I believe that in this dispensation of Grace that God is just as gracious and patient with those who struggle with homosexuality as He is those who have other sexual struggles and issues.
i believe that in this dispensation of grace that god is just as gracious and patient with those who struggle with homosexuality as he is those who have other sexual struggles and issues.
So to summarize, and please correct me if I am wrong, but you feel that being gay and not acting on it is no different than someone who feels they are but also realizes it is wrong and thus, does not act on those feelings?
Depends. If they realize they have these attractions, and put up a strong resistance to these temptations, fight them, and don't give in, in anyway, in thoughts or deeds, and go on doing that which is right, no I don't feel it's the same.
But if someone has these attractions, know that they are wrong, and don't go out and get a partner, or don't physically commit the act, but desires, lusts after it, contemplates the deed, daydreams about doing it, "getoff" on the thought of it, to the point that if it was possible for them to do it, they would, but only reason they're not because circumstances doesn't permit it, then, yes I feel they are no different, but the same.
It's the same as when Jesus said that if a man looks after a woman who is married, and lusts after her, he committed adultery already in his heart, even when he hasn't even committed the act.
If people would do what Jesus did, when the devil tempted Him and told Him to turn that stone to bread, where at the time He was really hungry, and could have used something to eat, and resisted the devil right away, and didn't give in, then they're not under condemnation.
But it seems that for most people, they would have turned that stone to bread, or would have said in their heart, "I'm not going to turn it, but it's no harm to just look at it," then they start to think on it, and salivate at the thought of it. That's not putting up a strong resisting...
__________________ Philippians 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.
Depends. If they realize they have these attractions, and put up a strong resistance to these temptations, fight them, and don't give in, in anyway, in thoughts or deeds, and go on doing that which is right, no I don't feel it's the same.
But if someone has these attractions, know that they are wrong, and don't go out and get a partner, or don't physically commit the act, but desires, lusts after it, contemplates the deed, daydreams about doing it, "getoff" on the thought of it, to the point that if it was possible for them to do it, they would, but only reason they're not because circumstances doesn't permit it, then, yes I feel they are no different, but the same.
It's the same as when Jesus said that if a man looks after a woman who is married, and lusts after her, he committed adultery already in his heart, even when he hasn't even committed the act.
If people would do what Jesus did, when the devil tempted Him and told Him to turn that stone to bread, where at the time He was really hungry, and could have used something to eat, and resisted the devil right away, and didn't give in, then they're not under condemnation.
But it seems that for most people, they would have turned that stone to bread, or would have said in their heart, "I'm not going to turn it, but it's no harm to just look at it," then they start to think on it, and salivate at the thought of it. That's not putting up a strong resisting...
I could not disagree more with this statement! Everything we do, whether good or bad, wicked or honorable, and this excludes nothing, "BEGINS" with a conscious decision.
Men are born as men, and women are born as women. If either chooses to 'play the role' of the opposite sex, then there arrived that critical moment when they made the decision to engage in that opposing role. It was their decision to make, and they could just as easily have chosen otherwise.
They will have no one but themselves to blame for their wicked deeds, for I am persuaded that even one's God-given conscience served to 'warn' them before they ever engaged in a homosexual act the very first time.
I don't recall ever deciding to be heterosexual. Do you?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
I think you are wrong about the bolded. There are actually some people born with a medical condition where they are born with the genitalia of both sexes.
They are known as hermaphrodites. Their parents and doctors may decide at birth to make them female when they really identify as male. That is not their fault. Also, some are born with males genes but look female. This is a scientific fact.
On the flip-side, I think there is a terrible trend to make homosexual behavior mainstream and many, who may not truly be gay, are jumping into the bandwagon as a fad. I am opposed to this.
I suppose that if any of my children had been born as you've noted, and I felt compelled to determine which sex they were to identify with, then the determining factor would have been whether they were capable of child-bearing. In that case, I would have opted for them being female, for no male that I've ever known or heard about has possessed a womb. There are only two sexes, male and female, and unless one has a womb and is capable of child-bearing, then they would have to be classed as a male. Seems rather simple to me, but that's just my opinion.
Yes definately... It was Eric Estrada on C.H.I.P.S in a tight T-shirt that did it!
For me it was probably watching Vicki Stubing from The Love Boat (hey, I was only 10 or 11!). Of course I also had a crush on "Jessica 6" from the television version of Logans Run.
Last edited by RandyWayne; 04-29-2013 at 11:54 AM.
Linear Mode
