UPCI Mega Churches???

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You're kidding, right?

Man, this forum is Bizarro world.

Mixelplix!

Amen. The bible clearly shows it was sexual sin that cost Sodom and Gommorha it's existence.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

[Cracker Barrel]

Ezekiel 16:4,50
Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

I heard Eld. T. Meade preach one his greatest messages on this scripture,

"God has the final say"

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Excuse me, but are you saying that Homosexuals are born Homosexuals?

No. But they are born with a law of sin in their members that, when revives, slays them. That law of sin can be directed toward homosexuality.

KBTW was referring to godsdrummer's post about hermaphrodites. She was calling hermaphrodites "freaks of nature". I do not believe it to be very consistent with Christ-likeness to call someone born with additional, opposite sex genitalia a "freak of nature", when God is the author of life and is the cause of many disabilities, as He said in Exodus to Moses, and etc. David wasn't and isn't the only human God "knit together" in a mother's womb.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by n david

Perhaps I wasn't clear. The examples you gave were perverted. It's perversion which caused Amnon to rape Tamar. It was perversion which caused Lot's daughters to have sex with him. It was perversion which caused incest in the Bible. I would agree perversion is not natural.

I should have separated the issue, instead of combining in the same sentence.

It is natural for a man to be attracted to a woman.

I am in alignment with the above.

It is not natural for a man to be attracted to a man. Period. It doesn't matter if he holds the attraction inside and doesn't act on it. It is unnatural according to the Bible and it is sin.

It IS natural (in the sense of normal/typical) to a human whose law of sin in their members has not been crucified and who is not walking in the Spirit.

Any form of sinfulness is natural to the natural, unregenerate person.

And I do not think you can prove that the attraction is "sin". Experiencing an attraction doesn't equal transgression. Acting on the attraction and allowing it to entertain the mind until the thoughts and intents of the heart lead one into sin, is.

It is only until lust has conceived, that sin is born. Simply having lust enter the heart, in any way, doesn't mean a person has sinned. Only when one attempts to sate their lust, that they enter into sinfulness.

Agreed. Lust is sin. Any man/woman who lusts after another man/woman is in sin. Our disagreement in that you believe it's okay for a man to be attracted to another man. It is not.

I do not believe it is "okay", but rather normal, in many circumstances, due to the law of sin in our members. Many are the young children who were abused, exposed, or misled into a sexual identity crisis and grew up confused and tempted and, due to environmental circumstances, possibly allowed to explore that crisis and act in unseemly ways with the same sex. For such a young child later growing up under that condemnation, walking in that darkness, homosexuality is "only natural", as the saying goes.

Natural doesn't equal God ordained/created. It means something that is normal, or comes naturally in a given situation. And since the given situation is sinful humanity, it's quite a normal thing, even for people in the Church, to experience same sex attraction. Most never dare speak a word of it to anyone, for fear of humiliation and condemnation, and so, never get any help from the Body, and just go on living with it, trying and crying and praying and seeking God, but never quite overcoming, eventually giving up because from the church-world's pov, they are nothing but abominations.

The bible is clearly against it.

Quite right. Clearly against it. Where have I given any indication I believe otherwise?

It's sin, regardless of whether the homosexual acts on his attraction or not.

You can't prove that from the Holy Scriptures. Heterosexual attraction between a married man and a coworker isn't sin, but a temptation waiting to become sin, if the man isn't careful.

Attraction is merely being drawn to something. We can be attracted to a new church, a different ministry, a new job, a new car, or whatever. None of that is sin, even if it's not God's will for us to have any of the above. It only BECOMES a sin when we refuse God's will, disobey His instruction, shrug off His admonishment, and go after that which attracted us.

The drawing to isn't a transgression. But one needs must be careful, that they don't allow their own lusts to draw them away into sin.

Is this really so contrary to how most people understand things? This seems the only sensible way to approach these things, to me, at least.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/freak-of-nature

freak of nature
Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a person or animal that is born or grows with abnormal physical features.
2.
an unusual, unexpected natural phenomenon.
Origin of freak of nature Expand
1840-1850

I didn't make that term up Votive.

The term "freak of nature" is simply a way of describing someone born with abnormal physical features, whatever they may be, and not necessarily se*ual.

And I agree with you that we are all created by the Lord.

Bump. I think you must have missed this post Votive?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/freak-of-nature

freak of nature
Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a person or animal that is born or grows with abnormal physical features.
2.
an unusual, unexpected natural phenomenon.
Origin of freak of nature Expand
1840-1850

I didn't make that term up Votive.

The term "freak of nature" is simply a way of describing someone born with abnormal physical features, whatever they may be, and not necessarily se*ual.

And I agree with you that we are all created by the Lord.

I know you didn't create the term. But I advise you, if ever you're in a crowd, and someone is there who has been born with some kind of deformity or abnormality, or tells you he or she is a hermaphrodite, please don't tell them you think they are a "freak of nature".

You will lose your witness and never get another chance to evangelize that person. To call someone a freak in this way would serve no better than to call a black person "colored". It will hurt just as much, and do as much psychological damage.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Cracker Barrel

Ezekiel 16:4,50
Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

I heard Eld. T. Meade preach one his greatest messages on this scripture,

"God has the final say"

Brother, that verse in Ezekiel is not about the Sodom in Genesis, but is a derogatory term for Jerusalem.

So, "Jerusalem's" sin was "pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idlness...".

Go back to the beginning of the chapter. See how God refers to "thy sister Sodom"? It goes back to Jerusalem and Samaria. It's quite clear, if the whole chapter is taken as one whole unit, and not dissected for proof-texts.

[votivesoul]

Brethren, Jude 1:7 does not AT ALL say what you all think.

The Greek word for "strange" as in strange flesh is:

hetero

As in heterosexual. Hetero means "different". Homo means "same".

See: http://biblehub.com/interlinear/jude/1-7.htm

See: http://biblehub.com/greek/2087.htm

The sin that occurred there is that the people of Sodom lusted after "different" flesh, that is, they wanted to fornicate with ANGELS, who, though they were in the form of man, were not actually humans. It wasn't about a homosexual rape gang. It was about people who wanted to have some nirvana experience by bedding angels, who, it was often believed, gave humans secret knowledge and understanding, often through sexual liaisons.

See Genesis 6, as an example, re: the sons of God, something Jude mentions as one of the examples of ungodliness, before referring to Enoch, a tome in which fallen angels procreate with humans and give humans forbidden knowledge in the process.

Yes, there was fornication in Sodom and Gomorrah, but no actual proof of homosexuality. Not a single verse of it happening. No verse indicating it didn't, either. So the Bible is silent here, and so should we be, except for their lusting after angelic flesh.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Bump. I think you must have missed this post Votive?

Just needed to catch up.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I concur too many can only think from the point of view that they have been given by others. "if the pastor says the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was homosexuality, then it must have been". Regardless as to the fact that the meaning of the word Sodom in Hebrew has nothing to do with sex.

Amen. "Scorched and Ruined" for "Sodom and Gomorrah". These were assigned, etiological names given to these places after God's destroyed them. Prior to, they likely had different names.