THIS IS WAR! END IS NEAR! EPISCOPAL CHURCH APPROVES SAME SEX MARRIAGES

[SarahM777]

Sorry SarahM777 but you're in disagreement with scripture.

Firstly, sexual immorality is not love, it is sin, and we should not love sin nor attempt to treat sin as love.

Secondly, agape love in the NT typically refers to divine love (what God prefers) as Strong's puts it and the purpose of God's divine love does not conflict with the purpose of His divine holiness and obviously is not a license for sinning. You're making a false assertion that is addressed in such NT passages as Romans 6:1–11 and 1 John (cf. 1 John 1:9–10).

The Bible rejects antinomianism. Though Christians are not saved through keeping the Mosaic law, we still have a responsibility to live godly lives as we walk by the HOLY Spirit (Gal 5:16) who continually works to transform us into the image of SINLESS HOLY Christ the Creator (Col 3:1, 7–10).

Instead of going around pulling a few scriptures out of context from the rest of God's Word to falsely teach people that they can immerse themselves in "lifestyles" of great sexual immorality, which is both condemned and sternly rebuked in both the old and new testaments as are the false teachers who wrongly teach such falsehood, turn your Bible to the book of Jude.

As the 'Dictionary of the later New Testament and its Developments' states:

"Jude itself indicates that the primary characteristic of the opponents is antinomianism; they reject the moral authority of Christ (Jude 4) and the law (Jude 8–10). As a consequence, they engage in immoral behavior, particularly sexual immorality (Jude 6–8, 16, 18, 23)."

Is it sinking it yet Sarah or do you want to rebuke Saint Jude for condemning "ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness... just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire."

Note that Jude has a proper exegesis of God's divine love and God's divine holiness (something the false teachers addressed in the book of Jude nor yourself managed to get right).

So did Saint Peter when he penned 2 Peter 2 and 2 Peter 3, noting “the holy commandment delivered to them” (2 Pet 2:21) and of “the commandment of your apostles” (2 Pet 3:2) for in the former text “the holy commandment” is parallel to “the way of righteousness” that was abandoned by the disobedient and for which they were condemned.

Theologian R. J. Bauckham observes that in both of these verses the Christian gospel is conceived of ethically and done so deliberately by Peter in response to the false teachers who had disturbed the community with their advocacy of antinomianism.

I can use big colored fonts too. Anyone can. Using big colored fonts has not made you any less wrong. You ARE wrong.

I never said sexual immorality is agape love. Agape love is NOT LAWLESSNESS. Agape love is what FULFILLS THE LAW.



Romans 13

[SUP]8 [/SUP]Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. [SUP]9 [/SUP]The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,”[SUP][a][/SUP] and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[SUP][b][/SUP] [SUP]10 [/SUP]Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Agape love CAN NOT SIN. Agape love is FULFILLMENT OF THE LAW.

 

[Mitspa]

Is it love to allow people to pervert a whole society and is love afraid to call sin..sin?

 

[SarahM777]

Approving and promoting sexual perversion is not love its hate! homosexuality is not biblical love nor the love that Christ brought to us, its lust.

Where did I say sexual perversion is love?

This is waht i was adressing

2. Its opposite, antinomianism, ousts God's moral law as a dynamic of the gospel and the Christian life. Antinomianism is heresy that tells Christians it's OK to forget about God's law and concentrate solely on agape love... a course which is a justification for degeneration and immoral licence, such as homosexual marriage, rather than promoting the true Christian liberty (i.e. freedom from sin).

Preaching Agape love is NOT preaching antinomianism, this is the meaning of of the word antinomianism

[h=1]Antinomianism
[/h]Antinomianism comes from the Greek meaning lawless. In Christian theology it is a pejorative term for the teaching that Christians are under no obligation to obey the laws of ethics or morality. Few, if any, would explicitly call themselves "antinomian," hence, it is usually a charge leveled by one group against an opposing group.

Antinomianism may be viewed as the polar opposite of legalism, the notion that obedience to a code of religious law is necessary for salvation. In this sense, both antinomianism and legalism are considered errant extremes.


Yet Paul clearly says this in Romans 13

[SUP]8 [/SUP]Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. [SUP]9 [/SUP]The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,”[SUP][a][/SUP] and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[SUP][b][/SUP] [SUP]10 [/SUP]Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

If love is fulfillment of the law then how can one say it's LAWLESSNESS that is being preached when the very thing that is being is the thing that fulfills it?

 

[Mitspa]

Where did I say sexual perversion is love?

This is waht i was adressing



Preaching Agape love is NOT preaching antinomianism, this is the meaning of of the word antinomianism

Antinomianism


Antinomianism comes from the Greek meaning lawless. In Christian theology it is a pejorative term for the teaching that Christians are under no obligation to obey the laws of ethics or morality. Few, if any, would explicitly call themselves "antinomian," hence, it is usually a charge leveled by one group against an opposing group.

Antinomianism may be viewed as the polar opposite of legalism, the notion that obedience to a code of religious law is necessary for salvation. In this sense, both antinomianism and legalism are considered errant extremes.


Yet Paul clearly says this in Romans 13

[SUP]8 [/SUP]Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. [SUP]9 [/SUP]The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,”[SUP][a][/SUP] and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[SUP][b][/SUP] [SUP]10 [/SUP]Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

If love is fulfillment of the law then how can one say it's LAWLESSNESS that is being preached when the very thing that is being is the thing that fulfills it?

Good point...but I think he touched on part of that truth in his post? At least that's how I read it...

1. Legalism effectively ousts agape love as a dynamic of the gospel and the Christian life by reducing both to obedience or conformity to a set of external commands or rules (after the manner of the scribes and Pharisees in the gospels).


Now I agree its much more than a "dynamic" its the very fulfillment of the gospel.

 

[SarahM777]

Good point...but I think he touched on part of that truth in his post? At least that's how I read it...

1. Legalism effectively ousts agape love as a dynamic of the gospel and the Christian life by reducing both to obedience or conformity to a set of external commands or rules (after the manner of the scribes and Pharisees in the gospels).


Now I agree its much more than a "dynamic" its the very fulfillment of the gospel.

I agree on that point and I do also agree that preaching lawlessness is just as wrong,BUT when one says PREACHING AGAPE love is the same as preaching lawlessness I think that is where the problem comes in.

Remember Jesus said this and He quoted Moses

Matthew 22

[SUP]34 [/SUP]Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. [SUP]35 [/SUP]One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: [SUP]36 [/SUP]“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
[SUP]37 [/SUP]Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[SUP][c][/SUP] [SUP]38 [/SUP]This is the first and greatest commandment. [SUP]39 [/SUP]And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[SUP][d][/SUP] [SUP]40 [/SUP]All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two
commandments.”


Luke 10

[SUP]25 [/SUP]On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
[SUP]26 [/SUP]“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
[SUP]27 [/SUP]He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[SUP][c][/SUP]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[SUP][d][/SUP]”

And those two come from Deuteronomy 6 and Leviticus 19.

And if love is fulfillment of the law then how can one preaching lawlessness if that love is the fulfillment of the law? That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Mitspa]

I agree on that point and I do also agree that preaching lawlessness is just as wrong,BUT when one says PREACHING AGAPE love is the same as preaching lawlessness I think that is where the problem comes in.

Remember Jesus said this and He quoted Moses

Matthew 22

[SUP]34 [/SUP]Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. [SUP]35 [/SUP]One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: [SUP]36 [/SUP]“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
[SUP]37 [/SUP]Jesus replied:“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[SUP][c][/SUP] [SUP]38 [/SUP]This is the first and greatest commandment. [SUP]39 [/SUP]And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[SUP][d][/SUP] [SUP]40 [/SUP]All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two
commandments.”


Luke 10

[SUP]25 [/SUP]On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
[SUP]26 [/SUP]“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
[SUP]27 [/SUP]He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[SUP][c][/SUP]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[SUP][d][/SUP]”

And those two come from Deuteronomy 6 and Leviticus 19.

And if love is fulfillment of the law then how can one preaching lawlessness if that love is the fulfillment of the law? That makes no sense whatsoever.

I didn't see that in his post...but many do make that charge...I don't think Age is one of them?

 

[Brother_J_BELGIUM]

This is all part of the falling away. It proves that the end is near, because the falling away must come first. Actually, a homosexual "marriage" being legalized isn't the worst thing; the worst thing is that the Church is accepting all of this. On the one hand, I'm happy that this has happened because it's a sign that the return of our Lord Jesus Christ is drawing nigh; but on the other hand, I'm concerned about the moral decay of the Church. Never in history has there been such a wide acceptance within the Church of homosexual "marriage" and homosexual "sex". When I say Church, I mean the body of Christ, not the Episcopal church or any other church denomination.

 

[blondieindahouse]

We are not under any obligation whatsoever to "fight" an apostate church. Our responsibility is to share with them the truth of Jesus Christ, in love.

Preach the Word
2 Timothy1I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: 2preach the word; be ready in season and out of season;REPROVE, REBUKE, exhort, with great patience and instruction. 3For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,…

Ephesians 5:11Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

 

[SarahM777]

I didn't see that in his post...but many do make that charge...I don't think Age is one of them?

This is what he said Mitspa.

2. Its opposite, antinomianism, ousts God's moral law as a dynamic of the gospel and the Christian life. Antinomianism is heresy that tells Christians it's OK to forget about God's law and concentrate solely on agape love... a course which is a justification for degeneration and immoral licence, such as homosexual marriage, rather than promoting the true Christian liberty (i.e. freedom from sin).

He plainly says speaking of only agape love is a course which is A JUSTIFICATION FOR DEGENERATION AND IMMORAL LICENSE. The very nature of agape love CAN NOT DO SO. Agape love is the TRUE CHRISTIAN LIBERTY which keeps us from sin because it CAN NOT SIN. Agape love is the love fulfills the law.

 

[Mitspa]

This is what he said Mitspa.



He plainly says speaking of only agape love is a course which is A JUSTIFICATION FOR DEGENERATION AND IMMORAL LICENSE. The very nature of agape love CAN NOT DO SO. Agape love is the TRUE CHRISTIAN LIBERTY which keeps us from sin because it CAN NOT SIN. Agape love is the love fulfills the law.

I can see where you would find fault in that statement ...of course we know that real agape love actually is a higher standard than the written code and never approves sinful behavior...maybe some have not come to understand what agape really means?

 

[SarahM777]

I can see where you would find fault in that statement ...of course we know that real agape love actually is a higher standard than the written code and never approves sinful behavior...maybe some have not come to understand what agape really means?

I think you're right on this. I think confuse Agape love with other forms of "love" and don't really understand the distinction.

 

[JackRT]

by Bruce Bawer in his “Stealing Jesus”:

Labels like biblical Christian and Bible-believing Christian, which many conservative Christians attach to themselves, wrongly suggest that there is something unbiblical about the faith of liberal Christians. We might speak of "exclusionists" and "inclusionists," because conservative Christians, unlike liberal Christians, tend to define the word Christian in such a way as to exclude others -- including, in most cases, a large number of their fellow conservative Christians. But it seems to me that the difference between conservative and liberal Christianity may be most succinctly summed up by the difference between two key scriptural concepts: law and love. Simply stated, conservative Christianity focuses primarily on law, doctrine, and authority; liberal Christianity focuses on love, spiritual experience, and what Baptists call the priesthood of the believer. If conservative Christians emphasize the Great Commission -- the resurrected Christ's injunction, at the end of the Gospel according to Matthew, to "go to all nations and make them my disciples" -- liberal Christians place more emphasis on the Great Commandment, which in Luke's Gospel reads as follows: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."

* The Church of Law holds that God loves only the "saved” and that they alone are truly his children; the Church of Love holds that God loves all human beings and that all are his children.

* The Church of Law sees Satan as a real creature, a tempter and deceiver from whom true Christians are defended by their faith but by whom atheists, members of other religions, and "false Christians" are deceived, and whose instruments they can become; for the Church of Love Satan is a metaphor for the potential for evil that exists in each person, Christian or otherwise, and that must be recognized and resisted.

* The Church of Law believes that individuals should be wary of trusting their own minds and emotions, for these can be manipulated by Satan, and that questions and doubts are to be resisted as the work of the Devil; the Church of Love believes that the mind is a gift of God and that God wants us to think for ourselves, to follow our consciences, to ask questions, and to listen for his still, small voice.

* The Church of Law sees "truth" as something established in the Bible and known for sure by true Christians; the Church of Love sees truth as something known wholly only by God toward which the belief statements of religions can only attempt to point the way.

* The Church of Law reads the Bible literally and considers it the ultimate source of truth; the Church of Love insists that the Bible must be read critically, intelligently, and with an understanding of its historical and cultural contexts.

* The Church of Law encourages a suspicion of aesthetic values and a literalistic mentality that tends to thwart spiritual experience; the Church of Love encourages a recognition of mystery and beauty as attributes of the holy.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Antinomianism takes a biblical teaching to an unbiblical conclusion. Antinomianism is contrary to everything the Bible teaches. God expects us to live a life of morality, integrity, and love. Jesus Christ freed us from the ceremonial burdens of the Mosaic Law; however, God's HOLY morality is eternal and unchanging. Read John 2:3-6 and 1 John 3:2-10.

In systematic theology, not to be confused with the cherry picking of scripture that you're engaging in, God's holiness cannot be uncoupled from God's love/grace and cast aside. With the arrival of the Messiah (e.g. Jesus Christ) a New Covenant was established and the Old Covenant fulfilled; however, God's HOLY morality did not change as God's HOLY morality is an extension of Himself and God Himself does not change (e.g. immutability see Malachi 3:6).

As 1 Thessalonians 4 states:

"It is God's will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality" noting that "But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people."

For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person-such a person is an idolater-has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them." -Ephesians 5:3-7.

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." -1 Corinthians 6:9-11.

When people claim to be spiritually regenerated (e.g. born again) (and therefore falling under God's divine love, grace, and forgiveness of sin) but then cast aside God's holiness to live wicked sinful lives marked by immorality such as homosexuality which New Testament biblical authors like John condemn; those same biblical authors state that the very regeneration of those people should be doubted for their life shows that they are still a child of the devil living in an unregenerate state as Jesus taught (see Matthew 7:15-23).

SarahM777, your false argument that people can engage in whatever immoral behaviors they wish to without incurring God's judgment and resulting consequence (e.g. antinomianism) was soundly refuted by biblical authors such as Paul, Jude, Peter, etc... in the HOLY Bible and the false teachers that crept in and taught this heresy were condemned by these biblical authors as I already explained to you in post #28 and #36.

You're teaching heresy and pulling verses out of context from the rest of scripture to try and justify it but you've been soundly refuted. Why don't you give it a rest before I start reporting you to the moderators for wrongly teaching blatant heresy which promotes sexual immorality in violation of this forum's rules.

I never said sexual immorality is agape love. Agape love is NOT LAWLESSNESS. Agape love is what FULFILLS THE LAW. Romans 13 8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,”[a] and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. Agape love CAN NOT SIN. Agape love is FULFILLMENT OF THE LAW.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Sarah, you're quote mining again as is your habit. What I said, in context, is that a genuine exegesis of scripture clearly reveals that God's divine love cannot be uncoupled from God's divine holiness with God's divine holiness cast away. Furthermore, I showed that when you teach that it can be you are teaching a heresy that the biblical authors condemned (along with the false teachers who were teaching it).

Feel free to stop quote mining, engaging in ad hominem, and mischaracterizing what scripture and others say at any time. Sooner is better.

This is what he said Mitspa. He plainly says speaking of only agape love is a course which is A JUSTIFICATION FOR DEGENERATION AND IMMORAL LICENSE. The very nature of agape love CAN NOT DO SO. Agape love is the TRUE CHRISTIAN LIBERTY which keeps us from sin because it CAN NOT SIN. Agape love is the love fulfills the law.

 

[Mitspa]

by Bruce Bawer in his “Stealing Jesus”:

Labels like biblical Christian and Bible-believing Christian, which many conservative Christians attach to themselves, wrongly suggest that there is something unbiblical about the faith of liberal Christians. We might speak of "exclusionists" and "inclusionists," because conservative Christians, unlike liberal Christians, tend to define the word Christian in such a way as to exclude others -- including, in most cases, a large number of their fellow conservative Christians. But it seems to me that the difference between conservative and liberal Christianity may be most succinctly summed up by the difference between two key scriptural concepts: law and love. Simply stated, conservative Christianity focuses primarily on law, doctrine, and authority; liberal Christianity focuses on love, spiritual experience, and what Baptists call the priesthood of the believer. If conservative Christians emphasize the Great Commission -- the resurrected Christ's injunction, at the end of the Gospel according to Matthew, to "go to all nations and make them my disciples" -- liberal Christians place more emphasis on the Great Commandment, which in Luke's Gospel reads as follows: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."

* The Church of Law holds that God loves only the "saved” and that they alone are truly his children; the Church of Love holds that God loves all human beings and that all are his children.

* The Church of Law sees Satan as a real creature, a tempter and deceiver from whom true Christians are defended by their faith but by whom atheists, members of other religions, and "false Christians" are deceived, and whose instruments they can become; for the Church of Love Satan is a metaphor for the potential for evil that exists in each person, Christian or otherwise, and that must be recognized and resisted.

* The Church of Law believes that individuals should be wary of trusting their own minds and emotions, for these can be manipulated by Satan, and that questions and doubts are to be resisted as the work of the Devil; the Church of Love believes that the mind is a gift of God and that God wants us to think for ourselves, to follow our consciences, to ask questions, and to listen for his still, small voice.

* The Church of Law sees "truth" as something established in the Bible and known for sure by true Christians; the Church of Love sees truth as something known wholly only by God toward which the belief statements of religions can only attempt to point the way.

* The Church of Law reads the Bible literally and considers it the ultimate source of truth; the Church of Love insists that the Bible must be read critically, intelligently, and with an understanding of its historical and cultural contexts.

* The Church of Law encourages a suspicion of aesthetic values and a literalistic mentality that tends to thwart spiritual experience; the Church of Love encourages a recognition of mystery and beauty as attributes of the holy.

Is this a fancy way of saying they don't believe the clear and evident reading of the scriptures and reserve the right to change the meaning of scripture to suite themselves? Because that's exactly what I read

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Bruce Bawer is an unrepentant practicing homosexual who liberally promotes the full acceptance homosexual immorality, homosexual marriage, and the homosexual agenda exercising an incorrect exegesis of scripture to promote the sexual immorality which he chooses to engage in and champions. Moving along...

by Bruce Bawer in his “Stealing Jesus”

 

[SarahM777]

Antinomianism takes a biblical teaching to an unbiblical conclusion. Antinomianism is contrary to everything the Bible teaches. God expects us to live a life of morality, integrity, and love. Jesus Christ freed us from the ceremonial burdens of the Mosaic Law; however, God's HOLY morality is eternal and unchanging. Read John 2:3-6 and 1 John 3:2-10.

In systematic theology, not to be confused with the cherry picking of scripture that you're engaging in, God's holiness cannot be uncoupled from God's love/grace and cast aside. With the arrival of the Messiah (e.g. Jesus Christ) a New Covenant was established and the Old Covenant fulfilled; however, God's HOLY morality did not change as God's HOLY morality is an extension of Himself and God Himself does not change (e.g. immutability see Malachi 3:6).

As 1 Thessalonians 4 states:

"It is God's will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality" noting that "But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people."

For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person-such a person is an idolater-has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them." -Ephesians 5:3-7.

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." -1 Corinthians 6:9-11.

When people claim to be spiritually regenerated (e.g. born again) (and therefore falling under God's divine love, grace, and forgiveness of sin) but then cast aside God's holiness to live wicked sinful lives marked by immorality such as homosexuality which New Testament biblical authors like John condemn; those same biblical authors state that the very regeneration of those people should be doubted for their life shows that they are still a child of the devil living in an unregenerate state as Jesus taught (see Matthew 7:15-23).

SarahM777, your false argument that people can engage in whatever immoral behaviors they wish to without incurring God's judgment and resulting consequence (e.g. antinomianism) was soundly refuted by biblical authors such as Paul, Jude, Peter, etc... in the HOLY Bible and the false teachers that crept in and taught this heresy were condemned by these biblical authors as I already explained to you in post #28 and #36.

You're teaching heresy and pulling verses out of context from the rest of scripture to try and justify it but you've been soundly refuted. Why don't you give it a rest before I start reporting you to the moderators for wrongly teaching blatant heresy which promotes sexual immorality in violation of this forum's rules.

I NEVER SAID ANYONE CAN LIVE IN SEXUAL IMMORALITY you're the one claiming I said that and I never did. And again I said agape love IS THE FULFILLMENT OF THE LAW. What I said was agape love CAN NOT commit sexual immorality,commit adultery,murder,steal,covet,take the name of the Lord in vain,make idols,have another god before the most High God.

And again what I also said was that how can you say that someone teaching Agape love (The very thing that fulfills the law is teaching LAWLESSNESS when if one is teaching true agape t is the very thing one is preaching that FULFILLS THE LAW)

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

 

[pwrnJC]

So the late Walter Wink is totally wrong about his interpretation of Paul's stance against homosexuality. Paul is just a vessel, speaking for GOD, then and now. How dare Wink twist the idea that it is perfectly fine that a natural born inclination of being gay or bisexual is NOT "exchanging" the natural for the unnatural. Why, according to Wink's logic..it is fine that gays exist and continue to sodomize because they are only acting out the natural way that they think they are. But, at the same time, heterosexuals would be the culprits that Paul speaks against if they suddenly became 'gay' against what they think they were. This reeks of demonic influence at it's worse!

 

[crossnote]

This is all part of the falling away. It proves that the end is near, because the falling away must come first. Actually, a homosexual "marriage" being legalized isn't the worst thing; the worst thing is that the Church is accepting all of this. On the one hand, I'm happy that this has happened because it's a sign that the return of our Lord Jesus Christ is drawing nigh; but on the other hand, I'm concerned about the moral decay of the Church. Never in history has there been such a wide acceptance within the Church of homosexual "marriage" and homosexual "sex". When I say Church, I mean the body of Christ, not the Episcopal church or any other church denomination.

I agree but I find it difficult to believe that any member of the true Church/Body of Jesus Christ would approve of homosexual marriage. But the Lord knows who are His.