Ask Me Help Desk - My christian belief

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Methinks she was referring to you.

The context does not appear to suggest so. And I have been abundantly clear that I accept scripture (66 books of the Bible) as the inerrant infallible word of God.

Can you say the same?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Akoue and Wondergirl appear confused about what an "orientation" is and I am trying to get this clarified so that we do not continue to waste time I have asked both of them to tell me what they believe a generic "orientation" is.

You keep saying that we are confused about what "orientation" means, but you haven't yet quarrelled with the definition we've endorsed. Please, explain, what leads you to suppose that we are confused. (Or is this some weird new mantra, in the way that, for a while "logic fallacy" was?)

Quote:

Second, Wondergirl put up a post which appeared to suggest that homosexuality was a mental defect / illness or sin. She made it clear that she does not feel that it is a sin but when asked to clarify what she does think about whether she believs therefore that homosexuality is a mental defect / illness, she won't respond.

I think both Wondergirl and I are on record holding that sin and mental disorder are not exhaustive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

The context does not appear to suggest so. And I have been abundantly clear that I accept scripture (66 books of the Bible) as the inerrant infallible word of God.

Can you say the same?

Do you accept its literal meaning as inerrant and infallible?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Akoue and Wondergirl appear confused about what an "orientation" is and I am trying to get this clarified so that we do not continue to waste time I have asked both of them to tell me what they believe a generic "orientation" is.

It is not necessary to define orientation as it is not part of this discussion.

Quote:

Second, Wondergirl put up a post which appeared to suggest that homosexuality was a mental defect / illness or sin.

No, she didn't.

"Appeared to suggest" is redundant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

It is not necessary to define orientation as it is not part of this discussion.

But it is. We need to help you understand the difference between orienteering and orientation before we can discuss specifics.

Quote:

Quote:

Second, Wondergirl put up a post which appeared to suggest that homosexuality was a mental defect / illness or sin.

No, she didn't.

Yes she did, and is refusing to clarify.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

You keep saying that we are confused about what "orientation" means, but you haven't yet quarrelled with the definition we've endorsed.

Show me a definition of orientation (generic) and I'd be happy to comment. What do you fear?

Quote:

Please, explain, what leads you to suppose that we are confused.

Well, if WG does not understand the different between orienteering and orientation, and you don't know the difference between generic and sexual or nautical, then clearly we need to get to basics.

Quote:

I think both Wondergirl and I are on record holding that sin and mental disorder are not exhaustive.

Then what you do you think that it is?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

But it is. We need to help you understand the difference between orienteering and orientation before we can discuss specifics.

Orienteering is using a compass to find your way. That also has nothing to do with the discussion on the table.

Quote:

Yes she did, and is refusing to clarify.

Please c/p my comment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

"Appeared to suggest" is redundant.

I note that you did what you criticized earlier and edited your message. Appeared to suggest is not redundant. Since I asked for clarification, I am trying to be fear and pointing out how what you said appeared to leave the door open for you to provide clarification in case you meant something else.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Orienteering is using a compass to find your way. That also has nothing to do with the discussion on the table.

See - we are making progress. Now provide a definition for orientation and we can move past this point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Methinks she was referring to you.

Tj said something to someone that not accepting the scripture means you are not accepting God's word. Then I said to Tj, You are assuming that we believe that the scripture IS God's word. Maybe it's not. We don't REALLY KNOW.. If you don't really know some, then that strikes at the credibility of all of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Show me a definition of orientation (generic) and I'd be happy to comment. What do you fear?

That you are using the very same debate tactic that I have seen you use before, as a way of derailing a discussion. That and I'm not interested in talking about orientation in general, since we are talking about sexual orientation (or trying to... this little tick of yours appears to be taking over the thread). You have refused several invitations to explain the relevance. That makes me think there isn't one.

Quote:

Well, if WG does not understand the different between orienteering and orientation, and you don't know the difference between generic and sexual or nautical, then clearly we need to get to basics.

Well, she gave a definition of sexual orientation, so why not stick with that?

Quote:

Then what you do you think that it is?

I've already suggested an answer, but you've been too fixated on the definition of "orientation" in general to attend to it. Not all deviations are defects.

Man, o man, you need a new bag of tricks. This junior high debate club stuff is b-o-r-i-n-g.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

See - we are making progress. Now provide a definition for orientation and we can move past this point.

Which one do you want?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cozyk

Tj said something to someone that not accepting the scripture means you are not accepting God's word. Then I said to Tj, You are assuming that we believe that the scripture IS God's word. Maybe it's not. We don't REALLY KNOW.. If you don't really know some, then that strikes at the credibility of all of it.

Ah, but you're trying to be rational. Can't allow that to happen.

What you say here makes me wonder why Tom doesn't want to say whether he takes the literal meaning of the Bible to be inerrant and infallible. He knows that if he says yes, then Ps.104.5 is waiting for him (it says the earth doesn't move) and he knows that if he says no, then that means the meaning of lots of passages that he wants to read literally is up for grabs.

It's just never a good idea to turn the Bible into an object of worship. That too is a kind of idolatry.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

That makes me think there isn't one.

Oh, there is one. He used it to derail another discussion on homosexuality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Paul --
1. felt tremendous guilt and shame
2. loathed himself
3. spouted self-judging rhetoric
4. had negative feeling toward his own body
5. felt controlled by something he had no power to change
6. experienced a war between what he desired with his mind and what he desired with his body
7. was driven to a legalistic religion of control
8. feared when his legalism was threatened
9. had an "interesting" attitude toward women
10. refused to seek marriage as an outlet for his passion
11. wrote, "And to help me keep from being too elated by the abundance of revelation, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to harass me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I sought the Lord about this, that it should leave me; but he said to me 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness' " (2 Cor. 12:7-9)
12. also wrote, "You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first; and though my condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me but received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus" (Gal. 4:13)
13. felt beyond redemption as per his Jewish upbringing and thus, even more, appreciated what Christ had accomplished

Yeah, yeah, the thorn was his eyesight.

You don't make sense. In your list you contradict yourself?

Galatians 2:21 (New International Version)
21I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"

Ephesians 2
8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

I don't quite understand your defense of homosexuality not being a sin.

Sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is sin. This includes homosexual sex, obviously, as well as heterosexual fornication and adultery.

Are you going to defend adultery as vehemently as homosexual sex?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to the argument that the Bible is written by men and not the inspired word of God...
Have a good day then... lets all believe what we think we should believe... how are you, one person, infallible compared to the thousands of years, the many scholars that have studied and debated what is in scripture?. why would someone believe what you have to say vs them?

G&P

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

Ah, but you're trying to be rational. Can't allow that to happen.

Maybe you, me, and she could come to some rational conclusions and wind up this discussion before I have to do my end-of-day litter scooping.

Quote:

Originally Posted by inthebox

You don't make sense. In your list you contradict yourself?

Galatians 2:21 (New International Version)
21I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"

Ephesians 2
8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

I don't quite understand your defense of homosexuality not being a sin.

Sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is sin. This includes homosexual sex, obviously, as well as heterosexual fornication and adultery.

Are you going to defend adultery as vehemently as homosexual sex?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to the argument that the Bible is written by men and not the inspired word of God......
have a good day then........lets all believe what we think we should believe........how are you, one person, infallible compared to the thousands of years, the many scholars that have studied and debated what is in scripture?.......why would someone believe what you have to say vs them?

G&P

So you agree that we should accept the authority of Tradition and that it should guide and inform our understanding of the Bible? Great!

Quote:

Originally Posted by inthebox

Sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is sin. This includes homosexual sex, obviously, as well as heterosexual fornication and adultery.

Are you going to defend...homosexual sex?

We are talking about homosexuality (the sexual orientation), not homosexual sex (the behavior).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

What you say here makes me wonder why Tom doesn't want to say whether he takes the literal meaning of the Bible to be inerrant and infallible.

Sigh - why do you mis-represent me. I have responded to this question dozens of times on this board alone, but I guess that the truth would ruin a good story.

I accept what scripture says in context, and I accept what it says word for word. I am not going to use the word "literal" because I have folk twist that to mean things that are not intended (i.e. that parables are never fictional, etc.).

Quote:

He knows that if he says yes, then Ps.104.5 is waiting for him (it says the earth doesn't move)

You know, some atheists were saying that to me the other day, but when you read what it says in context, it does not say what you and the atheists claim. I will never understand why people who profess to be Christian wish to try to discredit the Bible.

But more importantly, why someone who claims that he does not want to distract from the discussion by providing a definition for a word being used the discussion continually tries to distract from the discussion by posting irrelevant items like this.

Quote:

It's just never a good idea to turn the Bible into an object of worship. That too is a kind of idolatry.

Right - we should only give it the respect that is deserving of the inerrant, infallible word that God has revealed to us.

Now are you done with that distraction?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

We are talking about homosexuality

You should remind Akoue - he keeps trying to distract from the topic (see his last message).

Quote:

(the sexual orientation), not homosexual sex (the behavior).

But if you don't know what an orientation is, how can you possibly understand what a "sexual orientation" is?

If you think that you know what an orientation is, just spit it out, and let's move forward. What are you afraid of?