Jesus Christ Forums

[Guest]

I'm wondering if any of you have spent time ministering to gays and lesbians. What have you found to be effective or ineffective?

Scott Schalchlin

[Guest]

Please tell me someone has actually ministered to gays and lesbians! Otherwise, how can you possibly have this site with a clear conscience???

Scott Schalchlin

[webmaster]

Ok for humour ask if there are any here to minister too?

2nd I don't fully understand the question.

My job has been as follows:

I created a webpage at electrosnap to state a simple to the point view that it is a sin after looking on google and all the trash web sites out there lying to people telling them it's not a sin!

So all I get from electrosnap is hate mail, but I copied the web page here for them to complain about, but nothing so far. SO i created a webpage to show all the hate mail to reveal what these people are really like in their hearts.

My main goal & driving force has been the people who promotes it. Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years same as other sins and will be around till Jesus comes back.

What I'm interested in stopping is the people who promotes it as not a sin using my bible to do it with! This has become the main problem!!!!!

The goal also has been that when the people comes to the electrosnap sight they will at least feel guilty and understand that it is a sin, it might be 20 years from know but it might be enough one day for them to realize that they are heading toward a devil's hell and repent and accept Jesus.

But I realize telling people something is a sin has never stopped nobody and never will, but telling them it's not a sin is far worse then telling them it is a sin!

[Guest]

Let me see if I'm understanding you correctly. Your main ministry is directed to people who declare homosexuality to not be a sin, but not to homosexuals? Kind of a ministry against "false prophets." Is that right?

Scott Schalchlin

[webmaster]

[Guest]

I am right in the middle of moving. I may be a couple of weeks, but I'll think about putting some stuff together. I'm not a minister and actually have a job. Right now, every book and bible I own, but one, are packed. Also, I'm not completely comfortable with your approach and I don't want us to start fightin'!

Give me some time to think on it and I'll let you know if I have some ideas.

Scott Schalchlin

[webmaster]

I asked on June 1 and you replied on June 1, now it's June 25. That was 3 1/2 weeks ago.

Guess you won't help so I'll just do it myself.

[Guest]

"Webmaster"

What I say to you now I say in a spirit of Christian love and my prayer is that you will receive it in the same way?

Hate to say this bro but you're coming accross in a very aggressive manner (and not just on this thread either) and from past experience I know you don't like it when things don't go the way you want them to or think they should. I understand what you are trying to do and on that score I agree with you. However, because you are often coming across as doing it in a less than gracious way it makes it very difficult for those of us who want to stand along side you in support to actually do so.

I suspect that this is "your" ministry rather than something which God is calling you to do (though I could be wrong)? I suggest that you really seek God about what you are doing and ask Him to fill you with the same love for sinners that He has for them. Only when you have received that love can you ever hope to be an effective witness for Christ since truth spoken without love is more often than not brutal and therefore a parody of the Christian gospel and deeply offensive to those on the receiving end of it (which might explain why so many Christians incur vitriolic backlashes to the things that they say).

It is not my intention to belittle or humiliate you but only to point out areas which need to be further worked on and improved. I would be happy to give any assistance I can in helping you to recalibrate and refine this ministry.

Your brother in Christ,

Simonline.

[Aineo]

[Guest]

"Aineo"

"The answer to your question is yes! I have found that preaching the gospel, introducing them to the Biblical, not the historical Chirst, and prayer are the most effective.

What is not effective is bashing a lifestyle they did not choose or calling them names.

I have found fighting the propoganda machine a total waste of my time. The major movers behind the "gay agenda" are not gay, they are straight liberal organizations and the liberal media."

With all due respect, if you refuse to introduce someone to the "historical" Jesus then you cannot introduce them to the "biblical" Jesus either since they are one and the same.

Since God Himself repeatedly condemns the practice of homosexuality in scripture one can hardly expect Christians not to follow suit in also condemning the practice of homosexuality.

However, I concur that there is absolutely no biblical mandate whatsoever for the persecution of people simply for practicing homosexuality (though any such practice clearly needs to be lovingly but firmly denounced and shown for what it is - sin). If the person professes themselves to be a believer then they should be brought under church discipline (even to the point of ex-communication) for the practice of the sin of homosexuality, the same as with any other sin. If, however, the person is not a believer then they should be lovingly warned and then left to the judgement of God (1Cor.5 especially verses 9-13).

As for your last paragraph...can you substantiate that sweeping generalization?

Simonline.

[Aineo]

That last paragraph was not a sweeping generalization. Do the numbers for yourself. The population of the United States is 280 Million, even using the gay activist figure of 10% that would make their numbers 28 million. However, gay activists have acknowledged their percentage is false and was claimed for propaganda purposes only. The real percentage is closer to 3%, which makes the number of gays lesss than 10 million. You can check the 2000 US Census for yourself and extrapolate a percentage based on their data. I did that and found that .21% of our population is gay and lesbian couples living in the same household. Increase that number about 10 times and you will get a percentage of 2.1%. Do you honestly believe that less than10 million gays, not all activists can push the agenda you see at this time? Of course not!

The National Organization of Women
The Democratic Party
The NEA
The APA and AMA
Liberal Christians
The ACLU
The liberal media and the entertainment industry, and many civil rights organizations back the gay agenda and quietly promote it. Go to the search engine the Webmaster created and check the source of the pro gay agenda material. Most of it that I checked does not originate from gay activist sources.

I came out as gay when I was 18, became an activist in 1973 at age 30(the same year the APA took homosexuality out of the DSM III), saw the whole gay liberation movement start to die from lack of support and then saw it revitalized in 1978 with Anita Bryant. Her rhetoric gave gays the target they needed to revitalize the gay liberation movement. Anita also helped push heterosexuals into the gay camp with her less than Christian opposition to non-believers. And why, because she did not like wealthy gay men living in Dade County Florida. The media picked up her local campaign and it was covered from coast to coast and border-to-border. Even though Anita won here fight in Dade County she lost her position in society, lost her Christian music recording contracts, lost her position as spokesperson for the Florida Citrus Growers, had all her concerts dates cancelled by churches that had no desire to be picketed by gay activists and their supporters, and her husband divorced her. (BTW, a pervasive rumor at this time was that Anita’s husband was a closeted gay who had a relationship with another man while in college.)

The ex-gay Christian movement started in 1972 with the organization of Love In Action, this was followed in 1976 with the organization of Exodus International. The church has never supported the ex-gay movement, again out of fear of controversy. Not until 1992 and the election of Clinton did gay activism become a national focus for Christians. 20 years after gay liberation became an active political and economic force.

Now, the historical Jesus is not pictured as God in the flesh. The media has tried to picture Christ as a fluke, His resurrection as myth, and the empty tomb as a plot by His disciples.

The Biblical Jesus is the Messiah who died for the remission of sins, gave us the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, and opened heavens gates to the gentile nations. The Holy Spirit is the one who convicts, not man, and certainly not Hollywood's attempts to humanize Christ and turn Christianity into a child's daydream.

[Guest]

"Aineo"

In view of the fact that I am not an American and am not familiar with many of the abreviations that you have used would you care to explain them please? Again I am not familiar with Anita Bryant?!

"Now, the historical Jesus is not pictured as God in the flesh. The media has tried to picture Christ as a fluke, His resurrection as myth, and the empty tomb as a plot by His disciples."

Actually, He is, since the historical and the biblical Jesus are one and the same. (If this is not the case then Christianity is a false religion and as Paul said "we are to be pitied above all men" (1Cor.15:12-28). This is totally different from the "de-mythologized Jesus" who is an idolic construct of the vain imaginings of liberal theology.

"The Biblical Jesus is the Messiah who died for the remission of sins, gave us the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, and opened heavens gates to the gentile nations. The Holy Spirit is the one who convicts, not man, and certainly not Hollywood's attempts to humanize Christ and turn Christianity into a child's daydream."

Fine! But did it really objectively happen in time-and space history (like every other event in history) or was it actually nothing more than subjective "religious truth" which has as much validity in objective reality as Father Christmas, leprachauns, and the tooth fairy?! If it did then all that scripture declares happened to the man Jesus of Nazareth actually physically took place in objective time and space history (Indeed, this is what separates the Christian Christ from the parodies which supposedly happened to the Hindu gods (but as we all know this, like the Hindu gods themselves, is as true as leprachauns and the tooth fairy!))

"And just how are you a man going to convince any person who is really dealing with homosexuality on a personal level going to convince them the Bible calls their lifestyle sin? You won't! The Holy Spirit will! We sow the truth of the gospel, we water what we sow with love and encouragement, however God brings the increase. Attacking the lifestyle is attacking the person in the mind of gay men and lesbian women. Introduce sinners to the Sin Bearer and let the Holy Spirit do His job which is to convict and convert."

I believe that it is often a combination of the two, man declaring the truth externally while the Holy Spirit re-enforces this by conviction internally, though we are commanded to live, and in so doing make known, the gospel, in love, not with self-righteous bigotry.

Every blessing in your endeavours to comunicate the gospel to those who are struggling with homosexuality.

Simonline.

[Aineo]

The NEA is the National Education Association
The APA is the American Psychiatric Association and AMA is the American Medical Association
The ACLU is the American Civil Liberties Union

Do a Google search on Anita Bryant and you will get more information than you really want.

As to the historical Jesus, I stated that the media (meaning the American TV industry) has pictured Jesus as a historical figure who was not devine, etc. Since you are not an American you will not understand that referrence.

[Aineo]

Simonline, I presume you are heterosexual, in gay lingo that is ever-straight. When you minister to another ever-straight you have a common understanding of life, sexaulity, etc. The gay mindset is not the same as that of an ever-straight.

To you homosexaulity is a sin, to gay men and lesbian women their sexuality is their life. Their sexuality defines them as who their are not what they do. You see what they do as sin, gays and lesbians see what they do as who they are. Most ever-straights believe that homosexuality is a conscience choice. Gay men and lesbain women know they did not choose to have the desires and therefore believe they were created gay, they see the desires as innate, immutable, and unchangeable.

When puberty hits and your male friends are going gah-gay over girls(ugh), having erotic dreams, noticing breats, hips, etc. Gay men are noticing the rise in the levis, butts in tight pants, having erotic dreams about the high school quaterback, etc.

When you witness to a ever-straight man having an affair he may understand lust is the cause. What you don't understand about gays is what you call lust, they call love. Yes, there are gay men who are out to collect notches on their bedposts, just as there are straight men that do the same. But, when a gay man sees an attractive man he desires and goes into a relationship with, what you call sin and unnatural, he calls a a natural loving, committed relationship. Do you know why this is true for a gay man? No, because it is outside your frame of referrence and you see Lev 18:22. The gay man sees love, appreciation, affirmation, acceptance, a bonding that he NEVER RECEIVED FROM ANY ADULT MALE IN HIS LIFE.

It takes the love of Jesus Christ - a man - to fulfill his God given, normal, and natural emotional needs. Only Christ's love will set a gay man free, and telling him that his need for love is a sin and an abomination only raises barriers of self-protection and you get labeled a hate monger, a homophobic Christian, a prejudiced bigot.

2 Cor 7:9-11
9 I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful, but that you were made sorrowful to the point of repentance; for you were made sorrowful according to the will of God, in order that you might not suffer loss in anything through us. 10 For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation; but the sorrow of the world produces death. NAS

2 Tim 2:24-26
And the Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, 25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will. NAS

Men come to repentance through the will of God not by an exercise of free will. The Holy Spirit convicts and converts, not you or me. BTW, it works the same with lesbians only from a different perspective, the female perspective that also needs the love of a man - Jesus Christ - to set them free.
_________________

[Guest]

"Aineo"

"Simonline, I presume you are heterosexual, in gay lingo that is ever-straight. (No, actually in the worlds eyes I would be categorized as "gay".) When you minister to another ever-straight you have a common understanding of life, sexuality, etc. The gay mindset is not the same as that of an ever-straight (I know...only too well).

To you homosexuality is a sin, to gay men and lesbian women their sexuality is their life (i.e it has become an idol for them). Their sexuality defines them as who they are, not what they do (because their "sexuality" has become their god (Ex.20:3) and thus the thing which has primary influence in their definitition of themselves). You see what they do as sin, gays and lesbians see what they do as who they are (so what you are saying is that, since Scripture only condemns the practice of homosexuality, and not people for their sexual orientation, that then means that homosexuals define themselves solely by their actions?!). Most ever-straights believe that homosexuality is a conscious choice (that's because it is. Homosexuality as a sin is, initially, no more compulsive than any other sin such as theft or murder with which we all, homo and hetrosexuals alike, have to battle. However, the more we engage in such sinful practices the more compulsive they become and the more they define who we are until the sinful compulsive practices become habits which in turn harden into "nature" and in taking over completely thus totally defines who we allow ourselves to become. This, in effect, belies a total lack of moral character which, I grant you, is all the more difficult to develop in a world of total philosophical and ethical relativism.). Gay men and lesbain women know they did not choose to have the desires (With all due respect, nobody chooses to be tempted, it is simply an inescapable fact of the fall.) and therefore believe they were created gay, they see the desires as innate, immutable, and unchangeable (innate they may well be, since we are all born with a sinful rebellious nature, but immutable, no. Only God is immutable, temptation will end.).

When puberty hits and your male friends are going gah-gah over girls(ugh) (why the revulsion, since it is clearly what God intends for His creation?), having erotic dreams, noticing breats, hips, etc. Gay men are noticing the rise in the levis, butts in tight pants, having erotic dreams about the high school quaterback, etc (Again, I know...only too well.).

When you witness to a ever-straight man having an affair he may understand lust is the cause (as with "never-straight" men...who are still basically human). What you don't understand about gays is what you call lust, they call love (because, having their hearts and minds blinded by the Evil One (2Cor.4:4), they become incapable of correctly diferentiating between the two). Yes, there are gay men who are out to collect notches on their bedposts, just as there are straight men that do the same. But, when a gay man sees an attractive man he desires and goes into a relationship with, what you call sin and unnatural, he calls a a natural loving, committed relationship. Do you know why this is true for a gay man? No, because it is outside your frame of referrence and you see Lev 18:22. The gay man sees love, appreciation, affirmation, acceptance, a bonding that he NEVER RECEIVED FROM ANY ADULT MALE IN HIS LIFE. (I know that of which you speak (more than you realize) and I also know that every human being has legitimate emotional and developmental needs but seeking to fulfil those needs through the practice of homosexuality when they are not met through legitimate means is not the answer. We need to find / create other legitimate means.)

It takes the love of Jesus Christ - a man - to fulfill his God given, normal, and natural emotional needs. Only Christ's love will set a gay man free, and telling him that his need for love is a sin and an abomination only raises barriers of self-protection and you get labeled a hate monger, a homophobic Christian, a prejudiced bigot (Excuse me?! Christianity does not advocate telling someone that their quest to fulfil their legitimate need for love is a sin. Only if they are seeking to fulfil it in the wrong way (i.e through the practice of homosexuality) is it sinful.)

2 Cor 7:9-11
9 I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful, but that you were made sorrowful to the point of repentance; for you were made sorrowful according to the will of God, in order that you might not suffer loss in anything through us. 10 For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation; but the sorrow of the world produces death. NAS

2 Tim 2:24-26
And the Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, 25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will. NAS

Men come to repentance through the will of God not by an exercise of free will. The Holy Spirit convicts and converts, not you or me. BTW, it works the same with lesbians only from a different perspective, the female perspective that also needs the love of a man - Jesus Christ - to set them free."

(Obviously, you are an out and out Calvinist prefering to believe solely in the Sovereignty of God rather than a combination of the Sovereignty of God and the Free Will of Man which is actually the correct Biblical understanding of the Christian Faith. This is because salvation is primarily a LOVING relationship between the Creator and His creature (along the lines of a father with his son (and definately NOT along the lines of "Giusseppi and Pinnochio" which is how most Calvinists seem to understand it), which is why we are all declared to be "sons of God" by adoption) where BOTH PARTIES have legitimate input into the relationship. GOD DOES NOT WANT A CREATION FULL OF PINNOCHIO'S WHERE HE, AND HE ALONE, HAS TO CONSTANTLY PULL ALL THE STRINGS HIMSELF, SINCE THIS DEFEATS THE WHOLE OBJECT OF CREATING THE CREATION IN THE FIRST PLACE! This is not what Scripture means by "the Sovereignty of God".)

Simonline.

[Aineo]

Actually Simonline I am not a Calvanist, I simply believe that we are saved by grace, a gift, like salvation from God. Your appeal to the OT only shows you have a legalistic approach to Scripute. I would remind you what Christ said about judging:

[Guest]

"Aineo"

"Actually Simonline I am not a Calvinist, I simply believe that we are saved by grace, a gift, like salvation from God. Your appeal to the OT only shows you have a legalistic approach to Scripture.

"Men come to repentance through the will of God not by an exercise of free will. The Holy Spirit convicts and converts, not you or me." If this is what you really believe then you are indeed a Calvinist my friend.

"Your appeal to the OT only shows you have a legalistic approach to Scripture." So, following this line of reasoning to it's logical conclusion, you must also believe that Jesus has a "legalistic approach to Scripture" since He never once quotes from the New Testament?! (Just because someone quotes from the Old Testament that does not necessarily mean that they have a legalistic approach to Scripture.)

"I would remind you what Christ said about judging:

Matt 7:1-5

7:1 "Do not judge lest you be judged. 2 "For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. 3 "And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 "Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye? 5 "You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
NAS

So what you are actually saying then is that unbelievers should not be told the truth or warned about the danger that they are in because of their sin since this is an act of judgement on the part of those who would seek to warn them. Rather, only believers should be made explicitly aware of the nature and consequences of sin whilst the rest of the poor unfortunate souls should be left to flounder in blissful ignorance only to discover the truth on Judgement Day as Christ reads out the judgement against them and the subsequent sentence of death before having them hurled into the everlasting Lake of Fire (the "good news" of salvation is completely meaningless without first coming to an understanding of the reality of the "bad news" of sin first)?!

"Divorce is a sin and you could use Ex 20:13 against ever-straights who go through marriage like a revolving door, or alcoholism, drug addiction, etc. The institutional church has groups to help addicts, but very few sponsor ex-gay ministries."

Agreed. This is a terrible indictment upon the Church which urgently needs rectifying.

"Everything else you have to say is great if the people to whom you are ministering are Christians. Yet most of the gay men and lesbian women I know have no real knowledge of the Bible or what Christianity is all about. Like others with a legalistic attitude toward gay men and lesbian women you start with what you know and expect the whole world to agree with you or accept you faith as real. This is not reality."

With all due respect I do not have a legalistic attitude to homosexuality. I simply believe categorically and unequivocally (in accordance with what Scripture teaches) that homosexuality is sinful. I endeavour to communicate this in as loving and compassionate a way as I can but as a Christian who belives that truth is absolute and not relative I cannot and will not compromise on this.

"Do I believe that God alone brings us to salvation? Yes. What you are teaching is salvation by works. Make yourself perfect, clean, righteous, and then come to Jesus Christ. You are asking gays and lesbians to die to themselves and then come to Christ and actually it is the other way around."

"Do I believe that God alone brings us to salvation? Yes." (And you're trying to convince me that you're not a Calvinist?!)

For the record, I am not teaching "salvation by legalistically manufactured self-righteousness" but I am teaching that salvation in order to be shown to be authentic must be accompanied by works of righteousness (Jas.2:14-26) therefore the true Biblical gospel (as opposed to popular Evangelicalism's parody of it) is actually a gospel of salvation by faith and works and not just "faith alone" (for "faith" read "giving mental ascent to a set of theological propositions").

"Make yourself perfect, clean, righteous, and then come to Jesus Christ. You are asking gays and lesbians to die to themselves and then come to Christ and actually it is the other way around." This is not the Biblical gospel and as such is not at all what I am advocating.

The first stage of the Biblical gospel is a call to repentance from any and all forms of sinful behaviour and attitudes and a turning towards God. This requires an act of the will on the part of the sinner in order to choose to repent and turn away from sin and towards God. This repentance must be public and wholehearted (not secret and half-hearted) and, where appropriate, unwholesome and unhealthy associations and or relationships must be either redefined or terminated, whilst restoration and restitution must be made for past wrongs, also as appropriate. This then shows the community in which the person lives that this person is serious about getting right with God and that they are not just playing at it by simply coating themselves with a religious veneer. They are then required to believe (i.e. trust implicitly) in the life, death and resurrection of God's Son, Jesus Christ, as the exclusive means of salvation which God alone has wrought for them (Jn.14:6; Acts. 4:12). After this they are to undergo baptism in water as the means by which their personal death to the old self and their being raised to new life in Christ is achieved (according to scripture water baptism is not merely symbolic (as many Christians erroneously believe) but also instrumental (it is not "like" a bath it actually is a bath (Tit.3:5) - it is not "like" a burial it actually is a burial (Rom.6:3,4) in other words it actually achieves these spiritual realities rather than simply symbolically representing them - and, no, I do not believe in the accursed doctrine of baptismal regeneration or "ex opere operato" but rather that it is by the faith of the one undergoing baptism that these spiritual realities occur otherwise it is nothing more than water washing a dirty body and that's it). Finally, having now dealt with and "signed off" the believers past through water baptism, the normal procedure is that the believer then receives the baptism of the Spirit in order to enable them to successfully live the Christian life and to walk upright and blameless in God's sight (Rom.8). From then on they are said to be "on the way" and working out their salvation with fear and trembling (a.k.a.sanctification) this is when the believer learns how to "die to self" by daily, nay, moment by moment, putting off the sinful nature and being clothed with Christ's righteousness, by being transformed by the renewing of the mind (Rom.12:1,2) etc.

"Faith is a gift from God.
Salvation is a gift from God.
The Holy Spirit seals us AFTER salvation.
Repentance is a work after salvation.
Christ said "Many are called, but FEW are chosen.
Paul wrote (and I paraphrase) some sow, some water, BUT GOD BRINGS THE INCREASE. Have you ever studied Ephesians?"

Actually there is no "after salvation" since salvation lasts forever. What we are sealed after by the Holy Spirit is Justification. Repentance does not come "after salvation" either since it is actually a part of salvation. Only Justification ("I have been saved") is that part of salvation which can be thought of in terms of a "demarcation line". Sanctification ("I am being saved") is a definate process and should never be thought of in terms of a "demarcation line" whilst Glorification ("I will be saved") is still a future event which will only be realized at the consumation of the Kingdom.

"Christ said "Many are called, but FEW are chosen.
Paul wrote (and I paraphrase) some sow, some water, BUT GOD BRINGS THE INCREASE." I'm not sure what point it is you're trying to make here?

In answer to your question, yes, I have studied Ephesians.

"If you want to take on the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churchs (UFMCC), the largest pro-gay denomination in the world and other gay friendly churches with your stand -- fine, I agree with everything you say. However, members of the UFMCC have rejected the truth for a lie. They have exercised their free will and chosen to "worship man and not the Creator". But, I will repeat, many, probably most, gay men and lesbian women are not Christian or have any desire to become one. So you have to first preach the gospel and let GOD BRING THE INCREASE."

But I was under the impression that that is in fact what I am doing?!

"I have asked other's this question and never received an answer, let see if you can. Where in the Bible does it give us as Christians the authority to judge those outside the Body of Christ? Because that is exactly what you and other heterocentric Christians are doing."

Except perhaps for during the millennium, there is, as far as I am aware, no mandate for Christians to judge those outside the Church. Au contrare, Paul expressly forbids it (1Cor.5 especially verses 9-13). However, if, in your mind, the proclamation of the gospel (which involves proclaiming the need for repentance from sinful acts and attitudes (including homosexuality)) is synonymous with judging those outside the Church as you seem to be arguing then you are faced with quite a dilemma are you not? How do you propose to resolve this dilemma?

"Yes, I believe in free will. But without the "Hound Of Heaven" (a Roman Catholic way of referring to the Holy Spirit) to convict we will not exercise that free will in favor of Christianity."

Yes, I am familiar with the term "Hound of Heaven" and I personally have no problem with that term (or the concept it seeks to convey) theologically speaking.

Simonline.

[Guest]

Simon - I agree wholeheartedly with your posts. Well written and compassionate.

[Aineo]

"Men come to repentance through the will of God not by an exercise of free will. The Holy Spirit convicts and converts, not you or me." If this is what you really believe then you are indeed a Calvinist my friend.””

If my belief in the sovereignty of God makes me a Calvinist, I plead guilty. However,

[Guest]

"VP"

"Simon - I agree wholeheartedly with your posts. Well written and compassionate."

Thank you for your kind words of support and encouragement "VP". I look forward to reading your many contributions to this forum too. (Oooh! was that a word of prophecy there?! Lol!)

Simonline.

[Guest]

"Aineo"

""Men come to repentance through the will of God not by an exercise of free will. The Holy Spirit convicts and converts, not you or me." If this is what you really believe then you are indeed a Calvinist my friend.””

If my belief in the sovereignty of God makes me a Calvinist, I plead guilty.

With all due respect, it's not your belief in the sovereignty of God that makes you a Calvinist (since I believe in that too) but your belief in the sovereignty of God to the exclusion of the Free Will of Man, as evidenced by your statement "Men come to repentance through the will of God, not by an exercise of free will."?!


However,

Quote:
Ephesians 1:3-7

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. NAS
Sounds like the Doctrine of Election, a Calvinist idea, to me.

The doctrine of election, like the doctrine of the sovereignty of God, is actually God's idea, as elucidated in scripture (and no, I do not believe that God is a Calvinist or an Arminianist either). Calvin simply took the idea of divine sovereignty and built an entire systematic theology around it using the doctrine of divine sovereignty as a myopic lens through which to view and understand the rest of Christianity, thereby straying into the realm of heresy.

"But, you might say:
Quote:
John 3:16

16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. NAS
This is the Doctrine of the free will of man."

A doctrine to which the average Calvinist would not give houseroom.

"We seem to have diametrically opposed and apparently contradictory doctrines taught in Scripture. But, do we? I see both of these doctrines as true. Let me see if I can give you a simile that makes sense. I view both of these doctrines as Biblical truth and compare them to railroad tracks and the Gospel as a locomotive. If you remove either track the Gospel will crash. Many Christians stand on one doctrine or the other, and argue to defeat the one they don’t like."

Excuse me but doesn't this contradict your earlier statement that "Men come to repentance through the will of God, not by an exercise of free will."(which is how I came to the conclusion that you are a Calvinist)?

"When I am dealing with gays and liberal Christians who accept and promote gay theology, I stand on the Doctrine of the free will of mankind. I point out what the Bible teaches about homosexuality and will not back down. Like you I will not compromise the truth of Scripture. On the other hand, when dealing with those in the gay community and un-saved heterosexuals, I follow my belief in the sovereignty of God; teach about Christ’s love, His redemptive work on the cross, and the grace of God. What is grace? The unearned, unmerited, unwarranted gift of God, the free will of mankind has nothing to do with grace. Eventually the subject of what is sin comes up and then I simply state what the Scripture teaches about sin – all sin."

With all due respect I am not clear about what you are saying here. How does "standing on the doctrine of the Free Will of Mankind" help you to refute those arguments advocated by those within the Church who support homosexuality? Further, how does "following your belief in the sovereignty of God" help you when dealing with those in the homosexual community and un-saved heterosexuals? Surely our brief as Christians is to make known the whole counsel of God (thereby emphasising both the sovereignty of God AND the free will of Man together) to all men everywhere?

"”So what you are actually saying then is that unbelievers should not be told the truth or warned about the danger that they are in because of their sin since this is an act of judgement on the part of those who would seek to warn them. Rather, only believers should be made explicitly aware of the nature and consequences of sin whilst the rest of the poor unfortunate souls should be left to flounder in blissful ignorance only to discover the truth on Judgement Day as Christ reads out the judgement against them and the subsequent sentence of death before having them hurled into the everlasting Lake of Fire (the "good news" of salvation is completely meaningless without first coming to an understanding of the reality of the "bad news" of sin first)?!”

Of course not! I am saying that we should emphasize the love of Christ FIRST and FOREMOST."

But, with all due respect, do you not see that to emphasise the "love of Christ first and foremost" is actually a parody of the Biblical gospel? It is the nature of the Biblical Gospel to declare that because of man's sinful rebellion against his Creator he is destined to face judgement for his sinful rebellion and afterwards to be separated from his Creator for ever by being cast into the everlasting Lake of Fire "where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die". Only when man understands this will he then appreciate the nature of divine grace in saving him from such a fate. (If Adam and Eve had not fallen then how would they have ever learned about God's grace?) A man will not seek salvation until he realises (a) the nature of the impending situation from which he needs to be saved and (b) that in and of himself he is utterly powerless to do anything about it and thus is in need of a saviour. To emphasise the love of God to the diminution or exclusion of His other atributes (holiness, righteousness, justice, etc.) is to proclaim not the Biblical YHWH but a heretical parody which cannot and will not save anyone.

"I stand corrected, and agree that if you LOVINGLY AND COMPASSIONATELY declare all the truth of Scripture you will be rewarded with fruit. However, most Christians don’t approach homosexuality with love and compassion but with judgment. You are the exception not the rule, at least in my experience in my 21-year journey out of and living free of gay life."

I thank you for your most gracious comments. I only wish that I could be even more gracious and compassionate. It is true, many Christians are a very poor reflection of Christ when it comes to dealing with members of the homosexual community and this is an area where the Church needs to fall on it's knees and repent instead of adorning itself in robes of self-righteousness...sometimes, I just want to cry.

"No I am not a 5-point Calvinist. I do believe in the total depravity of man. (Gen 8:21, Rom 3:23, and 5:12) I reject any man is predestined to live a sinful life (ultra-Calvinism), however I do believe that God saves us through grace not works (repentance is a work), I do not subscribe to the limited atonement of Christ, and I reject the Calvinist view of once saved always saved (as practiced by many so-called Christians)"

Firstly, I believe that all men are predestined, without exception, some to everlasting life and others to everlasting torment. However, I find the idea of predestination as being "cast in concrete" (and therefore impossible to change) to be utterly repugnant and absolutely unbiblical (which is why I passionately believe that both Calvinism and Arminianism are heretical). God by His Spirit has shown me that all men are free to make their moral and ethical choices which in turn will seal their everlasting fate without this affecting, even remotely, the sovereignty of God. Most Calvinists like to cite Rom.9 in support of their theology whilst at the same time completely ignoring passages such as Ex.8:15,32; 9:34,35 which show that Pharoh hardened his own heart (thereby making God's judgement upon him just and righteous instead of a "kangaroo court" as in the case of the heretical version of God's judgement espoused by Hyper-Calvinism - a belief system to which many so called "moderate" Calvinists unwittingly subscribe).

With respect, Your understanding of repentance as being a "work" is incorrect. It is actually an act of faith (and as such is essential to salvation). For a much better explanation of Christian initiation than I could ever present I urge you to obtain and read Rev. J. David Pawson's superb work The Normal Christian Birth published in the UK by Hodder and Stoughton and available online from: www.davidpawson.com/. With regard to your views on "Limited Atonement" and "Once saved, always saved!" on these matters we share a common belief and as such stand shoulder to shoulder (which is as it should be). If you're interested, David Pawson has also written several other excellent works, (not to mention a very extensive audio and video cassette tape teaching ministry) two of which I commend to you now: Once Saved Always Saved? and The Road To Hell These two works are, in my opinion, the equivalent, in theological terms, of two "nuclear bombs" as far as "Once saved, always saved!" is concerned and I urge all who believe in "Once saved, always saved!" to prayerfully read and consider David's arguments before coming down dogmatically ( and often intransigently) on either side.

"”For the record, I am not teaching "salvation by legalistically manufactured self-righteousness" but I am teaching that salvation in order to be shown to be authentic must be accompanied by works of righteousness (Jas.2:14-26) therefore the true Biblical gospel (as opposed to popular Evangelicalism's parody of it) is actually a gospel of salvation by faith and works and not just "faith alone" (for "faith" read "giving mental ascent to a set of theological propositions"). “

"James teaches that good works is evidence of salvation; he does not teach good works as a prerequisite of salvation.

Are you by any chance Roman Catholic?"

As I recall, I also did not advocate that "works" (a.k.a. "legalistically manufactured self-righteousness") are a prerequisite to salvation, but rather I advocated that works of righteousness must accompany (not precede) salvation in order to establish and maintain it's authenticity (Jas.2:14-16).

Far too many "Evangelical Christians" have been duped into believing a parody of the authentic gospel which requires them simply to pray a "sinners prayer" and then give mental ascent to a set of theological propsitions without actually making significant fundamental difference to their lives (other than to take on a religious veneer, expend ones energies in perpetuating what I call the "Evangelical sausage machine" by engaging in copious amounts of "evangelism" and be seen in Church on a week by week basis). This is most definately not the Biblical understanding of salvation. But, sadly, it's what often passes for "salvation" within the sub-culture of "popular Evangelicalism".

In answer to your question "Am I a Roman Catholic?" the answer is most definately no. I loathe Roman Catholicism with every fibre of my being (as I do any and every religious system which seeks to draw people away from a living faith in God by incarcerating them into a form of institutionalized religion which often has the effect of sapping the spiritual life out of people).

"”The first stage of the Biblical gospel is a call to repentance from any and all forms of sinful behaviour and attitudes and a turning towards God.”

This is a manmade doctrine not backed up in Scripture. I am doing a Biblical study of “repent” and “repentance”. The prophets called the Jews to repent; in Revelation Christ tells the churches to repent. You are correct that repent means “turn to God” or better “return to God”."

"Repentance is a man-made doctrine not backed up in Scripture."?! Are we reading the same Bible (Matt.3:2; 4:17; Mk.1:15; 6:12; Lk.13:3; 13:5; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 17:30; 26:20)?!

"“Finally, having now dealt with and "signed off" the believers past through water baptism, the normal procedure is that the believer then receives the baptism of the Spirit in order to enable them to successfully live the Christian life and to walk upright and blameless in God's sight”

It did not work this way with Cornelius, did it? He received the Holy Spirit PRIOR to baptism."

With respect, that is precisely why I inserted the words "normal procedure" thereby tacitly acknowledging that there were exceptions to the normal procedure ( I was thinking of Cornelius as I wrote) but the exceptions are just that, exceptions, not the rule (see David Pawson's book The Normal Christian Birth op. cit.)

"So you have to first preach the gospel and let GOD BRING THE INCREASE."

But I was under the impression that that is in fact what I am doing?!”

Does that now make sense?

"”Except perhaps for during the millennium, there is, as far as I am aware, no mandate for Christians to judge those outside the Church. Au contrare, Paul expressly forbids it (1Cor.5 especially verses 9-13). However, if, in your mind, the proclamation of the gospel (which involves proclaiming the need for repentance from sinful acts and attitudes (including homosexuality)) is synonymous with judging those outside the Church as you seem to be arguing then you are faced with quite a dilemma are you not? How do you propose to resolve this dilemma?”

Again, the Bible does not teach repentance as a prerequisite to salvation.

With all due respect, I am wondering what kind of a gospel you are advocating because it does not seem to me to be the Biblical one (Matt.3:2; 4:17; Mk.1:15; 6:12; Lk.13:3; 13:5; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 17:30; 26:20; Gal.1:6-10)?! The Bible clearly teaches that repentance is the first step in the initiation process into the body of Christ (the ekklesia those who are "called out" from the world) and therefore into salvation, for there is no salvation outside of the redeemed community of living Biblical faith (by which I mean inclusive of all true believers throughout human history but not of the institution of either the Roman Catholic Church or any other man-made religious institution) I should therefore be grateful if you would please explain your position?

"Quote:
1 Cor 6:11
11 And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God. NAS
Notice the past tense in this verse? “Were sanctified,” means that at the moment of salvation God has set you apart; in one sense sanctification is the completed work of God. However, sanctification is also a continuing process of learning through the power and ministry of the Holy Spirit."

With respect, this does not alter the fact that the Biblical gospel commands people to "repent and believe" not "believe and repent". It is the repentance which must come first.

""NEVER learn what the Bible says...
ALWAYS learn what the Bible ALSO says!"

I like this; maybe you should learn what it also says."

I already have (Matt.7:1-5)

"Have you ever heard of Arthur Pink? He wrote an excellent book titled “The Sovereignty of God”. Pink is a 5-point Calvinist and although I reject Calvinistic theology I did learn a lot from reading Pink’s books. Another man you might consider reading is Jonathon Edward’s he is considered the best theologian America every produced. I would especially recommend his sermon “Sinners in the hands of an angry God.” Edward’s preaching is credited for the Great Revival of the mid 1700’s."

I am familiar with both Arthur W. Pink and Jonathan Edwards and I own, and have read, copies of both books to which you refer though I must confess it is quite some time ago since I last read either book.

"Quote:
Can a lost (unregenerate) man exercise a saving faith in Christ without first being regenerated by the Holy Spirit?

The Dallas Theological Seminary doctrinal statement says, "Yes". Edwards, the Reformers, and all major protestant confessions of faith since the Reformation say, "No"

[url]http://www.jonathanedwards.com/


So, with a little research Simonline, you will see that my belief is not just my own."

I'll give you another of the quotes I often use in my signatures...

"Truth is still true even if no-one believes it. Falsehood is still false even if everyone believes it." Truth does not stand or fall based on the number of people who believe it but rather it stands on the immutable character of God.

"Scott Schalchlin, asked a question that I answered through personal experience. As far as I can tell from responses on this thread I am the only one to answer his direct question with a direct answer. Now, Simonline, have you seen any fruit from your way of ministering to the unsaved gay or lesbian? I have, God has blessed my ministry with fruit. I will not argue with success.

I am not in a position to comment on the success or otherwise of your ministry nor do I believe it would be prudent of me to do so. Therefore I shall leave you to the tender mercies of Christ and allow him to be the only true judge of the success or otherwise of your ministry.

Every blessing,

Simonline.

[Aineo]

Well Sinomline, you have almost convinced me I need to change my perspective. However, I have a couple of questions.



"We seem to have diametrically opposed and apparently contradictory doctrines taught in Scripture. But, do we? I see both of these doctrines as true. Let me see if I can give you a simile that makes sense. I view both of these doctrines as Biblical truth and compare them to railroad tracks and the Gospel as a locomotive. If you remove either track the Gospel will crash. Many Christians stand on one doctrine or the other, and argue to defeat the one they don’t like."

Excuse me but doesn't this contradict your earlier statement that "Men come to repentance through the will of God, not by an exercise of free will."(which is how I came to the conclusion that you are a Calvinist)?

I agree this does appear to be a contradiction, however, for doctrines are taught in Scripture and they cannot be reconciled through proof texting, (which I despise, although I fall into that trap myself) but more about that later.

"Repentance is a man-made doctrine not backed up in Scripture."?! Are we reading the same Bible (Matt.3:2; 4:17; Mk.1:15; 6:12; Lk.13:3; 13:5; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 17:30; 26:20)?!

Let’s looks at the whole context of the verses you are referencing. Christ’s earthly ministry was only to the Jews. He made that quite clear.

[jjf1990]

Quick statement or rant...
Somebody else posted on this forum that in America there is 1 ordained minister for every 200 people, not sure if it is 100% true. But I do suspect that most people in this country know the difference between right and wrong. Like why Sunday is Sunday for, Thou shall not steal, murder etc. This makes them accountable to it. This is the way which I see how God has been using the Old Testament in this country over the past 60 years which satan has tried everything in his power to stop.

But a few questions...
Most Atheists knows the Bible better then most Christians do and most call themselves ex-christians. This makes them just as accountable as the Jews! What should be preached to this group?

Most Gay Activisit knows the Bible better then most Christians do! This makes them just as accountable as the Jews was! What should be preached to this group?

Quick statement or rant...
Is all the Bible real pretty words which men really want to hear?
But should they not be told anyhow even if it offends them and they get mad at you?