AOC Visits an X-Rated Burlesque Show

[Revmitchell]

No one is forcing people to accept homosexuality but the constitution states that they have the same rights as you do.

Yes they are they are suing cake shops for example. They are teaching it in Kindergarten classes and not giving parents advance notice.

 

[GoodTidings]

I do not think the gay and LGBTQ lifestyles.are consistent with God's purpose for sexuality. In that sense it is a sin. I am somewhat ambivalent on this because I believe that homosexuality is primarily a genetic tendency not a socially learned thing. That being said, could these people fight against that tendency and defeat it? Certainly not by using "conversion therapy" as supported by the right. That has been shown to be a failure.

Homosexuality is a sin and God said so. That eliminates the possibility that it is genetic tendency.

Have you ever met and talked with a homosexual? I have talked to two of them. One came to our house after I delivered a speech on proofs for the existence of God in my high school public speaking class. He assumed that I was a Christian because I spoke on that topic. He was right. He didn't want to be a homosexual. He wanted to be like almost everyone else. Thank goodness I realized I wasn't mature enough and hadn't had the life experience required to answer his questions. I suggested that he see a psychologist and aq pastor to help him. But I certainly didn't tell him he was damned to Hell because of his sexual tendencies. That might have turned him off the gospel for the rest of his life.
What would you have done in this situation?

What would I have done? I would have led him to Jesus, as He is the only One who could deliver him from his sin. Homosexuals need to get saved. They don't need to be coddled. They need Jesus. Jesus will remove their sin. I have seen it multiple times. I would have led Him to salvation. That's what I would have done.

Secondly, heterosexual sex outside marriage is also a sin whether it be outside marriage or an adulterous situation in marriage. People who do this without repenting are also subject to Hell. Why is this never stressed in church like homosexuallikty? Because it hits too close to home.

We address it all of the time. Maybe you're just not listening.

Probably at least half and probably most people in the congregation have been guilty of this at some time in their lives. Do you accept the fact that this is a sin?

Sure. The difference is that we are not pushing for adulterer rights. We are not demanding that everyone except adultery as a valid lifestyle.

The reason why we are addressing homosexual sin as much as we do, is because the homosexual community is imposing upon us a forced acceptance of their sin as normal and good. They are the ones making it an issue. They are the ones imposing it on us.

The homosexual community is not interested in peaceful co-existence. They want their sin normalized, mainstreamed to the point that they want to minority status, the same as African Americans or any other recognized minority. They want to force the Church to accept their lifestyle as valid to the point that we will be forced to ordain them into the ministry and allow gay people to occupy leadership in our churches.

THAT's why we talk about it so much.

 

[GoodTidings]

No one is forcing people to accept homosexuality but the constitution states that they have the same rights as you do.

Yes, they are. That is what the "equality" act is all about. If it goes into effect, Churches that don't allow gays to be ordained can and will be sued.

You are really not up on the facts. The very fact that Christians are being sued for refusing to participate in homosexual activities like gay weddings due their faith, is proof that they are forcing acceptance of homosexuality.

 

[Alcott]

But I certainly didn't tell him he was damned to Hell because of his sexual tendencies. That might have turned him off the gospel for the rest of his life.

I wonder if Jesus' telling the adulterous woman (John 8) to "go and sin no more" turned her off to the gospel.

 

[FollowTheWay]

I wonder if Jesus' telling the adulterous woman (John 8) to "go and sin no more" turned her off to the gospel.

No it did not but I'm not Jesus and I don't have the right to judge anyone except myself. Neither do you.

 

[GoodTidings]

No it did not but I'm not Jesus and I don't have the right to judge anyone except myself. Neither do you.

It's not about us judging anyone. But God has judged the homosexual lifestyle and those live in it are under His judgment.

We are allowed to judge what God has already judged and that is why we can offer salvation to those imprisoned by homosexuality.

 

[FollowTheWay]

It's not about us judging anyone. But God has judged the homosexual lifestyle and those live in it are under His judgment.

We are allowed to judge what God has already judged and that is why we can offer salvation to those imprisoned by homosexuality.

That's what I was talking about in my post "But I certainly didn't tell him he was damned to Hell because of his sexual tendencies. That might have turned him off the gospel for the rest of his life."

I do agree we should speak out on moral issues. But that doesn't include supporting a particular party or candidate as a "Christian" party or candidate.

 

[GoodTidings]

That's what I was talking about in my post "But I certainly didn't tell him he was damned to Hell because of his sexual tendencies. That might have turned him off the gospel for the rest of his life."

It depends on how you present it. Hell is a real place and Jesus preached about Hell. People go to Hell. The fact is that people need to know WHY they need salvation. The level of importance you place on Hell will determine the level of importance you place on Jesus.

And if they walk away from the Gospel, that is between them and God. People walked away from Jesus when He was on earth. It is not a failure on our part if someone rejects the Gospel, properly presented to them. As long as we have been obedient, what the prospect does with what they heard is not our responsibility.

It is no different than if I drive by someone's house in the middle of the night and it is on fire with them asleep inside and I start banging on their windows and yelling trying to wake them up and save their lives. They need to know the danger they are in and get out. I would be real jerk if I just drove by and did nothing.

There is a way to make people aware of Hell without it being an offensive presentation. They might still be offended no matter how you present it, but I am only responsible for telling them the truth in love. I am not responsible for how they receive it. That is between them and God.

Jesus didn't sugar coat the reality of Hell, neither did Paul.

I do agree we should speak out on moral issues. But that doesn't include supporting a particular party or candidate as a "Christian" party or candidate.

The problem here is that you promoting a lie that we view the Republican party as the "Christian party." That is simply not the case. That is what you deflect to, when you can't really muster up a mature, adult, substantive, intelligent response.

 

[FollowTheWay]

It depends on how you present it. Hell is a real place and Jesus preached about Hell. People go to Hell. The fact is that people need to know WHY they need salvation. The level of importance you place on Hell will determine the level of importance you place on Jesus.

And if they walk away from the Gospel, that is between them and God. People walked away from Jesus when He was on earth. It is not a failure on our part if someone rejects the Gospel, properly presented to them. As long as we have been obedient, what the prospect does with what they heard is not our responsibility.

It is no different than if I drive by someone's house in the middle of the night and it is on fire with them asleep inside and I start banging on their windows and yelling trying to wake them up and save their lives. They need to know the danger they are in and get out. I would be real jerk if I just drove by and did nothing.

There is a way to make people aware of Hell without it being an offensive presentation. They might still be offended no matter how you present it, but I am only responsible for telling them the truth in love. I am not responsible for how they receive it. That is between them and God.

Jesus didn't sugar coat the reality of Hell, neither did Paul.


The problem here is that you promoting a lie that we view the Republican party as the "Christian party." That is simply not the case. That is what you deflect to, when you can't really muster up a mature, adult, substantive, intelligent response.

I've been told 3 times tol my face that a Democrat can't be a Christian and we see that nonsense here all the time. Get real. You worship the Republican Party.

 

[GoodTidings]

I've been told 3 times tol my face that a Democrat can't be a Christian and we see that nonsense here all the time. Get real. You worship the Republican Party.

The Democrat party embraces infanticide, it embraces homosexuality, the LGBTQ lifestyle, it the party that is openly anti-Christian and rejects Jesus. So, you cannot support a party that is opposed to everything that is biblical AND Christian, but claim to be a Christian.

That does NOT mean that we think the Republican party is the party of Jesus. We simply know that the Democrat party is paving the way for the Antichrist.

 

[FollowTheWay]

The Democrat party embraces infanticide, it embraces homosexuality, the LGBTQ lifestyle, it the party that is openly anti-Christian and rejects Jesus. So, you cannot support a party that is opposed to everything that is biblical AND Christian, but claim to be a Christian.

That does NOT mean that we think the Republican party is the party of Jesus. We simply know that the Democrat party is paving the way for the Antichrist.

Rubbish. The Anti-Christ might already be here. His name is Donald Trump.

 

[GoodTidings]

Rubbish. The Anti-Christ might already be here. His name is Donald Trump.

Nope, Trump is too unpopular to be the Antichrist. But you people are preparing the way for the Antichrist with your open borders and one-world globalism.

 

[Alcott]

No it did not but I'm not Jesus and I don't have the right to judge anyone except myself. Neither do you.

Or do you mean we have no right to judge unless we refuse to admit we're judging ... considering your judging of Trump?

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Rubbish. The Anti-Christ might already be here. His name is Donald Trump.

Did you ever feel or express such concerns when the whole world seemed to be embracing the soon-to-be-president Obama? Or when they mindlessly bestowed upon him the Nobel Peace Prize?

 

[Alcott]

No it did not but I'm not Jesus and I don't have the right to judge anyone except myself. Neither do you.

Oh, I have the right to judge yourself?

 

[Wesley Briggman]

I do not believe in rejecting anyone for anything. I believe in reaching out to everyone including gays with the gospel. Do you agree?

FollowTheWay, I do not agree. My disagreement is partially based on the following scripture. God loves His children and has given us instructions concerning how to protect ourselves, our spouses and our children against being contaminated with the thoughts and life styles of unregenerate sinners.

Please, prayerfully, consider the following:

2Ti 3:1 KJV - This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2Ti 3:2 KJV - For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
2Ti 3:3 KJV - Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
2Ti 3:4 KJV - Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
2Ti 3:5 KJV - Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

2Jo 1:9 KJV - Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
2Jo 1:10 KJV - If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed:

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Tell that to the florists, cake decorators, and photographers who have fallen afoul of the various and sundry discrimination suites brought by some in he LGBT community.

No one is forcing people to accept homosexuality but the constitution states that they have the same rights as you do.

 

[just-want-peace]

It depends on how you present it. Hell is a real place and Jesus preached about Hell. People go to Hell. The fact is that people need to know WHY they need salvation. The level of importance you place on Hell will determine the level of importance you place on Jesus.

And if they walk away from the Gospel, that is between them and God. People walked away from Jesus when He was on earth. It is not a failure on our part if someone rejects the Gospel, properly presented to them. As long as we have been obedient, what the prospect does with what they heard is not our responsibility.

It is no different than if I drive by someone's house in the middle of the night and it is on fire with them asleep inside and I start banging on their windows and yelling trying to wake them up and save their lives. They need to know the danger they are in and get out. I would be real jerk if I just drove by and did nothing.

There is a way to make people aware of Hell without it being an offensive presentation. They might still be offended no matter how you present it, but I am only responsible for telling them the truth in love. I am not responsible for how they receive it. That is between them and God.

Jesus didn't sugar coat the reality of Hell, neither did Paul.


The problem here is that you promoting a lie that we view the Republican party as the "Christian party." That is simply not the case. That is what you deflect to, when you can't really muster up a mature, adult, substantive, intelligent response.

BINGO!!!!

 

[HankD]

The point is we have an immoral president which you wholeheartedly support.

OH NO, he is a SINNER!?

 

[HankD]

Personally I don't care if AOC likes porn. My gripe with any Democrat is abortion/infanticide.

I was once a member of a political party starting with my military years - The Democrat Party, A JFK - Pre Rowe v. Wade Democrat and at that time though I was a "Blue Dog" I had liberal leanings.

I could handle the JFK deal with Marilyn. Apparently so could Jackie, she stayed by her man. This was before Rowe v. Wade.

I started my "conversion" with Barry Goldwater. Hillary was a "Goldwater Girl", I was a "Goldwater Guy".

Today I have no affiliation, a small "i" pro-life independent with several Libertarian leanings.

Today the Democrat Party (DNC) has morphed into the Party of Death (abortion (infanticide), euthanasia, eugenics).
Death/Kill/Murder is part of their platform.

So AOC - yeah, be true to yourself - i can handle that except for legalized murder, cant handle that.
I can and have dealt with all manner of immorality in those for whom i have voted.

But not baby slaughter,