Originally Posted by tv1a (Post 639893)

The homosexual definition of a monogamous relationship is one sexual partner at a time. It is not uncommon for homosexuals to hop around from partner to partner yet claim to be monogamous.

Originally Posted by citizen (Post 641013)

Neither is it uncommon for heterossexuals to hop around from partner to partner yet claim to to monogamous. And if they are 'saved' heterosexuals then you only hop from partner to partner in the bounds of 'marriage'.
You marry, then divorce, then marry, then divorce, then marry...

Originally Posted by citizen (Post 641013)

Neither is it uncommon for heterossexuals to hop around from partner to partner yet claim to to monogamous. And if they are 'saved' heterosexuals then you only hop from partner to partner in the bounds of 'marriage'.
You marry, then divorce, then marry, then divorce, then marry...

Originally Posted by A_PoMo (Post 640014)

I completely disagree with all of what you've said here. Straight people are promiscuous too. Your view of recovering addicts is naive, salvation is an ongoing process. Sometimes people are miraculously freed from their vices, most times they are not and must learn to take up their cross daily, ala the Apostle Paul and his 'thorn in the flesh'.

Originally Posted by tv1a (Post 640553)

No one said straight people were not promiscuous. We were discussing the definition of monogamy in the homosexual community.
My view of addictions is scriptural. God does not give partial freedom from addictions. Whom the Son has set free is free indeed. The struggle occurs when the flesh doesn't line up with the Spirit. You cannot support that God wants people to struggle and not be free. I know people who have been delivered from homosexuality. I know others who struggle. The difference between deliverance and the struggling is when the man is aligned with the Spirit to receive deliverance.

When Jesus delivered people from demonic control, it wasn't a partial deliverance. Cite a biblical example where Jesus performed a partial miracle. Paul's thorn in the flesh is at best unprovable speculation.

Originally Posted by tv1a (Post 640557)

There is no a single scripture which suggests a chirstian has to struggle with addictions. Addictions are flesh problems. Every man is tempted when he is drawn away from his own lust. Temptation occurs because there is a fleshly craving to participate in sin.

If Jesus came to set the captive free, than every addict wanting addiction can be delivered.

I lost track of how many people I know who no longer struggle with addictions because the flesh is under subjection to the Spirit.

Originally Posted by A_PoMo (Post 640559)

you'll have to provide a source outside of your speculation where your definition of monogamy in the gay community is given. i have gay friends and i've kept half an eye on the gay issue and my understanding is that monogamy to gays is the same as monogamy for straights. I think we can both agree that promiscuity exits on both sides of the swing. My point was that you seem to be connecting the two and I don't necessarily see that connection in a general sense.

If Paul had a thorn in the flesh was he not free or was he still on bondage. Obviously he tried to align himself with the Spirit but God disallowed it and kept him in his condition against Paul's wishes.

Originally Posted by tv1a (Post 640734)

With all due respect, to really understand homosexuality, one needs to have both eyes on the issue.

.

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman (Post 641296)

Kind of difficult to speculate about Paul's thorn when no one here really knows what the thorn was. I really doubt that it was a "homosexual" crisis that was his thorn.

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman (Post 641287)

I am having a hard time reconciling this particular phrase according to scripture such as John 8:36. Perhaps I may be taking this passage out of context, and if by chance I am, how do you explain the justness and fairness of God? How could he miraculously deliver one, but make the other suffer such a weakness?