Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

Beyond The Four Spiritual Laws

It would help a Lot If people would simply follow the Scriptural way to 'be saved'.

That Jesus Christ is the Son of God -- that He died on the cross and rose again bodily after three days. According to Scripture.

John 14:6 Jesus Christ is telling us that "I am the way, the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father, but by Me." No good works on anyone's part. No legalism included.

A heretic would be someone who purposely teaches / believes contrary to God's Word. God's Word plus Nothing.

A Christian is a Christian IF they are following Christ's teachings because they know that His Word is the Correct Word. That they trust Jesus Christ as their personal Savior.

God's Word is True -- nothing else.
 
.
Rom 15:27 . . For if the Gentiles have shared in the Israelite's spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Israelites to share with them their material blessings.

Within the context of Rom 15:25-27, the Israelites to whom Paul refers are not those who believe and practice Judaism; but those who believe and practice Christianity. It is unbecoming for Christians to support religions that undermine their Master's; especially when it's taken into consideration that 1Cor 16:22 requires Christ's followers to regard the followers of religions opposed to his as cursed.
_
 
.
Rom 16:17-18 . . I urge you, brothers, beware of those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naïve people.

In the 17th chapter of John's gospel, Christ prayed for unity. People in church who cause division and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned are detrimental to his wishes.

NOTE: Christianity isn't a democracy. It's a theocracy. The New Testament Greek word for lord and/or master in Luke 2:29, Acts 4:24, 2Tim 2:21, 2Pet 2:1, and Rev 6:10 is despotes (des-pot'-ace) from which we get our English word despot; defined by Webster's as a ruler with absolute power and authority.

People in church following a fire in their belly instead of the wishes of Christianity's despot are guilty of insurrection. In their own minds; the rebels no doubt honestly believe themselves working for the greater good, but that path is risky. For example: failure to obey God cost King Saul the loss of his reign. (1Sam 15:22-26)

"smooth talk" is the practice of sophistry; defined as a reason or an argument that sounds correct but at its core is actually false; viz: subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation. Sophistry is typically rational, reasonable, and sensible; but the thing to keep in mind is that faith believes what's revealed to it rather than only what makes sense to it.

According to Eph 4:11-14 the very reason that Christ endows some of his followers to speak for him is so that the rest of his followers may have access to true premises upon which to build their faith and thus achieve the unity for which he prayed.
_
 
.
1Cor 1:10 . . I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.

I think it would be interesting to analyze the incident that prompted Paul to issue that order.

"My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this; one of you says: I follow Paul; and another says: I follow Apollos; and another says: I follow Cephas; and still another says: I follow Christ." (1Cor 1:11-12)

The "divisions" that Paul addressed were apparently related to the sins of rivalry and elitism-- some even going so far as to allege that their baptism was superior to the "second-rate" baptisms undergone by others.

Modern examples of that kind of elitism today might go like this: one might brag "I was saved at a Louis Palau crusade" while, not to be outdone, another might retort "That's nothing; I was saved at a Billy Graham crusade" or "My pastor got his degree at Dallas Theological Seminary" while another may counter by saying "So? My pastor got his doctorate at Yale Divinity School" or "I listen to Thru The Bible with J.Vernon McGee every day on the radio" while another may retort by saying "He's okay for some people; but Back To The Bible with Woodrow Kroll is where it's really at." or "I use nothing but the King James version of the Bible" while another may scoff with "People serious about Bible study use a Scofield Reference Bible in the NIV." or "I can read and write Greek" while another might retort: "You should try learning Hebrew sometime. Now there's a challenge." And then there's the hermeneutics know-it-alls who insist that the truth of a passage can only be seen in context and no other way

Those kinds of petty rivalries are harmful to unity; plus: they generate unnecessary bad feelings amongst Christians, and should be avoided.
_
 
.
1Cor 1:26-31 . . Remember, dear brothers and sisters, that few of you were wise in the world's eyes, or powerful, or wealthy when God called you. Instead, God deliberately chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise. And he chose those who are powerless to shame those who are powerful. God chose things despised by the world, things counted as nothing at all, and used them to bring to nothing what the world considers important, so that no one can ever boast in the presence of God.

. . . God alone made it possible for you to be in Christ Jesus. For our benefit God made Christ to be wisdom itself. He is the one who made us acceptable to God. He made us pure and holy, and he gave himself to purchase our freedom. As the Scriptures say: The person who wishes to boast should boast only of what The Lord has done.

Some of us tend to think ourselves pretty smart for having enough good sense to believe the gospel. But according to the passage above, we didn't become believers due to our IQ; were that the case, then Carl Sagan would've stood on the side of intelligent design instead of opposing it.

No; the credit is due to God's IQ, i.e. God alone was smart enough to make it possible for any of us to be in Christ Jesus. Personally, I look upon that as something not for me to boast about, rather; an incredible stroke of luck. (One of the meanings of "blessed" is fortunate.)

Boasting in what the Lord has done is sort of like the pride that sports fans feel for their favorite teams; especially when they win. Well; it goes without saying that God is a winner-- maybe He's not accounted a winner by the world's best and brightest, but certainly by those of us very pleased that Christ's mission succeeded.
_
 
.
The next spiritual law is embedded in the following scripture. It's indicated by underlined text.

1Cor 3:5-15 . .What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe. As The Lord has assigned to each his task: I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. The man who plants and the man who waters have one purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor. For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building. According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But let each man be careful how he builds upon it.

. . . For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it, because it is to be revealed with fire; and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built upon it remains, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be spared, yet so as through fire.

Sorry for that big gob of scripture, but in order to explain what is meant by the underlined text it's essential that I retain it's context.

It's easy mistake the judgment spoken of in that passage for the judgment spoken of in Rev 20:11-15. But there are crucial differences worth noting.

1• The fire spoken of at 1Cor 3:5-15 burns works. The fire spoken of at Rev 20:11-15 burns people.

2• People walk away alive from the fire spoken of at 1Cor 3:5-15. Nobody walks away alive from the fire spoken of at Rev 20:11-15.

3• People are awarded at the judgment spoken of at 1Cor 3:5-15. People are punished at the judgment spoken of at Rev 20:11-15.

FYI: Koiné Greek words for "purify" and "purge" are nowhere to be found in 1Cor 3:5-15; and a note in the current official Catholic Bible-- the 2011 New American Bible --says: "The text of 1Cor 3:15 has sometimes been used to support the notion of a purgatory, though it does not envisage this."

If perchance there are Catholics reading this, I should clue them that the non Biblical materials (foot notes) in the 2011 New American Bible have a nihil obstat by Reverend Richard L. Schaefer, Censor Deputatus, and an imprimatur by Most Reverend Jerome Hanus, O.S.B. Archbishop of Duguque.

Nihil Obstat is defined as: The certification by an official censor of the Roman Catholic Church that a book has been examined and found to contain nothing opposed to faith and morals

Imprimatur is defined as: Approval of a publication under circumstances of official censorship

So; if 1Cor 3:15 doesn't envision the notion of a purgatory, then what does it envision? It's a depiction of people who waken inside a burning home with barely enough time to get out; taking nothing with them but whatever they wore to bed. Their home is destroyed, and all their valuables and all their mementoes; but at least the occupants themselves are safe, and suffer no harm from the fire.

The works in context are those pertaining specifically to Christians like Paul and Apollos; viz: people involved in ministerial capacities e.g. apostles, missionaries, evangelists, pastors, deacons, Sunday school teachers, church administrators, home Bible study leaders, et al. Though John Q and Jane Doe pew warmer's works will some day be evaluated too; they are not the ones whose works will be evaluated as per 1Cor 3:5-15 because John Q and Jane Doe are depicted not as God's fellow workers, but as: (1) God's field, and (2) His building.

It's extremely important to note that only the Christian worker's works are tested with fire; not the worker himself. Compare this to the great white throne event depicted at Rev 20:11-15 where the dead's works are not tested; but rather, their works are introduced as evidence in the prosecution's case against them. The Christian worker's works aren't evaluated as evidence against them, but as potential credit to justify giving them a performance award.

Another extremely important thing to note is that the Christian worker's substandard works are burned up rather than burned off.

"let each man be careful how he builds upon it" indicates that Christian workers need to keep in mind that what they produce will be thoroughly scrutinized; and projects that don't measure up will be summarily culled; resulting of course in reduced compensation for their service.

How sad it would be to see workers like Mother Teresa who, after devoting decades of their lives to a Christian service capacity, only to be stripped of everything and come away with nothing to show for it; not even so much as a Boy Scout merit badge.
_
 
.
1Cor 3:18 . . If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a fool so that he may become wise.

I'm guessing that command relates to one of Christ's instructions.

"Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matt 18:3)

The koiné Greek word for "converted" is strepho (stref'-o) which basically means to twist, i.e. turn quite around or reverse (literally or figuratively)

In a nutshell, strepho is talking about taking a new direction.

Many of those in Jesus' audiences were mature, educated folk. Jesus is as much as saying that they need to go back to school and learn a new trade-- so to speak -- which is what quite a few people had to do back when the housing bubble burst in 2008 and they found themselves not only out of work, but also quite over-qualified and/or their skills no longer in as much demand like they once were.

In our age, "wise" would pertain to people high up in finance, education, science, art, computing, crafts, music, philosophy, politics, etc. Many of those kinds of people are brilliant, but when it comes to knowing the ways of God, they're about as bright as an elementary school kid just starting out in kindergartner in need of beginning right from square-one and learning some basics.

"The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise; that they are worthless." (1Cor 3:20)

Christ also spoke of humbling one's self as a little child. Well; I can say from personal experience that wise people like those mentioned above make very poor Sunday school students because their intelligence gets in the way. If only they would leave their IQ at the door, even they themselves would be the better for it.

"Receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls." (Jas 1:21)
_
 
Your post #106 -- you mentioned Mother Teresa and those like her -- many, many hard-working people who gave decades of their lives to wonderful humanitarian work -- what a shame it would be to have all those good humanitarian works over the ages end up amounting to nothing. Wouldn't that depend on the motivation For all the wonderful humanitarian work? It's true that thousands of people Have benefited from humanitarian works, but is it done to bring glory to God? Is the Gospel unto salvation being shared with all the people?

Or are all those humanitarian works being done As a 'good work'. Are all those people Trying to earn their way to heaven in the process Of. Salvation is Not 'earned' by anything we do. A person can have the most nurturing bed-side manner in the world -- is the Gospel being shared? Are the patients 'seeing Christ' in that person? Or is the 'people-helper' So busy with everyone that they miss the personal touch that is Also really needed.

Don't we All need to be continually learning -- should Anyone be 'leaving their I.Q. at the door' / We Do need to have willing/ open hearts.
 
.
1Cor 3:21-23 . . So don't take pride in following a particular leader. Everything belongs to you-- Paul and Apollos and Peter --the whole world and life and death; the present and the future. Everything belongs to you, and you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God.

I've noticed that avid sports fans are afflicted with chronic identity syndromes. When their favorite team wins; they say "we" won; as if they were on the field playing the game instead of up in the bleachers or on the couch at home watching the action on TV.

Christians that idolize their favorite pastors and/or Sunday school teachers are just as avid. They want to be identified with those kinds of church luminaries because it makes them look really smart and elite; when in reality it just makes them look silly and star-crossed.

But the thing is; when it comes to inheritance; Christ's believing followers are equals-- the big shots with the little nobodies --because they are all, regardless of status, co-heirs with Christ (Rom 8:17) which is somewhat different than a regular heir.

Regular heirs each receive an individually specified portion of a benefactor's estate while co-heirs are heirs in common. For example: supposing a benefactor's estate totals 60 acres of land plus $10,000 in a bank account. Co-heirs-- i.e. heirs in common --inherit the whole ball of wax corporately as one beneficiary instead of six; viz: all six inherit the 60 acres and the $10,000 as if each one were the only heir. So then, whatever the Father bequeathed His son, He bequeathed everyone belonging to His son.

I honestly cannot wrap my mind around that because the ramifications are just too, too remarkable; I really don't even want to think about it.
_
 
.
1Cor 4:1 . . So then, men ought to regard us as servants of Christ, and as those entrusted with the mysteries of God.

Big names like Mother Teresa, Charles Spurgeon, and Billy Graham are practically sacred cows-- but Christian celebrities like those are only human rather than divine. Just be grateful you're not one of them because their responsibility is immense.

"Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly." (Jas 3:1)
_
 
.
1Cor 4:5 . . Judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till The Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and expose the motives of men's hearts.

The "appointed time" is probably referring to the event described at 1Cor 3:5-15 when the work done by outstanding Christians will be evaluated for performance awards.

Human nature has a propensity to shower accolades on religious celebrities without having all the facts.

For example; we now know from Mother Teresa's private letters-- made public by Father Brian Kolodiejchuk's book "Mother Teresa / Come Be My Light" --that Ms. Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu was a nun with so little personal belief in God as to be an agnostic; and yet for decades everyone the world over thought she was the cat's meow and the bee's knees: a veritable poster child of piety in thought, word, and deed. It turns out Teresa was a remarkable actor. Her public image bore no resemblance whatsoever to the secret life of her inner being.

The Spirit's corroboration that comes to Christ's followers via Rom 8:16 never happened for Teresa. As a result, the remarkable nun came to the end of her life worried that if perchance there is a God, He didn't particularly like her and might actually be quite intent upon condemning her.

Well; I'd have to say that if somebody is a Christian missionary with those kinds of thoughts going thru their head, maybe they really ought to seriously consider another line of work.
_
 
For example; we now know from Mother Teresa's private letters-- made public by Father Brian Kolodiejchuk's book "Mother Teresa / Come Be My Light" --that Ms. Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu was a nun with so little personal belief in God as to be an agnostic; and yet for decades everyone the world over thought she was the cat's meow and the bee's knees: a veritable poster child of piety in thought, word, and deed. It turns out Teresa was a remarkable actor. Her public image bore no resemblance whatsoever to the secret life of her inner being.

I was unaware of this. Thanks for sharing.
 
.
1Cor 5:1-5 . . It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father's wife. And you have become arrogant, and have not mourned instead, in order that the one who had done this deed might be removed from your midst.

. . . For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of The Lord Jesus.

Gentiles of course do sleep with their stepmothers on occasion; but the world's practice of that kind of behavior is more an aberration than a custom.

Well, the Corinthians were treating that man's behavior as if it were a norm, i.e. they apparently felt that the man's conduct was trivial, undeserving of either attention or criticism. They must have wondered why Paul was reacting so badly rather than just "get over it". After all; it's none of his business what goes on behind closed doors. Had he not heard of the right to privacy? And besides, didn't the Lord say: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Delivering someone to Satan for the destruction of the flesh just simply means to cull them from the herd, so to speak. In other words: exclude them from congregational activities; e.g. worship, Sunday school, and prayer meetings. This is not as radical as totally breaking off contact with someone; it's purpose is church discipline rather than the social blacklisting practiced by Jehovah's Witnesses
_
 
.
1Cor 5:6b-8 . . Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

. . . I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters; for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he should be an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler-- not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.

The apostle Paul's leaven analogy indicates that the shameful conduct of just one member of the congregation is the whole congregation's shame.

This isn't a proprietary Christian principle. It first shows up in the 7th chapter of Joshua. The insubordination of one insignificant Jewish man-- just one --caused God to stop assisting Joshua's army in battle. As a result, 36 men were needlessly killed in action; and ultimately capital punishment was inflicted upon not only the insubordinate man himself, but also his sons and his daughters. What did God say? Achan has sinned? No: Israel has sinned. (Josh 7:11)

This is one of the best arguments against church expansion. The bigger a congregation gets, the more difficult it is to keep an eye on everyone's conduct.

Q: What about saved and born-again LGBT? Do they have to be culled from the herd too?

A: There was a time in the not-so-distant past when there would have been no need to ask that question. But the question is very pertinent nowadays what with so many State, local, and Federal laws practically giving LGBT the status of protected species. It's got to the point when labeling their sexual preferences as sin is considered hate speech.

The key to correctly applying Paul's instruction to Christian LGBT is the word "indulges" which Webster's defines as: excessive compliance and weakness in gratifying another's or one's own desires. In other words: before culling an LGBT they have to be sexually active; and not just active, but openly active.

And please; let's not level all the heavy guns at LGBT because the list takes in all forms of immorality; plus slander, heavy drinking, greed and swindling.

Those last two were responsible for the Wall Street crash of 2008 that led to thousands of people everywhere losing their jobs, their retirements, and their homes. LGBT are of no consequence at all in comparison to the power of greed and swindling to ruin people's lives, collapse entire economies, and create fear, panic, and havoc on a titanic scale.

NOTE: If there's an old leaven, then there must be a new leaven; which, I believe, requires an explanation.

Well; biblical leaven has practically nothing to do with yeast; after all, even freshly milled flour contains an amount of naturally-occurring fungi so it's just about impossible to find flour that doesn't contain some. But the presence of fungi isn't the focus in leaven. It's all about age rather than ingredients.

Naturally-occurring fungi will, in time, spoil even the very freshest lump of pure dough. Old leaven then, probably speaks of a lump of dough that has been allowed to get so old, and consequently so spoiled, that it's no longer fit for human consumption, not even for making sour dough bread, and has to be thrown out.

Paul's instructions relate to a parable that Christ told of a woman mixing some spoiled dough in with her fresh flour (Matt 13:33 and Luke 13:20-21). That's an old trick for making fluffy bread, which in our day has been replaced by adding cultured yeast to the mix instead of spoiled dough. In other words: adding yeast and/or spoiled dough speeds up the aging process; and if done just right, results in a pretty tasty product; which is a useful metaphor for saying that many of us, even the most dedicated Christians, prefer the flavor of our old ways rather than Christ's because our old ways are an acquired taste, so to speak, whereas Christ's ways take some getting used to.
_
 
.
1Cor 5:6a . .Your boasting is not good.

The Corinthian church was liberal in its attitudes about sex. That's no surprise considering the city's culture in that day and age.

Then, as now, liberals tend to think of themselves as sophisticated and progressive; and vastly superior to the stodgy, old-fashioned ways of conservatives.
_
 
.
1Cor 6:1-6 . . If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!

. . .Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead, one brother goes to law against another-and this in front of unbelievers!

Apparently some of the Christians in the church at Corinth let the Sermon On The Mount go in one ear and out the other.

"But I say unto you: That ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." (Matt 5:39-40)

"Why don't you judge for yourselves what is right? As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate, try hard to be reconciled to him on the way, or he may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny." (Luke 12:57-59)

The Lord began his teaching in Luke with the words "Why don't you judge for yourselves what is right?" In other words; if someone threatens to take you to court over a tort matter, and you know darn good and well he's in the right; don't force him to go to law. Instead, admit to your wrong and settle out of court. According to The Lord, it’s unrighteous to tie up the courts when you know your own self that you are the one who's in the wrong. There's just simply no righteous reason why Christian defendants and plaintiffs can't be their own judge and jury in tort matters.

"Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren." (1Cor 6:7-8)

The koiné Greek word for "defraud" is apostereo (ap-os-ter-eh'-o) which is an ambiguous word with more than one meaning, and more than one application. The meaning that seems appropriate in this instance is "deprive".

It works like this: Were I to trip and fall because of a crack in the walk leading up to the front door of the home of one of my kin; I wouldn't haul them into court over it because we're related; viz: any injury I might incur by tripping and falling because of a crack in their walk would be a family matter rather than a legal matter; and they have a right to be treated by me as family rather than as enemies in a lawsuit because we're related. Were I to sue them for tripping and falling because of a crack in their walk; I would be depriving them of the love that kin have a right to expect from one another.

Well; Christians are supposed to be brethren; in the highest possible sense of the word.

"We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. . . We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren." (1John 3:14-16)

I think it's safe to say that if somebody is comfortable taking a fellow Christian to court; then they certainly are not prepared to lay down their life for the brethren.

It's sad to see relatives suing each other in court; but it happens all the time. When the world does it; well, that's to be expected; but when Christians sue each other; that's dysfunctional.
_
 
.
1Cor 6:18 . . Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that commits fornication sins against his own body.

The koiné Greek word for "fornication" is porneia (por-ni'-ah) which doesn't especially mean pornography; it means harlotry; a term that Webster's defines as sexual profligacy. Porneia would include things like prostitution, adultery, promiscuity, date sex, free love, shacking up, one-night stands, swingers, wife swapping, and that sort of thing.

The command is not to walk away from fornication; but to run away from it as if your very life depends upon putting distance between you and it. The same Greek word is used at Matt 2:13 where an angel instructed Joseph to flee into Egypt in order to save his little boy's life.

Fleeing is different than shunning. I think what we're talking about here are the times when a golden opportunity comes along to mess around with somebody who is absolutely irresistible. Some people would call that getting lucky; but in God's estimation, it's getting stupid if you play along and see what happens.

Young Christian couples often want to know how far they can go with their dates before they're into forbidden territory. Well, we all instinctively know the upper limits, but since the lower limits aren't chipped in stone then I would have to say let your own conscience be your guide in accordance with The Lord's principles stipulated in the 14th chapter of Romans regulating gray areas. The key principles are:

"Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." (Rom 14:5)

"Happy is he that feels no guilt in that thing which he allows." (Rom 14:22)

"He that doubts is guilty if he eats, because he eats not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin." (Rom 14:23)

However, as an old senior guy of 74 who's been around the block a time or two: I must forewarn youngsters that the human conscience is trainable. What I mean is, if you manage to suppress your first-time pangs of guilt, the second time will be easier; and each succeeding suppression of your conscience gets easier and easier till the day comes when you feel no guilt at all. In other words: you will eventually succeed in cauterizing your conscience. (cf. 1Tim 4:1-2)

The phrase "sins against his own body" is sort of the same wording as at 1Cor 11:27 where it's said "whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of The Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of The Lord."

Some Christians construe 1Cor 11:27 as murder. Well if so, then sinning against one's own body would be suicide. But actually, what we're talking about here is gross contempt and disrespect. In other words; Christian fornicators are treating their body like a chamber pot instead of a holy vessel; and all the while dragging God's Spirit into situations that He finds extremely unbecoming.

"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?" (1Cor 6:19)

Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." (Eph 4:30)

They're also dragging Christ into shame and disgrace too.

"Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with an harlot? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with an harlot is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh." (1Cor 6:14-16, cf. Gen 2:18-24)
_
 
Q: What about saved and born-again LGBT? Do they have to be culled from the herd too?
Hello Adziilii

Looking for a little clarity.

Are we talking about one who comes to the faith as LGBTI or one who is of the faith and enters into this choice lifestyle afterwards?

Generally speaking at least, because I know there can be many additional nuances that can be brought up.

Thanks in advance.

By the way I do agree with your answer.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
<><
 
.
Are we talking about one who comes to the faith as LGBTI or one who is of the faith and enters into this choice lifestyle afterwards?

Well; the key to correctly applying Paul's instructions regarding LGBT is the word "indulges" which Webster's defines as: excessive compliance and weakness in gratifying another's or one's own desires. In other words: they have to be sexually active; and not just active, but openly active; which, I should think, applies to all LBGT regardless whether they were that way prior to becoming a Christian or took it up after they became a Christian.

That same rule of course applies to immoral persons, the covetous, the idolaters, the revilers, the drunkards, and the swindlers.
_
 
I'd kind have to disagree with you that ALL LBGT people are openly sexually active and feel a Need to be open about their sexuality.

It IS true that we hear some 'loud mouths' being Very loud. But I think that there are lots of Others who are homosexual and would like to simply live their lives -- even with a partner -- quietly.

Media -- Some of Society-- Want the rest of the general public to think that 'everyone' is coming 'out' and that it's okay to be public about their sexuality. IF that there the case -- then why the Hate crime -- why the derogatory names making fun of homosexuals.
 
Back
Top