Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Homosexuality "Fact Checker" for Born-again Christians
The Christian Post ^ | November 1, 2013 | James R. Aist

Posted on 11/02/2013 7:24:32 AM PDT by James R. Aist

I believe that it is incumbent upon born-again Christians to become well-informed about homosexuality, even though this is not a topic that is either enjoyable or entertaining to deal with. To help you get an idea of how well-informed you are, or are not, about homosexuality, I have developed this quick and easy–to-use “Fact Checker”. It will not only show you your current level of knowledge of the facts and truth about homosexuality, but it will also point you to key resources that will correct any misperceptions that you may have picked up from the liberal media or well-meaning, albeit misinformed, friends, relatives or co-workers.

(Excerpt) Read more at ipost.christianpost.com ...


TOPICS: Moral Issues; Religion & Culture; Religion & Science; Theology
KEYWORDS: bornagain; christians; gayagenda; homosexual; homosexualagenda; lesbian
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last
Have you taken this homosexuality fact-checker quiz yet? Try it...you'll like it.
1 posted on 11/02/2013 7:24:32 AM PDT by James R. Aist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

Conveniently located on your blog.


2 posted on 11/02/2013 7:26:44 AM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

Over 80% of homosexuals were sexually abused as children.

What else do you need to know when arguing against the “born gay” nonsense?


3 posted on 11/02/2013 7:36:31 AM PDT by G Larry (Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Psalms 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

“The Bible does not condemn “same-sex attractions” as sin.”

If Christ said that to lust after a woman is to commit adultery with her in your heart was a sin, is there a point that a “same sex attraction” also becomes sin, even if the “act” never occurs? Is a simple opposite sex attraction also a sin, or at what point does that attraction become pure lust(and therefore sin)?


4 posted on 11/02/2013 7:36:59 AM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
If Christ said that to lust after a woman is to commit adultery with her in your heart was a sin,

What you describe in that sentence is indeed sin. But that is not the same as opposite-sex attraction. Attraction is not the problem, opposite or same. It is what the individual does with that attraction.

5 posted on 11/02/2013 7:41:35 AM PDT by newheart (The worst thing the Left ever did was to convince the world it was not a religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

I would say that merely being sexually attracted to members of the same sex is a temptation, not a sin. It leads to sin when one acts on the temptation through lust and/or physical acts.


6 posted on 11/02/2013 7:45:46 AM PDT by James R. Aist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist
I read the article: good stuff. Thanks for putting it up.

Homo/bi/a-sexuality is a choice as we were created heterosexual.
God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.

7 posted on 11/02/2013 7:46:18 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

Good point.


8 posted on 11/02/2013 7:46:21 AM PDT by James R. Aist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

You’re welcome. I trust it was informative.


9 posted on 11/02/2013 7:47:59 AM PDT by James R. Aist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

took it and find I agree with most—but not all of his answers. I remain convinced one cannot be born again Christian (born anew/born from above) and claim equally to be homosexual for one is dead to the world as signified in baptism and born anew —a new creation the old things are passed away.But it may all just be a question of semantics.


10 posted on 11/02/2013 7:48:13 AM PDT by Robert Burkholder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

How about a fact checker on IF this sect called ‘born again’ is Biblical?


11 posted on 11/02/2013 7:55:32 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

Yes, there is the point that you are going down the wrong path, and yes, IYRC, at communion you join in the prayer to confess that your thoughts and desires have been sinful. At least in the Catholic & Episcopalian Communion prayers, anyways.


12 posted on 11/02/2013 8:08:47 AM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist
I would say that merely being sexually attracted to members of the same sex is a temptation, not a sin. It leads to sin when one acts on the temptation through lust and/or physical acts.

But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Matthew 5:28 (New American Standard Version, 1995)

No... Christ says that merely looking at a woman and experiencing desire is equivalent to committing adultery with her - if not de facto, then at least in "one's heart."

Thus, it is not necessary to commit any overt act - experiencing "lust" (sexual desire) is sufficient to speak of "sin."

Regards,

13 posted on 11/02/2013 8:16:32 AM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

Many people are attributing today’s political climate vis-a-vis Christian bashing as being anti-Christian. That’s not the point nor the objective.

The eventual goal is to bring society to the moral tipping point and utterly destroy and replace religious based moral aptitude with government created moral turpitude.

Think about this: Increasing population, diminishing resources. What’s the eventual outcome? When does the inflection occur? Who will suffer? Who will prosper?


14 posted on 11/02/2013 8:27:35 AM PDT by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

Try KJV

But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Shows intent


15 posted on 11/02/2013 8:27:37 AM PDT by Scrambler Bob ( Concerning bo -- that refers to the president. If I capitalize it, I mean the dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

That’s your interpretation.


16 posted on 11/02/2013 8:28:18 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Obamacare: You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Scrambler Bob

The KJV is not the entire Bible as it was at the beginning. It has been added to and subtracted from by Luther, and then the KJ followed.


17 posted on 11/02/2013 8:43:47 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Jesus said (twice)that to be “born again” is not an option for salvation; it is an absolute requirement (John 3:1-8). Of course, we are free to have our own contrary opinions.


18 posted on 11/02/2013 8:48:34 AM PDT by James R. Aist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Robert Burkholder

Have we remained completely free of sin since we were born again and justified? Or, are we being sanctified as we walk out our salvation with fear and trembling? Are we really any different in that regard from one whose sins include homosexuality?


19 posted on 11/02/2013 8:56:33 AM PDT by James R. Aist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

“sect”?


20 posted on 11/02/2013 8:59:32 AM PDT by DungeonMaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Somebody once said “ye must be born again,” can’t quite put my finger on it but I think is was somebody important.


21 posted on 11/02/2013 9:13:29 AM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

Over 80% of homosexuals were sexually abused as children.


That is something we will never know because it is always the excuse of any problem, it is always the fault of some one else.


22 posted on 11/02/2013 9:25:12 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek; All

Is the first “warmth of feeling” towards an attractive woman or man(same sex or opposite sex) the sin or does sin occur when one mentally starts to “peel off their clothes”?

I think if one has a good inner thought life, that first rush of ‘warmth’ should be a warning that “sin is at the door” and that one should “change the subject” mentally immediately!


23 posted on 11/02/2013 9:38:48 AM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist
Great post on an important topic.

I would much rather read something like this than the soul rotting garbage spewed out by the mass media.

Great set of links too! Here is an example of one that I enjoyed.

rethinkingtheology - Links Between Homosexuality and Pedophilia

Thank you for taking the time to share this excellent alternative to the poison that is typically served up by our minders.
24 posted on 11/02/2013 9:46:03 AM PDT by wizkid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist
This is better than I thought it would be. Don't know about this one, though:

God gives “same-sex attractions” to some people, making them homosexual.

That's a theological assertion, not a biological one. You can't disprove it by arguing that homosexual attraction isn't innate or hereditary (indeed, innate and hereditary aren't quite the same thing either, as all the recent talk about epigenetics indicates).

In any case, you can't reduce God to DNA. When people say God did something, they aren't necessarily saying that it's an unavoidable result of something material that science can identify or explain.

25 posted on 11/02/2013 9:59:06 AM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Missed my point. I used KJ as close to the Greek. Let's look at the Greek -- As πρὸςτό with the infinitive (e.g. Matthew 6:1), primarily denotes purpose; this may be equivalent to "looketh in order that he may lust, looketh to stimulate his ... The verb form denotes lustful purpose, as opposed to just 'looking'.
26 posted on 11/02/2013 10:09:38 AM PDT by Scrambler Bob ( Concerning bo -- that refers to the president. If I capitalize it, I mean the dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

The only thing i can think of with out first looking up scripture is that God destroyed two cities because of men lusting after each other, i do not see any scripture of this happening because of a man and woman lusting after each other even though that has been the case since Adam and Eve.

If there were no lust between a man and woman how could we expect to multiply?

So, no i do not believe it is the same thing.

Homosexuality is an abomination, it is a sin against nature,
Just the same as worshiping idols, can anyone worship idols and believe in God at the same time?

It is not the homosexuals that bother many people, it is their Agenda which separate them from God.


27 posted on 11/02/2013 10:16:25 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newheart

What you describe in that sentence is indeed sin. But that is not the same as opposite-sex attraction. Attraction is not the problem, opposite or same. It is what the individual does with that attraction.


Jesus said if a man lusts after a woman in his heart he has already committed adultery.

Why would,nt it also apply to another of the same sex?


28 posted on 11/02/2013 10:21:54 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

Homo/bi/a-sexuality is a choice as we were created heterosexual.
God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.


Exactly.


29 posted on 11/02/2013 10:24:07 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

The KJV is not the entire Bible as it was at the beginning. It has been added to and subtracted from by Luther, and then the KJ followed.


You are right, Bibles which changes some meanings brings in many millions of dollars to some one so i think we will see many more different translations.


30 posted on 11/02/2013 10:36:05 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

Thus, it is not necessary to commit any overt act - experiencing “lust” (sexual desire) is sufficient to speak of “sin.”


Well yes but the American standard is not the only version and even though the KJV says it too but there must be one that says it differently... sarc.


31 posted on 11/02/2013 10:41:58 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist

I certainly am not free from sin— Neither am I self Identified as homosexual. I am born anew—and sanctified by the blood of Jesus Christ.And when I sin— I do repent but do not continue in sin, as does one who identifies him/ her self as homosexual.


32 posted on 11/02/2013 12:06:27 PM PDT by Robert Burkholder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ravenwolf
Why would,nt it also apply to another of the same sex?

Of course it would apply. The problem is that equating attraction with lust is a category error. The kind of thing that leads to a complete denial of the worth of the human body (ala gnosticism). It is a profoundly Islamic concept that leads to things like treatment of women like a necessary evil.

You are attracted to food but the sin comes in what you do with that attraction. If it turns into an obsession and you fixate on cheeseburgers you have sinned. But simply because a cheeseburger whets your appetite it does not man you have sinned.

God created men and women and and all things beautiful. I can say that both Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are physically attractive human beings without doing anything more than recognizing God's handiwork. But if I were to take that to the next level via lust (toward either of them), I would be sinning.

33 posted on 11/02/2013 12:46:57 PM PDT by newheart (The worst thing the Left ever did was to convince the world it was not a religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Before his conversion Saul of Tarsus said the same thing about “The Way.” As a matter of fact, The Way is made up of “born from above” regenerated in the Blood of Christ believers. Don’t take my word for it examine Acts and the epistles.


34 posted on 11/02/2013 1:11:44 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Morpheus2009

Nancy Pelosi keeps getting communion and her public statements on killing babies in the womb are clear. Yet priests keep giving her communion.


35 posted on 11/02/2013 1:14:38 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Scrambler Bob

It’s OK to admire God’s handiwork but not to want to shoplift it.


36 posted on 11/02/2013 1:14:44 PM PDT by AppyPappy (Obama: What did I not know and when did I not know it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek
But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Matthew 5:28 (New American Standard Version, 1995) No... Christ says that merely looking at a woman and experiencing desire is equivalent to committing adultery with her - if not de facto, then at least in "one's heart." Thus, it is not necessary to commit any overt act - experiencing "lust" (sexual desire) is sufficient to speak of "sin."

I believe you are most correct. What depraved creatures of flesh are we! But there is Hope indeed! Jesus Christ!

37 posted on 11/02/2013 1:25:12 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Religion Moderator
The KJV is not the entire Bible as it was at the beginning. It has been added to and subtracted from by Luther, and then the KJ followed.

LOL, you do try don't you? While you are into changing things around in the Bible, you may want to take a look at the DRA (Roman Catholic Bible) vs. all those Prot versions when it comes to Genesis 3:15:

Here is the DRA Roman Catholic version of Genesis 3:15:

15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Here is the KJV of Genesis 3:15:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Who is tampering with Scriptures?

What INSPIRED Scriptures did the Prots throw out? Please don't go down the Apocrypha rabbit hole. That has been addressed many times.

Finally what does the verse quoted by the gentlemen above have to do with Luther or the Reformers. Is it your claim that the verse quoted on lust is not found in Prot Bibles or RC Bibles? Or did you just have a rainy afternoon wanting to stir the pot up a bit?

I will note, constantly changing the subject and dragging old arguments into new threads is a troll technique.

I love our 1st Amendment rights, but you continuously yell "FIRE" on every RF thread.

38 posted on 11/02/2013 1:49:14 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist
James you may not be privy to the pendantic Roman Catholic argument that the original Greek does not say "born-again" but has "born from above." For you and me, there is apparently no difference even though most scholars say "born-again" is the most accurate translation to English. Apparently, the RC apologetics sites all have this snippet to use in forums to trollfully interdict the actual subject.

I might note that our good Roman Catholic friends need to look at their DRA Bible for this is what it says for John 3:3:

3 Jesus answered, and said to him: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Even in their NABRE the footnote from John 3:3 says either term can be used but the commentary writer prefers the use of "from above."

So you have stumbled on a petty, ignorant argument their own church in their own Bibles don't argue.

39 posted on 11/02/2013 2:01:07 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: James R. Aist; Robert Burkholder
Have we remained completely free of sin since we were born again and justified? Or, are we being sanctified as we walk out our salvation with fear and trembling? Are we really any different in that regard from one whose sins include homosexuality?

I fully understand what you AND Robert are saying. Let's shift to a different kind of lust. How about the repentant regenerated former adulterer. If he is continuously having sex in this mind with the pastor's wife, that dude is sinning big time. We are told in Romans 8 that God The Father continues to conform us to the image of His Son. That means transforming our minds. Will this corruptable flesh ever be perfect--no, only when He replaces the corruptable with the incorruptable at Resurrection.

So if a homosexual who is repentant and saved continues to have sex with the same sex in his mind, then he or she really needs to examine themselves as Peter and Paul tell us to do. I think that is what Robert is alluding to, but don't know for sure.

40 posted on 11/02/2013 2:09:23 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DungeonMaster
“sect”?

Yeah, LOL you picked up on that troll remark too huh? Just the ever so cheerful and charitable Roman Catholics pooping on threads we dirty nasty Prots populate. I wonder if they run in synagogues yell "Hitler" and run out.

41 posted on 11/02/2013 2:12:28 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

I really think Jesus Christ was being brutally honest in the “lust in your heart” discourse. The honesty is there is not one human man born of the seed of Adam that has not violated this standard. Guilty as charged here! Yes probably a multiple offender when I was a teenager. That everyone has this sin in their hearts is no excuse though as we know from the Law. So all have sinned. We have seen that in the Bible too. Again that does not mean, “oh well I am doomed to repeat this because I am human so...”

No Jesus told everyone that the standard for entering the Kingdom of God was “to be perfect as the Father in Heaven is Perfect.” There you have it.

Jesus Christ also gave solutions to avoid hell and enter the Kingdom by cutting off the body parts that prevented us from being perfect. Mind you if I took that command literally I would not be able to type right now, nor would I see the keyboard, nor would I have a brain or heart. I would have casted them all off to gain the Kingdom. As a matter of fact if we are all honest none of us would have a whole body.

But the above is what happens, especially within some religions within Christendom, when we don’t follow the exact steps of the ministry of Jesus Christ on earth. His ministry ends at the foot of the Cross where sin is dealt with, and the promise of life everlasting begins with His Resurrection.

So if we take the Words of Christ and ministry of Christ and fail to see them within the Light of the Cross and Empty Tomb, we are left with a Sinai II message which is the Law. And with the Law and breaking it comes the Wrath of God. With the Cross and Empty Tomb comes deliverance and everlasting joy.


42 posted on 11/02/2013 2:28:56 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Scrambler Bob
"Missed my point. I used KJ as close to the Greek. Let's look at the Greek -- As πρὸςτό with the infinitive (e.g. Matthew 6:1), primarily denotes purpose; this may be equivalent to "looketh in order that he may lust, looketh to stimulate his ... The verb form denotes lustful purpose, as opposed to just 'looking'."

Sorry Bob but it seems you replied to one of the resident RC trolls that come to Evangelical threads to spew the hatred of Rome against other Christians.

43 posted on 11/02/2013 2:32:15 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ravenwolf

“You are right, Bibles which changes some meanings brings in many millions of dollars to some one so i think we will see many more different translations.”

The DRA is a perfect example of changing meanings.


44 posted on 11/02/2013 2:40:17 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ravenwolf

The Bible versions out there that are not literal translations usually obscure the most.


45 posted on 11/02/2013 2:42:02 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: newheart

Of course it would apply. The problem is that equating attraction with lust is a category error


27
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.


So maybe you can explain to me the point of what Jesus said.


46 posted on 11/02/2013 3:04:32 PM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

The DRA is a perfect example of changing meanings.


I am not familiar with that one, but even the ones which mean well can change the whole concept of the scripture.


47 posted on 11/02/2013 3:08:00 PM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

The Bible versions out there that are not literal translations usually obscure the most.


You are right, the living bible for instance.


48 posted on 11/02/2013 3:09:59 PM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: newheart

God created men and women and and all things beautiful. I can say that both Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are physically attractive human beings without doing anything more than recognizing God’s handiwork


P.S i will just say that i believe this conservation had a little more to do with it than simply thinking some one is attractive.

I don,t know who those people are but yes, just thinking some one is attractive is not lust.


49 posted on 11/02/2013 3:20:39 PM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

Lusting and attraction aren’t the same thing. If I find a woman in the office attractive, but I take that thought captive to the obedience of Christ I haven’t sinned.

If I dwell on that attraction, if I take opportunities to watch her walk by, if I review her body in my mind at night then I have lusted for her.

The Greek word for lust in Matthew 5 is epithumeo and means to covet, desire, to long for.

I’ve had a lot of personal experience with lust. It is indeed a sin and it corrupts the heart.


50 posted on 11/02/2013 3:22:31 PM PDT by gitmo ( If your theology doesn't become your biography it's useless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson