Thursday, December 01, 2011

Gig Harbor Pastor: "Same Sex Marriage a Civil Right"

Standing under a crucifix at Gig Harbor's United Methodist Church, the 50 or so who attended a "marriage equality" meeting recently, posed for a picture as the photographer encouraged the group, "close together, love thy neighbor."

Joel Connelly, columnist for the Seattle PI, was among those attending, describing the group as "babies, toddlers, young couples and seniors."

Rev. Jim Head-Corliss, pastor of the church, explained why he hosted the meeting. He told Connelly that, "This is a civil rights issue."

State Representative Laurie Jenkins, a Tacoma Democrat and lesbian activist who led part of the meeting said, "Truly this is the first time in 25 years we have had a meeting like this here."

Connelly defined people for other causes as people, "marching and shouting about change into bull horns"---while defining the homosexual "marriage" advocates as quiet, organized and focused on convincing legislators to re-define marriage.

A campaign recently launched against the Salvation Army suggests a very different demeanor by folks in this same community. I'll write about that tomorrow.

So what was the discussion in the meeting? Which legislators were specifically discussed? And, simply stated, what is the real question of the marriage debate?

Democratic Senator Derek Kilmer was defined as an advocate for "civil rights" issues, but they see him as "ambivalent" about re-defining marriage. They reported to the those gathered that, "It's the word 'marriage' that bothers him."

They think that the State House will likely pass Sen. Ed Murray's bill, based on the numbers and the support already shown by the House leadership. They also think the battle will come down to the State Senate. I agree.

So why would Senator Kilmer be "bothered" about re-defining the word marriage?

Clearly stated, this whole issue comes to this question:

What Is Marriage?

Is marriage the union between one man and one woman, introduced at Creation by the Creator Himself as the ultimate human relationship for mutual fulfillment, procreation and the nurturing and development of children, affirmed by every successful civilization and major religion in history?

Or...

Is it a mechanism or device to affirm and validate other, various relationships?

Associated Press reported from the initial meeting in Bellevue a couple of weeks ago that one of the main reason homosexual advocates are pushing for "marriage" is to "remove the stigma" from their behavior.

Washington State has already given them the benefits through the domestic partnership law.

What do you think marriage is? And should it be re-defined?

That question will be answered in Washington State in 2012. Either in the legislature or by a vote of the people.

During a time of questioning, the ancient biblical leader Joshua told his people, "You have seen God's faithfulness to us. You know His principles." While all may not agree, "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."

A contemporary call would be, "Choose this year if marriage between a man and a woman is an institution created by God and honored and affirmed by every major religion and civilization, for specific purposes."

Or...

Is it a mechanism, a device, for affirming and elevating various other relationships, for various other reasons? Or is there a deeper reason for its existence?

Defending marriage is not about hate or trying to deny anyone anything. It is about protecting the most fundamental human cornerstone of human experience.

Those who defend it will be demonized. I have been and so have many of you.

But, we must choose where we stand on this issue. And we must choose now.

As for me and my house, we will defend marriage and oppose re-defining it.

And we will act on that deeply held conviction. Will you?

You can help us stand in defense of marriage by financially supporting Faith and Freedom now.

This time of decision will pass. Our actions or in-actions will create the future of the culture for our children.

Your support is essential to a successful defense of marriage. Thank you.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Active. Be Prayerful. Be Blessed.

:: Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

52 comments:

  1. What Is Marriage?

    Is marriage the union between one man and one woman, introduced at Creation by the Creator Himself as the ultimate human relationship for mutual fulfillment, procreation and the nurturing and development of children, affirmed by every successful civilization and major religion in history?

    Or...

    Is it a mechanism or device to affirm and validate other, various relationships?


    OR

    is this a false question? Definition one is the religious one for Abrahamic religions, and the second is about the 100% totally secular civil contract licensed by the state in support of all kinds of marriage.

    Let's be clear - I don't any of us think the state makes you 'married' any more than it can make you 'tall' or 'fat'. Marriage comes from beyond government, all it does is have a contract to help support it.

    You have your definition of religious marriage, great. But that has nothing to do with anyone that doesn't practice your brand of religion.

    Marriage equality is just about if can license with a wife, then everyone can, simple as that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. These United Methodists have lost their minds.
    Whether they have lost their souls is God's decision.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gary you make a good point. This issue is really not about expanding marriage its about redefining it. That's a new thought to me. We should think about what marriage is. Can it be redefined and still be marriage? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So, when the country clubs had to stop banning jewish people, where they redefined or expanded? Or is that a silly question that's completely off the core issue of equal rights?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Kathi Smith (Port Orchard)10:49 AM, December 01, 2011

    How do these pastors who supposedly teach the Bible, justify their position in the face of Sodom & Gomorah being burned alive because of their homosexuality, thus the word sodomy. It's an abomination before God & to try to make this a marriage issue is so wrong. Someday everyone will know this is perversion that will bring the downfall of society. My opinion & belief.

    ReplyDelete
  6. OK please explain to me if Christians are not wanting "marriage" to be redifined, then why not change the language of the "CIVIL" marriage to one of that such as "Domestic Partners" or "Adult Civil Contract" or "Civil Unions" for everyone, then you are not redefining marriage you are changing it so that only the Church has Marriage. And everything else done by Government is labeled as "CIVIL".

    ReplyDelete
  7. To Kathi Smith, etc...

    Consider how deeply you believe that two men or two women should not be able to marry. Consider how ridiculous the argument appears to you that God would actually accept or even celebrate such unions. Think about how strong your conviction is that acting on same-sex attractions is a moral wrong that should be stopped. Think about how confident you are that these feelings are just and right in the eyes of God, knowing that there are many others around you who feel the same way.

    Now consider this: Up until the mid-1800s a majority of Christians felt just as sure in their beliefs that they should be able to own slaves, and they used the Bible to justify it. Up until the late 1800s / early 1900s a majority of good Christians believed with the same strength of conviction that women were not the equals of men and should not be able to vote, hold careers, or control a household. Up until the mid-20th century, a majority of moral Christians were aghast that members of two different races would come together in marriage and claim it is God-blessed.

    As confident as you feel today that you know God desires and wants about gay people, in years past your Christian forbearers were as confident in their beliefs about slavery, women, and interracial marriages.

    Now consider how history views those who owned slaves, oppressed women, or stood in the way of loving interracial couples.

    Tony

    ReplyDelete
  8. Gary

    You are making a fundamental category error. "Marriage" by the state, which is the focus of these couples, is NEITHER of the above definitions. It is very simply a PARTNERSHIP CONTRACT. That is the legal reality. You need to separate your religion from the civic sphere. I remain lost as to why you are not able to "reason" the very basic mechanical facts and thus cause strife, dissension and drag the precious name of Jesus through the mud. Why are you hurting our community and wasting our time??

    ReplyDelete
  9. Tony, you put up a straw man. All you have to do is read the politically incorrect history to know that the two are in no way the same picture.

    Slavery is one thing. Homosexuality is quite a different animal. There is no freedom for homosexuality. None possible because by its very nature it is bondage.

    OK, back to history. Very very clear that societies that began to embrace it did fail. Again and again.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Tony

    Consider this in the 1800's people who thought marrying 5 , 7, 9, wives think that it was a matter of civil rights just as clearly today as some think should be able to marry same sex genders .

    Now consider this , just as perverted as those attemts to attack others morality and beliefs are seen today for what they were then , consider today the homosexual activists that wish to take away a child's abilty to have a mom and dad as their standard support system to learn and be nurtured in love . They attemt to use Civil Rights as a method to undermine what has been entrusted to us to honor and respect .History has always taught us that it often repeats itself in some form or the other , our human nature needs redemtion , and our selfish desires often prove counter productive .

    Those homosexual activists and supporters that attemt to use their own morality and try to portray God's people as racist or the equal to , will face God . he will not be mocked .


    Consider that one time people believed killing unborn babies was just a choice , that a Couts decision or a state's RCW would some how make it moraly right .
    repair organs while in the womb of a baby .

    Which side of history will you be on . The Court's decision of Dred Scott where the law of the Land said people are property , unborn babies are the ownership of another person ,or the side that we are subject to the laws of nature and nature's God . That our rights Come from Him , not who makes the best argument or is able to project the best ad homiem attack .

    yes which side will you be on

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tony

    Consider this;

    1.Nowhere does the Bible condone slavery as it was practiced in this country. In fact, it expressly forbids it.

    2. Women are honored throughout the Bible for their faithfulness, compassion and hard work.
    There is no prohibition against a women running a household or having a job. As a matter of fact, Lydia, a seller of purple cloth was praised for her support of the Gospel. Ruth was a Moabite and yet married a Hebrew, clearly an example of interacial marriage. God honored her and even had a book dedicated to her in the Bible.

    3. I make no excuses for the ignorance of those in the past who tried to justify themselves with a "thus saith the Lord", when He said nothing of the sort. God expressly forbids people from doing so and promises punishment for them.

    4. I will not condone those in this present age who misrepresent God's word to sanction what His word clearly calls detestable and an abomination.

    5. Don't give me that, I'm not a Jew nonsense, the Book of Romans was written to Gentiles about Gentiles( that would be me and you). In Chapter 1 it says how God gives those who deny Him over to their sinfull desires and says they receive in themselves the due penalty for their error. Homosexuality being one of those desires

    There is no misunderstanding the intent of the message.

    6. Consider your conviction that God approves of your behavior, consider the conviction of those living in incest that God approves their behavior, consider those who lie,cheat and steal and believe God doesn't care or exist, consider those whose pet sheep calls them 'Daaaaddy' and are convinced that there is no penalty, consider those from NAMBLA with the same conviction as you.

    Now consider this;

    "Then I saw a great white throne and Him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from His presence, and there was no place found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found in the book of life, they were thrown into the lake of fire." Rev 20:11-15

    Adam and Eve pre-dates any civil contract. No mention of Steve or Sue.

    Today is the acceptable day of the Lord,if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  12. Craig and yet the good Christians of the time used the Bible to justify their slavery anyway, i.e. they misinterpreted it.

    Similarly today every single reference that could possibly talk about same sex relationships was about 'bad' ones, idolatry, infidelity, and violence. At no time was a same sex monogamous couple even referenced. For all the same reasons you think those people back in the 19th century were wrong, so many Christians feel you are too.

    What some seem to have missed is that Christians are under Grace and the Great Commandment, and what is or isn't sin is now not a laundry list of 'don'ts but by what's in our hearts.

    You bring up incest which has a recent example:

    In the UK a married couple found out years after their marriage that they were in fact brother and sister, adopted to separate families. Now to the laundry list people living under the yoke of Law they have grievously sinned but to Christians their hearts and intent were pure. Again its a natural progression, at first we were given strict rules, but as we mature we are then given principles and we evaluate things on a case by case basis as adults.

    Jesus gave us the ability to act as adults but many still want to behave as children.

    And it has nothing to do with the state civil contract the thread is about anyway. The best solution is the one suggested earlier - you want to define marriage for yourselves, get the state out of the 'marriage' business and have the legislature change the name of the civil contract to 'unions' or the like.

    Of course many Churches will still be performing marriage rites on same sex couples in the eyes of God but you will at least be able to pretend 'they aren't really married like I am' to a much higher degree.

    "Render under Caesar that which is Caesar's" and here that means the government not taking sides in matters of religion. You have a right to license a wife, so does every other citizen, ditto for a husband.

    Just get the word 'marriage' out of state government by replacing it with another for all citizens - simple solution with the only downside is it wouldn't bring in many donations.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 1. Redefining, tolerating, embracing, re-educating, changing laws, promoting the gay lifestyle and same sex marriage does not change the simple and unchanging fact that the way we are created physically is to have sex with the "opposite" gender. Period.

    2. While there may be many Christians who practice Christianity in various forms we can not overlook the fact that the pure, unlatered Word of God, The Bible, never changes. Therefore, a person who is truly has committed him or herself to follow God needs to do what God says to do - if they truly believe the Word of God and want to be in right relationship with Him and their fellow human beings. This means that all forms of what God says are immoral are indeed immoral and wrong behavior. This includes but is not limited to adultery, sex outside of marriage, incest, beastiality, and yes, homosexuality. The Bible is very clear about this. Our founding fathers believed that right government was founded on religion, law and the Constitution. (As in the petition the colonists wrote to the king of England to establish the state of Virginia.)

    3. Some people in the homosexual pride parades in Seattle have been able to disobey our laws of decency, going top naked, giant blow up penis and lewd behavior which if done by non-gay people they would be arrested. This ought not to be.

    4. The agenda the homosexuals have goes far beyond gaining "civil rights". In fact the majority's civil rights are being taken away by this small minorty. For instance, wedding vendors having to photograph or decorate for homosexual "weddings" or be fined, etc.

    So I believe we Christians who truly love our country and our Lord Jesus need to stand up to conserve the values and morals that our country was established on.

    Unfortunatly, our committment to follow the Lord Jesus and obey His laws will always put us in opposition to immoral lifestyles.

    Fortunately, the Word of God exhorts us to love our neighbor as ourselves and that is what we need to do.

    However, that does not mean we should go along with changing the laws of our country to make the majority of citizens conform to the minority if the minority's rights are protected already as the homosexuals are.

    Thank you Gary for your kind perserverence in this matter.
    Snohomish, WA

    ReplyDelete
  14. Oshtur, as always, has answered Craig wonderfully. Again, Craig misses the point. It does not matter what we believe the Bible says TODAY. In the past, Christians strongly and adamantly believed the Bible advocated their positions on slavery, women, and interracial marriage.

    That we don't see these biblical verses in the same way today is EXACTLY my point. One day we'll think it's crazy that we read into the Bible that we need to tear same-sex couples apart, fire them from jobs, and kick them out of their homes, or deny them aid.

    Craig, yes we do pick our sides. While your side hides behind God and disseminates "facts" meant to dehumanize gay people (sex with sheep, c'mon, 1 in 9000 gay couples stays together, right, and hundreds or thousands of sex partners, sure), our side is making progress by simply letting ourselves be known. Truth does not require your tactics to win converts.

    PS... I would love to see that Bible quote that "expressly forbids" slavery. I'll show you the ones that tell you how to treat and punish your slaves.

    Tony

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous, just FYI:
    It is not illegal to be nude in public in Seattle.
    The giant blow up penis is the one owned by the Seattle STD clinic used to promote STD prevention (oh and you missed the vulva costume? Equally as hilarious and also not illegal. )
    And what lewd behavior? Remember you have to show its some how any different that the previous week's Fremont Solstice parade with its hundreds of nude bicyclists - who aren't arrested either.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Oshtur

    1. Once again you missed the point, all homosexual behavior is bad. Whether monogamous or not, the Bible makes no distinction. It makes no mention of a good one.

    2. So if something is not a sin in my heart, then it's permissible, right? Grace will cover it, right? What some fail to understand is grace is not a license to do as you will, but unmerited favor from God because we are sinners at heart. To receive Grace their must be REPENTANCE and an attitude of humility before God and a change in BEHAVIOR.

    3. Somebody's been selling you and Tony cheap grace. News flash, doesn't work like that.

    4. They didn't misinterpret the Bible, they misrepresented it. That's a big difference. God's word hasn't changed in 6000 years. Paul decried this exact thing and man in his pride has ignored it.That's why there are so many denominations now. The good Christians read the Bible in context and opposed slavery, the mistreatment of women and those who opposed interacial marriage.

    Guess what Tony? There are people today who would bring back slavery, oppress women and ban interacial marriage. The Bible reads today just like it did 200 years ago. They are just as ignorant of it as their ancestors were.I'm not perfect, but I strive to be like the Bereans, who searced the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

    Oh, and Oshtur. The states are allowed within the U.S. Constitution to oversee religion as they see fit, not the federal government. You know who said that? Thomas Jefferson.

    5. The brother and sister in the U.K. is a strawman. Obviously them not knowing about it midigates the situation. I could in no way fault them for what they DIDN'T know, neither would God. Are they still married? That would be a problem because they now know. We're not talking about what you don't know but about what you do. Nice try, but not applicable.

    7.You already have a state sanctioned civil union. A "wife" by the very defination of the word is a woman. A "husband" likewise is a man.
    I know, I know, you want to "redefine" that also.

    8. On this we agree, homosexuality is idolatry, you have placed something above God. He says don't do it, you say I'm going to anyway. Pride goes before the fall.

    Jesus said " if anyone would come after me, they must deny themselves, pick up their cross daily and follow me"(Luke 9:23). That's the tough part, when Jesus calls a person, He bids them come and die to themselves.

    If you refuse to do so, you are commiting idolatry.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  17. It makes no mention of a good one.
    Makes no mention of flying in airplanes either. You can't assume that something not mentioned is bad.

    2. So if something is not a sin in my heart, then it's permissible, right?
    strawman since I didn't say that. What we do know is there is no longer a laundry list of 'don'ts' and each mere act has to be considered in the context of the great commandment, from which all current law flows.
    Yes behavior that is not in compliance with the Great Commandment should be stopped but being in a loving relationship isn't one of those things.

    They didn't misinterpret the Bible, they misrepresented it.
    As you are doing as you admit there is no mention of homosexuality except in negative contexts that are not relevant to what we are talking about today.

    Oh, and Oshtur. The states are allowed within the U.S. Constitution to oversee religion as they see fit, not the federal government. You know who said that? Thomas Jefferson.
    Please a cite. I've just looked and can find he said no such thing. And since in Washington state constitution it explicitly gives freedom of religion and no state support of religion its still not allowed.

    Obviously them not knowing about it midigates the situation.
    As so intent is what's important not the mere act? See we are closer than you seem to think. I think since same sex relationships of the kind we are talking about today are not mentioned in the Bible at all that you condemnation of them as a mere act is wrong, as do many Christians.

    You already have a state sanctioned civil union.
    Which isn't the same as the civil contract of marriage both in state, out of state, federally, and out of country.
    Wanting the same rights as other married people is only wanting equality.

    A "wife" by the very defination of the word is a woman. A "husband" likewise is a man.
    I know, I know, you want to "redefine" that also.

    Wow do you repent lies like that? I have never ever wanted to redefine wife as being a female spouse or husband for that matter, and yet you KNOW it. Both lies and sarcasm are repentable acts - you should probably stop.

    And Craig you have already admitted that all mentions of even possible homosexuality in the Bible are contextual, and that God has said nothing about same gender couples in loving relationships. It would seem that you are the one putting yourself above God in telling us what he means when the Bible says no such thing. The idolatry is yours.

    You have your marching orders and they all stem from the Great Commandment. Same sex couples can be in compliance with that as well as opposite ones. Deal.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Driving 120 on the freeway isn't mentioned either, but I don't want to assume anything.
    Homosexual behavior is expressly forbidden in the Old and New Testaments. It is a measure of just how far man has fallen that the concept of marriage has been perverted to mean anything that man desires it to be.

    You will find No and I mean NO reference to any marriage between same sexs in the Bible. It is detestable before God and an abomination of His desired plan for men and women. No Steve No Sue.

    Loving relationship isn't one of those things.
    Really? Then I'm free to marry my family members, since incest isn't strictly prohibited by the Great Commission. I can marry my sheep too! As long as I'm loving my neighbor and they love me, Hey, what's the problem, right? God's Word is always relavant, it doesn't change,
    yesterday, today and tommorrow

    Grace is not a license to sin.

    You're right, civil unions are state sanctioned. Marriage is sanctioned by God. They aren't the same nor should they be. See above.

    Not knowing midigates the behavior, knowing does not. Your intent is to keep doing what God calls detestable. Jesus said the intent is the same as the act, missed that one, huh?

    "I consider the Government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, the doctrine, disiplines, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion(1st), but from that which also reserves to the States the powers not delegated to the United States(10th). Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in any religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the States." Jefferson, Memoir, Vol. IV,pp.103-104, to Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808

    If it is as you say in the state constitution, that is within 10th amendment rights. As long as the population agrees.

    Correct me on this one if I'm mistaken. In previous threads you have referred to your partner as your husband. That would make you a wife, right? Wrong, because you are not a woman. A wife can't marry a wife, ditto for a husband. Who's not redefining what?

    The whole Bible is to be read in context."In the same way the men also ABANDONED natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion" Rom 1:27

    The intent is the same as the act, that's what Jesus said.

    You've received one plague already, how many more will it take?

    And so it goes.....

    Craig in Lacey

    And so it goes.......

    ReplyDelete
  19. Craig,

    Thank you for your patience and persistent intelligent defense of Biblical standards. I'm amazed at how much time Tony and Oshtur have to do this posting. It is time consuming and they seem quite dedicated.

    I have posted occasionally and want you to know that I'm standing with you and recognize that many of us are busy living a life for the Lord and don't have the time necessary to play 'ping pong' with these guys who seem to have made Gary their target.

    But as Gary has posted, most folks just email him personally and don't try to post since the aberrant behavior folks, whom Jesus died for and they will meet Him face to face some day, have time on their hands to post non-stop their twisting of scripture and others words.

    I appreciate you taking up the baton and as more pressure is exerted by the homosexual TINY minority more of us must get involved and especially vote. I said before that I will support SA more with my money for the very work they are doing to stop this spread of approval of such a sick lifestyle that is expressly and clearly condemned by God.

    What a silly silly suggestion that Christ came so we could all decide what was 'right' at the time or in the particular situation. Oh, my! I don't have time to post further now. Situational ethics - how absolutely ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  20. And if driving 120 isn't illegal its not immoral, right?

    Homosexual behavior is expressly forbidden in the Old and New Testaments.
    If you mean certain same sex acts in certain contexts I totally agree. None in idolatrous situations as mentioned in The Old Testament and Romans. None in fidelity situations like Corinthians, and Timothy, and none as an assault as might be referenced in Genesis, Judges.

    Never mentioned either way a same sex couple in a loving relationship.

    It is detestable before God and an abomination of His desired plan for men and women. No Steve No Sue.
    You can put words in God's mouth as many times as you want but it won't make it any more truth.

    Then I'm free to marry my family members, since incest isn't strictly prohibited by the Great Commission.
    It isn't? Tell me exactly how you would do that in this world right now without horribly harming the family member? Please be specific.

    That is the context of the Great Commandment - there might be a situation someday were actually necessary - that's why there isn't a laundry list anymore.

    God's Word is always relavant, it doesn't change, yesterday, today and tommorrow.
    And it says that the old Law has passed.

    Grace is not a license to sin.
    And yet what is and isn't sin is as you pointed out a matter of intent. Again, there is nothing that goes against Scripture or the Great Commandment in two loving people who are gay. That's an assumption on your part.

    Oh and thank you for the note from Jefferson - he was replying to Miller about his request to have a National day of Thanksgiving and Prayer and he said both the Central Government and the President have no such civil authority. And he did say that state's could pass such resolutions if they so chose since part of Miller's appeal is that he had declared such a day when he was Governor of Virginia

    But again Washington state has no such choice by its constitution.

    Correct me on this one if I'm mistaken. In previous threads you have referred to your partner as your husband. That would make you a wife, right?
    No I am also a male spouse, I am a husband, and I am an individual. Judging me by the qualities of another is sort of anti-Christian, right?

    You've received one plague already, how many more will it take?
    What plague is that? Monogamous couples without disease aren't at any risk for STDs. Are you sure you aren't confusing promiscuity with sexual orientation?

    ReplyDelete
  21. What a silly silly suggestion that Christ came so we could all decide what was 'right' at the time or in the particular situation. Oh, my! I don't have time to post further now. Situational ethics - how absolutely ridiculous.
    All the ad hominem's aside, that of course isn't what's being said. Sin is still sin, its just we have principles to judge it by. As Jesus taught during his expounding of the Law, people don't follow the Law, they don't understand the Law, and even if they did there would still always be that one thing they wouldn't do. That's why Christians judge on Grace and the Christian Principles now, the yoke of the old Law is passed.

    Oh and how long do you think it takes to keep up on this blog? Most replies are less than 10 minutes to create, most much less.

    I fully support Craig's right to think differently, but letting him know people just as Christian as he is disagree with him is just doing what the most recent blog post talks about - making sure that people know there is a choice. I'm not trying to convince him, or you, just letting people know there are other opinions. And everyone learns something - I was unaware of Jefferson's response to the request for a national day of Thanksgiving and Prayer until Craig brought it up.

    I am most prompted to write when Gary says something that is inaccurate or misleading - his 'false choice' argumentative fallacy in this blog entry being the prompt here.

    I would suggest that if you want some larger credibility and convenience you could get a free gmail.com account from Google. Not only will that allow people to know which 'anonymous' you are but you can sign up for automatic email updates to threads you are interested in. They are free, anonymous, and you can have as many as you like so you could have one for just here if that's your desire. Your mail client can easily be configured to get mail from this account too (just as mine does). Once you do the basics 'targeting' anyone is really much easier.

    You have a happy holiday season which ever one you are celebrating (this is a blog for Jews and Christians according to the purpose statement, right?)

    ReplyDelete
  22. You can take words out of God's mouth, it doesn't make it any less true. If God ordained same-sex "loving" relationships then where's the Scriptural evidence to support that. You're putting words in God's mouth, not me.

    As you agreed, intent is the same as the act, so if you intend to have homosexual relations you are in violation of God's plan. God made NO exceptions. Oh it's O.K.as long as it's monogamous. How do you know the people in Romans 1 weren't. He created them male and female and they became one flesh, not male and male nor female and female. That predates the giving of the Law.

    As to the law, Romans 7 explains the purpose of the law, to convict men of sin. Without the law there is no sin, we wouldn't know what sin is. You can't be saved by the keeping of the law as Paul pointed out. You must be saved thru confession,repentance and baptism. The law still has a place although not for salvation.

    No, Jesus said not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away untill ALL things are fulfilled. Judgement day is not yet upon us.

    Take the U.K. case, if they knew they were related and decided to marry anyway because they were in love. The state wouldn't have known. What's the problem right? It has happened before in history. Who am I to tell them they can't have a "loving" relationship.

    The Great Commission doesn't speak specifically to this situation. The Law does and convicts of sin, same with same sex unions. That is the purpose of the Law, as Scripture says.

    Judging you by the qualities of another is kind of anti-christian, right? Yes. Judging you by the qualities God ascribes to the spouse of a husband is not.

    Again, show me if you can, same-sex marriage in the Bible.

    I thank you for recognizing my right to post on this sight and I recognize your's also. You're right, I'm not going to change your mind, only God can bring you to repentance. You're not going to change mine either=).

    It is a matter of choice, I agree. Life or death, blessings or cursings, we must all choose.

    8:18

    Thanks for the encouraging words, it really isn't a burden compared to what my Lord carried for me. We are called to "contend for the faith once delivered to the saints". It's only with His grace and the power of the Holy Spirit that I can take up my cross and follow Him. I am nothing but a slave for Jesus, may His name ever be praised.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  23. Craig that's why these discussions are good - we learn. We have been going around the mulberry bush on this but you finally revealed what is different in this:

    "No, Jesus said not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away untill ALL things are fulfilled. Judgement day is not yet upon us."

    In the previous statement Jesus said he was the fulfillment of the law - this paragraph is used by Christians around the world to explain why the old Law is past, because it HAS been fulfilled.

    This isn't me, this is standard Christian theology - I'd send a link with all the scriptural references for this on a a single page but that's not the point - you probably know this anyway. It doesn't matter what your sect believes, many disagree with you.

    This not that the old Law is still there and you just won't be judged by it, this is that the old Law is gone, kaput, yesterday's news. The only Law is the Great Commandment and that which flows from it, nothing more.

    This might seem like the Wild West to you but from the other point of view its been like this for about 2000 years and worked just fine. Of course you are totally free to keep the old yoke on even when you've been told you can put it down, but its like carrying a 100 pound rock around with you for no good reason.

    Now talking with my husband (as his husband :) he says that the largest sects that still think the old Laws are still in force are the Catholics and the Calvinists with the Mormons coming up from behind. Being from Lacey either of the first two is a strong possibility.

    If your religion thinks they have to follow the old Law then do it, since as you have said, and I agree, much of sin is in the intent. But do understand that you aren't even coming from the same decision point as most Christians in the United States let alone Washington state.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This is a simple issue, as are all related to human behavior.

    Those who love and follow the Lord do not behave in certain ways. Their belief and love is what motivates them to try to save others from eternal damnation.

    Those who hate God rain their hatred down on those who Love God and everything God means to them. They resort to trying to break down Christian behaviors by using examples of Christians in Name Only (CINO'S).

    If you love God, you won't.

    If you hate God, you will - and will attack those who won't.

    It's that simple.

    I see many examples of attacks here, but you are forgiven. If you want to be. All you have to do is ask.

    ReplyDelete
  25. As you say, we learn, the purpose of the law is to convict men of sin, without it there is no sin.

    Yes, Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law, all of his purposes are not yet done. No one is saved thru the keeping of the law, that's sound doctrine. We're supposed to at some point in our walk not need a babysitter. We're supposed to be led by the Spirit of God, the Spirit does not condone the perversion of God's design. Male and Female are one flesh. No Steve, No Sue.

    We're going to keep going around the mulberry tree as I believe God's Word to be clear on the subject. You can't do as you want because God's grace will cover you, when He has said don't do it.

    I neither believe the Pope to be infallible nor do I believe in indulgences(Catholicism) or TULIP (Calvinism), once saved, always saved. I'll just stick was the Bible, thank you.

    I think most Christians would disagree with Homosexual marriage.

    You still haven't supplied even one example of this "marriage" in the Bible. Old or New Testament. Until you do I'll stick with the verses that call it detestable behavior and an abomination in the eyes of God. Whatever the reasons for it.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yes, Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law, all of his purposes are not yet done
    So your sect thinks. Many others say the old Law has been fulfilled and it has passed.

    We're supposed to be led by the Spirit of God, the Spirit does not condone the perversion of God's design. Male and Female are one flesh. No Steve, No Sue.
    So you say, others disagree.

    I think most Christians would disagree with Homosexual marriage.
    And even Jesus's disciples were mistaken on many things. We judge by the Great Commandment now and there is nothing incompatible with the Christian principles and being gay.

    Until you do I'll stick with the verses that call it detestable behavior and an abomination in the eyes of God. Whatever the reasons for it.
    Do what you choose to do just realize people just as Christian as you think otherwise.

    And if people could only do what was mentioned directly in the Bible we'd all be Luddites for sure. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  27. All right, Here's the direct quote;

    "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heavens and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commamdments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharises, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." Matt 5:17-20

    Jesus' own words that he didn't come to abolish the law. Heavens and earth have not passed away, have they? All things haven't been accomplished since Jesus hasn't returned for His Bride, huh? The dead, great and small, haven't appeared before the judgement seat of Christ, have they?

    The law has not been abolished, we must exceed the letter of the law and address the heart.If you intend to do something God has forbidden you have sinned before even doing the act.

    The danger is those who seek to make God's word null and void so they can pursue their own lusts and passions, whether they call themselves Christians or not. Romans 1

    Christians don't set God's Word aside for political correctness or expediency or what seems right to them at the time. God sets the rules. I didn't say that, Gary didn't say that. God says that. Twist and squirm all you want. God is not mocked, you will reap what you sow.

    Have you considered the rainbow? You guys like rainbows, right? You've adopted it as your standard. God put the rainbow in the sky as a sign of His promise never to destroy the world by water again. Old Testament, under the law.

    If we aren't under the law anymore, why is the rainbow still here? Do you know where you find the heavens and earth have passed away. Revelation, just before the judgement. You and your pastor friend have a serious doctrinal problem. I say this not for my benefit but yours' and all those who may read this. I am responsible before God for every word out of my mouth, so I take this very seriously. I don't want you to die, but to live a life pleasing to God. Why do you resist Him so? Pride goeth before the fall, brother. Don't let Satan have the victory. You can repent and be forgiven.

    I serve a gracious God, won't you?

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  28. Craig, this isn't open for debate. Explaining that Jesus had to be crafty in his answers to those trying to ask him 'gotcha' questions to make him speak heresy is taught in sunday school. He says he isn't there to abolish the law, i.e. just say its invalid, he is there to fulfill it. And then he says the the Law will only pass i.e., not be abolished but actually be finished in its purpose, when it has been fulfilled. It was a tricky answer.

    AGain, this is not MY interpretation this is just the Christian one (or one many subscribe to). I can't send a link but if you search for this in Google "Do Christians have to obey the Old Testament law?" the first link should be to a Christian website that has a link with the answer (basically 'no') and all the scriptural references that are used to justify this opinion.

    Again, I didn't write it, it was taught to me in Sunday School with the exact passage you are referencing, and as this article will show you there are plenty more references they use to justify it too, many I was unaware of myself.

    But if you are of a differing opinion you can see why we are at loggerheads over this - all you have to do is think that the great commandment now identifies what is and isn't sin, and that Paul's references to same sex activity were all contextual and not blanket condemnations and you my view is totally supportable.

    Yours obviously with its reliance on the Old Testament and thinking the old Laws are still valid even if not the metric of salvation, would not regardless of contextual.

    We have different views from different starting points. So all I can tell you is that people disagree with your position and that's why they can have what seem to be so widely differing positions on this subject and probably many others we just aren't discussing.

    Again though if YOU think its a sin then don't do it, since we probably both agree a conscious willingness to sin would be a sin in and of itself even if it turned out what was thought of as sin wasn't really at all.

    Take care.

    ReplyDelete
  29. A tricky answer? come on, man, you're reaching. This was immediately following the Sermon on the Mount, no one asked Him any "gotcha" questions or any questions at all.

    That Jesus spoke in parables to those who didn't or wouldn't accept his teaching is clear from Scripture. They charged him with heresy anyway. This isn't one of those times. He spoke clearly and concisely to the matter. He didn't come to abolish the law. The law is in effect until the heavens and earth pass away. Another words, until all things have been accomplished. Those are His words, plainly spoken, no tricks.

    That there are those that disagree is a given,.There are many false teachers out there as Scripture predicted. If it's not in line with what the Bible says about itself, it's false doctrine.

    Oh look! I think I see a rainbow=)

    Have a safe and Merry Christmas!

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  30. But he says quite clearly that it would pass with it was fulfilled and he was the fulfillment. It again it is basic Paulian theology.

    So who should I think has a handle on it, churches who were teaching this as fact to poor little me that explains how Jesus really changed the world for humanity in the middle of last century, or you, who's point of view sort of makes Jesus just some kind of 'get out of jail free' card.

    Sorry, your point of view is inconsistent with scripture (as the site points out) and makes much of what Jesus and Paul said nonsensical. At least from what I was taught and can find.

    You just want to be under the old Law for some reason and my hubbie said that refusing God's liberation from it might be a kind sin in and of itself. (but then he's Lutheran and they think that all are irredeemably sinful - the most holy person you know is just a cat's whisker's better than Ted Bundy in God's scale of measurement. - Only Grace saves anyone.)

    Something else to discuss anyway. :)

    ReplyDelete
  31. I don't know who taught you, but try praying and reading the Bible for yourself and listening to the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit that reveals truth, not man's opinion of it. Mine, yours or anybody else's.

    I don't know how Jesus could be any clearer in what He said. " Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven".

    He taught this directly to His disciples while sitting on the side of a hill, there's no one there to ask any gotha questions, No tricks, no craftiness. Heaven and earth are still here, no i.e.. The church is still here, no buts, The rainbow is still here, may His faithfulness be forever praised.

    Middle of the last century? Huh? You're depending on what someone taught in the 1950's? Please pick up a Bible and let God speak to you directly thru His Word. Forget what someone taught you, be like the Bereans, who searched the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

    The law convicts of sin, w/o it there is no sin.
    Keeping the law can't save you because no one can keep the law. Does that mean we can break the law with impunity because we are under grace. Not! If you sow to your sinful nature the law convicts you and the sentence is death. If you sow to the Spirit, the law cannot convict you and the result is eternal life. Does that mean we have to be perfect? No, that's where grace comes in. God in His wisdom recognizes we're a sinful, stiffnecked people. All of us. That's why we must deny ourselves and pick up our cross daily. Luke 9:23.

    Your friend is correct, the righteousness of man is as filthy rags, grace thru faith is what saves. Grace is accessed thru belief in Jesus' atoning death, confession of sins, repentance, baptism and faith in action (James 2:26).

    Scripture refutes all ypur arguments. That's polemics. Don't just accept mine or Gary's or your friend's or some website. You have to put in the time to understand the Bible. Lord knows I don't get all of it, but one thing I do. Forgetting what is behind, I strive to grab hold of that for which Christ grabbed hold of me.

    Happy Studying=)

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  32. Craig all you are saying in all that is 'I'm right and their wrong' when they say the same thing and have entire religious sects that believe the same way and you have claimed no sect other than yourself.

    Yes yes, you 'might' be the only person that has gotten the Bible 'right' but considering what I've seen from you in the past I kind of have my doubts.

    Still regardless you are right only for yourself. People just as Christian as you disagree as a matter of basic Christian theology of their entire sects.

    What it means is your pronouncements of what is and isn't sin are meaningless to other Christians, you don't believe them, they don't believe you.

    Maybe those who come here should do what the mission statement says - follow the Christian principles and leave the dogma to personal decisions as Paul requested.

    (of course all can keep the Christian principles regardless of the sex of their spouse but that's probably why you like the dogma so much. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  33. Oshtur, all you are saying is you don't care what the Bible says about itself. You are not alone, the Laodicean church is alive and well.

    I wouldn't dare claim that I have the only right knowledge, that's gnosticism. God's word says what it says and I agree with it. I'm not the only one that does. I don't need to belong to a "sect", as if that somehow justified anything. They can agree or disagree with God, they have to answer for their words also.

    I don't care if I'm the last man standing, I must answer from Scripture only. The Bible says the intent as well as the act are detestable before God. There is not even one homosexual relationship that God has approved, not one. He had plenty of opportunity to say so, He didn't.

    There it is, man.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  34. And it says the old law has passed. Pretending it hasn't only causes harm

    But again you can believe what ever you wish, this is America, but Christians disagree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Hi Bob

    I was wondering when you would get in on this.

    It has passed as a means of salvation, not as an example of what sin is. Romans 3:19-20.

    I would not know not to covet if "thou shalt not covet" wasn't a commandment. Same goes for the rest of them. Apart from the law, sin is dead. Romans 7:8

    Pretending that the law doesn't convict of sin is the real harm.

    You are free to believe what you want, like I said, that's a given. I ask no one to believe me. GO CHECK IT OUT YOURSELVES!!!!!!!!!.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  36. Craig you are picking and choosing. Romans 3, in fact all of Romans, is Paul telling the church of Rome composed of both Jews and Gentiles, how the Law doesn't apply anymore. Romans 7 compares it to a dead spouse that it is impossible to be unfaithful to anymore.

    And Jesus did not leave without any Law, as has been mentioned he says there are only two commandments that is the source of all current Law.

    Jesus is the King of Kings now, the Ruler of all and His Rules apply which were not the Laws of Moses as stated numerous times in the New Testament. In Galatians Paul even warns about the dangers of trying to turn back to the old Law.

    What might be confusing you is that Paul would often talk of the Law speaking to people of Jewish heritage who were still acting as if the old Law was still relevant as he specifically says in 1 Corinthians 9:21.

    The old Law is passed, as dead as a dead spouse. It can't get much clearer than that.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Exactly, turning back to the law as a means of self-justification before God, when no one is justified by the law, as Paul said in Romans 3.

    It is by grace thru faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ that we are accepted.

    As to the dead spouse, "So, my brothers, you also died to the law thru the body Of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, dying to what once bound us, we have been released from from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code".

    Serving in the Spirit means dying to sin, not allowing it to reign in your body. If you strive by the power of the Holy Spirit to do this you will reap eternal life.

    If however, you continue to let sin reign you are convicted by the law and the result is death(separation from God). Without the law there is no sin as Paul explained.

    Jesus said " all the Law and Prophets hang on these 2 commandments". He did not say that the law and prophets are null and void. (Matt 5). They are the basis for the 2.

    I think you meant Cor. 9:20, easy mistake, I do it myself sometimes=). Yes, he said he became all things to all people that some might be saved. In 9:21 he's speaking of those who believed in self-jusification, boasting before God of their righteousness, when God said it's like filthy rags.

    Bible's pretty clear on the purpose of the law(to convict of sin), when it will disappaer(when the heavens and earth do) and when a believer is no longer bound by it (when they're lead by the Spirit).

    The question is, are you Spirit lead?


    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  38. Jesus said " all the Law and Prophets hang on these 2 commandments". He did not say that the law and prophets are null and void. (Matt 5). They are the basis for the 2.
    But he said the law would pass if it was fulfilled and he is the fulfillment of the law with his blood sacrifice on the cross. The old law is like a dead spouse; it is dead to you and you are dead to the Law. It is yesterday's news.

    I think you meant Cor. 9:20, easy mistake
    I was just reference the end - but 19-21 are about how Paul will act whatever way he needs to regarding the Law, whether it is passed or not, to bring people, both Jews and Gentiles to the Christ's Law.
    Bible's pretty clear on the purpose of the law (to convict of sin)
    Yes that is what the Law since the law defines sin but the only current law is Christ's, not Moses, that has passed.

    You have presented nothing that says the Old Mosaic Law is still in force. Jesus said he was its fulfillment and that was the condition of its passing, Paul says over and over and over again it has passed in many different ways, Peter was said to have said it was a yoke that no Gentile need bear - seriously why do you think it is still in force in anyway? There is no scriptural interpretation I can find that justifies such a belief without lots of Picking and Choosing...

    How the world goes round and round.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Jesus said " all the Law and Prophets hang on these 2 commandments". He did not say that the law and prophets are null and void. (Matt 5). They are the basis for the 2.
    But he said the law would pass if it was fulfilled and he is the fulfillment of the law with his blood sacrifice on the cross. The old law is like a dead spouse; it is dead to you and you are dead to the Law. It is yesterday's news.

    I think you meant Cor. 9:20, easy mistake
    I was just reference the end - but 19-21 are about how Paul will act whatever way he needs to regarding the Law, whether it is passed or not, to bring people, both Jews and Gentiles to the Christ's Law.
    Bible's pretty clear on the purpose of the law (to convict of sin)
    Yes that is what the Law since the law defines sin but the only current law is Christ's, not Moses, that has passed.

    You have presented nothing that says the Old Mosaic Law is still in force. Jesus said he was its fulfillment and that was the condition of its passing, Paul says over and over and over again it has passed in many different ways, Peter was said to have said it was a yoke that no Gentile need bear - seriously why do you think it is still in force in anyway? There is no scriptural interpretation I can find that justifies such a belief without lots of Picking and Choosing...

    How the world goes round and round.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Let me try this again.

    The purpose of the law is to convict of sin, without the law there is no sin. All the law and prophets hang on the Great Commandments.
    The Law is fulfilled thru love.


    If you seek to love God you will do what HE SAYS with your heart, mind and strentgh. You don't get to decide what He says, He does.You don't take His name in vain. You tithe so that there may be food in His house, etc.

    If you seek to love your neighbor as yourself you won't do to them what God says don't do. That would be the law, right? You won't steal, lie, murder, have sex with family members, cheat on your wife or husband, have sex with animals, commit homosexuality, crossdress, hate your brother without cause. gossip, slander, covet, because you truly love them. It's always been a matter of the heart. If you give to the poor grudgingly, God doesn't honor that. He loves a cheerful giver. If you make excuses for not caring for your parents and say the money belongs to God (corbin), he doesn't honor that. Honor thy mother and father. If you hate your brother without cause, you have already committed murder. Thou shall not murder. If you are causing your brother to sin, do you really think that God honors that? You shalt not put a stumbling block in front of your brother. All Old Testament and perfectly valid today

    It's about the Spirit of the law, not the letter. Again jesus said until heaven and earth pass away nothing fron the law will pass away until all things are accomplished.

    Have the heavens and earth passed away? Why is the rainbow still here?

    Jesus warned against breaking the commandments and teaching others to do so, he also promised greatness to those who practiced them and taught others to do so.

    Here's something also to consider; did you know "love thy neighbor as yourself" is an Old Testament command? Lev. 19:33

    I think your real issue is the law convicts you that what you are doing is wrong in God's eyes, you're trying to find a way around it and there isn't one. God doesn't affirm your behavior and neither will I.

    We'll just have to wait and see, won't we=)
    And so it goes.......

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  41. It's about the Spirit of the law, not the letter. Again jesus said until heaven and earth pass away nothing fron the law will pass away until all things are accomplished.

    Have the heavens and earth passed away? Why is the rainbow still here?


    Hmmm, the greek word 'panta' or 'all' is always used relative to the topic at hand - it is talking about the fulfillment of all the Law, which was accomplished by Jesus. If he had not, yes the Law would be unfulfilled but he did.

    If your whole argument is based on the misconception that he was talking about 'all' in some objective sense then there's your mistake - he was talking about all of the law mentioned immediately before.

    Again, Christ's Law is not Jehovah's law, Paul was clear no that and Christ was also clear on what his Law was - it all flows from the two Great Commandments that Jesus stated was the basis of his Law., that it was part of the old Law is not unexpected right?

    As to your wondering - this is just a discussion about basic Christian belief - most Christians in the US are on my side if you look stated beliefs of the majority sects. I have found a few non catholic people arguing your point but they are usually Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Church of Yaweh and the like that feel they must keep the Old Testament Laws. And in debates published online about the issue they seem to conclusively lose in proving their case.

    This isn't about me - again this is basic Lutheranism 101 and I was taught it in a Methodist sunday school. The question is why are YOU so invested in this minority point of view?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Precisely, I think we're getting somewhere. It is part of the old law, like the reference to love thy neighbor in the Old Testament.

    Now who's picking and choosing? You can't divorce "law and prophets" from "till heaven and earth pass away" and say Jesus was only talking about the beatitutes, he didn't even mention the prophets when giving them. Even given the benefit of the doubt that he accomplished everything, the heavens and earth should be gone, right? No rainbow, right? Old Testament.

    You're closer than you think. I don't subscribe to any "isms" or "ists". The Bible is sufficient, thanx.

    This isn't about me either, it's about what God affirms as right and wrong.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  43. the heavens and earth should be gone, right? No rainbow, right?
    You keep saying that and it still makes no sense - the statement says the Law will exist basically 'forever' unless it is all fulfilled. The Law was fulfilled. I mean it says it right there!

    Not only are you misreading it you are not even taking it as full face value - you wouldn't be eating shrimp, have a menstrating woman in your home, etc if your view was correct. As Moses and others said, the Law is a complete unit- either its all in force or its not the Law.

    And if the bible was all you needed you wouldn't have the position you do so it is all very confusing.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Yes, the law was fulfilled! I've said that already. The blood of bulls and goats can't erase sin, they are only a covering until the final sacrifice is made. Jesus is that final sacrifice. He fulfilled the requirement for the remission of sins. That's the fulfillment of the law. I don't understand how you don't get that.The sects you referenced earlier are in error if they are trying to keep the law as a means of salvation or self-justification.

    Are we reading the same sentence? "For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot shall pass away from the law until all is accomplished." Not fulfilled, accomplished, different word.

    It doesn't make sense to you maybe because you've said you're not a believer, you're not Spirit led and you're going by what someone told you, instead of doing the due diligence required? Here's where it's accomplished, "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more." Rev 21:1

    Hmmmm, sound familiar?

    Scripture proves he wasn't talking about the beatitudes, He wasn't giving a tricky answer, and the heavens and earth don't pass away until after Satan is bound for a thousand years.

    What more do you need?

    As to food laws. They were abolished so that Gentiles could be witnessed to. Read Acts 10:9ff. As to washing utensils, formal ceremonies of the priests, etc. Their is no longer a temple in Jerusalem. There is no sacrifice for sins left. Christ fulfilled the requirement of the law. "without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sins"

    Like I was saying, Oshtur, please pray and accept Christ. He will reveal His Word to you.Tomorrow may be too late.=) Take care.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  45. Are we reading the same sentence? "For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot shall pass away from the law until all is accomplished." Not fulfilled, accomplished, different word.

    or this:

    New Living Translation (©2007)
    I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God's law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.

    or this:

    King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
    For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    etc, etc etc.

    The greek word Πεπλήρωται in Matt 5:17 that Jesus uses is for when people do things, when 'fulfilling' or 'completing' is a task, the word γένησθε in Matt 5:18 is used when something innately completes or finishes. Using the word 'accomplished' is inaccurate since that implies something a person does.

    One usage is what Jesus is doing, one is just about the Law being completed - 'fulfilled' is a generic term that covers both.

    It doesn't make sense to you maybe…
    Come on Craig, people just oozing with Spirit have held this position for hundreds of years. I am just pointing it out to you, again - its not up for argument with me - this is an established Christian doctrine held by churches that were around at and before the founding of this country.

    This isn't new news by any definition.

    Hmmmm, sound familiar?
    Yeah, but has nothing to do with the Law passing away. You are the one who has erroneously thought 5:18 was about the world passing away - its not, it is referring to the word law 2 words before the last word γένησθε.

    There is no sacrifice for sins left. Christ fulfilled the requirement of the law
    EXACTLY! And both old and new Testament say the law of Moses was a unit, it is either all in force or none of it is. You can't 'fulfill' part of it since it is a single thing. Again, this is Christianity 101. That's not my opinion, that's Christian opinion.

    You keep arguing with me things that have been debated by far more knowledgable people than you or me many times online. And reading the transcripts of the debate the side that says the old Law passes seems to always 'win' if you are talking about being able to justify the opinion with Scriptural passages.

    "Accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior' done and done. Doesn't say you have to think he's magical, doesn't say you even have to believe in an after life. Doesn't even say you have to worship the Bible.

    Dude already accepted Jesus - he's a great guy I'm sure and I do everything he has required - again his yoke is ever so light, you should try it.

    You keep saying people have to do more - now wouldn't it be Satan's job to make Jesus seem difficult to approach?

    You think about that ;)

    ReplyDelete
  46. I'm not arguing with you and I really don't care what tradition has been established by denominationalism.

    The Bible repeatedly says that the purpose of the law is to convict of sin. Scripture teaches this principle over and over. Those who reject Christ as their Savior will be judged according to the law, they are not under grace. None are justified by the keeping of the law, because none can keep it. Christ is the only remedy.

    The law still has a purpose, just not for salvation. That's Christianity 101.

    Those who have the Spirit of God are led by the Spirit to obey the Great Commandments, which contain the principles of the old code, i.e. murder, stealing, lying, sexual immorality, etc. are wrong because they violate God's commands to love Him and your neighbor as yourself. That's Biblical doctrine.

    Jesus told the religious leaders if they didn't believe Him, they should at least believe the works that He had done, i.e. miracles. Even they couldn't dispute those. You do have to believe He's the Son of God.

    Jesus spoke much on heaven and hell, if it wasn't necessary why spend time talking about it? Why do we need to be saved? Life just ends and that's it, right?

    Yes, you do have to worship the Bible, as it's the Word of God. John 1.

    You accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior? Why? You clearly don't care what he says about your behavior. Lord means master, you have no rights because you are a "doulos", a slave. A Christians one responsibility is to obey the master, whatever the cost to self.

    His yoke is light, however he never promised it would be easy. Think it's easy to watch your family chopped to pieces for your faith, to have your enemies be those of your own household, to be tortured yourself for your faith, how about carrying your cross? There is no comfortable way to carry it, and denying self? That's probably to most difficult of all.

    No, I have added nothing. Jesus has never been difficult to approach, if you have a repentant heart=) It's Satan's job to make people think they can approach Jesus on their own terms.

    It was his lie from the beginning " Did God really say.....?"

    Still thinking=)

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  47. The law still has a purpose, just not for salvation. That's Christianity 101.
    Exactly, Christ's Law, which in the New Testament is referred to separately from God's (Mose's) Law repeatedly.

    Of course there is still law, the law of Christ, just not the law of Moses which was given to the Jews and the Jews alone.

    Whatever you want to believe is your right - you want to pretend your yoke is still heavy, bear it with prideful haughtiness. The rest will just do what Jesus asked of them and get by just fine.

    Its your choice.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Jesus told you not to commit sexual immorality and you refuse to stop. Who's being prideful and haughty? It's not the hearer of the word, but the doer who is justified.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  49. Jesus told you not to commit sexual immorality and you refuse to stop.
    Who's being sexually immoral? Now I do remember him saying that no one choses to not be attracted to women, that it was a gift from God

    I do think you are confusing a mere act with infidelity, promiscuity, and idolatry. A gay person can keep Christ's Law just as well as a straight person does.

    As always, I think your Bible studies have you worrying about the wrong things...

    Take care and have a good day - I am making incredible gay Christmas cookies all day ;)

    ReplyDelete
  50. No, you are incorrect, what He said is the ability to be celibate is a gift from God.

    A mere act? No, its much more than that, it's idolatry and infidelity. The idol being yourself and your partner. Infidelity being your joining yourself to something God calls detestable instead of doing what God calls right. It would be the same if you were stealing or bearing false witness, also mere acts!

    " for this reason a man will leave his mother and father and be united to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." That is God's stated plan for marriage throughout Scripture. Not a man shall be united to his husband or a woman united to her wife.

    " So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of theit thinking. They are darkened in their undersatanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more." Eph. 5:17-19

    And you would claim Christ? Heresy! You not only continue to do what God calls sin, but approve of those that do! Romans 1:32

    You've offered no Scriptural basis for same-sex marriage, none. You are a stumbling block to your brothers and sisters. You are in bondage Oshtur and you won't even acknowledge it.

    Temptation is not sin, giving into it is! Remember , we do not wrestle against flesh and blood but agaist the powers of darkness. Don't be conformed to the ways of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind!!!!

    Seek God and you will find Him, if you seek Him with all of your heart. Don't be deceived!!!

    Bon appetit=)

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  51. Sorry Craig there was no word for 'celibate' in Aramaic or Greek. The disciples asked if they should forgo marrying women, and his response was the ability to do so is a gift from God.

    Again, your bondage to the old law has clouded your mind and heart which is your choice.

    It has been an interesting exercise of how those who are the most homophobic can only rationalize it by relying on things that are past. Good thing to differentiate between the Christianists and the Christians it seems.

    You take care and when the cult of Craigism gets a membership of more than one you let me know ;)

    ReplyDelete
  52. While It's true there's no Greek or Hebrew word for celibate. He didn't say go and marry men, so the concept of celibacy is being taught.

    Cult of Craigism? LOL!!! That's a good one:) No, that homosexuality is sin has been Christian doctrine long before you or I were born. I'm not alone in that belief by any means.

    The cult of Oshturism:) has many adherents and a broad road to walk on. I hope you bought your asbestos suit. =) It's your choice.

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.