Featured Refusing Service II

That is a good and I might add honorable exit Rev.

 

It is. See my reply here to RevMitchell.

No. The directive was for involvement with the world, as Paul clearly stated in v. 10, saying that "I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world."

That's is truly misapplication of a passage. The Greek heterozugeo is translated "unequally yoked" or "bound together" as later editions of the NASB than 1992 translate it. The meaning is to not have fellowship -- i.e., association, communion, intimacy -- with an unbeliever. A business transaction does not qualify, under the guidelines of the Koine Greek language. That would be designated by the Greek pragmateuomai, translated "business," or meros, which is "trade." Doing business with an unbeliever is not fellowship or association on the scale Paul spoke of in 2 Corinthians 6:14.

As I've detailed in replying to the first two parts of your post, that is incorrect.

 

And who was he writing to when he said that?
To the Corinthian believers
In application then? Are you going to marry a lesbian anytime soon? How about recommend such a marriage to your children?
If not, why the verse of being unequally yoked?

The other application of the verse could be going into business, making that person your business partner. Are you planning on starting a business with someone who is gay? If not, why are you bringing 2Cor.6:14 into this conversation? What relevance does it have?
It is simply a red herring that has nothing to do with anyone here.

Paul distinguished between those inside the church and those without. I suggest you do the same. Those within the church assembly were to be judged that the church body remain pure. "For what have I to do with those that are without."
Those "on the outside of the church body," are those that we are to be reaching with the gospel. Paul mentions them:

1 Corinthians 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

These are the ones that you are to go to and to witness to. God has given to each of us "the ministry of reconciliation. Each of these need to be reconciled with God. It is our duty to give them the gospel that they might be reconciled to God. If you don't do it, who will?

 

Who was the woman in John chapter four that Jesus went to?
What kind of reputation did she have?
Jesus deliberately went through Samaria, deliberately sat at Jacob's well, deliberately went out of his way to talk to this woman.

He said (because he was God, and knows all things) "You have five husbands and the one you have is not your own."
But Christ was patient with her.
It seems as if you have no patience with any sinner.

 

I read through the thread Aaron. I read of your attitude. There is no need for the emotional response.
Do you know what it means to "love the sinner and hate the sin"?
What if God called you to have a ministry among the gay crowd. Would you obey him?

 

Oh.....that is mature.

 

Aaron, brother ... and I mean that sincerely --

As for your psychoanalysis of me, I assure you the most recent of the regular reviews of my sanity and personality required for my licensure have given me a clean bill of health. So while I appreciate your obvious concern, it is misplaced.

I'm not leading a "parade of sodomy." I'm advocating loving your neighbor, which as has been gently pointed out to you, is to this point a failing on your part. I've said repeatedly that I do not condone the sin, but neither, as so many, many do here -- far too many -- do I condemn the sinner. One has gone so far as to claim that those engaged in homosexual practice are beyond redemption. That is clearly an unbiblical, incorrect interpretation. It also spills over into attitude, which is even more unbiblical.

Note that throughout my discussions of this issue over the last several days, I've stated that we are free to refuse service to someone as long as we don't cite a specific aspect of their lifestyle, skin tone, faith (or lack thereof), national origin, or other facet of existence that can be even remotely construed as violating their Fourteenth Amendment rights. Anyone can refuse to serve anyone, just don't tell them it's because of something you don't personally like about them.

Gays are already protected by the U.S. Constitution from unreasonable treatment. There is no need to add the phrase "sexual orientation" to the Fourteenth for them to be covered by it. I would oppose such an effort. It is unnecessary. That does not mean they are not discriminated against, just as we are discriminated against for our faith. We seethe and cry out to God when it happens to us. Why would we expect them to react any differently when it happens to them? And why should we be the ones who place them in that position?

We shouldn't. The passages I've cited tell us that Paul didn't believe we should ever involve ourselves with making judgments about those outside the church. Inside the church regarding those living in any kind of sinful lifestyle, we most assuredly can deny the Lord's Supper, baptism, marriage rites, or even refuse to allow them to serve the church. Outside the church, we have a responsibility to be good witnesses, love our neighbor, speak the truth in love, and not act like the world.

Most of what I've seen on this thread today is "of the world." We should be ashamed.

 

Psa 139:21-22 Do not I hate them, O Lord that hate thee? And am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with a perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. Remember David was a man after Gods own heart.

 

That's David speaking, not God. One, this passage speaks of war, not sexual sin. Two, David was as wrong as are those on this thread claiming his enemies are beyond redemption.

David quickly acknowledged his sin in vv. 23, 24:

Psalm 139, NASB
23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Try me and know my anxious thoughts;
24 And see if there be any hurtful way in me,
And lead me in the everlasting way. ​

Wrong-headed words, followed by repentance. Good example for all of us.

 

CONTEXT:
Psalms 139:19 Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men.
20 For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain.

Spurgeon's, Treasury of David, he identifies these men, as men of war, not as homosexuals and lesbians.
Please don't take Scripture out of context trying to prove your point.

 

You cannot separate the sin from the sinner, a sinner does what he does because of who he is, a sinner. Math 15:16-19 Are ye also without understanding? Do ye not yet understand that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? But those things which proceeded out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications thefts, false witness, blasphemies.

 

11 Tim 3:16 Do you believe the scripture is inspired by the God ? Would not David have erased these verses if he was not inspired to write them as you say he repented of what he said ?

 

Do you need to be reminded that you are too a sinner? Seems like it.

 

All through the four gospels Christ refers to the lost as sinners. I know the that Christians do refer to themselves as sinners saved by grace but Christ did make a distinction between saved and lost in the four gospels by the word sinner.

 

1 Timothy 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.