why many religious people will go to hell

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Me2:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Jesus Christ did not teach tolerance toward sin.

didnt he die for EVERY sinner, and Every Sin? </font>[/QUOTE] No. But that isn't the point.

Jesus never taught that sin should be tolerated but rather repented of and forgiven. Repentance means a change of direction away from the sinful behavior.

isnt that "tolerance" to the ultimate degree.

No!!! A million times no. Christ's death was a demonstration of total and utter intolerance toward sin. God's justice, His total intolerance for sin, demanded that a sufficient payment be made. Jesus paid it.

didnt he even take the shame that "sinners" layed on him at the time as they nailed his body to the cross...saying "father, forgive them for they know not what they do"?

Are you really confused about the meanings of tolerance and mercy?

Mercy doesn't validate the transgression, it simply forgives the penalty.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by KenH:
That is simply not true in regards to our relatonship with God. Any sin, regardless of how "small" we may regard it, requires separation from God - apart from the finished work of Christ Jesus.

Ken, perhaps this went over your head. Homos don't have a relationship with Christ.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by Johnv:
1. DD, you're correct when you refer to Romans 1 and homosexual hehavoir being a judgement from God.

2. You'd be wrong, however, to presume that all homosexuals are the recipient of a judgement from God.

3. There are many judgements that God has handed out. For example, famine and earthquakes. Yet, those who are victims of famine or earthquakes today are no more guilty of sin than any of us, and their lifestyle is no more repugnant than those who live in prosperity and clement weather.

4. I disagree that a homosexual sex is worse than heterosexual extramarital sex.

5. Both are inappropriate.

6. Jesus even says that a person who looks at someone who is not a spouse is guilty of adultery, and adultery is a violation of the Ten Commandments.

1. I know.

2. I encourage you to go back and reread Romans 1.

3. At least you aren't arguing apples and oranges. Oh wait, yes you are.

4. So. I gave Scripture.

5. Both are sin. However, homo sin is worse than hetero sins.

6. Violation of the 10 commandments? Are you kidding me? You still think you are bound to the 10 commandments? No wonder you don't get so much of basic theology. The 10 commandments were the summary of the Old Covenant John. Helloooooooo.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
1. SimplyBee,

You might want to disregard the last post (the one that said homosexual sins are worse than heterosexual sexual sins)...

2. I think the summation of all of this would be thus: If you are tempted, don't act. Count yourself blessed to have suffered for Christ.

3. You are what you are - neither I nor another believer can tell you that your feelings are or are not your own fault.

4. But scripture is clear that homosexual relations are something from which we must flee.

1. Charles, keep telling yourself you aren't a liberal. So far it has kept you believing that. I gave Scripture, you gave opinion. This isn't our first controversy where that same scenerio has played out.

2. Homos don't suffer for Christ as they are still bound in their sin. SimplyBee should feel extreme conviction as the feelings/acts are opposed to God's revealed will.

3. We can say they are wrong. That is because we have been commanded to declare the whole counsel of God, and SimplyBee is in rebellion. Sorry Chuckles.

4. Agreed, especially since homos are saved.

 

[Charles Meadows]

I think DD has a different bible than do we. That might explain some of the tangential misinterpretations.

DD, does your bible say "Marcionite canon"?

 

[Me2]

Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Mat 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Mat 7:4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam [is] in thine own eye?


I know the difference between Gods standards and mans standards. He emphatically warns not to judge another.

thats "tolerating" the sin as well as the sinner.

try proverbs..

Pro 22:24 Make no friendship with an angry man; and with a furious man thou shalt not go:
Pro 22:25 Lest thou learn his ways, and get a snare to thy soul.

The Lord Warns to stay away from such. not to "judge" them. But to stay away!

thats tolerating the sin and the sinner.

Although I stand behind everyman eventually receiving impartial Grace, I also stand behind the Lord being Everymans Judge.

Thats not my Job to judge another, nor any other mans on this planet. we are to tolerate, and stay our distance away from such until they are judged by the righteous judge. The Lord Jesus Christ.

Me2

 

[Terry_Herrington]

Originally posted by Scott J:
The NT teaches a gospel of repentance. Christians sin and sometimes grieviously. However, a Christian will not accept sin as their "lifestyle".

A drunk can be saved. A saved drunk might have failures after salvation maybe even for what we might consider a significant time. But he won't go back to being a full-time, unrepentant, God-defying drunk.

AMEN!

Scott, I have never heard it put better that this!

I know something about getting away from God, but, during these backslidden times, I always knew that what I was doing was sin. Praise God for His ability to bring His children back to Him.

 

[Charles Meadows]

DD,

Sorry about the Marcion remark!

I'm not a liberal in the true sense of the word. I'm properly a moderate conservative. And if you'll note I did cite the appropriate scriptures. The difference I guess is that I also read the verses surrounding the salient ones and applied them within the context of scripture as a whole.

What you've done, plain and simple, is twist scripture into supporting your xenophobic stance. Rom 1:26,27 in no wise is saying that all homosexual temptation is secondary to God giving individuals over to reprobate mind - although that has occurred in terms of our society as a whole. How do we know what's in someone's head? Hint - we don't. If someone has homosexual attractions he/she should resist them and pray that they be taken away. That in itself is not sin. And where by the way did you (scripturally) get your position that homosexual sins are worse than heterosexual ones?????

 

[massdak]

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
DD,

Sorry about the Marcion remark!

I'm not a liberal in the true sense of the word. I'm properly a moderate conservative. And if you'll note I did cite the appropriate scriptures. The difference I guess is that I also read the verses surrounding the salient ones and applied them within the context of scripture as a whole.

What you've done, plain and simple, is twist scripture into supporting your xenophobic stance. Rom 1:26,27 in no wise is saying that all homosexual temptation is secondary to God giving individuals over to reprobate mind - although that has occurred in terms of our society as a whole. How do we know what's in someone's head? Hint - we don't. If someone has homosexual attractions he/she should resist them and pray that they be taken away. That in itself is not sin. And where by the way did you (scripturally) get your position that homosexual sins are worse than heterosexual ones?????

if you read romans you get the crux of the result of sinful exclusion of God, and it results in a judgment of giving sinners over to their sinfulness and self perversion, it results in the abomination of homosexuality and it is revealed that it is a serious condition of sin.

the post i first made has shown that adding a sinful name to Christianity is a move to validate homosexuality as less then sin and it is reasoned by some that it is something a person can excuse themselves for. what a person in this sinful condition needs is to recognize this exceedingly sinful condition and the helplessness of it and to turn to the only hope which is in Christ.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Daniel David:
Violation of the 10 commandments? Are you kidding me? You still think you are bound to the 10 commandments?

No, we're not bound by them, as salvation is not contingent upon them. However, we're obligated to adhere to them as a blueprint for living a Godly life. Jesus also instructed us to love the Lord (which the first part of the Commandments give guidance to) and to love our neighbor (which the second part of the Commandments give guidance to).

 

[SimplyBee]

A quick reply:

I am digesting the posts and have some responses, but I would like them to be well thought out and complete rather than quickly fired out for the sake of discussion. I've been at work for the past nine hours and have a lot of reading and writing to do, so bear with me.

--SimplyBee

 

[massdak]

Originally posted by Johnv:
The problem with Massdak's opening post is that it proports that salvation is contingent upon something other than grace. That is a liberali religionist view, and in unscriptural. Scripture says that none of us is righteous. Massdak makes the mistake of thinking that only homosexuals and the like are unrighteous. That very judgement is in and of itself unrighteous.

There is a somewhat similar discussion in another thread which discusses if we are saved even if our doctrine is not 100%. If Massdak is correct, then all who adhere to the false doctrine of KJVOism would be hellbound!!

Thankfully, I have a relationship with my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, which is what saves me, regardless of how many scriptural interpretations or doctrines I might be wrong about, or how many sins I have committed, or how many sins I have not yet committed.

that is a serious charge johnv could you take my original post point by point and show me that it is the way you say and how salvation is contingent upon something other then grace?
i dare you to question my motive as excluding Gods grace. you just might be talking about a different jesus then the bible tells

 

[SimplyBee]

Response #1, for pinoybaptist:
"Yet you never gave us any explanation. You gave us lamentations." Yeah, I did. Sorry about that. Put yourself in my shoes and read some of the comments that are in this thread (or on this board in general, it doesn’t take long). It's a bit easy to get frustrated.

I really, really like your post, though. The way I see it, you ask three questions (forgive me for paraphrasing):
1. [Am I] a practicing homosexual?
2. [Am I] a recovered homosexual?
3. [Am I] struggling with conflicting feelings and unsure what to do?

I have a really strong suspicion as to why you want to know the answers to these questions.
If I answer yes to #1: forget it, there is no way I can be sincere, my opinions are therefore no longer valid.
If I answer yes to #2, then all praise to Jesus Christ, I meet the criteria - I am a real Christian and can be dealt with as such on friendly terms.
If I answer yes to #3, maybe someone would have compassion for me and give me some resources to steer me in the right direction so that I may end up as a #2.

That's the only reason I can gather that you would ask such a question. I would (out of respect for you) never ask you if you have regular sexual relations (we'll go on the assumption that this is what you mean by 'practicing') with anyone, married or not, same or opposite gender. In my opinion, those are personal questions that don't need to be aired on an anonymous message board.

I'm not going to answer. Not because I don't have an answer, of course, but because you must have sensed some sort of sincerity in my writing and you need to know whether to treat me as friend or foe, clean or dirty, sane or otherwise. You can’t accept the fact that I am genuinely interested in Christ’s truth over and above all things, and so you need toto either discount me altogether or ‘know’ that I am ‘on your side’, so to speak. Sharing my opinion is fruitless and will end up in a nasty shouting match which will leave everyone angry, and I've been down that road too many times to do it again. What I will do, though, is offer you some insight as to how I approach this subject (and others) in my continual search for truth.

The amount of time that I have put into this study is measured in years, not weeks, hours, or days. There is of course the reading of the scripture - both the related and the unrelated - to try to determine the meanings. There is the study of the original Greek and Hebrew writings to try to understand more. There are countless hours, countless volumes of commentary from the extreme left, the extreme right, and the extreme number of positions in between. There is an attempt to exhaust every possible academic outlet available to help in determining what the scripture says and how it should be interpreted. All of this study leads me to a particular stance on an issue, a modification of my belief structure, or an otherwise acceptably researched postulate.

But we all know that all that research is nowhere near enough. No, this final researched opinion becomes a theory that is then put through the spiritual ringer. Hours and hours of prayer, begging the Holy Spirit to show me the truth. Countless conversations with trusted friends, pastors, and people with strong beliefs on either side of the issue. I pray by myself, I pray with others, I ask others to pray for me… there’s an awful lot of prayer going on, and I can’t help but think that’s a good thing. Then, and only then, after I feel as thought the Holy Spirit has spoken to me about the truth of my stance, do I accept it as truth (which then is reevaluated if necessary).

This is not an issue that I think I have all the answers to and just throw around my opinions willy-nilly. No, this is a intensely passionate pursuit of the truth at all costs. I meet too many gay men and women who are dying, suffering, crying out in solitary anguish because of the void that is in their hearts. And while there are most certainly exceptions, the generalization made by the gay community towards the church is that they are cold and judgmental. Very few if any gay people whom I meet believe the church to be a place where they will find unconditional love and people who will actually care for them and about them; a place where they will find the peace that they are desperately searching for. Folks, we have become so passionate about making our opinions known that even if it was not our intent, the love of Christ is not showing in our words and actions. I’m just as guilty of it as anyone. It is hard for me to read a response like Terry_Herrington’s first post here and not become angered and have a poor attitude.

Again, thanks to you and the other members of this board. The opportunity to do this small bit of writing is still proving to be a very good thing for my soul.

--SimplyBee

 

[Daniel David]

Chuckles, once again you fail to deal with Scripture. That is your problem though.

 

[Daniel David]

So John believes we are saved by grace and sactified by works. Paul called the galatians foolish for the very belief. What does that make Johnny?

 

[KenH]

I see that Daniel evidently believes one can be saved and then live any old way he pleases.

 

[GeneMBridges]

Originally posted by Daniel David:
So John believes we are saved by grace and sactified by works. Paul called the galatians foolish for the very belief. What does that make Johnny?

I would hope and expect that those that name the name of Christ could and would, in fact, not use ad hom attacks on the character of others, whether insinuated or overt when the rules specifically forbid that and it detracts from discussion of the issues themselves.

Likewise, while I have my feelings on this subject and have in the past articulated them at great length, I will simply say that the repeated use of the term "homos" on page three of this discussion in the manner used is no different to the homosexual than the use of the term "nigger" to a black man or woman or the term "boy" to a black male. It is perjorative, plain and simple. It appears muliple times, all in posts from you, Daniel David.

I don't know what's worse, the fact that it was used repeatedly, and, I hope in ignorance of the usage or the fact that the moderator(s) of the forum let it go as if it was okay, assuming that one has been by here to read each post.

While in no wise a moderator, having done my time on other Christian webites in my time, I do know this, while I do not know the character of any person: We who name the name of Christ can at least take the time to not use perjorative language of others, even those whom we believe "have no relationship with Christ," or those brothers and sisters with whom we have sincere disagreements. It does NOTHING to further either our argument or the gospel.


There are, in fact, non-Christians who come here and read and lurk. This I know for a fact. Some are homosexual. This I also know as a fact. Simply Bee stated that the generalization that the gay subculture makes about us is that we are a place where there is no love, that is cold, and where they can expect no peace at all. Even for those that do repent, this remains true, as we make them jump through more hoops than others who come to us steeped in sin from head to toe. It's just not homosexual sin in which they come to us. I can't help but think that the language in particular, Daniel David, you chose to use repeatedly on page three only lends credence to those opinions of us. Let us not set any more stumbling blocks between ourselves and those who are either wrestling with this issue personally or who simply do not know Christ at all. In the end, we will be judged for many things. Let's not add that to that list.

 

[SimplyBee]

Response #2 for Scott J:
“But usually when someone speaks of homosexuality the way you have, they aren't referring to a sin that they think should be repented of and resisted but rather one that we narrow minded Bible believers should just accept.” This is very quite interesting to me. Could you possibly point out what in my post gave you this impression? I would genuinely like to know.

“I hope it will be helpful to point out that this may be the root of your problem. You don't just "happen" to be gay.” Let me further explain the statement you refer to. My identification - who I am – is a follower of Jesus Christ. The statement that I “just happen” to be gay was meant to illustrate that being gay does not make up my identity but rather that I am first and foremost His, and the fact that I am gay is really quite secondary to the equation when you are trying to figure out the mystery that is SimplyBee.

I respectfully offer this small bit, however, for you to consider: when I first read your post, it is difficult to describe in words how deeply offended I was by the statement I quote above. My first reaction was “well, if you’re so much of an expert, then what exactly have I been dealing with for the past two decades?” It was misinterpretation on my part, I think. When you are dealing with someone who is so intimately familiar with this issue - someone who has put so much blood, sweat, and tears into it, whenever you casually make a statement that maybe I had not fully considered my current situation… it is just difficult to take. Not so much because you have a differing opinion, but just that I interpreted it as being arrogant – almost like you were mocking my search for truth. There was (or is, I suppose) really no way for you to know that or even separate me from someone who is just here to cause trouble. I say all of that to say this: if you are having discussions with someone who is or claims to be both gay and Christian, understand that the likelihood is extremely strong that they are already intimately familiar with the finer aspects of this viewpoint – it just kind of comes with the territory.

God bless you all.
SimplyBee

 

[KenH]

Gene,

Daniel David is pretty much a thorn in the side of any substantive discussion that he interjects himself into on this board.

Thank you for your well reasoned retort to him.

 

[SimplyBee]

Hey GeneMBridges, thanks. I was hoping there was someone who would, while not endorsing my theological viewpoints, recognize the seriousness of the social landscape on this issue. My presence here is most certainly not to push my opinions on homosexuality off on anyone, because I am seriously outnumbered and have done that too many times as it is (with no avail, I might add).

It’s just that you would be amazed at the response you get when you show a gay person even just a small, minute taste of the love and peace that comes from a relationship with Christ. It is truly an incredible manifestation of the Holy Spirit to see a gay man or woman become saved. It would just…(forgive the expression)… knock your socks off. The rest – the opinions, the convictions, the theology - trust God with that. I haven’t been disappointed so far.