The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum How do you think the homosexual movement

will play out in about 5-10 years? Will it become like co-habitation, say 35-40 years ago.

Another thought, would it help Christians in generally to condemn cohabitation as much as we condemn homosexuality. I mean, would it help to be seen as consistent in this. I realize it would not change anyone minds, but at least they could see the argument better and give us credit for being consistent.

On the basis of sheer personal speculation, I expect that homosexuality but especially gay marriage will be given full recognition by law in the majority of the states here in the US. And, I fear that homosexuality will be appended to the current "hate crime laws" so that anyone speaking out against it will be subject to persecution, much like it is now in Canada.

In regard to co-habitation, I assume that real, true Christians have always considered this a sin which should be repented of no less than homosexuality, blaspheme, or fornication.

The question you ask is very interesting to me. "Would it help Christians in general to condemn cohabitation as much as we condemn homosexuality?" Do you mean, would it help our cause of being faithful witnesses to God's goodness and mercy? On the face of it, it would be easier to turn a blind eye to all that goes on around us that is wrong or evil; but then we could be charged with dereliction of duty towards God for ignoring the 'plight' of those around us who need to hear the Gospel. It is right that we should be concerned or vexed as Lot was by the unrighteousness around us, 2 Pet 2,7 "And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked". Sin is sin and everyone is guilty of it but the question for me is how best to convey the truth of this to individuals around me and for the Church as a whole to best bear witness of the fact to those in the nations in which we live.

They are equally as bad as lifestyles but the idea that condemning those choices might help Christians is strange. We should want to show mercy to those who are guilty of these things. Our attitude towards those on the outside of the Church should be one of love and where and when appropriate we might do well to point out that living in those ways is not living God's way. But that is only part of the Gospel as I understand it. Some people need to be told the bad news that they are sinners in need of salvation before they will begin to entertain the idea of turning to Christ and serving Him instead of themselves.
It would certainly let the world see we were being consistent if we were equally vociferous about things in the Bible that God disapproves of.
Another problem I've encountered with highlighting particular sins is that some individuals think, if they put that one thing in their life that's wrong, right, then they will be ok, which is ridiculous. We need to find ways of impressing on folks the simple truth that no matter how 'good' you are you can't please God without Jesus.

Your view on this is probably what the majority of modern professing Christians espouse. So, your view is most definitely the 'popular' one. But, is it biblically based? If the Gospel preached by the Lord Christ and the Apostles is one which we should model, which it certainly is, then it is inescapable that the core of the truth of the Gospel is that every man, woman and child born into this world is a sinner and under the just wrath and condemnation of God. (Gen 6:5, 8:21; Ps 5:5, 7:11; Job 15:16; Eccl 9:3; Jer 17:9; Ezek 8:9-18; Matt 15:19; Mk 7:21-23; Jh 3:18-20; Eph 2:1-3, 4:17-19; Titus 3:3) It isn't simply that people aren't living "God's way", but rather the awful truth is that they are haters of God, rebels who desire to do what is evil. The truth is that there is not one person who has ever lived who has walked in "God's way" in thought, word and deed, i.e., there is only ONE person who has ever done good and who was pleasing to God.

The very first thing the Holy Spirit does when He regenerates a sinner is to "convict of sin, of righteousness and of judgment" (Jn 16:8). Was Paul unmerciful and unloving when he wrote Romans 1 to 3? Was Peter insensitive to the feelings of his hearers when he preached his first sermon on Pentecost?

The #1 error, among many in our day committed by the majority of professing Christians is that they dumb down the truth and distort the Gospel in order to make it "more palatable". Rarely will you find a church website state clearly, truthfully and boldly the truth about man's fallen condition. What you will find is some 'fluff' about man being separated from God, or men have 'fallen short' of living perfectly; they haven't done all that they might do in a better way, etc., etc., ad nauseam. They are bold in asserting the lie that God loves everyone and desires their love back.

The issue always boils down to, "What is the Gospel?". That question historically has been dealt with again and again with the same answer, which is most always rejected by the majority of professing Christians who think there is a 'better way' to 'win souls for Jesus'. That question has been answered by myriad men of God and in myriad ways, some of which can be found HERE and again HERE. And among them, one which I personally find most stirring to my soul is J.I. Packer's The old Gospel and the new.

I certainly don't think that to show mercy to someone is the same as being soft on their condition i.e. of belonging to that category of persons who "unless they repent, they will die in their sins".
Mercy is something we are called to love but I agree with you that some have a different idea to me and it would seem also to you of what mercy is.
I hope you don't count me as one who is guilty of committing the error you mention based on what I had written in the post.
I don't believe there is a prescription for the exact words one should use when evangelising those we live next to and God knows how to use us to speak the words that will accomplish what He wishes to accomplish in the lives of the hearers.

Perhaps you could expand just a bit on what you mean by "Mercy is something we are called to love..."?

Micah 6.8 "He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"
No I'm not going to expand on what I've said, I'm just going to believe that what Micah said to do is for me to do and I'm going to try and do it.
(I understand that it can only be put into practise properly when it is understood in light of the rest of Scripture)
Perhaps you could explain what it means because you are better at that than me!

1. Was that sarcasm at the end of what you wrote above?

2. First you say that you are not going to explain what you mean by "loving mercy" in the context of bringing the gospel to others, but rather you are just going to do it. However, then you admit, and rightly so that you cannot put something into practice unless it is understood correctly. Don't you see a problem in taking that position?

3. I agree, a right understanding of any text in Scripture must precede any attempt to put it into practice. The word "mercy" in Micah 3:8 is probably better translated, "kindness", which is a more general term than mercy which most often connotes the withholding of warranted punishment for something deserving of it, e.g., a crime committed against you, the state, a sin committed against you, God, etc. The CONTEXT of the passage is God's indictment against the people of Israel for their blatant hypocrisy in that they were meticulous in adhering to the outward ceremonial laws in regard to God's worship but they ignored and constantly violated the moral law of God as it should have been practiced before God and to other men. In summary, God required the adherence to the moral law; the Ten commandments which was summarized as "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength and love your neighbor as yourself."

4. So, now with that understanding how is one to practice showing kindness (mercy) to those who are enemies of God and Christ in regard to the specific subject of bringing the Gospel to them? Do you believe it is wrong to bring up specific sins which someone is guilty of practicing/committing and show how God views that sin, e.g., homosexuality is an abomination and that no one shall inherit the kingdom of God who is guilty of that sin (1Cor 6:9,10)? Would it be in error to show that homosexuality is a result of God's punishment upon all idolaters whereby God has withheld His providential restraint and allowed some to do that which their depraved nature is want to do?

5. My position is that showing kindness and speaking the truth in love to a sinner is to do that very thing... reveal to them the inexorable holiness of God and their own corruption of nature and then pointing them to Christ; the love of God exhibited in His sacrifice for sinners. You can read in more detail what I have written on what the true Gospel is HERE. When the Lord Christ dealt with the "rich young ruler", He spoke of the necessity of keeping the moral law to which the young man ignorantly and arrogantly claimed he had kept perfectly from his youngest days. In response, Jesus knowing that this man never once kept the law as God requires specifically mentioned the 10th commandment, knowing that this man's life was in total violation of it more than the others, at least in an outward way. In short, this sinful young man loved money and things more than anything else and Jesus told him that he needed to sell all that he had and give the proceeds to the poor. What was the result of that counsel? Perhaps by today's standards of gospel preaching, Jesus Christ would be considered a total failure, because this man walked away and he was 'exceedingly sorrowful'.

The rest of the pericope (Lk 18:18-30) is even more revealing because what the Lord Christ did was make it vividly clear that NO ONE can attain eternal life by works for all are 'rich' in their own eyes and love this world and the things of this world and themselves most, all of which are sin. The only thing that has merit is Christ Himself and thus one must forsake their sinful worldly 'love' and love God and follow after Christ.

It is the responsibility and the necessity of those who would speak of the Gospel to sinners to remove any vestige of self-righteousness and self-reliance and point to Christ. ONLY THEN will anyone truly seek salvation in Christ. We are to speak the TRUTH about God and His perfect holiness, about man's fallen condition, his total hopelessness and helplessness, and the perfect righteousness of Christ, without which no man shall see God except as Judge with the end being eternal damnation and punishment. We must have that compulsion to speak of those things for the honor of God and for the sake of that multitude of poor needy sinners who are on the road to eternal hell. We must not be ashamed of the Gospel, for IT is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes.

Dear Pilgrim.
Answers to your post are:
Your 1st point) No.
2nd point)It shouldn't be a problem between us, I hope, so no (particularly if you consider this post as a whole)
3rd point) Your definition makes sense. It is not for us to declare anyone 'not guilty'of transgressions.
4th point)In answer to the 2nd Qu. Absolutely not, sometimes needed to illustrate that they like us all are guilty. In answer to the 3rd Qu. Not sure, are you?
5th point) 1st Qu. The man left disappointed and probably angry and that is no less than what we should expect when we preach. To the natural man Christ is a failure because He doesn't answer their desires he finds His command too much.
Your very last sentence: 100% agree.

Regards.

To draw a parallel: if we had a friend that we knew was dying of cancer and we kept on at him to take the medicine that could cure him but we didn't tell him first he had the disease, we shouldn't be surprised if he refused to take it. We can and should 'use' the law to convict hearers of our preaching of their guilt. I believe Paul more or less stated that that would be a correct use of the Law in his writings.

a. I would say rather than "sometimes"... "always, every time" for there is no one who is not guilty before God.

b. Yes, I am 100% sure of what I wrote: "Would it be in error to show that homosexuality is a result of God's punishment upon all idolaters whereby God has withheld His providential restraint and allowed some to do that which their depraved nature is want to do?

Just a small but extremely important note in regard to your illustration, which I think is mostly correct. It isn't that anyone is terminally ill, e.g., "dying of cancer", but rather Scripture is more than perspicuous in describing all men who are born into this world as being DEAD; spiritually dead (Jh 3:3,5, Rom 5:12,14,17; Eph 2:1-5, 5:14; 1Jh 3:14) and who are but stench in the nostrils of God (Jh 11:39).

The horrible truth is that when we bring the gospel to the world, we are speaking to DEAD people who are incapable of hearing the truth of their condition and the necessity of being reconciled to God in Christ. Yet, this is how God has determined to save His people; through the preaching of the gospel which is the power of God unto salvation... for faith come by hearing and hearing by the preaching of the word of Christ (Rom 10:12-17).