This Makes #2 on the List, REALLY???

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Who said I was judging pedophiles? I never did. Did you see a different post than what I posted? Did you miss the point of this thread?

You said:

Originally Posted by jfrog

Then give pedophiles the same benefit. Or do you only refrain from judging others on sins that don't bother you very much?

Originally Posted by Sasha

I would hardly compare a pedophile to a gay person. Not sure why you would.

...when asked why you don't give pedophiles the same benefit of not judging as you do homosexuals, You didn't deny that you judge them, instead you justified being able to judge them because pedophiles are far worse than homosexuals

[shazeep]

amen--far worse. only to us, tho...

[houston]

Originally Posted by Sabby

LOL.

I'd like to know how one can make a moral comparison of failed social relationships with homosexual activity.

There are some exceptions, but obviously someone working on their fourth marriage has interpersonal issues that go far beyond sexual activity!

Clean house inside the church before worrying about what others are doing.

[houston]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ah, no--the frog has a point there. sin is sin. and btw, pedophilia, once common and even accepted, is way on the decline; just more reported now.

interesting to me that it is those Christians on their 4th marriage that in a large part make homosexuals (or at least make them feel more justified).

My point, really.

[shazeep]

amen.

Originally Posted by houston

Clean house inside the church before worrying about what others are doing.

and amen. And oh, good luck with that, too, as from where i stand, the Apo/Pent church seems to be melting? in the heat? Hmm.

[Aquila]

Gay people and gay couples existed in ancient times. How do we think Jesus would have responded to them?

[Aquila]

One interesting interpretation that I've read addressed the Centurion and his servant. The Greek word for "servant" used here is "pais". In many extra-biblical sources this kind of servant was more akin to a male concubine. There were other words in the Greek to denote a bond servant or attendant of a home. Sometimes the term is used as a term of endearment for a male concubine.

Even more interesting is that Rome didn't always permit Centurions to marry. This was because the state would be responsible for caring for their dependents while on deployment or if they were killed in war. It is documented that many centurions had "boy servants" or "pais" who were both house servants... and concubines. Remember, the Romans had few hang-ups with regards to this lifestyle. Roman culture also seemed to value relationships between men as being more noble than visiting prostitutes or loose women. Now, was this the case with the centurion in the NT? I don't know. However, I've read the story with this in the back of my mind. Let's review the story, then I want to comment on it's implications...

Matthew 8:5-13 (ESV)
5 When he had entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, appealing to him, 6 “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly.” 7 And he said to him, “I will come and heal him.” 8 But the centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9 For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. And I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes, and to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” 10 When Jesus heard this, he marveled and said to those who followed him, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith. 11 I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, 12 while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” 13 And to the centurion Jesus said, “Go; let it be done for you as you have believed.” And the servant was healed at that very moment.

Here the centurion tells Jesus about his suffering servant (pais, boy servant). Jesus tells the centurion that He will come and heal the servant. However, the centurion is convicted. He feels that he isn't even worthy to have Jesus under his roof. Why? Clearly this centurion didn't feel unworthy to beseech Jesus to heal his servant. However, something about the centurion's home life was making Christ's visitation to the centurion's home convicting. We know that the centurion was honorable as far as centurions go. In fact, he had assisted the locals with building a synagogue at one point and seemed to genuinely care for the Jewish people (Luke 7:4-5). None of this really speaks of his personal life. Only that he was socially kind and just to the local Jews. The usage of the term "pais" may very well indicate that while the centurion was a decent man, he had a "boy servant" he was living with. This would have made him feel terribly unworthy to be visited by a man of Christ's caliber. If this is true, it shows the humility of a sinner seeking a healing for a person they care about... even if the relationship was "unclean" in accordance to Jewish law. Does Christ condemn him? Ridicule him? No. Jesus simply moves with compassion to heal this beloved servant. Does it condone the relationship? No. We see in Christ what could be a grand demonstration of grace towards a Gentile who was quite possible living in sin as the Gentiles tended to do.

Folks, we're going to encounter sinners in this world. Some are going to be in relationships. Some are going to be in "marriages". How will we handle these lost souls should they seek healing, love, and grace? Will we light torches and drive them away? Or will we sincerely pray for them and welcome them into our midst that they might receive what God intends to give them? Our calling isn't to merely condemn sin and gain converts to our religion. Our calling is to reveal sin and declare that there is a Savior who provides grace and empowerment. We call them to repentance. That word is "metanoia". The prefix being "meta" a change as in a metamorphosis. And "noia" as in the mind, or manner of thinking, as in "hyponoia", meaning to think slowly. So repentance is a "change of mind". Strong's defines it as follows:

3341 // metanoia // metanoia // met-an'-oy-ah //
from 3340 ; TDNT - 4:975,636; n f
AV - repentance 24; 24
1) a change of mind, as it appears to one who repents, of a
purpose he has formed or of something he has done

We are to call people to change their minds with regards to what they think about sin and God. We are to convict them of their sins, yes. However, we are also to turn the convicted to Christ for grace. We can encourage people to repent and turn from their godless lives to Christ, who will have abundant mercy and grace for their sinful failings and glaring imperfections. This doesn't mean we condone the actions. It does mean that we point them to one who can cover all their sins with His precious blood.

[houston]

You sure read a whole lot into the text.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by jfrog

You said:





...when asked why you don't give pedophiles the same benefit of not judging as you do homosexuals, You didn't deny that you judge them, instead you justified being able to judge them because pedophiles are far worse than homosexuals

So my absence of denial of judgement means the opposite? Whatever judgement I may have against another has little to do with the fact that they are a sinner, but perhaps what kind of sinner. For instance, I don't fear my children being in the presence of a gay man, but I am a bit more careful about them being around known pedophiles...and many other people who may hurt them. And not just adults either. If kids are mean to them, I tell them to stay away from people like that. If you call that judging, well....

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Sasha

So my absence of denial of judgement means the opposite? Whatever judgement I may have against another has little to do with the fact that they are a sinner, but perhaps what kind of sinner. For instance, I don't fear my children being in the presence of a gay man, but I am a bit more careful about them being around known pedophiles...and many other people who may hurt them. And not just adults either. If kids are mean to them, I tell them to stay away from people like that. If you call that judging, well....

I don't think you understand my stance. I'm all for judging each and every one of those sinners. I think it's right to judge. I'm most against hypocrisy. Saying dont judge anyone including homosexuals and then making excuses for why it's okay to judge pedophiles is not right IMO.