reads "The early church welcomed a gay man" and another reads, "Would Jesus discriminate."
Reverend Colleen Darraugh with the Metropolitan Community Church of Greater Dallas tells CBS-11 exclusively they've been the target of controversy since the billboards went up last week.
"There are people who have told us to re-read our bible, which is the very question we're asking others to do. We've had people say how dare you take the name of God in vein," Darraugh said. The billboards will be up through the end of the month.
(Excerpt) Read more at krld.com ...
It doesn't matter if they were born that way or not, it is no excuse for continuing the behavior.
Most men I would argue are not born with the desire to be with only one woman for life, yet most stay true to their wives and thus follow God's commands. If I can stay true to my wife, they can resist the urge to dirty their peckers.
Matt 5:18 (red letters)
“I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished”
I was replying to the poster who cited Leviticus. Homosexuals claim that the Old Testament no longer applies. They cannot make that same argument regarding Romans 1:18-32.
They are probably referencing I Cor 6:9-11 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."
He did every day, and we do too. Discrimination at the supermarket means I don't buy rotten meat, moldy fruit or stale bread...it is the simple act of determining good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, Godly vs. unGodly. But while Christ judged the Sin, he never damned the sinner. He loved everyone, just as God does. And if I loved someone that much, and they were doing something stupid that might kill them, it would be my responsibility as a friend to warn them.
The call of "Judge not, lest ye be judged" is usually taken out of context...the Pharisees were going to stone someone to death for the very sin most of them had committed. It might be better said, "Judge in the way you want to be judged." Where I have shortcomings before God, I want them rooted out lovingly, with kindness and care, so I can be more like what God wants me to be, and so that the things that seem right to me but not to God won't ruin me in the long-run. This kind of loving judgment, that judges a man's "fruit" but doesn't damn him as a cursed failure, is what Christ gave those around him, and as Christians, what we should emulate.
Use of the term “a” gay man seems as though it’s referring to a specific individual.
It has us scratching our heads while leafing through the book of Acts.
You too seem to have missed the word “ostensibly” in my original post.
5 When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6 "Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering." 7 Jesus said to him, "I will go and heal him." 8 The centurion replied, "Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go,' and he goes; and that one, 'Come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it." 10 When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11 I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 13 Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! It will be done just as you believed it would." And his servant was healed at that very hour.
It would be an understatement to say that it is a reach to interpret the above as they would have us interpret it.
Christ said he didn't come to overturn the scriptures, but to fulfill them. The Old Testament is REPLETE with invectives against homosexuality.
This is interesting as last night there was a history channel special on Sodom and Gomorrah with extracted discussions from various Biblical “scholars” who interpreted the Old Testament events relating to that destruction as due to “unknown” sins or perhaps due to a violation of the laws of charity and had nothing to do with homosexuality. They went on to note that excavations at Sodom and Gomorrah provided no proof of any sexual aberrations !!!!! Finally, they noted that the numerous salt deposits there were the rationale behind the story of Lot's Wife and the entire narrative may have been based on much later views of the destruction site and salt deposits.
Interesting.
My guess is that if they found numerous male skeletons engaged in acts of sodomy and a pillar of salt around a female skeleton with a Canaanite inscription that said “Lot's Wife” they would find some other excuse to justify their contention that buggery is fine and normal.
And that's the part they seem to be ignoring. As another poster put it ... sinners are always welcome, but the sin is not.
By that you mean that
liberals believe that Jesus abolished the law?
I’ve run into this before, as well. But mostly, they just discount the authority of the Bible as a whole.
I wonder when the Christian wife-swapping community will start advertising?
Well said.
“No, but he cannot have a relationship with an imperfect person, God demands perfection and that includes being sexually pure.”
Huh?
Have you ever read a bible?
Not a single person that God had a relationship with was perfect, except His Son.
Don't worry about that we know they are in there. I know lots of scripture and sometimes I don't remember where it's at either but I know it's in there somewhere.
We are made perfect by the grace of God as our sins are washed away by the blood of Christ.
When I said “ostensibly” I meant that not everyone realizes that the laws laid out for the Jews in the wilderness do apply to all people, though some are more applicable than others (most Christians do not maintain a Kosher diet, nor do they seem to be required to, as evidenced by Peter’s dream of the great net).
Yes, liberals in general discount the authority of the Bible, but in this case, I’m wondering (mostly rhetorically) how a gay “church” can legitimately claim to teach the Bible. They can’t outright discount the authority of the Bible, or they wouldn’t bother showing up. They must, then, discount only some sections. But how to determine which ones? If some parts don’t apply, might other parts also not apply, and if so, where is the line drawn? Just as God created people with homosexual tendencies, He also created people with sociopathic tendencies. Are we then to permit those people to exercise their proclivities because who are we to judge their lifestyles?
Possible, but that is rather generic, don’t you think? And the tense is past. “Were” is the relevant verb.
No, the way I read it, because these gays aren’t actually looking to repent and cease practicing their vice, is that they are referring to an active gay man.
I once heard a theory that St. Paul was gay. However, as he wrote the passage you gave, it seems unlikely to me. And, if so, what would it matter? Paul was a sinner, same as the rest of us. And obviously, he had repented.
There can be no such thing. An unrepentant blasphemous sinner openly mocking Gods commandments isn't a "Christian".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.