AIDS and Romans 1:24-32

[dianetavegia]

Originally posted by just-want-peace:
Just out of curosity, would you knowingly frequent a restaurant that you knew employed aids victims as cooks?

Victims? Victims are innocent persons. Most AIDS sufferers either have been involved sexually or used drug to expose themselves and their families.

NO. I would NOT choose to eat at a restaurant with an AIDS patient as a cook, server, dishwasher, etc. The AIDS virus has been found in tears.

In the case of bubonic plague, etc., our govt. would most probably reenact the ability to quarrantine whole families like they did for other conditions when I was a child. I would support that.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Romans 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

Before you start screaming about the innocent children of homosexuals or drug users, consider this verse:

2 Samuel 12:7 Then Nathan said to David, "You are the man! Thus says the Lord God of Israel: 'I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your keeping, and gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if that had been too little, I also would have given you much more! 9 Why have you despised the commandment of the Lord, to do evil in His sight? You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the people of Ammon. 10 Now therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised Me, and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.' 11 Thus says the Lord: 'Behold, I will raise up adversity against you from your own house; and I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. 12 For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, before the sun.' " 13 So David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." And Nathan said to David, "The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 14 However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who is born to you shall surely die."

15 Then Nathan departed to his house.And the Lord struck the child that Uriah's wife bore to David, and it became ill. 16 David therefore pleaded with God for the child, and David fasted and went in and lay all night on the ground. 17 So the elders of his house arose and went to him, to raise him up from the ground. But he would not, nor did he eat food with them. 18 Then on the seventh day it came to pass that the child died. And the servants of David were afraid to tell him that the child was dead. For they said, "Indeed, while the child was alive, we spoke to him, and he would not heed our voice. How can we tell him that the child is dead? He may do some harm!" 19 When David saw that his servants were whispering, David perceived that the child was dead. Therefore David said to his servants, "Is the child dead?" And they said, "He is dead."

God said of David:

Acts 13:22 And when He had removed him, He raised up for them David as king, to whom also He gave testimony and said, 'I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after My own heart, who will do all My will.'

God spared not the child of David, a man after My own heart. How then will he spare the children of those who are not children of the King?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just something to think about! Verses please! Bible study is good for our soul!

Diane </font>[/QUOTE]Considering that this particular passage deals with homosexual sin specifically, I don't think that AIDS can automatically be the presumed punishment. The reason is because one can catch AIDS through heterosexual sin just as easily as they can through homosexual sin. Just ask Magic Johnson. We might very well state that all STD's are a result of all sexual sin in general, but I think we will have a hard time defending the idea that it is speicifically targeted at homosexuals. But, even then, how do we explain those who have sinned sexually and not contracted an STD?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by KenH:
AIDS can be the result of sexual sin just like other STDs can be the result of sexual sin. I think it is misguided to emphasize AIDS in this regard over other STDs.

AIDS is currently the only STD that cannot be treated and cured if found early enough. HPV (Cervical Cancer) can be found early and 'healed'. Syphilis used to kill, but can now be quickly treated.

Some people will have no more symptoms, but about one third will progress to tertiary syphilis, with widespread damage to the heart, brain, eyes, nervous system, bones, and joints. Late syphilis can result in mental illness, blindness, severe damage to the heart and aorta, and death.

The list goes on but only AIDS remains 'uncurable' at this time. </font>[/QUOTE]What happens to your theory if science finds a cure?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
Just curious....

To what extent are homosexual men responsible for the spread of AIDS ?

I have no idea. Probably as responsible as the Red Cross and other blood banks in the early days of the disease... </font>[/QUOTE]Yeah. The red cross went around having unprotected promiscuous anal sex ?

Gay men were dying from their bath-house encounters, the government asked them to stop, until they could figure out what was happening, but the gays screamed "opression", we backed off, and now little kids get the disease.

You probably don't buy the fact that they poisoned the blood supply, on purpose, to raise awareness for their disease, either, do you ?

And I know yer gonna call be hateful & lacking the love of Christ, and all other kinds of stuff, but my mind has been made up.

"It appears science and morality teach the same lesson..." Ronald Reagan </font>[/QUOTE]Bro. Curtis,

I have never heard that theory before. Do you have any evidence of this tampering? It almost reminded me when I first read it the way Jews were blamed for the Plague. The end result of that particular defamation was not very good.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
Why isn't it on our hands too? We ~knew~ right from wrong. We were the Christians sent to the world to show them the way of Christ, and we didn't do our job.

We sat in our air conditioned homes instead of going door to door because we didn't want the neighbors angry with us.

We built larger churches with newer speaker systems instead of buying bibles for the lost.

We made excuses not to vote or attend political caucuses when the issues were moral ones. Expecting someone else to do it for us, and then acting shocked when they stopped teaching morals in the public schools.

We KNEW the truth.
We were told to share the truth.

We didn't.

Now, millions are dead, and we watched them die.

We could have told them, "God loves you, and whether you believe it is a sin or not, whether you think it is a natural urge or not, the bottom line is, you're making a choice, right now, to make your sex life more important than the rest of your life, and God MUST come first. "

We could have taught them about Christ and let Christ change their hearts, but we didn't.

Isn't the blood on our hands too?

There certainly are a lot of "we's" in that statement. Is there a mouse in your pocket? How in the world do you know what I did or did not do in the 80's? Where is your evidence that I didn't do my job, or even that the Church in general did not do their job? Are you saying that because the society became more wicked and payed the consequences of sin, that the Church didn't do their job? If so, let me ask you, before the flood, did Noah do his job in warning of what was to come? Just because a lost world ignores the warnings of the Christian world does not mean that Christians are not doing their jobs.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by just-want-peace:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Considering some of the statements in this thread, it's no wonder that AIDS needs to be an issue of civil rights.

Just remember your philosophy should we have an epidemic of bubonic plague, or typhoid, or any number of other deadly diseases.

If/when it gets close to your family, I dare think you just may be a little more anxious to exterminate the cause rather than defending those who ignore sanitary precautions thereby putting you & yours at a needless risk!
</font>[/QUOTE]Speaking of which, history records a time when folks did that very thing you are suggesting:

In 1348 there appeared in Europe a devastating plague which is reported to have killed off ultimately twenty-five million people. By the fall of that year the rumor was current that these deaths were due to an international conspiracy of Jewry to poison Christendom. It was reported that the leaders in the Jewish metropolis of Toledo had initiated the plot and that one of the chief conspirators was a Rabbi Peyret who had his headquarters in Chambéry, Savoy, whence he dispatched his poisoners to France, Switzerland, and Italy.

By authority of Amadeus VI, Count of Savoy, a number of the Jews who lived on the shores of Lake Geneva, having been arrested and put to the torture, naturally confessed anything their inquisitors suggested. These Jews, under torture, incriminated others. Records of their confessions were sent from one town to another in Switzerland and down the Rhine River into Germany, and as a result, thousands of Jews, in at least two hundred towns and hamlets, were butchered and burnt. The sheer loss of numbers, the disappearance of their wealth, and the growing hatred of the Christians brought German Jewry to a catastrophic downfall. It now began to decline and did not again play an important part in German life till the seventeenth century.

Jewish History Sourcebook: The Black Death and the Jews 1348-1349 CE

Too bad their weren't any civil rights for the thousands of innocent folks who were slaughtered over a lie born out of fear and hatred.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
I have never heard that theory before.

Joseph Botwinick

Sure you haven't.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Do you have any evidence of this tampering?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
I have never heard that theory before.

Joseph Botwinick

Sure you haven't. </font>[/QUOTE]Correct, Bro. Curtis. Now, do you have any evidence to present for this charge?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Bro. Curtis]

And to compare what we're talking about to Jewish oppression is a pretty good leap.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Do you have any evidence of your charge? And the comparison, although not perfect, is valid. You claim that Homosexuals contaminated the blood supply on purpose and the Europeans accussed the Jews of contaminating the drinking wells. Further, if you look at the language used by JWP, you will see that my comparison grows even stronger.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Bro. Curtis]

No, your comparison is crazy.

First of all, nobody said kill anyone. It is immature of you to suggest so.

Second, science could not have linked the Jews to the water supply. Science HAS linked the start of the spread of aids to the homosexual lifestyle.

Third, when gays were dropping dead from something nobody could identify, they screamed discrimination, and were allowed to donate blood. Given the militant, in your face style of the militant gay movement, and the God-given power of reason, you cannot be dumb enough to think they didn't know what they were doing.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
No, your comparison is crazy.

First of all, nobody said kill anyone. It is immature of you to suggest so.

Just remember your philosophy should we have an epidemic of bubonic plague, or typhoid, or any number of other deadly diseases.

If/when it gets close to your family, I dare think you just may be a little more anxious to exterminate the cause rather than defending those who ignore sanitary precautions thereby putting you & yours at a needless risk!

Considering that this statement was made in the context of ridiculing the need for civil rights, I think you are incorrect in your assessment of my maturity and accuracy.

Second, science could not have linked the Jews to the water supply. Science HAS linked the start of the spread of aids to the homosexual lifestyle. [/QUOTE]

1. Defamation does not have to be proved by science in order to be deadly. At least, it sure didn't in the case of the Jews.

2. I am open to learning more about this. I have heard it said in the past that science is not sure at best, or has conflicting views, about the origins of AIDS. Would you please show me the scientific proof that you speak of?

Third, when gays were dropping dead from something nobody could identify, they screamed discrimination, and were allowed to donate blood. Given the militant, in your face style of the militant gay movement, and the God-given power of reason, you cannot be dumb enough to think they didn't know what they were doing. [/QUOTE]

Again, I don't remember ever hearing this. Perhaps I was too young at the time to realize that it happened. Would you please show me some evidence that this is true?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[AVL1984]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
A homosexual brought the disease to America, where it was spread thru the gay bath houses.

And promiscuity wasn't invented in the '60s. It became accepted in the '60s, but was with us a long time before that.

Nowhere did I state that promiscuity was invented in the 60's, so please, don't try to twist my words or try to make me look stupid. I find this approach all too common in people who can't prove their points. Now, do you have sources to prove that it was brought by one homosexual to America? I know there is one report that states so, though again, I don't know where it is at this particular moment, and would have to look for it again. Or are you just going by the movie "And the Band Played On", Bro, Curtis?

 

[AVL1984]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by just-want-peace:
Just out of curosity, would you knowingly frequent a restaurant that you knew employed aids victims as cooks?

Victims? Victims are innocent persons. Most AIDS sufferers either have been involved sexually or used drug to expose themselves and their families.

NO. I would NOT choose to eat at a restaurant with an AIDS patient as a cook, server, dishwasher, etc. The AIDS virus has been found in tears.

In the case of bubonic plague, etc., our govt. would most probably reenact the ability to quarrantine whole families like they did for other conditions when I was a child. I would support that. </font>[/QUOTE]Diane, MANY AIDS patients ARE indeed victims...innocent persons...period! Many of them have never even had sexual relation, others indeed have, adulterous affairs, or just plain premarital relations. Others have ACQUIRED it through transfusions, birth, blood being spilled in accidents, etc. Some have even contracted aids by going to the dentist and having dental work done by a dentist who himself didn't even know he/she had AIDS. I know when I worked for Menards in Pekin, Illinois, I had a man from Lincoln, Illinois who was shopping there and cut his hand on sheet metal. I tried to assist him and got cut, too, while trying to get his wound to stop bleeding. His blood went all over my wound. We found out he was with his girlfriend, though he was married. I had aids testing done several times over the next few years because of that. I came back clean every time. One of my coworkers on another job coworkers acquired aids when a truck driver cut his hand during delivery of some objects and this worker tried to help stop the bleeding and get him to the nurse. This coworker is now deceased, as is the truck driver. The driver didn't know he had aids. They believe he had it transmitted to him through his wife who had received a blood transfusion in the early 1980's. It's not just a matter of "sin", and I don't understand those who can sit there in a self righteous attitude and say it is! Because of the fall of Adam, to some degree, yes. But, to just smugly say it is ALL because of sin is incorrect and sloppy theology at best!

And for anyone to say that homosexuality is worse than any other sin, they are incorrect. God may have indeed given them over, but we find that God hardened Pharaoh's heart...then there is the sin of unbelief. God says His Spirit will not always strive with man, and the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit won't be forgiven in this life or the next....so, is it really worse? I don't think so.

My rant for the day!

 

[AVL1984]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
And we tried to help them, but they wouldn't have it.

Do you have proof of this? What is your particular source to back this claim up? From all indications from people I know, they did indeed try to get help, but they were largely ignored by the CDC and many health officials. That indeed may have put some off of trying to receive help, especially after being treated as the lepers of the Bible were.

 

[AVL1984]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
Why isn't it on our hands too? We ~knew~ right from wrong. We were the Christians sent to the world to show them the way of Christ, and we didn't do our job.

We sat in our air conditioned homes instead of going door to door because we didn't want the neighbors angry with us.

We built larger churches with newer speaker systems instead of buying bibles for the lost.

We made excuses not to vote or attend political caucuses when the issues were moral ones. Expecting someone else to do it for us, and then acting shocked when they stopped teaching morals in the public schools.

We KNEW the truth.
We were told to share the truth.

We didn't.

Now, millions are dead, and we watched them die.

We could have told them, "God loves you, and whether you believe it is a sin or not, whether you think it is a natural urge or not, the bottom line is, you're making a choice, right now, to make your sex life more important than the rest of your life, and God MUST come first. "

We could have taught them about Christ and let Christ change their hearts, but we didn't.

Isn't the blood on our hands too?

This is a blanket, unproveable discourse from you TexasSky. You may believe that nobody did anything, or that Christians as a whole did nothing, but that is YOUR take on the subject, and probably not factual in the least. Who says that we didn't tell them about Christ? Who says we didn't try to reach out to them? Who says their blood is on our hands? Where are your sources to back up such blanket statements?

 

[AVL1984]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
No, your comparison is crazy.

First of all, nobody said kill anyone. It is immature of you to suggest so.

Second, science could not have linked the Jews to the water supply. Science HAS linked the start of the spread of aids to the homosexual lifestyle.

Third, when gays were dropping dead from something nobody could identify, they screamed discrimination, and were allowed to donate blood. Given the militant, in your face style of the militant gay movement, and the God-given power of reason, you cannot be dumb enough to think they didn't know what they were doing.

And you have no way of knowing that they did, Bro. Curtis. You have set yourself up as the final authority, judge and jury on this particular subject. Please, as Joseph asked, back up your assertions....facts, sources, etc. Thank you.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Perhaps you could point out which one of my statements is wrong. How did the AIDS virus get spread ? Why wouldn't we shut down the bath houses when this first started ? How did the virus get into the blood supply ? And my biggest question, when their gay bath house friends started dying gruesome, painful deaths, why didn't they stop ?

And again, I never said treat them like lepers, kill them, or anything even remotely like that, so I don't know why everyone keeps going there, but to put the blame for this awful epidemic anywhere else is dishonest. I say if the government hadn't worried about the reactions & protetsts from the gay community, and agressively isolated the sources in the very beginning, a lot of innocent people would still be alive.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Bro. Curtis,

Do you have any evidence?

Thanks,

Joseph Botwinick