Jennifer Knapp officially comes "out"

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

I am thinking God really does not care...I mean come on...think about it...why would he fill a gay or lesbian person with the holyghost...

Just some food for thought

God promised to pour out his Spirit upon all flesh... yet all men will still be held accountable for their deeds.

[KWSS1976]

But why would God give someone the holyghost that was living in a "So called sin" You mean to tell me that his spirit will dwell in a dirty vessel.........

[Michlow]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

But why would God give someone the holyghost that was living in a "So called sin" You mean to tell me that his spirit will dwell in a dirty vessel.........

[Sam]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

But why would God give someone the holyghost that was living in a "So called sin" You mean to tell me that his spirit will dwell in a dirty vessel.........

He dwells in some of us, doesn't He?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

But why would God give someone the holyghost that was living in a "So called sin" You mean to tell me that his spirit will dwell in a dirty vessel.........

One is "justified" by faith, this allows one to receive the Holy Ghost though they are still in need of sanctification. But it is understood that if one refuses to allow the Spirit to work unto sanctification the Spirit will depart. That's my understanding.

[Aquila]

I was once told about the following passage in relation to this subject,

Matthew 8:5-10
5And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him,
6And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.
7And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him.
8The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.
9For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
10When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
11And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
12But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
13And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.

Here we see a centurion beseeching Christ to heal his “servant” who was sick and grievously tormented. Jesus offers to come and heal the servant. The centurion answered stating that he wasn’t worthy that Jesus should come under his roof, and then expressed faith that if Jesus but spoke the word his servant would be healed. The man then expresses his understanding of authority, equating it to Christ’s ability to exercise spiritual authority. When Jesus heard this he marveled and said, “Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.”

What I was told was interesting. The term for “servant” in this passage is “pais”. In Greco-Roman culture centurions were forbidden to marry and so many centurions had liaisons with women they weren’t married to. However, centurions were often sent with orders to various locations. It was a Greco-Roman cultural norm that a centurion would take a male apprentice of lower rank in as a “servant” or “pais”. This servant served to provide for more than the centurion’s military needs, if you catch my drift. The implication here, as interpreted by some is that this centurion’s “pais” was sick and dying, so the centurion sought out Christ. Evidently this “pais” mattered quite a bit to this centurion for him to beseech Jesus to heal him. When Christ offers to come to the centurions house the centurion states, “I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof,” Centurions didn’t care about Jews, they were seen as dogs by the Romans. However, it can be implicated this centurion understood the Jewish law and how his relationship with his servant was unclean, therefore he felt convicted that Jesus would even come under his roof. After hearing the man explain that he had faith in the authority of Christ’s spoken word, Christ was impressed by the centurion’s faith. Christ then spoke the word and the “pais” was healed.

IF (a big IF) this “servant” was this type of servant (which was very common among the Romans), we see an example of how Jesus might have dealt with this subject.

I just found the interpretation interesting. But this is an example of how interpretations can change as time goes by.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by yisroelm

Question for everybody: Is there anybody on AFF that knowingly fellowships practicing homosexuals and feels justified doing so?

I have and will fellowship with again the few Christians I know who are attempting to fight homosexuality.

I have not, do not, and will not fellowship with anyone who does not think that homosexuality is a sin.



I wouldn't write Jennifer Knapp off just yet. From reading some of her quotes, it appears that there is still struggle aspect to the lifestyle she has chosen to embrace.

I wonder Ray Boltz is and how he's doing. Maybe, he's now convinced that it is better to fight and live for God than to embrace sin as good.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by Aquila

It's a matter of interpretation. I remember my senior pastor, who has since fallen asleep, teaching against mixed marriages from the Bible. That's the way their generation interpreted the Scripture. What I think Sam is wondering is if our current "interpretation" of Scripture on this subject will also fall along the wayside for a more accepting position.

I remember mixed marriages being preached against from Ezra chapters nine and ten. Even Verbal Bean had a sermon (was it titled "Death in the Pot?" wherein he said something to the effect that the church would drift so far from God that "mixed children would be dancing before the altars of the LORD."

Interpretations often change within a couple generations. If you were to travel back in time to the 20's, 30's, 40's, and perhaps even the 50's you'd see mixed marriages being condemned based on their interpretation of various biblical texts.

Today we say that the Bible doesn't condemn mixed marriages.... Sam is wondering of tomorrow we'll say that the Bible doesn't condemn same gender marriages or relationships.

same sex can always be scripturally condemned.

[Scott Hutchinson]

The scriptures don't condemn interracial marriage,but the bible does condemn Homosexuality.We can love the sinner,but hate the sin.

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

The scriptures don't condemn interracial marriage,but the bible does condemn Homosexuality.We can love the sinner,but hate the sin.

Yes, but sadly most humans have a problem separating the two.