Supreme Court Upholds Gay Marriages

[Zaac]

So, according to your logic there is no starting place, no singular sin to start with in convincing them they are sinners in general. However, general sin cannot be proven until you first prove they have sinned singularly!

That's not according to my logic. my logic says, if you in humbleness , humility and love are trying to point someone to Christ, why throw the stumbling block of being confrontational into the mix? People , in general, shut down and will not listen to you if they feel attacked.

As I've said many times before, folks in the evangelical church have pet sins. And using one of those pet sins as a singular starting point to convince someone they are a sinner becomes more about us winning an argument than it does convincing them they are sinners.

God draws people unto Himself. The Holy Spirit convicts. You're not convincing anyone.

Don't you think it would be a bit easier to show them they are a sinner by showing them that they've committed the same sins as practically every other person in the world? Don't you think it would be easier to show someone that they have , for instance, told a lie, than it would be to convince them that homosexual sex is a sin?

Are you trying to point them to Christ or win a political argument?

Try telling people they are sinners in general without providing specific instances IN THEIR LIFE?

Try branding people and making them feel like one particular sin is worse than all others and see how effective you are in pointing them to Christ.

The witnessing of the Gospel should be relational. and the easiest way to make someone understand what you're trying to say when witnessing Christ is to put them on COMMON GROUND with you. You don't stick them on an isolated island of "the worst" sin.

You've told a lie. And you know that they have told lies. WOW. That makes them a sinner worthy of eternal separation from a HOLY God.

Why would something like homosexual sex even enter the topic of discussion? When people focus on these pet sins, it's because they are trying to win an argument and not trying to "win a soul" for Christ.

You ever wonder why avowed atheists, homosexuals, etc will ask Christians what they think about these things? It's because they want to argue. They aren't trying to understand. They are trying to win an argument.

And the church shouldn't fall into the same trap of framing the conversation around pet sins.

According to your logic, there can be no convincing of sin at all, because you deny one can begin with a particular sin to prove they are sinners.

Stop being silly and expressing an opinion about my logic which you are obviously incorrect about. :laugh:

If you cannot begin with a particular sin, you have no basis to prove they are sinners at all. Think about it before responding.

Read the rest of my response. Who in their right mind would start with homosexuality? That's about arguing and winning. It's not about pointing anyone to CHrist. There are much easier approaches to do that if that is your intent.

 

[Aaron]

I don't understand why Christians are so obsessed with gay marriage.

I don't understand the denial of professing Christians.

Does the State approving a heterosexual couple have any standing with God?

Yes it does have a standing. He will judge that state.

 

[gigabyte71]

That's not according to my logic. my logic says, if you in humbleness , humility and love are trying to point someone to Christ, why throw the stumbling block of being confrontational into the mix? People , in general, shut down and will not listen to you if they feel attacked.

This is a good point. Maybe I am incorrect here, and anyone can feel free to correct me, but, with the exception for the preaching of Peter on the day of Pentecost, I don't recall any instances of conversions that started with confronting people about their sin.

 

[Jerome]

Teaching notes for a quarterly, text is Genesis 18 & 19

"The sin of Sodom: The text does not explicitly state the sin that brought God’s judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah; in fact, the Bible does not imply that a particular sin brought this destruction. It seems reasonable that these people sinned in many ways.

Isaiah 3:8-9 says that their speech and deeds are against the Lord. This may refer to blasphemy and acts of deliberate defiance of God. Jeremiah 23:14 indicates that the cities of the plain were guilty of adultery, lying, and injustice. In addition, the prophet Ezekiel (16:49) outlined a number of Sodom’s transgressions: pride, gluttony, luxurious living, and oppression of the poor. These lists do not overlap in their accusations; therefore, we must conclude that city was guilty of a broad range of sins.

Traditionally, many Jewish and Christian commentators have concluded that homosexuality was at the heart of Sodom’s wickedness. Genesis Nineteen gives some indication of sexual sin in Sodom."

More here

 

[Revmitchell]

People need to know why they need Jesus. People need to know just exactly what the cross means and why Jesus blood had to be shed. You cannot deal with those issues unless you discuss the sin of men. It is just not possible.

 

[gigabyte71]

People need to know why they need Jesus. People need to know just exactly what the cross means and why Jesus blood had to be shed. You cannot deal with those issues unless you discuss the sin of men. It is just no possible.

Aside from the sermon that Peter preached on the day of Pentecost, is there an instance in the New Testament that you can point to that validates this? I can't recall an instance where Paul was speaking about the requirements of salvation where he said you had to believe you are a sinner.

I am not doubting you on this, but I would like to see some proof.

 

[Revmitchell]

Aside from the sermon that Peter preached on the day of Pentecost, is there an instance in the New Testament that you can point to that validates this? I can't recall an instance where Paul was speaking about the requirements of salvation where he said you had to believe you are a sinner.

I am not doubting you on this, but I would like to see some proof.

Well I do not know what gospel message you are preaching but the one of the bible certainly does. You cannot get to the death and shed blood of Christ without talking about why He shed his blood and died.

Paul said that the law is not what saves us but it is what shows us that we are sinners (Romans 3:20)

In contrast to salvation being a free gift Paul wrote that the wage of sin is death. (Romans 6:23)

Jesus Himself told people to repent, Peter said to repent in Acts 2 & 3.

Paul preached repentance in Acts 8, 17 and 26.


However, what Peter preached on the day of pentecost is evidence enough.

 

[gigabyte71]

Well I do not know what gospel message you are preaching but the one of the bible certainly does. You cannot get to the death and shed blood of Christ without talking about why He shed his blood and died.

Paul said that the law is not what saves us but it is what shows us that we are sinners (Romans 3:20)

In contrast to salvation being a free gift Paul wrote that the wage of sin is death. (Romans 6:23)

Jesus Himself told people to repent, Peter said to repent in Acts 2 & 3.

Paul preached repentance in Acts 8, 17 and 26.


However, what Peter preached on the day of pentecost is evidence enough.

You have proved my point, next time you should check your references before posting. Acts 8 doesn't even have Paul in it.

Are you this friendly to the people you talk to face to face? /sarcasm

 

[Revmitchell]

You have proved my point, next time you should check your references before posting. Acts 8 doesn't even have Paul in it.

Are you this friendly to the people you talk to face to face? /sarcasm

Never mind I will just add you to my list.

 

[Yeshua1]

There is a general presumption made when speaking of Sodom and Gomorrah, that focuses on homosexuality as the major sin. It is the obvious target for the unlearned Christian to attack because it works well with those who prefer to use the law to bring repentance.

Ezekeiel 16:49-50:"Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen."

God states clearly that he destroyed Sodom's sins because of their pride, their excess of food while the poor and needy suffered; sexual activity is not even mentioned. Yet homosexuality is a result of any dying culture. Yes it is bad, but something else precedes it that God hates as well but we never speak of. Pride and arrogance are the American way. Our bill of rights are more important than denying ourselves to be more like Him. We think our constitution is the Kingdom of God. It is not. Not even close. The U.S. got blessed after WW2 and became a very fat, "I want it now" people. Idleness of time is proven. We are the inventor of modern entertainment to cure our boredom. Excuses are made to justify ignoring the poor by charging them as lazy. In most traditional mindsets the poor need to earn our sympathy. We have caused the very reasons homosexuality has blossomed, and still blindly focus our efforts on repealing laws that will never cure the disease. This will be our fall.

Except that God clearly stated that theur great sinning was lusting and going after strange flesh!

No doubt they had a multitude of sin issues, but that particular one was what God them judged by God...

 

[Yeshua1]

Huh? Why would God prohibit homosexual unions? There's no such thing.


violated what? Something that doesn't exist?




Is what morally a sin?

Can one be really saved by the grace of God, and yet still live in sin with those of same sex without any regrers/remorse?

And how can a church teach come to Jesus for salvation, and yet also excuse that as being legit now in sight of God?