What Would Jesus Say to a Gay Couple Today?

By Tom Gilson Published on October 10, 2017

“Suppose there were two gay men right here in this room — men who loved each other. Suppose Jesus walked into the room right now. What do you think He would say to them?”

A friend of mine was asked that question not long ago. It’s a great question, and the answer he gave was brilliant.

It’s a great question because Jesus’ opinion matters, and because there’s a lot of confusion over what He would say.

Misunderstandings in Jesus’ Name

We know that God is love, and that His first commandments are to love Him and one another. Some say that’s all you need to know; that love is a value higher than all others, higher even than truth. So if these men want to love each other, certainly Jesus would bless them for it, right?

We know, too, that Jesus wouldn’t reject the men. He associated with every kind of “sinner,” while rebuking the “smug religionists,” as I like to call them; the hypocrites who thought they were better than everyone else.

So we know that Jesus would engage with them with warmth and love, and He would certainly stand for love. But still we have to wonder, what would he say?

”Do You Want To Be Healed?”

Here’s how my friend answered. It comes straight from conversations Jesus had when He was here on earth (John 5:2-9, Mark 10:46-52).

“What would you have me do for you? Do you want to be healed?”

Jesus would ask them, “What would you have me do for you? Do you want to be healed?”

He might even offer them God’s forgiveness, as He did with the paralytic in Mark 2:1-12.

Love That’s Truly Life-Giving

The standard gay-rights answer, of course, would be, “Absolutely not! Forgiveness? What an insult! Our love is good and right. You’ve told us to love one another, and that’s what we’re doing. So we expect you to bless our relationship!”

Jesus ran into this kind of thing a lot: people who thought they could tell Him what He should be doing. More often than not He responded with questions.

So I think He might say, “What, do you think you cannot love one another without putting sex in the picture?” His own answer to that should be obvious. Or he might ask them, “What leads you to believe your love is good and right?”

I’ve wondered that myself. It’s not just that gay sex seems inherently wrong to me. It isn’t even just my conviction that God’s word says it’s not good. It’s what we can observe with our own eyes — or the eyes of researchers. The New Atlantis reported on this at length last fall: the LGBT life is not an emotionally healthy one, and it isn’t just because of anti-gay stigma.

Even gay-friendly researchers find that gay men typically connect with an extraordinarily high number of partners. This is not a picture of life-giving relational health. Rather it’s a picture of always seeking, always hoping, and always being disappointed.

Which is why I believe Jesus would ask them, “What would you have me do for you? Do you want to be healed?”

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

Why the Question Needs Asking

In the Gospel accounts he asked those questions of a man who was lame, and one who was blind. You’d think the answer would be obvious. I’ve been partially disabled for much of the past twenty years, with serious problems in both feet. I’ve worn out four fracture boots; I’m on my fifth one now. I’ve had four foot surgeries in the past six years, and I’m facing the fifth in less than two weeks from now.

I want to be healed. Who wouldn’t?

There’s a whole movement now of LGBT people who don’t think they need Jesus’ help that way.

But there are people who have “made friends” of their disabilities. It certainly isn’t true of most disabled persons, but some find it more convenient — and perhaps more familiar, too — to allow their physical challenges relieve them of some personal responsibility.

So these questions were very insightful. Jesus didn’t force His healing on anyone. He did it only when He knew they wanted it. And there’s a whole movement now of LGBT people who don’t think they need Jesus’ help that way.

To Say Yes or to Say No

Yet I believe there are many who would still say, “Yes! We’re willing to let go of what’s seemed right to us — because in reality we know it isn’t. We’re not happy being this way. We want to be healed.” And I believe He would do it for them.

Now we know that in real life, people who seek spiritual healing from same-sex attraction rarely experience it fully. It would be cruel to suggest that this is what people should normally expect when they encounter Jesus today.

But this has been a what-if scenario: What if Jesus walked through the door right now, in the flesh? Of course we can’t heal like Jesus did. My doctors haven’t healed my feet like Jesus healed the lame. When He walked the earth, He did what He alone could do. Sometimes He still does miracles; more often He has other plans for us, plans that cause us to rely on Him through weakness, not in strength.

As for those who would consider his offer an insult, I expect He would do as He did with others who rejected His word: He would let them walk away. He would let them live with their decision — and its harmful consequences.

And as He also did when He was on earth before (Luke 19:41-44), He would weep for them.

 

Tom Gilson is a senior editor with The Stream and the author of Critical Conversations: A Christian Parents’ Guide to Discussing Homosexuality with Teens (Kregel Publications, 2016). Follow him on Twitter: @TomGilsonAuthor.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • If the Gay couple was married, would Jesus tell them to get a divorce?

    • If they requested the healing I’ve spoken of here, He wouldn’t need to say it. Having experienced His healing, they would want to dissolve the union.

      Otherwise, would He tell them to do it? His words on divorce in Matthew 19 were very specifically pointed toward the marriage of a man and a woman. He wouldn’t recognize this as a real marriage, so He would certainly have no problem with telling them to divorce — except it might not be the most redemptive approach to take toward them.

      So I think He’d much more likely lead with the questions I already mentioned above. If they rejected Him at that point, I don’t think He’d go chasing after them telling them, “But wait! You have to get a divorce!” That wasn’t His style. He always started with the heart. If people weren’t willing to listen to Him on that level, He let them go. What would be the point of telling them one more thing, when they weren’t willing to hear the first thing?

      And what if someone pressed Him on the question? He rarely let that happen. He stayed in control of conversations. I think he would find a way to steer the discussion toward the real point, which isn’t the the legal fiction that said they were married, but their hearts.

      • Well I’m sorry, Tom, but I just don’t get it. It makes no sense to me. I mean, if it wasn’t for your interpretation of Scripture, would this even be an issue for you? Why is it that Straight couples are encouraged to make commitments, marry, forsake all others, and live in monogamous bliss until death do them part, and that this is a GOOD thing …. yet for Gay couples do aspire toward the same is somehow a BAD thing? How is this supposed to make any sense to Gay people?

        I assume your response will probably be, “I didn’t make the rules.”

        • It’s my interpretation of Scripture, along with my understanding of natural law. But it is a carefully considered interpretation based on a great deal of study. Therefore I think it isn’t just my interpretation; it’s also a true interpretation of Scripture, which is a true and reliable source.

          It’s good for straight people to marry because that is what marriage was intended to be. I’ve written articles and part of a book to explain that. Others have written entire books. I won’t try to re-explain it all again here. If you really want an answer to that question I can direct you to some good sources.

          If gay people can’t make sense of it, I can only try to continue helping them understand. That’s one reason I keep writing on this topic. I don’t do it with the expectation everyone will think it makes sense. That would be an impossible goal for any writer on any topic.

          • Conversely, do you ask Gay people to help YOU understand? Calling a person’s sexual orientation “a very difficult psychological condition to change,” is likely to elicit a facepalm moment. Being Gay is as fundamental to my life experience and identity as being Straight is to yours. And yet you act as though you have some profound insight into the hearts and minds of Gay people that we ourselves lack.

          • Betty Lou Schwartz

            Chuck, you still do not want to see….you want Christ and the Bible and the Church to say your homosexuality is ok, well, the Bible quite plainly and repeatedly says it is not. Christ would never force you to see what you do not want to see, but He does ask the question – do you want to be healed? And He is there when you see.

          • DEAR BETTY:

            It isn’t that I don’t WANT to understand. I have been listening to anti-Gay rhetoric for most of my 58 years. How could I NOT understand?

            When you talk about “healing,” exactly what are you referring to? I have never met anyone who has been magically changed from homosexual to heterosexual. We all have choices to make in terms of how we conduct our public and private lives, but sexual orientation is not one of those choices. Some people are happy to be single and promiscuous, others aspire toward marriage and monogamy. None of these choices hinge on whether someone is Gay or Straight. Do you understand this?

            Are you married to a man? Why did you marry him? Is it only because you wanted to make babies with him, or did you truly, deeply LOVE him and wanted to share your life with him?

            If “healing” mean resigning oneself to loneliness and isolation, without any hope for love and commitment with a compatible person, you can keep it.

          • pgroup

            Christ’s healing isn’t magic; it’s miraculous. That you can’t believe it’s real is your issue, not Christ’s.

            Face the truth – you are quite satisfied with the choices you’ve made. So another Scriptural verse applies to you: Verily I say to you, they have their reward already.

          • Chuck, I think I anticipated all your objections in the original article.

            The standard gay-rights answer, of course, would be, “Absolutely not! Forgiveness? What an insult! Our love is good and right. You’ve told us to love one another, and that’s what we’re doing. So we expect you to bless our relationship!”

            Jesus ran into this kind of thing a lot: people who thought they could tell Him what He should be doing.

            As for those who would consider his offer an insult, I expect He would do as He did with others who rejected His word: He would let them walk away. He would let them live with their decision — and its harmful consequences.

            And as He also did when He was on earth before (Luke 19:41-44), He would weep for them.

          • tether

            I have met a woman who was once a lesbian. She was healed as a result of prayer and is now quite attracted to men and looking to get married soon.

          • Kevin Carr

            Chuck, as one post stated below, Jesus doesn’t do magic, it is miraculous, if you can even grasp a tiny bit of the grace of God, and how much he is for you, he wants us to come to him with whatever it is we are carrying, he accepts us as we are but doesn’t want us to stay as we are. He isn’t going to sprinkle pixie dust, some battles we just can’t fight on our own and he doesn’t expect us to. He is all in for you, you can’t get more all in than death on the cross. Check out Joe Dallas he has dealt with people that are involved in homosexuality, porn addiction. He knows from being on the inside.

          • Jeremy L

            She isn’t going to get it. She never will. She probably DID get married to a man because she thinks men are really, really sexy and wanted to have sex without being sent to hell. I’m convinced these people don’t know what love is. At all. She also broke her own rules by trying to teach you when Paul suffered not a woman to teach. These people are nothing but lustful freaks and flagrant hypocrites (ya know – the type of people the man they claim to worship resented the most). Chuck, if you are married, know that your relationship with your husband is worth more than any relationship these fools in this thread will ever have. Tom, the self-proclaimed “expert” who refuses to listen to you, can go home and have sex with his “wife” (I don’t believe he is really married, and he needs to just respect that) every night and proclaim that because of their heterosexuality and their heterosexuality alone God blesses their sham of a relationship. But in reality, Tom’s relationship with his “wife” is just hollow, meaningless lust and mindless reproduction meant to increase Christianity’s numbers so it can meet its primary goal of eradicating the world of LGBT people.

    • Kevin Carr

      It is not a legitimate marriage. He said a man will leave father and mother and cleave to his wife. The models are there in scripture, there is no same sex model at all. Can you point to one scripture that speaks of homosexuality in the positive?

      • John Connor

        No gods needed for a couple to be married. All that is required is a marriage license and two consenting adults.

      • Myth Buster

        Jesus spoke extensively about the Idolatry of Money in the Gospels and his dislike for the wealthy. People seem to have overlooked all of this when voting for the guy that endlessly bragged about his $11 billion on the campaign trail. Maybe since Jesus didn’t even address the homosexuality issue we could leave that to God?

      • Paul

        Exactly. Jesus wouldn’t dignify their sinful lifestyle as a legitimate marriage to begin with.

        • I’m not talking about a sacramental marriage, but rather a civil marriage recognized by the government. None of the legal benefits of marriage come from the church.

          • Paul

            Sin isn’t cleansed by govt

          • He would tell them to dissolve their governmentally recognized union — as I wrote earlier, and in the same context I tried to describe then.

          • Kevin Carr

            We must obey God rather than man, what Christ says will supersede government.

    • Patmos

      He would instruct them to if they wanted the kingdom, but he wouldn’t chase them down and wag a finger of shame at them. He came to save not to condemn, and he forced the gospel on no one.

    • They wouldn’t be married in the first place. Just because you sign some papers or go through some “ceremony” doesn’t make you married in the eyes of God.

  • Trilemma

    “What Would Jesus Say to a Gay Couple Today?”

    The answer to that question simply reveals a person’s beliefs about homosexuality and about Jesus’s personality. Since the Bible is silent on such relationships, it’s easy to project one’s own beliefs onto what Jesus would say. Personally, I think Jesus would converse with them pretty much the same way he would with a heterosexual couple.

    • Patmos

      “Since the Bible is silent on such relationships”

      It’s not silent on the matter. Homosexuality is considered by God to be an abomination, and the law handed down by Moses addresses it.

    • Well, of course it reveals our beliefs about homosexuality and about Jesus! But Trilemma, you’re treating it as if we don’t know anything about those things. I have reasons for what I believe about them, and thus I think they’re not just “beliefs” in the casual way that term is often misused today. I think they’re true.

      And how did Jesus converse with straight people, anyway? He invited them to follow Him. He defined the terms on which they could do that — terms that included willingness to follow and to obey Him. He challenged them to holiness. He healed them. He taught them what was true, and He corrected what was wrong. He tailored every conversation to the person He was with, so there was no one way that he spoke with all people, except always to call them to following Him in truth, grace, and love.

      So yes, He would do those things with a gay couple, as he would with hetero persons — and I think He might do it in the way I’ve written above.

      • Trilemma

        I agree with everything you said here except for the questions Jesus might ask though I agree he would start off with questions. The question, “Do you want to be healed?” assumes they need to be healed of their homosexuality, and to offer them forgiveness assumes they need to be forgiven for their homosexuality. There are many Christians who believe a gay couple does not need to be healed or forgiven. Their answer to what would Jesus ask a gay couple would be different from yours.

        If the gay couple were happy with who and what they are and happy with their relationship, then I don’t think Jesus would ask, “Do you want to be healed?” or offer forgiveness for their homosexuality. However, there are men who are gay who would rather be straight. If that were the case with this gay couple, then Jesus might ask them if they want to be straight.

        • You can feel free to disagree. But if they told Jesus they didn’t want to be healed, He would weep, for He would know that they were wrong. If they thought they had no need for forgiveness, He would grieve for the life they were giving up, and the destruction they were accepting in its place.

          You assumed that I was assuming they need healing and forgiveness. Your assumption is incorrect. I was making no assumption. I was applying what I’ve learned through careful study of Scripture and natural law.

          • Trilemma

            I see how what I said made the assumption that you were making an assumption. Sorry about
            that. That was poor wording on my part. I should have said that the question, “Do you want to be healed?” indicates they need to be healed of their homosexuality, and to offer them forgiveness indicates they need to be forgiven for their homosexuality.

            When you said that Jesus might offer them forgiveness, it indicates that you believe there’s something there needing forgiveness. Some Christians believe that simply being attracted to the same sex is a sin needing forgiveness. I assume that’s not the case with you. Since you did not say it was a sexually active gay couple, it seems you’re making the assumption they are sexually active and that’s why they need forgiveness. It’s a pretty safe assumption but there are gay couples who don’t have sex. Does a chaste gay couple need forgiveness for their relationship?

          • No, there’s no need for forgiveness there — except who ever uses that language, “a chaste gay couple”? The ordinary understanding of “gay couple” isn’t “chaste.” Chaste gay friends, sure; but rarely do we speak of a chaste gay couple.

          • Trilemma

            Chaste, gay couple was a topic of discussion a couple of years ago. Here’s a defense of chaste, gay couplehood. (Delete the space after each dot.)

            spiritualfriendship. org/2015/02/04/chaste-gay-couples-and-the-church/

            Here’s a criticism.

            www. catholicvote. org/chaste-gay-couples-and-other-same-sex-unions/

            There are chaste gay couples who are more than just friends. As a topic of discussion, it helps separate same sex attraction from same sex sex. If same sex sex is wrong, it seems to me that trying to be a chaste gay couple living together can be a bad idea just like trying to be a chaste male and female couple living together.

          • GPS Daddy

            Trilemma,

            I think that your not accepting the nature of the gospel. The gospel is REALLY GOOD news for those that understand their position before God because of this sin… it does not matter what the sin is, what matters is the need we have before God. When I grasp how much my need is because of MY sin then it does not matter WHAT the sin is. What matters is that Jesus takes it away. He cleanses me of the thing that separates me from God. The future what what is means to be in heaven totally outweighs anything this live can offer. Who cares what the sin is… get rid of it. Thats the attitude we should have. ANYTHING that is a hint of sin we should want to separate from our lives. No excuses. No regrets. No looking back.

            Sexual attraction is of this life. A mere moment in the totality of your life. Who cares what the issues are in the first minute of the day of your life. If there is something in that first minute that means you spend the rest of the day in jail verses at the beach what will you choose?

        • Kathryn Rose MacDonald

          I don’t see where the author specifically stated Jesus would offer to heal them of or forgive them for their homosexuality. I saw the author say Jesus would offer healing and forgiveness without specificity.

          Hmmm, without the author giving specific parameters as to exactly what would be healed and forgiven, my brain went somewhere else altogether. I assumed the question entirely differently. Interesting.

          I think everybody has something from which they’d like to be healed- something about themselves they feel is “wrong” or “unhealthy” or “flawed” or the like. I think everyone has something for which they’d like to be forgiven- something carried around with them about which they feel a sense of guilt or responsibility. I know we have wounds we can’t see and don’t know about that need to be healed. I know we have sins we can’t see and don’t know about that need to be forgiven.

          Jesus sees and can heal us from those wounds–the ones we see or the ones we can’t. Jesus sees and will forgive us of those sins–the ones we confess and the ones we don’t know.

          • I re-read my article to see whether I had indeed been so vague. I guess I thought I’d made my subject more clear than that, when I predicted the “standard gay-rights answer,” and also when I went on to speak of gay sex as compared to the love Jesus called us to have. But maybe not, at least not for all readers.

          • Kathryn Rose MacDonald

            It was not my intention to insult you, sir. And I whole-heartedly apologise for having done so. I suspect it has little to do with your writing and more to do with my…………well, God creates us all differently, and I got the odd-brain configuration. My brain just doesn’t always go where it’s expected.

          • Trilemma

            I agree. If Jesus walked into a room with a gay couple present and simply asked, “Do you want to be healed?” they might say they want to be healed of their HIV infection or some other illness. Then Jesus might leave them to explain being HIV negative to their doctors before checking back up on them later, kind of like Jesus and the man born blind in John 9.

    • Jim Walker

      Bible is silent ? Which bible do you read ?

    • Mike Armistead

      How can you say the Bible is silent on such relationships? Genesis 1 & 2 layout the biblical foundation for sexuality and marriage, and there are no alternatives presented to one man and one woman united for life. Genesis 19, Leviticus 18 and 20, Mark 7 (with 2 Greek terms that specifically address homosexuality – “porneia” and “aselgeia”) and 10, Matthew 19, Romans 1, I Corinthians 6, I Timothy 1, and Jude all address the same topic and reject anything not in the mold of Genesis 1 & 2. That’s a whole of non-silence to anyone who understands scripture.

      • WestTexasRose

        Well said. Thank you for the scriptural cites. Maybe some will actually take the time to READ the Word rather than “think” they know what Jesus would say or do.

      • Trilemma

        Let’s look at just the Old Testament. Genesis 1 and 2 don’t say anything about gay relationships. You’re assuming this silence means condemnation. Genesis 19 is talking about men wanting to rape Lot’s visitors. Leviticus 18 is most likely talking about male prostitution in connection with the worship of Molech. Leviticus 20 is most likely talking about pederasty. The Old Testament never mentions sex between two women or say anything about a lesbian relationship.

        • Kevin Carr

          Romans 1:26-27 seems pretty straight forward about leaving the natural use, that is for male and female.

          • Trilemma

            I think Romans 1:26 is most likely talking about feminism which Paul would consider unatural. I think Romans 1:27 is most likely talking about drunken male same sex orgies for a pagan god such as Bacchus.

          • Gary

            What you are trying to do, (justify homosexuality from the Bible) cannot be done without perverting the meaning of the Bible.

          • pgroup

            I know where that effort ends and it ain’t pretty for them.

          • Trilemma

            I think the meaning of the Bible is being perverted in order to condemn homosexuality.

          • I’ve studied those claim, Trilemma. At length. I’m afraid the shoe is on the other foot.

          • Trilemma

            I respect that you’ve studied this at length. Here’s an example of what I’m talking about. Genesis 19 is often used to condemn homosexual relationships like the one pictured in your hypothetical situation. This looks like a perversion of the Bible to me since it looks like Genesis 19 talking about an attempted gang rape.

          • Gary

            Well, you are wrong. I’ll bet that happens a lot with you.

          • Kevin Carr

            Then what is the correct interpretation? I guess if you want you can shape it to justify fornication, adultery, lust, or anything one chooses. The problem with what you are doing is that we want to make our sin okay and look for loopholes.

          • Kevin Carr

            You think are the operative words, you are trying to shape the word of God into what you would like, which would be private interpretation. If what you are saying is true then what are the degrading passions and vile affections? What is the exchanging of natural function and burning in desire for one another?

          • Trilemma

            The Greek word translated “degrading” or “vile” is atimia. This word is also used in 1Corinthians 11:14 to describe long hair on a man. So, in Romans 1, Paul is either saying homosexual sex is akin to long hair on a man or he’s not talking about homosexual sex.

    • “The Bible is silent on such relationships”. LOL

  • Patmos

    Jesus would say the same thing everywhere he went: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17)

    While it is true that we are saved by grace through faith, the notion that you can bring your sin with you is a big fat lie propagated by the modern lukewarm church. There has to be some acknowledgement of sin for grace to occur, because what then is the reason for grace?

    • Patmos

      It’s also recorded in Mark chapter 1, Jesus picked up John’s message of repentance, he didn’t abandon it:

      “14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
      15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe — the gospel.”

      And like I say it was what he led with, because grace cannot occur without there being acknowledgement of sin. The one has to preclude the other just by definition.

      Does this diminish the message of grace? Certainly not! But if grace just occurred on it’s own, without repentance, would mean then that sin becomes justified. The sinner would not be changed, not having repented, and would not be a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17) and would not consider himself dead unto to sin and alive to God (Romans 6:11).

      It is true though, some do not heed the good news of the gospel. For light has come into the world, and some loved darkness more than the light.

      • Patmos

        And trust me I say all this being far from perfect, and very much a work in progress.

        You do not have to be perfect to be offered God’s grace, because then salvation would be about your works rather than grace.

        • Myth Buster

          I agree. Jesus nor the Bible didn’t weight homosexuality above other
          sins. It is one of many sins and one of many abominations against God. Other abominations have been selectively ignored. Those that have elevated this above others seem to be doing it based upon their own 21 Century prejudices.

          • Patmos

            Well, to a degree, but at the same time there isn’t a celebration of other sins and abominations like there is with homosexuality. I don’t see any parades for other violations of God’s law.

          • Concerned Christian

            why don’t we see parades for other violations of God’s law?

            I wish Christians, opposed to homosexuality, would seriously ask themselves that question.

            Most Christians/churches have been around far more people committing other sins than they have homosexuals.

            Yet, do any of the other sinners feel as uncomfortable around Christians as members of the homosexual community?

            Maybe if the sinners did, you might see more parades. For now why bother, you’ve already been accepted!

          • Myth Buster

            Absolutely true. My point is that this sin has been elevated by some above others based upon their own 21 Century prejudices. I have relatives that profess to be Christians and absolutely hate homosexuals; yet, have themselves violated various aspects of what is found in the Gospels, but that doesn’t seem to bother them too much. One then has to ask why has this sin been artificially elevated above all others? No where in the Bible have they been weighted. If God chose not to weight them then his followers should not. That’s my only point.

  • Kathryn Rose MacDonald

    “I don’t know what Jesus would say to you about _____, that’s a personal thing between you and Jesus and has nothing to do with me. If you don’t know Him, I will happily introduce you, if you’d like. Or if you already know Him, I’ll happily go with you to ask, if you’d like the support for your morale. Regardless, like in any relationship, it’s best if you get your answers directly from the other person rather than through a third-party.”

    That is my standard response (or words to that effect) for any “what would Jesus/God say/do about __________” question. It keeps me out of a LOT of trouble, saves me carrying a LOT of inappropriate burdens, and ensures I am always pointing folks in the right direction. I figure, if I point them to Jesus/God, then I can’t possibly unintentionally guide/lead them astray.

  • Concerned Christian

    Re-Post

    Years ago, we had a family gathering. My nephew, who was around 5 at time, did something embarrassing and everyone in the room laughed at him. He was embarrassed and you could see it in his eyes as he looked around the room to see who he could retaliate against. He couldn’t hit the adults because he knew he would be in big trouble. So instead, he hit his older sister in the head with a toy car.

    This is what conservative Christians have become. Kids who attack someone that they perceive to be weak because they’re afraid to take on the source of their embarrassment.

    Donald Trump is a walking embodiment of the problems plaging the church. From marriage, fornication, lying, arrogance, ignorance and the list goes on and on. Yet, there are no post written on this site that chastise him or the church for this behavior. No, Christians just looked around the room and found the weakest person in the room to attack.

    However, much like my nephew found out, that act still had consequences. So does turning a blind eye to the problems in the church which have nothing to do with the LGBT community.

    • Jim Walker

      Everyone has a past, you included. So as a concerned Christian, shouldn’t you be concerned of his salvation ?

  • Marbled Bread

    He had the same message to all people: “Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

    Real Christianity is amazingly simple. It’s about getting rid of your sins because made you for something greater.

  • Otho Cooley

    Christ came to seek and to save those who are lost. (Luke 19:10) As it is revealed in the Word of God, all people are sinners. (Romans 3:23) The consequences of sinful behavior is eternal separation from God, but there is the opportunity to find forgiveness from God and eternal life through repentance. (Romans 6:23) This requirement of our righteousness God is lovingly shared with whosoever will trust in the grace of God. He is not willing that any should perish but that all people will be saved. (II Peter 3:9)

    Furthermore, there is good news to share about the work of the Holy Spirit to help defeat those sins that destroy the human race. 9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (I Corinthians 6:9-11)

    While Paul enumerates those who will be excluded from eternal life, he declares the power of the Spirit of God sets free from every bondage and deception of the evil one. The city of Corinth, Greece was rampant will all types of immorality. However, the message of the gospel of Christ brought deliverance to those who came to Christ. This city had Aphrodite, the goddess of love and beauty, with a thousand “temple prostitutes.”

    GOD’S GRACE IS SUPERIOR TO THE SINS OF HUMANITY. (ROMANS 5:20) The gospel song states, “I know, yes, I know. Jesus blood can make the vilest sinner clean.

  • David M. Crowder

    “Now we know that in real life, people who seek spiritual healing from same-sex attraction rarely experience it fully. It would be cruel to suggest that this is what people should normally expect when they encounter Jesus today.”

    So when one encounters Jesus today, with ANY sort of sin..do we apply this principle? Or is same sex attraction a “really hard one ” for Him? I hope his track record is better on salvation and freedom from hatred,lying, murder,theft,fornication,and any other BIG sins you can name.

    • I think in this whole thread there’s been some confusion between the experience of same-sex-attractedness, which is a very difficult psychological condition to change, and which needs healing which some experience but not all; and the sins of same-sex physical intimacy, which need repentance (on the individual’s part) and forgiveness and power for change from the Lord. Jesus still has an excellent track record with freedom from hatred, lying — and the sins involved in same-sex physical intimacy.

    • Randy

      If you believe and have faith in Christ you are whole. The flesh counts for nothing. The spirit is life. What else is there to say? Sad that some, when reading scripture, still eat from the tree of law with it’s supposed knowledge of good and evil that brings death, as it was intended so that you might die to yourself and the desire to be like God by your own hand and will and effort, and some eat from the tree of life and spirit that gives life, and rest in the work of Christ to make you into His image.

  • Gary

    If Jesus walked into a room where a “gay couple” was, it is very likely he would say nothing at all to them, turn around and leave the room.

    • If you are right, I have no need of such people in my life.

      • Gary

        You need Jesus, but he doesn’t need you.

        • Jamie Patterson

          but he wants us all!! He would leave 99 sheep to go after the one that is lost!! Only if their heart is hardened towards him would he turn and walk away!! Just my opinion.

          • Gary

            A sheep in the NT is always a metaphor for a believer only.

          • pgroup

            Disagree. Like the rich young ruler and Yeshua, it was the ruler who walked away, not Christ.

          • Jim Walker

            God reached out to him but gave him a choice and he chose to walk away.

      • He’s not right about that.

        • Gary

          Reality proves I am right.

    • No, Gary. That’s not Jesus. Mark 2:15-17.

      • Gary

        Obviously, Jesus has never called many homosexuals to repentance. Why do you suppose that is?

        • Given that homosexuality is only 2% of the population, it probably wasn’t a high priority. It doesn’t mean He supported it. He doesn’t mention abortion either. It doesn’t mean He supports abortions.

    • Jim Walker

      The same O’ Gary..

  • Nicholas

    Christ would explain that what they’re doing is gravely sinful and contrary to God’s plan for humanity. He would tell them to cease committing their sins and offending God, to repent, and to amend their lives.

    • I think it’s worth repeating, since it’s easy to miss:

      I think in this whole thread there’s been some confusion between the experience of same-sex-attractedness, which is a very difficult psychological condition to change, and which needs healing, which some experience but not all; and the sins of same-sex physical intimacy, which need repentance (on the individual’s part) and forgiveness and power for change from the Lord.

      • Nicholas

        I agree. Since your article is about a couple, we assume that they’re being physically intimate.

  • “REPENT.”

  • Ectomy

    He almost always left sinners alone unless they
    approached him. Then he would show them
    how to correct their mistake and if they chose
    to listen to him and were repentant, he closed
    with forgiveness and the clear instruction to;
    “Go, and sin no more.”
    Things are still the same today.

    • Randy

      So, He’d contradict His own words knowing there is not one without sin and no one who does not sin and anyone professing not to sin is a liar…? Yeah, that sounds right. Or, maybe, sin is unbelief? After all it is written “anything done without faith is sin”. Well, then, faith in what? In your ability to not sin? OR in Christ. Quite a predicament.

      • Buypass

        I see you are having fun with your strawman. Just don’t play with matches.

        • Randy

          I see you don’t believe what you wrote since you’re using “you are” and not “you’re” in your phrasing. It’s not a straw man (that’s the way it’s used, not as one word, which tells me you REALLY don’t know what you’re talking about) argument, either. “You’re” just being glib and attempting to be witty. Another snide “christian” winning the hearts and souls of men, eh?

          • Yes, “straw man” is the usual and preferred form of the term. Look up “strawman” on RationalWiki or the Free Dictionary, though, and you’ll find that “strawman” is also used as an alternate form. Language evolves. I see “strawman” so often, by writers of all persuasion, I wouldn’t be surprised if it were on the way to becoming equally accepted or even preferred.

            And really, Randy, if we’re going to tell people they don’t know what they’re talking about, should I chide you for not capitalizing the proper noun “Christian”? No. If I saw it as a continued pattern I might point it out to you, but not on just one occurrence. No one expects people writing these comments to edit them to the tiniest detail. You knew that, right?

  • Randy

    “Jesus ran into this kind of thing a lot: people who thought they could tell Him what He should be doing.” Sort of leaves a gaping hole of contradiction for you, being that your article is based exactly on that premise…

    • Really?

      • Randy

        Yes. If you don’t see it I can’t help you with that.

        • There’s a difference between understanding someone well enough to guess what they’d say, and telling them what they should be doing.

          • Randy

            Tom Gilson would say that no woman should have a child until they are exactly thirty years old, and if they do, then they must have their heads shaved and put into the street.
            Is there really a difference, Tom?

          • Yes, there is a difference. (The first sentence of your comment is completely strange and totally disconnected from the rest of the conversation, so I won’t bother addressing it, but I can at least answer the question you asked.)

          • Randy

            The first sentence of my comment isn’t disconnected. It’s an example of me taking liberty with what you might say, how each action, telling someone what they should be doing and guessing what they’d say, is similar in the outcome. It’s not disconnected at all. I think you’re merely reacting at this point and not putting any thought into the conversation.

          • It’s an example of you taking liberty with what I haven’t said, actually, and what you quite frankly know I would never say. What I wrote in this article was an informed application of what we know about Jesus, which for these purposes is quite a bit. What you wrote is an intentional distortion of what little you know about me.

            Therefore as an analogy it’s so distant from the rest of what we’re talking about, it’s useless. There is no analogy there.

  • Fred

    What would Jesus say? “Don’t eat the falafel, gives you gas”. Who knows and frankly who has the right to even imply they know what Jesus would say. This kind of talk is why religion is losing popularity.

  • Randy

    In reading these comments it never ceases to amaze me the contradictions and misinterpretations, and objectifying that most “christians” base their arguments.
    Can we seriously look at the testimony of “Go and sin no more”? Is Jesus contradictory? Is He ridiculous? Is He a liar? Why would he be speaking of flesh in that statement when in several other passages He says “No one is without sin”, “All have sinned”, “If anyone professes to be without sin he is a liar”.? The scriptural definition of sin is “anything done without faith is sin”. Faith in what? Faith in your ability to uphold the law? Or faith in Christ? Which do you suppose? The adulterer was caught within the temple grounds, by the men of the law, and not for nothing, but she was, as they were, living under the law and not under faith.
    But let’s look at another issue: The scripture is a mirror for one to reflect on one’s SELF. It is NOT a magnifying glass to scrutinize your neighbor. This is the wide path of Cain – to do it by the law and not by faith. It is what time and again God pleaded with His people to come to Him for rest and they would not, instead, even in the beginning, wanting something that “they” could do to prove worthy, or acceptable or “like God”. The law came to show the impossibility of this, as the school master. But instead of learning such a thing and turning to God for mercy, man turned into the law to validate themselves. Sadly, men have now taken Christ and made a religion and law out of Him. Mankind, never learns.
    So, are you asking these men to subject themselves under the law or under faith? If you are basing their forgiveness upon the
    law, then you are asking them to uphold all of it. And if you are asking them to uphold all of it, you are now subject to upholding it all as well.
    Let me ask you a question, because this topic is exhausting: Sex before and outside of marriage is a sin too, isn’t it? Yet, when the men of Sodom wanted the Angles thrown out to them so they could dominate them, Lot offered his virgin daughters. Was he merely choosing between the lesser of two sins? Are we really having that argument? Really?
    Put your faith in Christ and preach the good news.

    • Who is excluding sin? Of course we all sin. If Jesus were here in front of me I would want Him to heal me from my sins.

      • Randy

        That’s your take away? Good Lord. Believing in CHRIST makes you WHOLE. I wasn’t anywhere near speaking about anyone excluding sin. Jesus…

        • No, believing in Christ is not enough. Even Satan believes in Christ. Where you go wrong is in confusing the laws of ceremony (circumcision, ritual baths, animal sacrifice) with laws of morals. The moral law is not dissolved with the new covenant, only ceremonial laws. That is a mistake I see Protestants make over and over. St. Paul is constantly outlining moral laws that must be adhered to. I’m not about to look up the quotes, but you know very well he counts homosexuality as a transgression. But the clearest example of the integrity of the moral law come from the words of Jesus himself. Look up the parable of the sheep and the goats, Matthew 25. The goats that are separated out for hell are shocked they are going to hell. They obviously believed in Christ. They even think they were moral, but yet Christ sends them to hell.

          • Randy

            Wow. The scripture is clear that Satan (demons) believe(s) in “God” – and shudders. They (Satan and Demons) don’t have faith in Christ. I can see by your appearance that you believe you are righteous. Those Pharisees thought the same and would be shocked as well at their exclusion. They didn’t “obviously” believe in Christ. Sorry for you, but I stand with Christ and Christ alone. I haven’t the strength nor desire to stand with the law. You can have it. I’ll be over here with Rahab and King David and Noah…

          • You fail to explain why Christ sends the “goats” to hell in Matthew 25, even though they believe in Christ but failed to follow the moral laws. Until you can explain away that, you don’t have a leg to stand on.

          • He said it Himself: “I never knew you.” Apparently their claims to knowing Him, believing Him, following Him, were false.

          • Randy

            Apparently. “They” did many things “in His name” but never “knew” Him. Some are justified by themselves and “their” works and “their” actions. I’ll take justified by Christ for eternity, Alex.

          • I’m not sure if you’re agreeing with Randy or not. The reason “He never knew them” is because they failed to follow the moral laws. Their claims of knowing him were only in their own mind. There is an objective reality. Look at the passage:

            Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ 44 Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’45 He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’

            The key words are “You did not do for me.” To do, it’s an action, Believing Christians can go to hell.

            Now of course there is repentance.

    • Jim Walker

      You’re all over the place. I can’t piece together what you really wanted to say.
      So are you pro-LGBT ?

      • Randy

        I’m pro Jesus and Christ alone. My faith (that He gave me) in Him has made me whole.

        • Jim Walker

          Thanks. Faith without works is dead and I believe you are doing the 2nd part.

          • Randy

            John 6: 28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

            Romans 10: 1Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. 2For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. 4For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

            5For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. 6But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) 7Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) 8But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

            Romans 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

            Which of the works am I not doing, specifically?

            Of which “works” do “you” read it?

          • Jim Walker

            Quote : “I believe you are doing the 2nd part”, that I “works”.

  • This is brilliant. That’s exactly what He would say, “Can I heal you?” I have to remember this.

  • Bezukhov

    “Go directly to jail. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.”
    It’s probably what most people on this site wishes He would say.

    • Kevin Carr

      You are projecting.

  • Jeremy L

    What kind of arrogant fool thinks he can accurately divine the words of Jesus (or anyone else) for a situation we have no documentation of Jesus ever having been in? Well, unless you count the centurion and his servant, that is.

    • Kevin Carr

      Because the Bible declares God is the same yesterday, today and forever, I don’t see anywhere that he had a sliding scale of moral behavior. He is the living word and he and the father are one.

      • Jeremy L

        Except he was killing people relentlessly and was all about ceremonial laws in the OT and is the exact opposite in the NT

        • This is one of the more common misconceptions — but that’s exactly what it is.

          We do have record of Jesus being in situations with people who needed healing and forgiveness.

        • Kevin Carr

          And the law was fulfilled by Christ. He was relentlessly killing them? You see nowhere that time after time he had given people time to repent?

          • Jeremy L

            Time to repent? The victims of the flood had time to repent before they were drowned? The builders of the Tower of Babel had time to repent before they were scattered across the earth? Abraham had to plea for the people of S&G and Moses had to plea for the people he was leading in the desert numerous times. You sure we’re reading the same stories?

          • Kevin Carr

            Yes, Noah preached to them 120 years from the time he started building the ark, or was that too short notice? The builders of the tower were not destroyed (are you reading the same story?) Lot plead for S&G, the people in the desert had been lead out of captivity, and feed by God, and seen miracles, they needed time? Are we reading the same accounts?

          • Jeremy L

            It is ambiguous what the “120 years” reference refers to, be it man’s lifespan, the time before the flood, or what have you. And there is no account of Noah preaching to anyone before the flood. You are making assumptions to make Bible stories more palatable, not actually reading the Bible. Did I SAY the builders of the tower were destroyed? I said they were SCATTERED without a chance to repent for building the tower. Lot pleads for S&G? Now you don’t even know your Bible characters. ABRAHAM pleads for S&G because OT God was eager to destroy them! OT God was also very quick to want to destroy the Israelites every time they messed up in the desert only for Moses to intervene. The OT God is presented as vindictive. There’s no way around it.

          • Kevin Carr

            I’m trying to make it more palatable? No. he worked on the ark for 120 years, nobody but nobody asked about it, what is it? I t had never rained before. As for S&G i stand corrected, but i do know my characters. God was quick to destroy them? There were none to be found righteous. Show me where it says God was just eager to destroy them? He could have done it without any input from Abraham. As for the Israelites after they worshiped and idol, that didn’t free them, didn’t feed them, or keep their clothes from wearing out, they put another god before him. All the ways of God I can’t understand, but I

          • Kevin Carr

            (Fat fingered). This is also the same God that came as a man and offers salvation to all that come, that offered himself as the sacrifice, and shows unparalleled grace and mercy. But we too can resist him so much that he will let us go our own way. You miss that God.

        • Jerome Horwitz

          Before and after Jesus.

    • Jerome Horwitz

      Because God said so. Not by His words per se, but through His actions. Jesus is not only God’s Son, He said, “I and my Father are one. (John 10:30 KJV).”

      So, yes, Jesus most certainly did.

      • Jeremy L

        Yes, Jerome. Yes. God/Jesus hates gays more than he hates anyone or anything in all of the universe, just like you. Congratulations.

        • Jerome Horwitz

          Your stupidity doesn’t impress me.

          • Jeremy L

            Your evilness doesn’t impress anyone.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            Newsflash: Nobody has to agree with homosexuality. There’s nothing normal or natural about it. Nothing.

          • Jeremy L

            I get the sense you are bitter and senselessly spiteful towards homosexuality and gay people, and it’s frankly ridiculous. What did a gay person ever do to you? Your opinions on homosexuality are just that–opinions. And they are clearly not based on anything except irrational animus. Not natural? People aren’t “choosing” to be attracted to the same sex, I’m afraid. Not “normal”? To you. Not to everyone. I don’t imagine you’ll ever give a gay person/couple the time of day, since you’ve sadly made up your mind about how they’re “bad”. I wish I knew what was causing you to feel such strong animus, but perhaps not even you know.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            I get the sense you are bitter and senselessly spiteful towards homosexuality

            Go to hell. I made my position crystal clear. I am not the one with the problem here, so go and pass that horsecrap on to someone else.

          • Jeremy L

            Calm down. You hate gays. Did you want some special reward for that? Who cares about you? No one who matters, that’s for sure.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            Flagged and blocked.

            This guy has posting privileges why? Mods?

          • Jeremy L

            Flagged and blocked why? Does it bother you that I say you hate gays? You do. Own it.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            I’m sure he’ll own up to that just as soon as you own up to you’re not having anything but inflammatory ad hominem and demagoguery to offer to the discuss.

          • Jeremy L

            I own that I will call people out for being stupid and immoral. But calling people out for being stupid and immoral has never been the basis for my arguments. My arguments rely on logic, which comes across as personal attacks to those who are illogical.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Just what one might expect. Ya can’t take ownership for even your own actions. No surprise.

            You wouldn’t know logic if it slapped ya upside the head. And ya just proved it with your narcissistic, psychotic self-imposed god-complex AGAIN.

        • Troy Fullerton

          Correction, Jeremy, God / Jesus hates HOMOSEXUALITY. He died to save homosexuals.

          • Jeremy L

            *Sigh* Oh, I shouldn’t, but I can’t resist. Does God/Jesus hate men with long hair or does he just hate LONG HAIR ON MEN? (1 Cor. 11:14). Does he hate women who teach or does he just hate TEACHING AS A WOMAN? (1 Tim. 2:12). I could go on. But you probably have some giant stretches from an apologetics textbook that will explain away my “misreading” of such verses. Or maybe you actually think having long hair as a man and teaching as a woman are immoral acts. Which is pretty dumb. A being who can create the universe is not going to make dumb rules. Is it really so impossible that Paul is speaking his own mind?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            When the spiritually dead try to read the Book of Life it’s like a blind man trying to read a road map before hopping in the car to drive. You have to get a heart transplant before you can have eyes to see.

            Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” (John 8:47)

            “The unbeliever does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him. And he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1st Cor. 2:14)

            “There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” (2nd Peter 3:16)

          • Jeremy L

            Calling me spiritually dead doesn’t cancels out unsavory statements by Paul about women and long hair. But thanks for playing.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Calling out Paul’s comments as “unsavory” doesn’t cancel out the Truth of them nor that they are really from the Holy Spirit. But thanks for playing.

            Always appreciate it with those who have NO substance to offer resort to totally discrediting themselves with such gibberish.

            “Wise men speak because they have something to say, fools speak because they have to say something” – Plato

            And, for the record, I did not call you spiritually-dead. God did. I simply echoed what He has already said and how He describes you.

            And you are dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you walk according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them you live in the lusts of your flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and are by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:1-3)

          • Jeremy L

            So men with long hair are disgraces. Got it. Women shouldn’t be allowed to teach. Got it. How foolish of me to question these things. (This is sarcasm. I thought I’d let you know since you have a hard time recognizing it).

            P.s., why are you quoting Plato, a pagan who is truly rotting in hell right now?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            You ain’t got nothing and you just proved it. And yes, it’s quite foolish for you to be questioning things in mockery that you can’t understand in the first place.

            The reason for quoting Plato is because while you can’t understand Scripture I though MAYBE you could understand a pagan.

          • Troy Fullerton

            You actually said something that I agree with, Jeremy. You said “a being who can create the universe is not going to make dumb rules”. That is correct! So when the God of the Universe inspired the writers of the scriptures to condemn homosexuality….well?

          • Jeremy L

            If the God of the Universe doesn’t make dumb rules, why the male long hair condemnation? And so many other things as well. If you want to say the bizarre, arbitrary rules of the OT were “fulfilled”, why were they even authored to begin with? With homosexuality, you could throw “natural law” arguments at me all you like, but at the end of the day, the idea that someone attracted to the same sex shouldn’t date/marry like anyone else is not only dumb, but highly unfair. No, they cannot become attracted to the opposite sex. No, they will not inevitably end up in a life of promiscuity. So your position isn’t justified.

          • Troy Fullerton

            There is nothing I could say that would dissuade you from your assumptions, so I’m not going to attempt to here. I tend to think that the Apostle Paul knew what he was talking about, and I think it’s unspeakably arrogant for you to even imagine that your opinion regarding whatever you call “dumb” or “unfair” holds greater weight than the word of God. God made male and female from the beginning, and crossing gender lines (such as long hair on men) or confusing gender lines was the first step toward other abominations.

          • Jeremy L

            Hey, if you guys ever launch a campaign against long hair on men as serious and as fervent as the campaign against ssm and homosexuality, I’ll take you seriously. But that day’s obviously never going to come. I’ve seen male youth group leaders wearing long hair without a care in the world, and no one in their church community batting an eye about it. As if 1 Cor. 11:14 simply does not exist. Selective Bible reading and hypocrisy are both strong within Christian circles.

  • Troy Fullerton

    At some point–some personal fork in the road–we all have to decide what we’re going to believe. A segment of the secular psychological community puts forth the narrative that homosexuality is an inherent, immutable characteristic, similar to eye color or skin tone–some even going so far as to say that it’s genetic or a part of how one is born. With all scholarly sounding authority, they insist that you either are or are not homosexual, and that efforts to do change are futile.

    On the other hand, the word of God says that homosexual behavior is an abomination to God and a precursor to a reprobate mind. Homosexual sex is resoundingly condemned in the Bible–the same Bible that says that God is love and that Jesus is the Savior, puts homosexual activity right in the same category as other forms of fornication and perversion, and even makes it clear that there were EX-gays who had abandoned the lifestyle in the early church (I Cor. 6:11). You can’t have it both ways–either the secular psychological community proclaiming that homosexuality is natural and unchangeable is right (and therefore homosexuals should be accepted “just as they are” and encouraged to stay that way), or the Bible is right, and homosexuals need to repent, abandon that lifestyle, and embrace a new sexual identity by faith in God.

    In sorting all of this out, I think it’s vital to remember that when it comes to any sin problem, we were all “born that way”. Prior to a real encounter with Jesus Christ, a profound experience of surrender and conversion, and the genuine baptism of the Holy Ghost, we are all inherently sinners—and sin comes naturally to us. So naturally, we all think we’re inherently powerless to change—to a certain extent, WE ARE. I’ve heard serial fornicators who think they’re powerless to stop having unbridled heterosexual sex tell me the same thing–that they’re “just that way”, and cannot change, regardless of what the Bible says. Whatever our issues prior to real salvation, it’s not surprising that we should think that it’s just the way we are, because we’re ALL “born that way”. That’s why we need to be born again.

    • Rick

      Troy, I really appreciate this response. Wonderful clarity on the issue.

    • Jerome Horwitz

      Actually, the answer to the issue is a lot less complicated.

      Romans 3:4 says, “God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.”

      This tells you that we should not put our trust in man, but in God. There is, in fact, a reason why it has been said, “Within the pages of the Bible are the answers to man’s most pressing needs.”

      With this in mind, God said homosexuality is a sin. That ends the argument.

    • Jeremy L

      The comparison of gay couples to fornicators is a false comparison. It’s like saying you being with your wife is a vice or an addiction. It will never cease to amaze me how people refuse to understand this.

      • Troy Fullerton

        Jeremy, there is a difference between “refusing to understand” something and disagreeing with something. What you are proposing is based upon a premise–the premise that a homosexual relationship is the equivalent of a heterosexual union. I don’t agree with or accept that premise based on A. the obvious facts of the anatomical plumbing and the fact that homosexual relations do not result in procreation, B. the clear, unequivocal statements in the word of God regarding the issue, and C. the fact that burning in lust for something in no way makes that sexual attraction natural, normal, or acceptable (i.e. pedophilia, multi-partner sex, other forms of perversion).

        • Jeremy L

          I disagree with the premise that the ability to procreate defines whether or not a relationship is worthy. Further, it isn’t true that all gay couples simply “burn with lust” for each other. But what use is there trying to convince you? Perhaps if you had a close family member or friend who was gay (as I have), you would see things differently. I would’ve sounded fairly similar to you not terribly long ago until I witnessed the love of same-sex couples and the effects of anti-gay attitudes firsthand. *Sigh* But whatever.

  • I would simply ask what are you basing your decision to be a homosexual on? Most people today base all their decisions on their FEWINS and care nothing for TRUTH! Most people today are fools (raca), much like “in the days of Noah”. Oh yes HE is returning soon very soon!

    • People don’t “decide” to be homosexual. Why would anyone choose such a thing? You risk condemnation by your church, rejection from your family, ostracization at school, getting fired from your job. Wouldn’t it be a helluva lot easier to simply “decide” to be heterosexual instead?

      But no. We all have choices to make in terms of how we conduct our public and private lives, but sexual orientation is not one of those choices.

      • Jerome Horwitz

        People don’t “decide” to be homosexual.

        They sure as floop aren’t born that way.

        • Jeremy L

          Yeah, I know several gay couples who’ve been shouted at and beaten for their decision to be gay. Perhaps you were among their harassers? It does make you wonder why they choose to always have to worry about potentially be harmed or heckled in public, huh? One of life’s great mysteries. /s

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “for their decision to be gay. ”
            |
            Thank you for admitting it is a “decision” and a choice. And no, they weren’t shouted at and beaten for their decision. They were done so because of some ignorant fool who didn’t know better. The irony is that both of them will likely wind up in the same place. Truth be told, I often wonder if at least part of the eternal torment won’t be spending time handcuffed together.

          • Jeremy L

            Is sarcasm lost on you? It is not a choice. I was pointing out how ridiculous it is to think that they would “choose” to be gay and risk being beaten/harassed, as well as potentially rejected by their family and friends. It is infinitely easier to be straight. If they could choose to simply be straight and save themselves harassment/beatings/rejection they would.

            I don’t even have words for the sickness in your statement that being gay and harassing/shouting at a gay couple are morally equivalent. You have no concept of morality and no ability to make moral judgments. But why would you need that since “God” tells you what’s “right” and what’s “wrong”?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Too late. Can’t walk it back now. You already let the cat outta the bad and revealed what you know to be the Truth. Funny how that happens so often. All one has to do is let the spiritually-dead, God-hating, sons of disobedience and children of wrath talk long enough and they always wind up stepping in their own regurgitated vomit and totally discrediting themselves.

            Just like you did again with your “It is infinitely easier to be straight.” Once again showing they could CHOOSE to go back to being normal. You didn’t do a very good job of trying to get outta that statement either. All you did was publicly display that you suffer from the self-deluded narcissistic, self-imposed god-complex whereby you exercise your faux omniscience. As if you are the god of the universe and can read everyone’s mind to know what they would do if they could.

            So, when you decide you wanna climb up on the throne and start telling me about “morals” you’ll have to pardon me for giving you as much credibility there as you’ve shown in your previous remarks. I don’t think I’ll be taking the advice on morals from a spiritually-dead, totally-depraved minion of Satan any time soon.

            To answer question… you’re right there. I have God. I am in of need of NO man to tell me what is moral or not.

          • Jeremy L

            I made no admission that being gay is chosen because it is not the truth. By “easier to be straight,” I implied no ability to change orientation. I merely stated that if you are straight (not a choice), your life will be easier than if you are gay (not a choice). People “choosing to be gay” despite social risks is not impossible, but it is improbable. You think gay couples liking being beaten and shouted at and having to deal with people like you? In the end, your reliance on extravagant insults is embarrassingly childish. “Minion of Satan”? Grow up. You don’t know me.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Ah but you did. It’s still there in black & white for all to see. Would you like for me to post some links to several homosexuals who’ve been delivered from their sin?

            Or are ya gonna step back up onto your throne, exercise your faux omniscience again and tell me they were never really homosexual to begin with?

            Yes, I read your implication and it’s as bogus as your faux omniscience.

            Ah, but I do know you. Here, let me show you again…

            And you are dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you walk according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them you live in the lusts of your flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and are by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:1-3)

            “But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man.” (Matt. 15:18)

            “The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.” (Luke 6:45)

            “Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.” “The venom of asps is under their lips.” “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.” (Rom. 3:13-14)

            “Behold, they belch forth with their mouth; Swords are in their lips, For, they say, “Who hears?” But You, O LORD, laugh at them;” (Psa. 59:7-8)

            “For there is no truth in their mouth; their inmost self is destruction; their throat is an open grave; they flatter with their tongue. Make them bear their guilt, O God; let them fall by their own counsels; because of the abundance of their transgressions cast them out, for they have rebelled against you.” (Psa 5:9-10)

            “His mouth is full of curses and deceit and oppression; Under his tongue is mischief and wickedness.” (Psa. 10:7)

            A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind. (Prov. 18:2)

          • Jeremy L

            I claim no omniscience, just reasoning skills, which you lack. You have an emotional need for gay people to be able to become “ex-gay” in order to validate your beliefs, but you don’t consider the very obvious pressures that would make alleged “ex gays” lie to themselves and others.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Ah but you did. It’s right there in black & white and I pointed it out. Perhaps a refresher in 3rd Grade English would help. Or maybe a psychiatrist. I’m not holding my breath though.

            Again, both our comments are there in black & white. I’ll let others decide who has the reasoning skills. Here’s a little hint for you though: When ALL you can offer is inflammatory ad hominem and demagoguery with NOTHING of any SUBSTANCE, it’s a pretty safe bet one’s reasoning skills are sorely lacking or just plain absent.

            I’ll offer this an example to see if you can put 2 & 2 together….

            “I claim no omniscience” followed almost immediately by “You have an emotional need for gay people to be able to become “ex-gay” in order to validate your beliefs”.

            For the record, I have no such emotional need whatsoever. Your self-deluded narcissistic self-imposed psychotic god-complex has failed you miserably once AGAIN.

            As for the “very obvious”, we’ll just take those comments in the context of your delusion. No doubt they are “very obvious” to YOU.

          • Jeremy L

            I’m not offering anything of substance? I’m simply attacking people? How ironic that such an accusation is coming from a guy who calls people “minions of Satan” and offers nothing but blocks of Bible text and arrogant dismissal of every point of logic I make. I plainly offered the logic that people are not likely to choose to be gay because of the social risks of getting harassed, beaten, etc. That people do not choose their sexual orientations is a fact, not a personal attack.

            “For the record, I have no such emotional need whatsoever.” Your angry insistence that people choose to be gay when that flies in the face of all reason says otherwise. You never answered why people would choose to be gay even though they would have to face beatings, harassment, rejection, and people like you. Not once.

            To anyone who isn’t suffering from irrational and intense hatred of gay people brought on by religious delusions, it’s clear that gay people would hide/suppress their sexuality if they were under the thumb of someone like you who could potentially harm or ostracize them if they revealed or expressed their genuine orientation.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “I’m not offering anything of substance?”

            No. You’re not. And I don’t know why you’d ask that when I clearly stated that fact unless it’s because…

            A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind. (Prov. 18:2)

            “I’m simply attacking people?”

            Yes. Again, don’t know why you’d ask that because your comments are right there in black & white for all to see. Unless, of course, it’s because…

            A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind. (Prov. 18:2)

            and…

            Like a dog that returns to its vomit is a fool who repeats his folly. (Prov. 26:11)

            “How ironic that such an accusation is coming from a guy who calls people “minions of Satan” and offers nothing but blocks of Bible text and arrogant dismissal of every point of logic I make.”

            Uh, the “minions of Satan” is short for “spiritually-dead, totally-depraved, sons of disobedience, and children of wrath”. Would you prefer I cite this every time:

            And you are dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you walk according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them you live in the lusts of your flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and are by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:1-3)??

            “I plainly offered the logic that it doesn’t make sense that people “choose to be gay” because of the social risks of getting harassed, beaten, etc.”

            Well, thanks for the public display of your logic? Now let’s look at three questions that MIGHT just help you see that they are NOT logical.

            How do you know that is true?

            Is there any observable evidence?

            Are you making any assumptions?

            “That people do not choose their sexual orientations is a fact, not a personal attack.”

            Uh, NO. It’s not a FACT. A “fact” is indisputable. Your OPINION is quite disputable.

            First, you have NO evidence that suggests people choose or choose not to be Homosexual based on fear of reprisal.

            Second, thousands of years of WRITTEN History PROVE otherwise.

            “Your angry insistence that people choose to be gay when that flies in the face of all reason says otherwise.”

            Ah, well, I see your faux omniscience has failed you once AGAIN. I’m not angry. So that goes with your diagnosis of my “emotional need” as well. Which only further gives evidence to your self-imposed god-complex whereby you exercise your faux-omniscience publicly demonstrating once AGAIN for all to see that you are quite deluded and intent on clinging to the narcissistic psychotic illusion rather than Reality.

            “You never answered why people would choose to be gay even though they would have to face beatings, harassment, rejection, and people like you. Not once.”

            Of course I never answered your delusional false assumption. You just got done with a whole bunch of comments about me denying that it’s not a choice and then you ask me that? You are quite confused, obviously, and it’s REALLY showing now.

            Let me be as clear as I can possibly be: The Homosexual, Transgender, Adulterer, Fornicator, or any other who practices any form of sexual immorality CHOOSES to do so.

            “And this is the condemnation: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:19-20)”

            That is their CHOICE. They do NOT come to the Light because the CHOOSE to cling to their sin instead of the Savior. Just like you do.

            “To anyone who isn’t suffering from irrational and intense hatred of gay people brought on by religious delusions”

            There he is again, folks! Climbs right back up on his imaginary throne where HE is the god of all the universe and exercises his faux omniscience. Oh no, there’s no hint of narcissism or psychosis in that statement! LOL

            “it’s clear”

            to HIM. Now let’s just consider the source and all he’s proved thus far.

            “that gay people would hide/suppress their sexuality”

            Uh, like they suppress the truth by using “gay” instead of the self-determinative accurate word Homosexuality

            “if they were under the thumb of someone like you who could potentially harm or ostracize them if they revealed or expressed their genuine orientation.”

            Well then, if they’d suppress their sexuality simply because they were under the thumb of someone who could potentially harm, or ostracize them, they should have NO problem surrendering to the Lord Jesus Christ who will forever give them eternal torment in the Lake Of Fire and ostracize them forever from the Kingdom of God.

            Now how’s that LOGIC for ya?

            And nice try at perpetuating your lie but there is NO such thing as any genuine “orientation” except for that which God gave – Heterosexuality. And you haven’t even come close to proving there is. In fact, you just proved my case with your last statement.

          • Jeremy L

            Royce, the burden of proof is on you. You seem to forget that your belief in God, belief in the Bible, and belief that homosexuals will burn in a Lake of Fire if they act as homosexual are all opinions themselves, even if you really, really, really believe they are true. By contrast, my beliefs rely not solely on faith that they are true or appeals to authorities whose existence cannot be demonstrated, but on quite a lot of evidence, actually.

            For one thing, It is widely accepted by all reputable medical and psychological communities that being attracted to the same sex is not chosen and cannot be changed. They have pointed to differences in the brain structures between homosexuals and heterosexuals. They have observed the influence of hormones in the womb, genes, and, yes, even environment on whom/what someone will prefer sexually in adult life.

            To conclude that being homosexual is a choice is nothing short of ludicrous, but I get that you don’t necessarily proffer that. You simply insist they can “stop” being attracted to the same sex, right? Well. Not quite. All organizations claiming to be able to change people from homosexual to heterosexual have either admitted fraud or have been successfully sued for false advertising (Exodus International, JONAH, etc). “Pray the gay away” has never been demonstrated to work, with the only “proof” being people’s claims, and yes, they would lie about any change in their sexual preference if change were heavily expected of them.

            Now, Royce, if you want to say homosexual people should simply ignore their sexuality, that’s fine and that actually makes sense. But NO ONE has to agree with you, especially since monogamous same-sex relationships are demonstrably innocuous and not at all analogous to adultery or fornication as you insist. That’s just plain out in the open for people to observe. You can keep insisting the opposite, Royce. But insisting is all you can do. I don’t think anyone can deny I offer more than mere insistence, even if you think all I have is crap. As for your little “gotcha” moment about how there could be a “murder orientation”, “rape orientation”, or “lie orientation”, simply consider that people all have MOTIVES to murder, rape, and lie despite the risk of being ostracized. Now, if your premise that heterosexual orientation is the only true orientation and that anyone and everyone can access heterosexual orientation, then what does one have to gain from being gay if they could just be straight instead? Also, there is a huge, huge, huge difference between getting an urge to murder, rape, and lie and having automatic physiological and psychological responses to attractive people of your own sex. I’m afraid it is you who hasn’t been thinking critically at all this whole time.

            I called you delusional and you called me delusional. Our lovely little conversation has all been laid out here in black and white for all to see, as you said. Others can decide who, between us, is the delusional one. Peace out.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “Royce, the burden of proof is on you.”

            Ah, so you have NOTHING of SUBSTANCE to offer and I showed that and now you turn to shifting your argument to “prove it”.

            I couldn’t give two-spits less as to what you accept about God nor what you do or don’t buy into. You wanna rot FOREVER in the Lake Of Fire, go right ahead. Just like the man who’s told not to rob a bank or murder but doesn’t listen. He wants to rot in jail – so be it. You wanna rot in the Lake Of Fire – so be it. Meanwhile I’ll be with Jesus in Heaven while you’re gnawing your tongue wondering why you were so stupid!

            And there is evidence. Plenty of it. Ever since the Dawn of Man, Mankind has known there is a God. From the beginning of time every tribe and tongue has testified of God. There IS EVIDENCE of their belief in God. Again, you’re just too stupid to be able to even figure out why that is.

            So your rejection of the evidence in exchange for a willful intent to believe a lie, reject the Truth and evidence, and live in Denial is ALL on YOU. And it will be ALL on you for ALL Eternity.

            Thanks for proving you don’t have anything to offer besides ad hominem and demagoguery.

            Now, let me take your empty rhetoric and use it as a training tool for the edification of others…

            So folks, you’re barreling down the highway at 70mph and you see a sign that says, “STOP!!!! Turnaround. Bridge out.” But you ignore it and just keep right on barreling down the highway. And you come to another sign that says, “WARNING!!!! Turnaround, Bridge out.” But you ignore it and just keep barreling down the highway. Then you come to a sign that says, “LAST CHANCE!!!! Turnaround. Bridge out. Lake Of Fire at the bottom and NO WAY OUT!!!”

            Now, according to Ol’ Jeremy here, the folks who put those signs up are just people with faulty “opinions”!

            Now, YOU decide. Who you wanna follow? The signs or Jeremy? YOU decide who is showing REAL “Love” for you. The folks who put up those signs and give you a warning or Ol’ Jeremy. And YOU decide what are YOU gonna do? Follow the signs and heed the warning or just keep right on barreling down the highway?

            I just hope I’m the last face Jeremy gets to see as he goes barreling along on merry way there. Because I do so want to see the look on your face as you hear me say, “I told you so!”

          • Jeremy L

            One last thing. As for the “walking, talking living human beings that prove me wrong”, if people want to empty their wallets on the books and music of Butterfield, Hill-Perry, and Yuan because they have absolute faith in what as far as I can tell are one-sided stories, they are welcome to do so (note that I don’t know if their stories are one-sided, but I would like to hear from others who can corroborate, like Butterfield’s ex-girlfriend). “Ministry” is certainly one way to earn money, and the “ex-gay” angle certainly helps to bring people in. No, I don’t know for a fact that these people are inauthentic and/or rip-off artists. But even giving them the benefit of the doubt, Butterfield, Hill-Perry, and Yuan don’t even say that everyone can “become heterosexual”, offering instead the narrative that some attracted to the same sex will gain heterosexual attraction while others won’t. So not even they push the narrative of “complete switch for everyone is possible”. Perhaps Butterfield, Yuan, and Hill-Perry are attracted to both sexes and choose to suppress one side of their sexuality. I don’t know. But I choose to take their “ministries” with a grain of salt.

            Everything else I won’t even touch because I predict you’ll simply keep up with your rapid-fire dismissal. Your ferocious religiosity is quite impressive, I’ll give you that. Royce, if we can end this peacefully here that would be great, because this honestly hasn’t been productive and if I got angry, snide, and presumptuous at moments, I’m sorry. But I can tell you don’t want to hear me and I don’t want to hear you, so there are my final, final thoughts. You are free to disagree, and I agree to disagree.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “Ministry” is certainly one way to earn money, and the “ex-gay” angle certainly helps to bring people in. ”

            Well now, why isn’t that a surprise. Just assume one’s motives are bad and discount the evidence because they don’t fit within our paradigm. Nevermind actually bothering to listen to what they have to say and seriously consider that it is YOU who may be the one who is “one-sided.”

            “But I choose to take their “ministries” with a grain of salt.”

            Exactly. And the operative words there are “I” and “choose”. Granted, it is easier to be your own god than to die to yourself and surrender to God.

            “Everything else I won’t even touch because I predict you’ll simply keep up with your rapid-fire dismissal. ”

            Uh, you mean like you did so well with the people that provide evidence you’re wrong.

            “But I can tell you don’t want to hear me”

            Well, I could address that but, like you said, “and I don’t want to hear you”. So, in obedience to Christ that is where it’s time to shake the dust from my feet as a sign it will be better for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than you.

            You are free to choose what you may but you are NOT free from the consequences of your choice.

        • Do you know this from personal experience?

          • Jerome Horwitz

            I know it as a fact.

          • As someone who was indeed born Gay, I can tell you you’re simply wrong. I no more chose to be Gay than you chose to be Straight …. assuming you are.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            The word is “normal,” not “straight” and you are otherwise full of crap.

          • Jeremy L

            Don’t listen to this psychopath. He doesn’t know you better than you know you. Anyone obsessed with being “normal” likely has profound self-esteem issues. There’s nothing normal about his attacks and condescension.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “As someone who was indeed born Gay, I can tell you you’re simply wrong.” Prove it. You can no more prove you were born “gay” (Why not call it for what it is: Homosexual. Or is that too self-determinative and condemning?) that “Alien Boy” can prove he was born an alien.

            There is only ONE “sexual orientation” and that is the one that God gives which IS Heterosexual.

            Now, that said, “orientation” is really irrelevant. What is relevant is BEHAVIOR. And thus far it isn’t arguable that Humans can CHOOSE to act on their impulses or not. Though admittingly there are some challenging even that.

            So you profess to being a Homosexual. Which category will you be in – those who choose to die to themselves daily and pick up their cross and follow Christ by rejecting the notion to act out on their desires and therefore inherit the Kingdom or those who choose to cling to their lusts and spend eternal torment in the Lake Of Fire?

            And this is the condemnation: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:19-20)

            “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and sexually immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” (Rev. 21:8)

            “Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.” (Rev 22:15)

          • Jeremy L

            “So you profess to being a Homosexual. Which category will you be in – those who choose to die to themselves daily and pick up their cross and follow Christ by rejecting the notion to act out on their desires and therefore inherit the Kingdom or those who choose to cling to their lusts and spend eternal torment in the Lake Of Fire?”

            It’s not simply “desires” and “lusts”, Royce. Two people of the same gender can fall in love that is as real as the love of any man and wife.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Yes, it is quite simply a “desire” and most certainly “lusts. You have NO clue what “Love” is.

            “Love” doesn’t aid, celebrate, approve of, endorse, support, or in any way participate in the death and eternal torment of another.

            And that can include Silence.

            Do you love your neighbor enough to tell them they will spend Eternity in the torment of the Lake Of Fire if they don’t confess, repent, and surrender as a slave to Jesus Christ?

            “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and sexually immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” (Rev. 21:8)

            “Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.” (Rev 22:15)

          • Jeremy L

            “Yes, it is quite simply a “desire” and most certainly “lusts.” That’s not true. Actual interaction with gay couples proves you dead wrong. Let me guess what you’ll say next: “False omniscience fails you again!!! I HAVE interacted with them and they’re sinners!!!!” Well, I would say how about you interact without letting your preconceived notions cloud your judgment, but it’s apparent you’re already far-gone.

            “Do you love your neighbor enough to tell them they will spend Eternity in the torment of the Lake Of Fire.” This is an excuse to hate gays (Let me guess: “FALSE OMNISCIENCE!!!”). “I’m just trying to save them” doesn’t fly as justification for your beliefs/actions, even if that’s really what you think you’re doing. Let me guess: “THAT’S NOT WHAT I THINK I’M DOING IT’S WHAT I KNOW I’M DOING”.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “”Yes, it is quite simply a “desire” and most certainly “lusts.” That’s not true. Actual interaction with gay couples proves you dead wrong. ”

            Oh, I’d love to hear how you quantify that statement! Based on what? YOUR perception?

            And then you are so ignorant as to turn around and say, “Well, I would say how about you interact without letting your preconceived notions cloud your judgment, but it’s apparent you’re already far-gone.” LOL Oh no, YOU don’t have anything clouding your judgment. Hate to be the one to break the bad news to ya, bud, but you definitely DO. It’s called SIN.

            And you are dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you walk according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them you live in the lusts of your flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and are by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:1-3)

            As for the rest of your blather and empty drivel, I’ll just say thanks for putting your sin and psychosis on full public display and for proving my points.

  • George Copen

    Go and sin no more…

  • Royce E. Van Blaricome

    Good read. I have often brought up the paraplegic at the pool of Bethesda. Gilson is correct. Why would Jesus ask? Because some would say, “Uh, no thanks. I’m good. I got folks that bring me food, bring me a blanket, help me with this and that. Nah, I’m good.”

    I would just add one thing to what Gilson said and that is “until”. Gilson says Jesus wouldn’t reject them and He’d let them walk away. I subject He’d do exactly what He told us to do. If they don’t receive us and our truth, shake the dust from our feet AS A SIGN unto them. How many followers of Christ are not obeying that? Often they say, “but I don’t wanna shut any doors” As if they can open them in the first place!

    Show me just me one verse in the Bible where a God-mocking, rebellious sinner clung to their sin, celebrated and reveled in their sins and tried to lead others to Hell with them was ever given audience or even the time of day by Jesus?

    And ya wanna know why there is not more in the Bible about God speaking to the Haters, mockers, blasphemers, etc? Wanna know why there is not one verse in the Bible where a God-mocking, rebellious sinner clung to their sin, celebrated and reveled in their sins and tried to lead others to Hell with them where Jesus ever gave audience or even the time of day to them? The answer is because He didn’t.

    In fact, there are no recorded words from Jesus even on Judgment Day to them. But there are the Posers and the Apostates. Albeit they are few as well. See Matt. 7:21-23. God does not waste His breath on the disobedient, rebellious fools who choose to remain sons of disobedience and children of wrath.

    Jesus showed love, grace, mercy, and compassion for the Deceived but His harshest, most severe rebukes were for the Deceivers. I can’t be dogmatic about it but I tend to believe that the hottest place in the Lake Of Fire with the most severest punishment and where the greatest torment will be experienced is reserved for those who practice their sin and attempt to lead others into the fire with them in the name of God, using His Word, while claiming to be a follower of Christ.

Inspiration
The Strangely Mysterious Beauty of Christmas
Tom Gilson
More from The Stream
Connect with Us