liberal definition

You make the spurious assumption that gay people "choose" to be gay.

Some gay people choose the heterosexual lifestyle.

A law is opressive if it denies equal rights to all citizens. As Christians, we must speak truth to power, and thus when systemic injustice exists, opression is implied.

Just because you don't like the answer doesn't make it a non-answer.

 

==Actually I think two of the verses I gave are very prescriptive (1cor 7:2, Matt 19:8-9). Genesis 2 is where God created marriage. So while it is descriptive in nature it is of good value to see how God defines marriage.

==Those "marriages" do not fit God's original standard laid out in the creation order (nor the New Testament standard which is a husband of one wife).

==I think Scripture is very clear on what happens to adulterers (Heb 13:4, Matt 5:27-32, 1Cor 6:9-10, Rev 21:8). There does not seem to be much compromise in dealing with adultery.

==No, it redefines its "legal" definition of marriage. Marriage has not be redefined by God (the creator of marriage).

==So you know homosexual couples who want marriage who are having NO phyisical relationship?

 

Ok. Lets just say it wasn't a very good answer but perhaps it's the best you can do under the circumstances.

 

I'll just say it wasn't the answer you wanted and leave it at that.

 

Ok. What I am about to do is get very, very serious. I am doing this because there is some truth here that needs to be told.

1. There is no solid evidence that people are “born gay”. Psychologists and biologists are not sure why some people seem to have leanings towards members of the same sex. They have theories but none of those theories has gained wide spread acceptance. So it is wrong to say that, or to imply that, homosexuals don’t choose homosexuality. They may not choose their temptations but they choose how they respond. Like the fornicator, homosexuals make the choice to take their clothes off and hop in bed with a member of the same sex. They make that choice and it is that choice which will condemn them to eternal hell fire. Biology does not determine morality. If it did then fornication would not be a sin.

2. Homosexuals do not need Christians to be their defenders. Homosexuals need Christians to be their warning signs. We should be warning them about the fact that homosexuals will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1Cor 6:9-10). We should be warning them about the fact that God calls homosexuality an abomination (Lev 18:22). We should be warning them about the fact that God calls homosexuality “degrading”, “unnatural”, indecent”, and that those who practice it are worthy of spiritual death (Rom 1:26-27,32). We should be warning them that, unless they repent and turn to Christ in faith, their eternal fate will be the lake of fire (Rev 21:8,27).

What did God say to the prophet Ezekiel about being a watchman for the house of Israel?

“When I say to the wicked, O wicked man, you will surely die, and you do not speak to warn the wicked from h is way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require from your hand” –Ez 33:8 (see 33:7-11).

If you, or anyone else, are not warning the homosexuals you know about their need of repentance then you will be judged by God for not doing so. They will die in their sin, perish in hell, and probably curse you for not warning them.

God will hold us accountable. Not for other peoples choices but for our failure to do what we are told to do. We are told to preach repentance from sin to all the nations (Lk 24:46-47). That includes homosexuals. If we pick up the cause of homosexuals, to defend them, then we are guilty of the crime of helping them into the lake of fire.

Certainly we should stand up against people who mistreat any human. However we should not take up the political cause of those who are living in abominations. We can, and should, protect all people we can from violence. But we as Christians dare not take up the cause of sin.

 

So if I think that the State isn't God, and should treat people fairly, I'm going to Hell?

Thanks, Martin, you're typical.


:BangHead:

 

Good post Martin and from the heart as well.

It is unfortunate that some liberal Christians simply refuse to recognize the Word of God for the truth that it is. It just doesn't fit their worldview and God never intended it to.

Another poster on BB suggested not too long ago that there was no such thing as a "liberal Christian". I have never bellieved that, but the more I talk about scripture and the application of it to our daily lives with some of them, the more I am leaning toward the same opinion.

God help us.raying: We all need His strength all the time, not just when it fits our view.

 

No, your response is typical because you did not address any of the Biblical points I made. My points were not about the government (as any reading of my post will show). My points were about Christians taking up the political cause of those who defending their sin and who are unrepentant in their sins and abominations. Maybe you should go through my post point by point? I await your point by point reply.

 

The premise of the OP is flawed. There is no definitive "liberal definition" of the phrase in question. Ask 10 people, liberal or conservative, and probably get 10 answers.

 

Your argument doesn't hold water. First you state that investigators don't know why homosexuals act that way. OK. Then you say that it's not possible therefore to argue that homosexuality is biological. OK, I would accept that. But then you claim that therefore homosexuals choose their lifestyle. That doesn't follow from your facts. You can only conclude that we don't know why homosexuals are as they are. That was the researchers' fact that you quoted. Understand?

 

I stated that people are responsible for their actions. While we may not know why some people are tempted with homosexuality we do know that the actions are a choice.

 

Moderator Note: Reminder that any Topics and/or Posts advocating or condoning homosexuality are in Direct Violation of BB Posting Rule #2. This is a Reminder.

Lady Eagle

 

Yes, that's why I found the question unanswerable - but I didn't know how to express it so succinctly. :thumbs:

 

It's easy to understand why. There is no such thing as "homosexual oppression". It doesn't exist. If it did, one of you could tell us what it is or give us some examples.

 

The question was not, "What is homosexual oppression?" or "Do you know of any examples of homosexual oppression?" but "What is the liberal definition homosexual oppression?"

Two different things.

 

Well, since anything I may say to Marin to refute his "points" may be construed as "supporting or condoning homosexuality," my hands are tied.

When everyone gets their head out of the sand and can understand the difference between Church and State,
perhaps I'll be able to communicate further in this.

 

I think that's what "tell us what it is" is saying. By asking someone to point out examples would make it easier to understand the meaning.

It's all a moot point, however, since it doesn't exist in the first place... except in the minds of those who support the sin of homosexuality.

 

When you learn what God requires of you as a Christian, you won't have any problem communicating. Rewriting God's Word is a tough task amongst Bible believing Christians.

 

Moderator note: A number of personal attacks have been deleted. As such, this thread is being closed without further discussion.

Lady Eagle