-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Sexual immorality
- Thread starter Brother Shane
- Start date
menageriekeeper
Active Member
What he burned was a city full of folks who refused to repent of their evil ways. Sodomy was just one example of how evil they were.
I think that we forget that Romans chapter one not only tells us how bad homosexuality is, but also just how one gets into that condition. Instead of starting in verse 26 of this chapter we need to start back in verse 23(the how verse): "And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherfor God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts."
The sin wasn't and isn't just homosexuality. Homosexuality stems from idol worship. Back in the days of Sodom sex was widely practiced as part of the worship of those idol. Today we don't worship idols made of stone and such as they did then. Instead, we worship a perfect body(think Hollywood), money, and so on. This then leads to God "giving us up" to our own devices including homosexuality and after that the list of things in verses 29-32. The first sin and the worst is not worshipping God.
I think that we forget that Romans chapter one not only tells us how bad homosexuality is, but also just how one gets into that condition. Instead of starting in verse 26 of this chapter we need to start back in verse 23(the how verse): "And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherfor God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts."
The sin wasn't and isn't just homosexuality. Homosexuality stems from idol worship. Back in the days of Sodom sex was widely practiced as part of the worship of those idol. Today we don't worship idols made of stone and such as they did then. Instead, we worship a perfect body(think Hollywood), money, and so on. This then leads to God "giving us up" to our own devices including homosexuality and after that the list of things in verses 29-32. The first sin and the worst is not worshipping God.
Ithink the problem here may be one of semantic confusion. Love and hate are being treated as opposites and exclusive of one another, when, in truth, they are neither. The opposite of love is ignoring. The opposite of hate is like. You cannot hate someone you like and you cannot like someone you hate.
But love is not an emotion like hate or like is. Love is a commitment to care for someone regardless of the emotions involved. You can love someone you hate. You can care for someone as much as you care for yourself and still have a violently negative emotional reaction to them.
Which is why God, who IS love, did and has love the world, meaning all people, while not liking, and even hating, some, as the Bible clearly points out. It also points out, however, that He takes no pleasure in the condemnation of the wicked. That pleasure would be His is love and hate were indeed opposites.
God hates homosexuality. There is no doubt of that in the Bible. We see in Romans 1 that whose who refuse to worship Him can be given over to it. It is thus on the side of The Lie, which is one reason you hear homosexuals and deceived others defending it with such passion. They have preferred the Lie and thus are defending that which is on its side.
God leaves no shadow of a doubt, however, regarding His opinion and judgment of that degradation. But does He love those people? Absolutely. They also receive rain, sunshine, and good things in their lives. They also receive every opportunity to turn and believe. They also are those Jesus died for. They will not go to hell because of their sins, but because of their refusal of Christ Jesus, as said so clearly in John 3:16-18.
But love is not an emotion like hate or like is. Love is a commitment to care for someone regardless of the emotions involved. You can love someone you hate. You can care for someone as much as you care for yourself and still have a violently negative emotional reaction to them.
Which is why God, who IS love, did and has love the world, meaning all people, while not liking, and even hating, some, as the Bible clearly points out. It also points out, however, that He takes no pleasure in the condemnation of the wicked. That pleasure would be His is love and hate were indeed opposites.
God hates homosexuality. There is no doubt of that in the Bible. We see in Romans 1 that whose who refuse to worship Him can be given over to it. It is thus on the side of The Lie, which is one reason you hear homosexuals and deceived others defending it with such passion. They have preferred the Lie and thus are defending that which is on its side.
God leaves no shadow of a doubt, however, regarding His opinion and judgment of that degradation. But does He love those people? Absolutely. They also receive rain, sunshine, and good things in their lives. They also receive every opportunity to turn and believe. They also are those Jesus died for. They will not go to hell because of their sins, but because of their refusal of Christ Jesus, as said so clearly in John 3:16-18.
Emily25069
New Member
I love you Helen!
(well, I love just about everything you say on this here board)
(well, I love just about everything you say on this here board)
Marcia
Active Member
Before the story of Lot, God said this about Sodom:
The NET Bible has this comment:
This means they were wicked and rebellious long before the Lot incident. It seems to be pretty serious.
I am aware of what you refer to, which is Ez. 16.49
But verses 46 and 48 say this:
This is a lot more than just not having compassion.
And in the NT we have this:
There is a big difference between our concept of 'hate' and 'love' and and how God hates and loves. Unlike us, God hates perfectly just as He loves perfectly. I do not think we really understand how God hates any more than we can understand how God loves or how He exists in the Trinity. We are just too finite and He is infinite.
BTW, guitarpreacher, I trust you were just kidding on your comments above. No serious student of the Bible really believes that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their lack of compassion.
BTW, guitarpreacher, I trust you were just kidding on your comments above. No serious student of the Bible really believes that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their lack of compassion.
guitarpreacher
New Member
Only because that's what it says
Study the Bible more closely fellow saints. The only time Jesus went off on anyone was when he encountered hypocrits.
Remember when Jesus encountered the woman that committed adultery? The Pharasees wanted to have her stoned. Jesus stepped in and said "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." Then when no one stepped forward, he asked "Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?" He went on to say "Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."
Homosexuality is lust. "Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."
Pappy, your arguement about John 3:16 and God hating sounds like extremist-Calvonistism and is almost an echo of Fred Phelps beliefs. You can either take that as a compliment or an insult
Remember when Jesus encountered the woman that committed adultery? The Pharasees wanted to have her stoned. Jesus stepped in and said "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." Then when no one stepped forward, he asked "Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?" He went on to say "Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."
Homosexuality is lust. "Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."
Pappy, your arguement about John 3:16 and God hating sounds like extremist-Calvonistism and is almost an echo of Fred Phelps beliefs. You can either take that as a compliment or an insult
So, love is merely an outward work of the flesh? You're saying one can harbor ill will in his heart, have no feeling of affection or "bowels of mercies," no brotherly kindness—more than that—one can despise and detest someone in his heart and still fulfill the divine commandment to love his neighbor as himself? Can a man despise and detest his wife in his heart, and still be in obedience to the commandment to love her as Christ loved us? Can a man despise and detest God in his heart, and still claim to love God? It can be said that a man loves God as long as he fulfills the outward requirements of the law, though in his heart he has a "violent emotional reaction" toward God?
The fact of the matter is, that though love is not mere affectionate feeling, it does not exist without it. First, that love and hate are indeed opposites is clearly seen in Matthew 5:43, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy." This, of course, is not a commandment of the law. No where is anyone commanded or suffered to "not like" our neighbor. In fact, the law forbids negative emotional responses toward the ones it commands us to love, Lev. 19:18.
Second, the NT definitions of love exclude negative emotions, and encompass kind affections. Love is the fulfilling of the law (Rom. 13:10), and we've already seen that the law forbids the dislike of one's neighbor. The summary of the law and the prophets is in the Golden Rule (Matt. 7:12). Tell me, which of you really want men to have violent negative emotional responses toward you? How does it feel when you know that the mere mention of your name makes people want to puke? To be loved then, means not only that someone does good outward works toward you, but that they also have kind affections for you.
You cannot love someone you hate, and you cannot hate someone you love.
They will not go to hell because of their sins, but because of their refusal of Christ Jesus, as said so clearly in John 3:16-18.
The verse cited above does not say that men are condemned because they refused Christ, as if it were an act of their will, it says very clearly that they are condmened because they do not believe. This is a critical distincition not merely because it is a faithful relation of what the verse is actually saying, it's critical because the very Gospel itself is at stake. Belief is not an act of the will, but a state of mind imparted by the Spirit, Tim. 1:17. One says that God accepts someone on the basis of a work, and the other says it is not of any works at all. One says God has kind affection for me because I've done something loveable, and another says His kind affection for me is on the basis of His mercy and loving kindesses alone. One is a pagan notion, and the other is a Christian doctrine.
Don't fall over when I say this Aaron, but "right on"
We are dealing with the ambiguities of the English language here, besides the fact that we all have different nuance when we use words like love and hate, so I think the discussion will continue.
I am not certain that is what she meant, but I also reject that position flat out. Even in the OT, redemption did not come from the sacrificial rituals themselves, but from the heart desiring to please God that engaged in them. Abraham's faith was imputed to him as righteousness long before Moses wrote down the levitical laws.
If you are merely gaining the outward conformity from an individual, but their heart it filled with iniquity, than they will be viewed by God as Jesus viewed the Pharisees, "Whitewashed tombs, filled with the bones of the dead"
There is no need for Christians to have a different view on homosexuality than on heterosexuality. Scripture forbids sex outside of marriage. Period.
I'm inclined to agree with guitarpreacher here. I've read the story several times. There were numerous cities besides Sodom and Gomorrah that were engaging in the same sexual sins. S&G were singled out from the others after their view on treatment of outsiders was described. Now, that doesn't mean that I'm in any way condoning sex outside of marriage, including homosexuality. I don't. However, I will also not read something into the scriptures covering S&G that is not there. There's been too much of that from the pulpits for hundreds of years already.
A few things, Aaron:
So, love is merely an outward work of the flesh?
Is commitment an act of the flesh? Of course not! It is a decision you make and then act on. It can include affection, but I can guarantee you it does not have to, at least all the time. I can remember being awakened by a two year old daughter who had not slept through the night since birth. And I can remember being so sleep-deprived by that time that I felt like I hated her at four in the morning. Nevertheless, I would go in to her and pick her up and comfort her or change her or whatever she needed. I was committed to her, but that particular time my feelings were pretty violently negative. She is 26 now and married and we are as close as a mother and daughter can be. But it was not always like that!
You're saying one can harbor ill will in his heart, have no feeling of affection or "bowels of mercies," no brotherly kindness—more than that—one can despise and detest someone in his heart and still fulfill the divine commandment to love his neighbor as himself?
Harboring ill will is your sin. But yes, you can have no feelings of kindness and still take care of someone. We are commanded to love our neighbors, not to always feel kindly toward them. The outworking of the matter is, however, that when you do commit to love and when you act on that commitment regardless of your feelings, you will find yourself appreciating and often sincerely liking that person. Our commandment is to love, not to like. And when we choose to love, the emotions which make it easier do come along as we work it out in our actions and words.
Can a man despise and detest his wife in his heart, and still be in obedience to the commandment to love her as Christ loved us?
It doesn't work that way. As you care for a person, you come to care deeply for them. The emotions FOLLOW love, they do not cause it. Love is a decision to care, a commitment to another regardless of how you feel about it at the time. If a man finds himself despising his wife, then I would say he did not choose to love her in the first place, but instead chose to care for other things or other people first, thus probably resenting whatever time or money his wife needed or was asking for.
Can a man despise and detest God in his heart, and still claim to love God? It can be said that a man loves God as long as he fulfills the outward requirements of the law, though in his heart he has a "violent emotional reaction" toward God?
One does not commit to someone or Someone he hates and detests. Loving is a commitment, a decision one makes regarding another. Now, it is possible to commit to God, be born again, to express that condition with respect and honor toward God and yet have hard times roll down on you to such an extent that for awhile you feel like you hate God for allowing it. But that will be temporary as you see how He works it out and you will end up gladly divesting yourself of that emotion and deeply appreciating God again. But all the time you will have chosen to serve and honor and respect Him. The way you put it, however, is not possible simply because love is a decision and you will not make that decision regarding God if you already hate Him! The outward 'works' is simply the working out of that decision.
The fact of the matter is, that though love is not mere affectionate feeling, it does not exist without it. First, that love and hate are indeed opposites is clearly seen in Matthew 5:43, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy." This, of course, is not a commandment of the law. No where is anyone commanded or suffered to "not like" our neighbor. In fact, the law forbids negative emotional responses toward the ones it commands us to love, Lev. 19:18.
Love most certainly can exist without affection! Hopefully not for long, but it is most certainly possible!
Now, regarding the Matthew verse, what if your neighbor is your enemy? You can, and must, care for him to fulfill the commandment but that does not mean you have to like the fellow!
Nor are negative emotional responses ever forbidden! We are told to limit them, as not letting the sun go down on our wrath. But I can guarantee to you that if your wife or mother gets raped and killed, you are going to have some violent negative emotional reactions and you will not have been sinning to react that way!
Believing is not a work. That is a Calvinist mistake. It is a decision of the heart, of the will. Love is also a decision of the heart, of the will. How they are acted upon is another story altogether. But we are not robots, programmed to believe or to love. If so, then the commandments would be nonsensical. We are not commanded to sleep and eat and go to the bathroom! These we do automatically. Commandments are for what we not only don't do automatically, but are to tell us that a lot of what we do naturally is wrong and that we must choose otherwise.
That choice, as Paul tells us in Romans 7, might run counter to everything in our natures, and from that miserable condition only Christ can save us, but that choice can nevertheless be made.
A man who is spiritually dead is not spiritually unconscious. He is, rather, separated from God, who is life.
So, love is merely an outward work of the flesh?
Is commitment an act of the flesh? Of course not! It is a decision you make and then act on. It can include affection, but I can guarantee you it does not have to, at least all the time. I can remember being awakened by a two year old daughter who had not slept through the night since birth. And I can remember being so sleep-deprived by that time that I felt like I hated her at four in the morning. Nevertheless, I would go in to her and pick her up and comfort her or change her or whatever she needed. I was committed to her, but that particular time my feelings were pretty violently negative. She is 26 now and married and we are as close as a mother and daughter can be. But it was not always like that!
You're saying one can harbor ill will in his heart, have no feeling of affection or "bowels of mercies," no brotherly kindness—more than that—one can despise and detest someone in his heart and still fulfill the divine commandment to love his neighbor as himself?
Harboring ill will is your sin. But yes, you can have no feelings of kindness and still take care of someone. We are commanded to love our neighbors, not to always feel kindly toward them. The outworking of the matter is, however, that when you do commit to love and when you act on that commitment regardless of your feelings, you will find yourself appreciating and often sincerely liking that person. Our commandment is to love, not to like. And when we choose to love, the emotions which make it easier do come along as we work it out in our actions and words.
Can a man despise and detest his wife in his heart, and still be in obedience to the commandment to love her as Christ loved us?
It doesn't work that way. As you care for a person, you come to care deeply for them. The emotions FOLLOW love, they do not cause it. Love is a decision to care, a commitment to another regardless of how you feel about it at the time. If a man finds himself despising his wife, then I would say he did not choose to love her in the first place, but instead chose to care for other things or other people first, thus probably resenting whatever time or money his wife needed or was asking for.
Can a man despise and detest God in his heart, and still claim to love God? It can be said that a man loves God as long as he fulfills the outward requirements of the law, though in his heart he has a "violent emotional reaction" toward God?
One does not commit to someone or Someone he hates and detests. Loving is a commitment, a decision one makes regarding another. Now, it is possible to commit to God, be born again, to express that condition with respect and honor toward God and yet have hard times roll down on you to such an extent that for awhile you feel like you hate God for allowing it. But that will be temporary as you see how He works it out and you will end up gladly divesting yourself of that emotion and deeply appreciating God again. But all the time you will have chosen to serve and honor and respect Him. The way you put it, however, is not possible simply because love is a decision and you will not make that decision regarding God if you already hate Him! The outward 'works' is simply the working out of that decision.
The fact of the matter is, that though love is not mere affectionate feeling, it does not exist without it. First, that love and hate are indeed opposites is clearly seen in Matthew 5:43, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy." This, of course, is not a commandment of the law. No where is anyone commanded or suffered to "not like" our neighbor. In fact, the law forbids negative emotional responses toward the ones it commands us to love, Lev. 19:18.
Love most certainly can exist without affection! Hopefully not for long, but it is most certainly possible!
Now, regarding the Matthew verse, what if your neighbor is your enemy? You can, and must, care for him to fulfill the commandment but that does not mean you have to like the fellow!
Nor are negative emotional responses ever forbidden! We are told to limit them, as not letting the sun go down on our wrath. But I can guarantee to you that if your wife or mother gets raped and killed, you are going to have some violent negative emotional reactions and you will not have been sinning to react that way!
Believing is not a work. That is a Calvinist mistake. It is a decision of the heart, of the will. Love is also a decision of the heart, of the will. How they are acted upon is another story altogether. But we are not robots, programmed to believe or to love. If so, then the commandments would be nonsensical. We are not commanded to sleep and eat and go to the bathroom! These we do automatically. Commandments are for what we not only don't do automatically, but are to tell us that a lot of what we do naturally is wrong and that we must choose otherwise.
That choice, as Paul tells us in Romans 7, might run counter to everything in our natures, and from that miserable condition only Christ can save us, but that choice can nevertheless be made.
A man who is spiritually dead is not spiritually unconscious. He is, rather, separated from God, who is life.
Amen, preach it!!!
When we marry, we promise to love the other person. We don't promise to have feelings for them (feelings are fickle). Feelings follow the facts. Facts don't follow the feelings. Does the rear bumper drive the car, or does the rear bumper follow the car? You'd look prety stupid driving your car around in reverse all the time, yet so many people go through life making decisions with their rear bumpers instead of their brains.
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
Please provide the Scripture for such a claim. Are you saying that God doesn't love the sinner?
Regards,
BiR
You're right. Believing is not an act of the will, but that wasn't what you stated. You said:
Which, when taken with what the cited verses actually say, means that one is refusing to believe in Christ.
A man will either believe the Gospel or he won't. There is no inbetween. If a man does not accept Christ it is because he does not believe in Him, and no amount of Scripture, argument or miracles will convince him otherwise. Just ask the Jews. Belief is a state of mind. No one can choose to believe in Christ any more than one can choose to believe in the Easter Bunny.
I know that you are an avowed enemy of the doctrine of election, and no amount of argument or Scripture will convince you otherwise, so I won't make this a Calvinism vs Arminianism argument. I belabored the point to say this: One's view of love is dictated by his view of God and man, and that's why you and I are on opposite ends of this issue, and why you essentially had to commit literary suicide to reconcile love and hate the way you did.
I can't convince one of the truth of Calvinism, but I can demonstrate that your blurb about love and hate is more than merely unsupported by the Scriptures, it is directly contradicted. And so I did that, and in your rebuttal you made not one appeal to Scripture to refute my claims. Not one. You merely offered arbitrary maxims about the nature of the law and its scope, and you basically changed the glory of God into an image like that of man in an attempt to make Him and his love and hatred small enough to be grasped by the mind of men, and to offer them a false sense of security thinking that their depravity is virtue, and their sins righteousness.
I've shown that love and hate are indeed opposites. I've shown that the law forbids negative emotions toward the objects of love from both the Old and New Testaments. Now, it's up to you from Scripture to show me otherwise.
This is my stance. I think God loves all his creations. I do not think a person is born with the choice if they will be homo or not, otherwise clearly there would be no gay people.. who willingly chooses "Oh let me have sex with a man instead of a beautiful lady" I think pretty early on "homosexuals" show gay tendencies. I do think however they can choose to comply with their urges or not just as you would choose to comply with the urge to watch a porno and masturbate even though you know its wrong.. Its a temptation. Maybe instead of hating maybe you should pray for a miricle to heal them..
WE DONT MAKE THESE CHOICES WE ARE JUST PAWNS in this dirty game of chess- did a kid in Africa choose to not have food or water?
WE DONT MAKE THESE CHOICES WE ARE JUST PAWNS in this dirty game of chess- did a kid in Africa choose to not have food or water?