The lack of positive posts for the Mayor here for this article is sad. Have we become so numb to the issue? Or have we become programmed to accept the Sodomite agenda to the point that we see this as ??? what? Just another day in FLA? It doesn't affect me so I'll just stick my head in the sand and hope it all goes away. With such boldness on their part, to engage in public sex, it can only be a matter of time before we see the gang scene of Sodom being played out on the streets of America. The media will spin such attacks as "the rage of the Gay man." "After being persecuted and put down for so long they are actively bringing about change in society through civil disobedience such as we have not seen since the Civli Rights of the 60's and never equalled in its scope and daring in challenging society's moral status quo." Or at least headlines of some equivalent. Hear the philosopher's cry, live for the NOW, God is dead and tomorrow we die.
Davey from Finland: I suspect that is the express intent behind this legislation from the beginning. Just as Lyndon Johnson crafted legislation to silence Pastors from any political speech from the pulpit (or face the wrath of the IRS). This legislation allows government to monitor all speech from the pulpit, and the public forum. If passed, then forums and sites such as this one will quickly be shut down for allowing any references to Leviticus 20 or Romans 1. It is not inconceivable that the Office of Homeland Security and the NIS would (if not already) monitor web traffic for key words such as "sodomite, abomination, sin, Romans:1, Leviticus, God's judgment" and the like. Free speech is only free if it conforms to government approved forms of speech. Like the frog in the pot we have been oblivious to the heat and what has been going on around us when it come to "tolerent" political correctness. Christians have been asleep inside the four walls of their guilded cages, and now we are seeing Christianity is not tolerated in the public square any longer. Now the social engineers are hatching a plot to get inside the church and regulate what is said there as well. Look at Canada, and the Netherlands (or was it Switzerland) to see what is coming. Judgment is just ahead.
Kenny, Yea and amen. It is a trap of Satan to begin to re-define biblical terms, reject this Scripture, exalt that Scripture, and take verses out of context to where they are found and out of context to the entirety of Scripture. Reductionism, legalism, liberalism and higher criticism are all echoes from the Garden of Eden, "yea, hath God said...?" Taken out of context one could make a case for suicide. Jesus told Judas, "That thou doest, do quickly" (John 13:27) "And he (Judas) cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself." (Matthew 27:5) Jesus speaking again in Luke 10:37b,said, "...go and do thou likewise." Yes, that is absurd, as are some of the comments we have seen here concerning the cannon of Scripture. I will stand on the inspired, infallible word of God as given to men of old as the Holy Spirit moved them. I serve a God who spoke all creation into existence and it has stood fast. Something as simple as preserving and translating that word into the common tongue is as nothing to the Sovereign Creator God. When the thought police come to arrest me for hate crimes as defined by a "tolerant" government that's out of control, I want to make sure they have enough evidence to convict me as a Christian firm in the faith.
KK, Circumcision was not given for salvation, neither could the Law of the Old Covenant save. Circumcision was given as a sign of the Covenant. The Law was given to show what sin is, and as a mirror to show we are guilty before God and need a redeemer. Anything we touch to do good is instantly tainted by our sin. That is why there had to be a man without sin to make the offering for our sin. The spotless lamb of God, Jesus Christ. Fully man that He could stand in our place, and fully God that He could endure the price required by the Law. That we might be reconcilled to God through Him. Salvation is by grace-through faith in Jesus Christ. A gift extended to us through faith in the gift giver. Baptism, like circumcision, is an outward sign of an inward change. Romans 6 beautifully tells of justification and about Baptism in the Christian's life. I 100% agree in the need for one who professes faith in Jesus Christ, who is Born Again to be obedient to baptism. But outside of isolating Acts 2:38 and taking it out of the context of all of the rest of Scripture, Baptism is a sign of obedience, not necessary to salvation. Christ finished all the work required for salvation on the cross, then He extends that gift to us through faith in His finished work.
Exposed Wolf, I missed that you disregard the Book of James as well. That is one-tenth of the New Testament in this thread alone that you in your exalted knowledge have dismissed from Scripture. You therefore have no Scriptural authority to back up your heritical claims. By the authority of 1 Corinthians 6 you are judged to be a wolf, a suplanter, a subverter of doctrine and the word of God. Unitl such time as you repent, humble yourself before God and publically ask forgiveness for the error you have promoted concerning God's word your are hereby delivered unto Satan that you may learn not to blaspheme. I say this in all humility before God, but stand by what I have said based on the authority God has granted me to so do according to Scripture.
Expositor? Expositor of what? You do realize Professor Teabing is a fictional character don't you? Let's see, so far in this discussion thread you have thrown 2 Peter and now Revelation out of Scripture. Tell us o learned one, what else would you throw out of Scripture? Why, such a one as yourself doesn't need Scripture at all, just make it up as you go. I now see why you cling to baptismal regeneration, it allows you to claim part in your own salvation. With such advanced knowledge of religious things, especially knowing what letters are cannonical and which are "obviously" false, you do us double honor, not only to impart your immense knowledge with us but to actually even acknowledge our existence, I feel so priveledged to even blog in the same space. Wow, we have one among us who is sooo gifted, who knows more than all the early church fathers about what is and isn't true Scripture. I suspect the Holy Spirit even comes to you for counselling. Your arrogrance is only exceeded by your ignorance. Continue this course of promoting heresy and deception and be anathema.
KK, please stop "YELLING", I'm not blind. If you will take a deep breath and reread my previous posts you will see I have already answered your ? on Acts 2:38. Pity, you have answered none of the questions I have raised. I'll restate this one more time, there are no (N-O) works unto Salvation. If there were then Jesus did not need to die on the cross. A careful reading of James, in context shows that we are saved to do good works. My works are an outward evidence of my faith in Jesus Christ. In Acts 2:38 where is remission found? In baptism or in repentance and faith in Jesus Christ? Even a cursory study of "remission of sin" shows it is the shedding of blood and faith in the one who shed His blood for us that brings remission of sin. Just as circumcision in the Old Testament did not save but was a sign of the covenant, so baptism is the same in the New Covenant. Baptism cannot save you, only grace can save you. Faith does not save you, only grace can save you. Christ suffered the stripes, we did'nt. Christ was nailed to the cross,we weren't. Christ endured the wrath of God being poured out on Himeslf for our sakes, as punishment for our sin so we would not have to suffer that wrath. Salvation is a gift to us from the one who purchased it. What then can we add to it?
OPEN We are talking about the Doctrine of Salvation here. Is Salvation by grace or by works. If by works then it is no longer grace. The preponderance of Scripture declares Salvation is a gift of Godâ€™s grace delivered through faith. (Eph.2:8-10, Rom. 10:8-12 etc) Yet there are those who take one verse in Scripture and build an entire Doctrine requiring Baptism for Salvation. (Acts 2:38) Saying baptism is required for remission of sin. Yet if you look at all the ref. to remission you find that remission is based upon faith and repentance. (Acts 10:43, Luke 24:47, Rom.3:25) If Baptism is necessary for Salvation why then was Jesus Baptized? What sin would one charge to Jesus, that He would have need to be Baptized for? It was a shadow of what was to come. Even the Baptism of repentance John preached was an outward sign of an inward change. â€śJohn answered, saying unto them all, I in deed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: He shall baptize your with the Holy Ghost and with fire:â€ť *As to Philip and the eunuch, the eunuch confessed faith in Jesus Christ prior to baptism. Romans 10:9-10* Baptism is the first step of life in Christ, but Christ must first give life for that step to be taken.
KK, Baptism is one of only two ordinances the Lord gave to the Church to follow. 1-was the Lord's Supper that we should do in Remembrance of His instituting a New Covenant, and what He did for us on the cross. 2-was baptism, whereby we identify ourselves with Christ by a type or a symbol, that being, a type of death, burial and resurrection. The immersion symbolizes death (when Jesus was baptized it was a shadow of what He was going to do) under the water represents burial and coming out of the water symbolizes resurrection. All is explained in Romans Chapter 6. I hope this has been helpful to you.
Expositor, I agree that all these; repentance, faith, obedience are all part of the Christian life. I also believe that we are to be obedient to baptism. Grace is what saves, faith is the vehicle that delivers grace,and baptism is the manner by which we identify ourselves with Christ. (Signifying the death, burial and resurrection.) As we are immersed it shows our death, under the water shows our burial and coming up out of the water shows our resurrection to life in Christ. Regeneration takes place simultaneously with repentance and conversion, when we believe we are made new creatures in Christ. Baptism shows outwardly what has taken place inwardly.
Expositor, OK, if salvation is by Grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone across all epochs, (God's mercy extended to man through faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ) then why do some say baptism is required for salvation in the New Testament? Is God's grace no longer sufficient? Do we have to add something to His mercy to make it effectual? Even Abraham believed before circumcision was given (Romans 4:9-25).
Expositor, What you are saying is God condemns in the temporal what he allows Himself to do in the spiritual. ??? The question is still left for you to answer, "If Jesus could grant salvation to whomever he wished, why did He have to die on the cross?" We know there is no salvation in any other, it is only found in Jesus Christ, the Way, The Truth and the Life. NO ONE can come to the Father except through the Son. If there was anyother way for salvation do you not agree that the Father would have answered His prayer in the garden? How were Old Testament saints saved? Not by the Law. If by faith, faith in what? Their deeds? No flesh shall be justified by deeds of the law. Faith in what then? In the one promised in Genesis 3:15. Yet the work of salvation was not finished until Christ died on the Cross. Is it not true they looked forward to the same moment in time we look back to?
So can God contradict Himself? On one hand call justifying the wicked abomination, while on the other hand justifying the same? He can only do so if the demands of His Law are satisfied, and the price for sin has been paid. Again Jesus endured the wrath of God against sin being poured out on Him. So what can we sin tainted creatures do to aid in our salvation? Nada,Jesus did it all.
Expositor, If Jesus Christ could grant salvation to whomever He wished... why was the cross necessary? Where was salvation found prior to Christ dying on the cross? Why then was the cross necessary? Proverbs 17:15 states, "He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the LORD." Ex. 23:7, "Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked." Finally, Romans 3:23 says, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." If Jesus could just grant salvation to whomever He wished, then there was no need for Him to suffer and die on the cross and God would be guilty of murdering His own Son. There must be a price paid for our redemption, the wages of sin are death. There had to be a sacrifice to satisfy Godâ€™s judgment on sin. (Romans 3:23-26) There had to be a propitiation for the remission of sins. Listen to this sermon closely: www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sermonID=32607154858 Jesus took the beatings, was crucified, suffered Godâ€™s wrath on sin poured out on Himself, what then can we sin tainted creatures do to add to His finished work of salvation?
Expositor, No the thief died after Christ died. When he died it was after Christ (God the Son) said, "It is Finished." If baptism were so critical to salvation why then did Paul not baptize more than he did? Sir you make something that man does necessary for salvation. You frustrate grace in so doing. The believer follows Christ in believer's baptism as a testimony that they are following Christ as a symbol of the death, the burial and the resurrection to newness of life. By your doctrine no Old Testament saint is saved and the prisoners in the gulags around the world who have no access to baptism cannot be saved either. The shedding of blood is for the remission of sin. Water only cleanses the body and is a type, not the substance. Jesus Christ was the last sacrifice for sin, the only acceptable sacrifice for sin and He is the Lamb that taketh away the sin of the world. Anything we do to add to the work He has done for our salvation is heresy. Let God be true and everyman a liar, God said, It is finished, and God was satisified. What will you add to that?
"Acts 10:43 is a very special case; it is the exception, and definitely not the rule." ???? To Him give all the prophets witness, (so all God's prophets testify that) that through His name (The Lord Jesus Christ) whosoever believeth in Him shall (not might) receive remission of sins. Baptism is an ordinance given to believers so that they publically identify with Jesus Christ as His follower. Baptismal Regeneration cannot be biblically defended. It is argued emotionally and out of context but it leaves you saying Jesus was a liar when He said, "It is finished," thereby adding our work to salvation. Then it is no longer a gift of God and man has reason to boast.
I have to add expositor is wrong about the thief on the cross as well. Jesus died before the thief, putting the thief in the New Testament period.
I regret the deterioration of discourse in this string. Unless something changes here's my final statement: I believe I have faithfully stated why I am so dogmatic over the "english" translation sodomite. The same reasoning goes for the term sodomy even though sodomy is not found in translation. I stand by all my posts without apology. As to the Jonathan/David thing, there is no contradiction in God, if their friendship were anything other than that close, best-friend in the whole-wide world, friend that sticketh closer than a brother, love for one another... then God would be guilty of a gross injustice, He cannot wipe out a nation on one hand for a sin He condones and blesses in the other. I believe in standing firm for Biblical truth and doctrines. I believe in being diligent against dilution of the same in order to be more "tolerant" to a secularized society. I do preach the Gospel in love when I'm on the streets, or going door-to-door. However, for those who claim to be Christians I am much more dogmatic about not allowing terms to be redefined and watered down so that they are more acceptable. Finally, I hope my posts have been honest and attacked ideas, thoughts and reasoning and not the person. Bravo, Tom, I have enjoyed the discourse & I will be praying as rqst
Why do "I" beat this same drum??? Look there is no linguistic problem here. The male temple prostitute was engaged in same sex relations. To call him a Kadishite does not accurately describe the sin and why it is so abhored by God. We know the sin of Sodom as given in Scripture. Genesis 18-19. When translated into English how were the translators to describe thes male prostitutes? "Like as unto men of Sodom" Again we know God's judgment on Sodom so the term Sodomite is a faithful rendering and discription of the men who engage in sexual acts with members of their same gender. Tom, don't confuse agape love or philos with eros. David and Jonathan's hearts were knit together, nowhere does the Scripture even suggest physical intimacy. One of the greatest problems with modern day intrepretation of Scripture is the tendency to impose 21st century mores on patriarchial and first century culture. My dogma in this matter is to make a stand against watering down Biblical terms so they become more palatable. It is spiritual suicide to accept terminology that no longer reflects God's judgement on sin. Take away the reference to Sodom and God's resultant judgment and you are left with the story of the woman caught in adultery. Not the same. (Thanks for the "hidden" comment also)
Bravo, You are attempting to justify homosexual "affection" by separating it from the biblical term and its direct relation to the sin. You are saying that homosexual rape is different from sodomy. There are no degrees of sin! The term sodomite is God's word to describe not just the attempt to have sexual relations with the angels from God but is the sin that went on consentually daily in the city. This was not just a rape gang that was waiting for strangers to come to town, this was going on daily. You see the story of Sodom and you fixate on the gang of would be rapists, God told Abraham He was going to destroy Sodom for the cry of the city and the sin that was very grevious. He destroyed Sodom to show Abraham His judgment on those who engage in such sin. Sodom-ite one from Sodom, a resident of Sodom, or the people of Sodom. All are remembered for the judgment God brought against them for their national sin. Again you fixate on a preception of rape in the story of Sodom, yet your own rationalization by using the term male temple prostitute is one of engaging in the sin of Sodom for money or for the gods. The idea in Scripture is that anyone who engages in sexual relations with a member of the same sex is as a man from Sodom.
Tom, I can not answer for others in the Church. I do know my own heart. I know not only what I was but who I am. I know the blackness and depravity that is in my flesh, I have lived it. I also know self righteous justification for pet sin, personally. I am still reaping, from the sowing of sin, a "bountiful" harvest. I am constantly aware of my transgressions against my LORD and my God, and it grieves me. That is why I gave God praise for 1 John 1:9 in an earlier posting. If we walk in continual, habitual sin then John condemns us in 1 John 1:6, "if we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth." God cannot lie, so let God be true and everyman a liar. All Scripture is given by inspiration from God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God, may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. My former sin has been romoved as far as the east is from the west. Scripture says "Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey?" So, Yes, I am VERY aware of my own sin!
Bravo, The use of the word sodomite is not inaccurate, in fact it is laserbeam accurate in describing the sin that human secularism terms homosexual. The sodomite finds it so offensive precisely because it is so accurate in pinpointing their sin against the Almighty Creator God. Twist and turn, squirm and misdirect as they will the term sodomite is before them showing them their sin. Their own conscience tells them they are guilty before God. There is no false tie between homosexual affection and homosexual rape, in God's eyes they are the same... sin. Rape does not carry more points than fornication, hate is not better than murder, adultery is not "worse" than entertaining the fantasy of the same relationship. All are sin against God Almighty. All sin is against God, and Scripture plainly states sexual sin is also against one's own body (1 Cor 6:18-19) Do you have a Roman Catholic background? Your second paragraph sounds so RCC. I beg you, before you do anything else, anything else, get before the Lord and pray the Holy Spirit reveals to you what Romans Chapter 6 and 7 are all about. I pray God the Holy Spirit will enlighten your heart and mind concerning these passages of Scripture. This life we now live in the flesh we live by the faith of the Son or God. Gal. 2:20