born gay

[Meshullam]

Why not and no it was not murder as we understand. But, what about Aaron's sons or the the sons of Reueben. God killed them. Or my bible is wrong one.

Be aware that the hebrew word for 'kill' is different in meaning depending on context, and is translated different ways into the greek teachings of the apostles. Some forms of it also mean 'to anull', to 'abolish (the state of)' or 'to bring low'.

Physical killing is obviously wrong on a higher level. There is no hint of 'love those around you' in committing a killing. and there is no 'Vengaence is God's' when we take vengeance for ourselves.

But in the context of the commandments, the word 'rasah' (meaning loosely 'kill') does somewhat refer to the 'intentional' killing of another person.

But that does not mean that a passionate crime, or a crime of punishment is not 'intentional'.

You need to understand the difference between compassion and lawfullness.

Lawfullness decrees that if there is a premeditated murder, that it is 'permissible' for the death penalty to be given. In fact, under 'law', it is permissible for a person to act eye for eye in most cases. Under the law, people CAN be put to death. But permissible and beneficial are two different things.

The law is not without flaws. And not without loopholes and misunderstanding.

It is lawful for a person to be given the 'sentence' that stands for their crime. But it is compassionate to forgive.

The executioner, if he were to become 'righteous' would not be an executioner at all. Make sense?

Forgiveness is the pinnacle of what the law fails to do.

 

[PS]

Be aware that the hebrew word for 'kill' is different in meaning depending on context, and is translated different ways into the greek teachings of the apostles. Some forms of it also mean 'to anull', to 'abolish (the state of)' or 'to bring low'.

Physical killing is obviously wrong on a higher level. There is no hint of 'love those around you' in committing a killing. and there is no 'Vengaence is God's' when we take vengeance for ourselves.

But in the context of the commandments, the word 'rasah' (meaning loosely 'kill') does somewhat refer to the 'intentional' killing of another person.

But that does not mean that a passionate crime, or a crime of punishment is not 'intentional'.

You need to understand the difference between compassion and lawfullness.

Lawfullness decrees that if there is a premeditated murder, that it is 'permissible' for the death penalty to be given. In fact, under 'law', it is permissible for a person to act eye for eye in most cases. Under the law, people CAN be put to death. But permissible and beneficial are two different things.

The law is not without flaws. And not without loopholes and misunderstanding.

It is lawful for a person to be given the 'sentence' that stands for their crime. But it is compassionate to forgive.

The executioner, if he were to become 'righteous' would not be an executioner at all. Make sense?

Forgiveness is the pinnacle of what the law fails to do.

So when they were about to stone the woman taken in adultery, would you say that was lawful killing and if so by whose law?

Remember the Ten Commandments say unequivocally thou shall not kill and there was Jewish law that allowed killing even for theft. Where do you draw the line?

 

[MaggieMye]

Nonnicknametouse: " He is angry with god because he wants to be gay and go to heaven." This is your son wanting to BE God and make the rules. This is idolatry and rebellion, not any different than what Lucifer exuded before his fall. Homosexuality is 100% emotional dysfunction. EMOTIONAL. Think back to your son's early years. What were the family dynamics? Are you, as a mother, willing to LEARN about the spiritual side of homosexuality? Are you willing to take responsibility if any is yours? Are you willing to learn about generational curses, word curses, SO that you can TAKE ACTION and break them of and then learn to prophesy emotional and sexual HEALTH to your son?
If so, email me. [email protected]
Maggie

Maggie

 

[CDavid]

Now im not comparing being gay to having mental handicaps...but using the phrase of God doesnt make mistakes is just kinda bleh in this discussion. Maybe gays arent a mistake anyways?

Before the enlightenment of the 1960s, homosexuality was treated as a mental disorder (which it is in most cases) with moderate success, at least for those who sought treatment. But, the intellectual elite, many of whom are themselves sodomites, control institutes of "higher learning" (now that's a laugh) and the psychiatry industry, have rewritten all the rules of norm. They expect us to swallow sodomy (no pun intended) as a norm.

If there is no sin in the world, there is no need for a savior and no need for God. This born gay theory, is part of the larger plan by Satan, to remove the very thought of sin and it's consequences, and eliminate the need to have faith in our Lord Jesus.

 

[mpaper345]

I do not believe that someone is born gay but is a choice.When a baby is born it is innocent until it makes wrong choices later in life which all will do because we are not born knowing God.Adam and Eve were created knowing God but we are not so we will sin before we come to God.We do not inherit Adam and Eve's sin but when they sinned they gave us a choice between good and evil and we are born not knowing God so we will sin before we come to God.

Babies are innocent when they are born but born in to sin which does not happen until later on according to their choices.

The Bible says the angels always behold the face of the Father for the little ones.

I do not believe anyone is born to do any kind of sin that they cannot overcome and saying someone is born gay is kind of them making it out that they cannot do anything about it which is not true.Like it is an excuse to do that act and it is alright and the secular world loves it because it gives them liberty to act how they want and they are still right with God or to diminish Christianity.

 

[Meshullam]

So when they were about to stone the woman taken in adultery, would you say that was lawful killing and if so by whose law?

Remember the Ten Commandments say unequivocally thou shall not kill and there was Jewish law that allowed killing even for theft. Where do you draw the line?

Yes, Jesus said 'nor do I condemn you', because the others were also sinful and they wanted to stone her, and also to have Jesus killed. They were no better than she was'. I know the story well.

Jesus also said to the people 'You have heard it said, eye for eye, and tooth for tooth, but I tell you, whomever may strike you on the left cheek, turn to him the other also'.

The law said they could be 'stoned'. Some countries laws still say that people can be put to death. And as God says, the authorities have that power. But Jesus understood God's way fully, and in it he forgave and taught forgiveness. And God was happy with him.

as I said, law can be mistaken. People twist God's law every day to condone killing. The Pharisees did it back then, and they mistook the law in their hard hearts and turned it. And who would dare argue? Because their argument was valid in the cold logic that they assimilated themselves into, but they never quite grasped 'compassion'.

The law of God needs to be read with the right way of mind, a spirit of compassion, spirit of holyness, with insight.

Anyone can read God's book and turn it into an excuse to be ahrsh and violent and pretend that condemnation is 'righteous judgement' and that 'judgement' is the same as punishement, or to condone violence and killling or vengaence wrapped in a cloak of self-righteous anger. But it takes a special kind of man to live in compassion even when the very book he lives by is being engineered against its principles.

I don't believe the bible tells me that I am ever right to kill, for any reason.

'All is permissible, but not all is benificial'. God gave us the ability to kill, to see killing, and to be killed. I believe it's because it's the best way to show someone the pointlessness of it all.

 

[Meshullam]

Nonnicknametouse: " He is angry with god because he wants to be gay and go to heaven." This is your son wanting to BE God and make the rules. This is idolatry and rebellion, not any different than what Lucifer exuded before his fall. Homosexuality is 100% emotional dysfunction. EMOTIONAL. Think back to your son's early years. What were the family dynamics? Are you, as a mother, willing to LEARN about the spiritual side of homosexuality? Are you willing to take responsibility if any is yours? Are you willing to learn about generational curses, word curses, SO that you can TAKE ACTION and break them of and then learn to prophesy emotional and sexual HEALTH to your son?
If so, email me. [email protected]
Maggie

Maggie

So you just called her son the devil's mirror, and blamed her for his state, then made out like she isn't already trying to learn from it all, and finally offered your hand.

classic psycho-manipulation.

Don't listen to her nonnicknametouse.

If you sin, and you find perhaps one sin difficult, something you can't let go of, a trap you keep falling into, do you say to yourself 'I hate myself' or 'God hates me' or 'I'm a bad person'?

If you do, imagine how much your son does. How much guilt he probably already feels. He covers it with anger because he doesn't know how to cope.

You both need to stop.

You are not perfect. And your son is not perfect. But I tell you, God does not favour the mean, the deceptive. He favours the downtrodden, like you and your boy right now.

Talk to him like a son, not like 'a gay'.

We all sin. And he;ll be sitting right up there with us, I can guarantee that to you. I do not care what anyone says back to me. There is nothing worse about his sin than about any of mine, or yours.

HE won't be one with a woman. And he looks at his own image (man) and prefers that to the image of what he can 'look after' and be 'husband to'.

That is not something anyone should hate him for. I am sure he is very, very far from the devil.

I've been guilty of being angry at God, a LOT OF TIMES.

And you know what God said to me?

'When I have wrought with you for my very NAMES SAKE, then you shall know at that time that I am God'.

It's that moment where God tells you ''I'm not who you think I am, son'.

We portray an image of God that we gather from personified words and linguistic concepts we don't actually understand the way the hebrews do.

And portraying that demonic torture hate God is just as bad as making a gold statue and bowing down to it or worshipping the carnal-mind of oneself anyway. BUt poeple do it every day; blaspheme the spirit of holiness and good-will.

They tell decent people they're worthless because of one sin, when they have an abundance of their own!

They tell people they aren't enough. They threaten with a hell that they do not even understand the meaning of.

They call God evil more than your son does, because they put themselves above others and pretend like they are somehow chosen, not for what they do, or because God loves his creations, but because they are 'better' than you!

What an irony!

Do not listen to these people. They will spoil your spirit and trample on your soul.

God knows what we all are to be before we have even lived at all, and if there was not a plan, then God's will is as useless as the hate your son receives.

But there is a plan, my love, and it's the most beautiful plan that ever came to be. Just you watch.

Show your son the compassion that you would wish to be shown.

 

[PS]

Yes, Jesus said 'nor do I condemn you', because the others were also sinful and they wanted to stone her, and also to have Jesus killed. They were no better than she was'. I know the story well.

Jesus also said to the people 'You have heard it said, eye for eye, and tooth for tooth, but I tell you, whomever may strike you on the left cheek, turn to him the other also'.

The law said they could be 'stoned'. Some countries laws still say that people can be put to death. And as God says, the authorities have that power. But Jesus understood God's way fully, and in it he forgave and taught forgiveness. And God was happy with him.

as I said, law can be mistaken. People twist God's law every day to condone killing. The Pharisees did it back then, and they mistook the law in their hard hearts and turned it. And who would dare argue? Because their argument was valid in the cold logic that they assimilated themselves into, but they never quite grasped 'compassion'.

The law of God needs to be read with the right way of mind, a spirit of compassion, spirit of holyness, with insight.

Anyone can read God's book and turn it into an excuse to be ahrsh and violent and pretend that condemnation is 'righteous judgement' and that 'judgement' is the same as punishement, or to condone violence and killling or vengaence wrapped in a cloak of self-righteous anger. But it takes a special kind of man to live in compassion even when the very book he lives by is being engineered against its principles.

I don't believe the bible tells me that I am ever right to kill, for any reason.

'All is permissible, but not all is benificial'. God gave us the ability to kill, to see killing, and to be killed. I believe it's because it's the best way to show someone the pointlessness of it all.

Thank you for your considered reply Meshullam. You are so right to say, "

Anyone can read God's book and turn it into an excuse to be harsh and violent and pretend that condemnation is 'righteous judgement' and that 'judgement' is the same as punishment, or to condone violence and killing or vengeance wrapped in a cloak of self-righteous anger."

You will know from the forum that people may quote the same passage of scripture in support of opposing view points and an example is 1 Corinthians 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me—but not everything is beneficial."

If you check it out in the Bible you will see it is in quotes, these are not the words of Paul, he was quoting a common saying which originated from Plato. The Corinthians loved to quote this because it meant (in their minds) that immorality was permissible.

Of course this is wrong and Paul went on to put them right, but this is the reason there are so many conflicting views on the forums because although people quote scripture, they do not always fully understand the meaning of it. I hope you don't mind me saying.

This brings us to the matter of turning the other cheek which is also found in Lamentations Chapter 3 verse 30 it reads, "let him give his cheek to the smiter.”

Now even today people in different cultures have a clean hand and an unclean hand. This is to do with hygiene. So suppose I was to hit you with my right hand, it would land on your left cheek, so if you turned your other cheek towards me I wouldn't be able to hit you because then I would need to use my left hand to hit you on the right cheek. But if my left hand, according to my culture, is unclean, then I would not be able to hit you because I would have committed a serious offence.

This is why we need to be so careful when interpreting scripture.

May God bless you.

 

[dashadow]

Here's my thoughts on the subject (now that I've consumed an entire pot of coffee and my brain is functioning somewhat)-

The Bible is very clear on the topic of homosexuality; God says it is an abomination. Nowhere does it call blindness, or deafness, or being born with only one arm, or mental handicaps, an abomination (wait, it doesn't right? More coffee!!).

Based on that alone, it makes zero sense to me that God would create a tiny child who is, at birth, gay.

I do think that each and every person is born with their very own unique set of traits (duh, right?) and therefore, also with their very own unique set of weaknesses, things they are likely to be tempted by as they grow up.

For instance, some people's downfall is alcohol. Personally, that doesn't tempt me in the slightest. However, I have a really hard time saying no to cake...cookies...ice cream. I know a lot of people who don't understand why that's hard for me; they just aren't tempted by deliciousness, I guess.

Also, they're skinnier than I am.

Anyway, I wasn't BORN a sugar-fiend. I didn't come out of the womb demanding doughnuts. I didn't much care one way or another about sweets until I was older. At some point in my childhood, I was exposed to baked goods, and had I not had my mother to tell me "no more", I probably would have eaten nothing but cake. Now, I fight the temptation to gorge on sweet foods, because hey, remember gluttony? Yeah, bad stuff.

My point is, that particular weakness, that temptation, was triggered for me in my childhood. And instead of saying "No thanks", I said "More please!"

But it doesn't mean that people are born as gluttons, or gay, or alcoholics, or murderers, or adulterers. At some point, they are presented with a choice to become that way; to give in to the temptation, or not.

...I hope all that made the kind of sense I intended it to.

I think this is spot on. I believe some people are born being more susceptible to lust. If they are raised in an environment that doesn't discourage inappropriate sexual activity, that lust may begin to pervert them. In some instances that perversion is fed by those in position of power who take advantage of them, relatives, priests, teachers, etc.

I don't think there is any way to prove people are born homosexual. Nor do I think there is a way to disprove it. But I know for a fact that some people choose to be so.

 

[Meshullam]

Thank you for your considered reply Meshullam. You are so right to say, "

You will know from the forum that people may quote the same passage of scripture in support of opposing view points and an example is 1 Corinthians 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me—but not everything is beneficial."

If you check it out in the Bible you will see it is in quotes, these are not the words of Paul, he was quoting a common saying which originated from Plato. The Corinthians loved to quote this because it meant (in their minds) that immorality was permissible.

Of course this is wrong and Paul went on to put them right, but this is the reason there are so many conflicting views on the forums because although people quote scripture, they do not always fully understand the meaning of it. I hope you don't mind me saying.

This brings us to the matter of turning the other cheek which is also found in Lamentations Chapter 3 verse 30 it reads, "let him give his cheek to the smiter.”

Now even today people in different cultures have a clean hand and an unclean hand. This is to do with hygiene. So suppose I was to hit you with my right hand, it would land on your left cheek, so if you turned your other cheek towards me I wouldn't be able to hit you because then I would need to use my left hand to hit you on the right cheek. But if my left hand, according to my culture, is unclean, then I would not be able to hit you because I would have committed a serious offence.

This is why we need to be so careful when interpreting scripture.

May God bless you.

Yes indeed, turning the other cheek was a way of showing humility and meekness, but also a way to shame the aggressor and he would then confine himself by his own silly laws.

He will hit a man in anger but if he should turn the right cheek, he won't hit him because he believes his left hand is somehow unclean. It just goes to show the ridiculous nature of some laws and superstitions.

when Paul says 'I can do anything, but not all is benificial', he also goes on to say 'nobody should seek for their own gain, but for the gain of others'.

This to me, also puts a new spin on the concept of what benefits him. He does not intrinsically use it to speak of his own immortality, or to live for his own gain, even if that gain be immortality, but instead he says 'do it for others, do what benefits THEM'.

This is the true spirit of holiness. Self sacrifice breeds children, and their names are freedom, hope, and compassion.

peace.

 

[PS]

Yes indeed, turning the other cheek was a way of showing humility and meekness, but also a way to shame the aggressor and he would then confine himself by his own silly laws.

He will hit a man in anger but if he should turn the right cheek, he won't hit him because he believes his left hand is somehow unclean. It just goes to show the ridiculous nature of some laws and superstitions.

when Paul says 'I can do anything, but not all is benificial', he also goes on to say 'nobody should seek for their own gain, but for the gain of others'.

This to me, also puts a new spin on the concept of what benefits him. He does not intrinsically use it to speak of his own immortality, or to live for his own gain, even if that gain be immortality, but instead he says 'do it for others, do what benefits THEM'.

This is the true spirit of holiness. Self sacrifice breeds children, and their names are freedom, hope, and compassion.


peace.

If I can explain about the clean and unclean hands Meshullam. It isn't superstition, there is a very good reason for it. Some people, and it happens in the UK where I live and it will happen in America as well, sit round a communal cooking pot and dip their fingers in the bowl and pop the food in their mouth. I think they do that with their right hand but I am not sure.

So for hygiene reasons, when they go to the toilet they wipe their bottom with their left hand. Just imagine if they put their unclean left hand into the communal food bowl.

It goes further, if their hand is cut off for theft, it isn't just a case of loosing a hand which is bad enough, it means nobody will eat with them, they are cast out from society and they could starve to death.

The food laws in the Old Testament are also important for very good reasons also, they may not always apply today but five thousand years ago they were very, very sensible. I have seen atheists scoff, but they don't understand, and unfortunately neither do a lot of Christians.

The same hygiene problems arise with gay sex and I don't know for sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if this is why the Bible comes out so strongly against it.

Be good.

 

[Meshullam]

If I can explain about the clean and unclean hands Meshullam. It isn't superstition, there is a very good reason for it. Some people, and it happens in the UK where I live and it will happen in America as well, sit round a communal cooking pot and dip their fingers in the bowl and pop the food in their mouth. I think they do that with their right hand but I am not sure.

So for hygiene reasons, when they go to the toilet they wipe their bottom with their left hand. Just imagine if they put their unclean left hand into the communal food bowl.

It goes further, if their hand is cut off for theft, it isn't just a case of loosing a hand which is bad enough, it means nobody will eat with them, they are cast out from society and they could starve to death.

The food laws in the Old Testament are also important for very good reasons also, they may not always apply today but five thousand years ago they were very, very sensible. I have seen atheists scoff, but they don't understand, and unfortunately neither do a lot of Christians.

The same hygiene problems arise with gay sex and I don't know for sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if this is why the Bible comes out so strongly against it.

Be good.

I suppose in a way that makes sense.

But still, nowadays it doesn't really apply, seeing as we have soap and water. I mean, I assume chef's back in the day used more than one hand to strip meat, or cook, or to do all manner of things. I'm sure people didn't use their right hand for everything, yano.

There is another concept about this.

The right hand is symbolic of strength (of God) and giving. It is symbolic of a gift. It is a source of 'light'.

The left hand is symbolic of darkness.

Now, Jesus says 'when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing'.

This to me says, 'don't let the dark part of you influence your giving'.

The hands do not have minds of their own. But the mind has both a willingness for good and a willingness for evil.

So, this hyperbole is more about the state of the mind not allowing selfishness to overcome charity, than about literally giving with your right hand, to me anyway.

 

[A-Omega]

Scripture specifically calls homosexuality "unnatural." So naturally, no one would be born gay. And Romans 1 goes on to call it sin, not a"physical condition" or genetic trait (and of course there is absolutely ZERO scientific evidence of any sort of the existence of gay genes). I don't know what more needs to be said on it that is not just human-made doctrine.

When we let The Bible speak, it's clear.

 

[jonrambo]

Amen aomega

 

[Angela53510]

I once went into a lesbian forum to find out about the people. God told me to do this and not judge. It was very hard, as I do believe homosexuality is wrong. They were very accepting of me, so long as I did not preach - though I longed to.

I found out that most of the women had been badly abused or molested by men, including close family relatives. They resented and were bitter not just towards men, but to the women who hid it, so their husbands, brothers, grandfathers and sons would not be prosecuted. In the 6 months I went there, I did not find ONE woman who was gay because she was "born that way." Something to ponder.

Brings me to the media. It is saturated with accepting gays as normal. We were watching "Property Brothers" about renovating houses. First it was a lesbian couple, which took my husband and I the whole show to figure out that "two mommies" meant they were gay! Duh for us! Then they had a male gay couple on. MUCH easier. We shut off the show and stopped watching it. But it just seems like if you don't accept it as "normal and natural" then you are some kind of hateful bigot. The media is totally biased to the left wing agenda. And I consider myself left wing, in terms of caring for the poor, but this is so far over and beyond what Jesus wanted us to do, it is ridiculous.

As far as sex ed, I kept my kids out of school based, non gender separated sex ed in elementary school. Do you know what the other kids did to my kids? They envied them, because it was so embarrassing to have mixed gender sex ed classes. My kids felt like they were the heroes, because I stood up to a corrupt public school system. My daughter in university took a human sexuality course from a Catholic college toward her degree. The thing that she remembered the most was "The STATISTICS say that sex before marriage results in significantly higher divorce rates!!!"

That really spoke to her heart. I was so glad that she announced that bit of sex ed was making her wait till marriage. Why don't they teach that FACT in sex ed classes? No one wants their marriage to fail. The rage, (which has been around since the 60's when I was young) is that sex before marriage helps you. That is why kids fall into the trap. Again, sex before marriage is portrayed as normal. It is rampant, no doubt about it! But NOT normal.

So teach them the real facts about sex outside of marriage, and help those poor hurting women lesbians by prosecuting the sinners who rape and abuse and molest them, and maybe we will have more people who willingly follow God's law, because it is the way that leads to a better and happier life.

 

[terminator]

Scripture specifically calls homosexuality "unnatural." So naturally, no one would be born gay. And Romans 1 goes on to call it sin, not a"physical condition" or genetic trait (and of course there is absolutely ZERO scientific evidence of any sort of the existence of gay genes). I don't know what more needs to be said on it that is not just human-made doctrine.

When we let The Bible speak, it's clear.

Absolutely.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

 

[_lost_words_]

Everyone is born with sin - that is true.

No matter what that sin is, if you don't overcome it, you will suffer for it.

I was born with sin that condmened me like homosexuality comdemns another.

We are both in the same boat; his homosexuality does not make him any less pure than me, and my sin does not make me any more pure than him.

If a homosexual fully repents and overcomes his sin, yet a heterosexual person does not repent or overcome their sin,

Who then, by God's law will be condemned?

The heterosexual.

Overcoming is not easy, and honestly the world blows homosexuality out of proportion. All the Bible says is that it is a sin worthy of death, just like all other sins ( Romans 6:23.)

Homosexuality can be overcome - does it mean you have to live a lie and live a hetero lifestyle to please God?

Not really. Simply acknowledging it and trying to resist it and praying God to expunge it, you will definitely overcome!

The devil played a good one against homosexuals by making it such a huge deal. Really, some people find their only confidence and self - identity in homosexuality, setting themselves apart in some secular reality.

Sin is sin.

If I overcome mine, and a homosexual his, I look forward to rejoicing in heaven with him.

 

[Meshullam]

Scripture specifically calls homosexuality "unnatural." So naturally, no one would be born gay. And Romans 1 goes on to call it sin, not a"physical condition" or genetic trait (and of course there is absolutely ZERO scientific evidence of any sort of the existence of gay genes). I don't know what more needs to be said on it that is not just human-made doctrine.

When we let The Bible speak, it's clear.

Well, by your definition of natural.

But the greek word that is translated 'natural', in the contect of the 'natural mind', actuallly means more like 'animal' or 'carnal'.

and sin is actually defined in this context, as 'animal' rather than 'enlightened'.

It is also said that 'all are accursed in (the state of) sin so that God may have mercy on ALL'.

So, actually, we are all accursed in an 'animal' nature.

This means that everyone is born, and succumbs eventually to some form of sin, whatever that sin may be; covetousness, greed, spite, hate, idolatry, or indeed, homosexuality.

 

[Meshullam]

1 Timothy cites these as forms of unruliness;

insubordination (to God), impiousness and being without spirituality, sinfulness on the whole, irreverent attitude, profane, or 'speaking profanities' (either of another or of God), father-destroyers, mother-destroyers, man-destroyers, people who sexually prostrate themselves, homosexuals, kidnappers and thieves, liars, people who perjure, and any other form of living which doesn't endure or allow sound teaching (of morals).

IT also says that the teachings of right-thinking are not made for a just man, but for people who succumb to these things above;

I believe that's an ironic way of showing that nomatter how 'righteous' oneself believes themselves to be, it needs to be said that actually; none are THAT righteous. Just look at that list.

We're all guilty of one of these in some form or another. One of the things mentioned is 'sinfulness'.

'He who says he is without sin is deceived'.

We are all, in fact, needing a guide to our lives, not just one sect of 'sinfullness'.

 

[Meshullam]

I once went into a lesbian forum to find out about the people. God told me to do this and not judge. It was very hard, as I do believe homosexuality is wrong. They were very accepting of me, so long as I did not preach - though I longed to.

I found out that most of the women had been badly abused or molested by men, including close family relatives. They resented and were bitter not just towards men, but to the women who hid it, so their husbands, brothers, grandfathers and sons would not be prosecuted. In the 6 months I went there, I did not find ONE woman who was gay because she was "born that way." Something to ponder.

Brings me to the media. It is saturated with accepting gays as normal. We were watching "Property Brothers" about renovating houses. First it was a lesbian couple, which took my husband and I the whole show to figure out that "two mommies" meant they were gay! Duh for us! Then they had a male gay couple on. MUCH easier. We shut off the show and stopped watching it. But it just seems like if you don't accept it as "normal and natural" then you are some kind of hateful bigot. The media is totally biased to the left wing agenda. And I consider myself left wing, in terms of caring for the poor, but this is so far over and beyond what Jesus wanted us to do, it is ridiculous.

As far as sex ed, I kept my kids out of school based, non gender separated sex ed in elementary school. Do you know what the other kids did to my kids? They envied them, because it was so embarrassing to have mixed gender sex ed classes. My kids felt like they were the heroes, because I stood up to a corrupt public school system. My daughter in university took a human sexuality course from a Catholic college toward her degree. The thing that she remembered the most was "The STATISTICS say that sex before marriage results in significantly higher divorce rates!!!"

That really spoke to her heart. I was so glad that she announced that bit of sex ed was making her wait till marriage. Why don't they teach that FACT in sex ed classes? No one wants their marriage to fail. The rage, (which has been around since the 60's when I was young) is that sex before marriage helps you. That is why kids fall into the trap. Again, sex before marriage is portrayed as normal. It is rampant, no doubt about it! But NOT normal.

So teach them the real facts about sex outside of marriage, and help those poor hurting women lesbians by prosecuting the sinners who rape and abuse and molest them, and maybe we will have more people who willingly follow God's law, because it is the way that leads to a better and happier life.

Perhaps. But you also have to remember, not many of these young women may ever change even if their abusive men were prosecuted, because that still doesn't change what happened to them. It still happened.

Also, there aren't many lesbians who can exactly call themselves 'Christians', even though every single person on this planet is accursed in an animal nature of some kind; and sins in some form, just like those 'homosexuals' everyone focuses on.

I know lesbians who are attracted to women yet date men because of the hate they might get from people, particularly in religious backgrounds. Lesbians who weren't abused, too. And society does that to people.

Even if they were to abstain from sexual relationships completely, It's a very hard society for a woman to be celibate as-well, particularly in a religious setting.

If she is attracted to women, but wants to 'do the right thing' and be celibate, then she is either branded 'frigid', 'unwanted', 'can't get a man' or 'unnattractive', or indeed 'just in it for the funbags aka sleeps around'.

Another thing you failed to mention is that most people who have sex before marriage on a regular basis rather than a 'one time mistake' basis would tend to be not religious. So their marriages fail because they don't consider marriage to be anything more than a piece of paper.

And to be honest, I tend to blame modern religions image that every 'christian' is as perfect and holy as God himself. Holier than thou propaganda to be honest. I know Christian families who, if they found out what their daughters and fathers and mothers and sons were up to, would soon see that nobody is very perfect in this world.

Media shows marriage in a form that is a signed document and a grand display, and in a form that is 'disposable' if certain 'needs' aren't met for either party, whether it's 'excitement' or 'not enough sex'; people treat marriage cheaply because of loose morals, but not necessarily from choice, it's usually out of either poor understanding of the power that sex can have and the concept of marriage, and WHY it's better to abstain from sex.

Personally I have come to be convinced from reading, that if two people fall into a deep love and commit, are patient and gentle, kind and considerate, faithful and hopeful, loving and have reverence for the God, for love and for all these good things, that the moment they 'commit' to each other, is the moment they are 'committed'. Then they may go on to 'marry', which in fact, means for two things to become 'together', ie. one flesh, and have a long, happy relationship. The reason for the ring is simply for the man to prove to the woman's 'father' that he will look after her. But nowadays, most women's fathers won't be as strict, and the women has the social status and secular rights to be able to 'look after herself', whereas women didn't really have that in ye olde days.

I can tell you, even if the law was tight as a snare drum; people would still succumb to lust anyway, and do it behind people's backs. Like children from some religious families do nowadays. And their relationships with their parents are wrought with fear and angst and distance, rather than love and teaching and support.

It is impossible to get someone to never do something out of their fear of punishment, because one day, they will just walk away and do it anyway. Adam and Eve proved that already.

that's why God sets us in sin and allows us to experience the pointlessness of it. IT's alright trying to teach someone but they have to learn it for themselves with the support of their parents and the love of them. see love, love shows a support and a 'caring'that fear and complete strictness and authoritarian teaching never can. If God gives us the ability to do something, it's for a reason! And another thing about love; it causes the child to 'respect' their parents and WANT to listen to them, rather than just being afraid of punishment.

I've discovered it's no good to preach and act holier than thou and perfect; because nobody is. It just makes a person look like complete fool.

I would rather live in a country where people have the freedom to make their own choices and aren't put to death every ten minutes anyway, than a world governed by the pharisees; oh-so-perfect on the outside yet condoning 'righteous killing' and being as black as coal on this inside.

The problem is a lot of religious types no longer care for sin as being a 'state' and a curse, something people need 'learn to udnerstand', they view it as a simple, momentary choice and 'if you're gonna do that, then God already hates you enough to send you to hell'. Yet they do it too!!

And then they wonder why a lot of western Christianity is looked upon like a brainwashing cult.

The point is, I try to set high moral, and compassionate standards for myself, I do, but I don't favor myself when I'm looking at people who christian society deems 'lesser than we are'.

I have sexually immoral friends.

Jesus certainly didn't favour the high and mighty, and the holier-than-thou, and nor should we.