PhenomenonVFX: ^^^Dude, u I understand. What u are saying in essence is that the OP's assertion is just Striklym's imagination and his own personal sentiment and that he has nothing scriptural to back it up with. I totally get u. That is why I directed my above comment which u quoted to Bizmahn. I dont seem to get the dude. He is just arguing with emotions. Unless u and Bizmahn are one and the same.

As to Striklymi's lack of scriptural backing, I think he has provided one or two passages to back up his sentiments. He is saying that God doesnt deal in white and black like we humans do. There are so many grey areas which God takes into account. Hence the statement: “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you."

I only called your attention because of your earlier post, when he addressed me saying "Never mind". Since you understand, me that's cool. However, I really am not asking for scriptural backing, since he stated it clearly that he is not talking about those bound by the scriptures. I will rather not go into the scripture quoted so as not to waste time on the obvious(which he knows). No, I am taking his cue, so I left scripture and went to nature. The proof I need is for him to show me any society where homosexuality was practiced as what is right to do. It could be common at a time but you need to tell me it was accepted as right. If it was not accepted as right by any societal or natural law,then it is wrong, and any one practicing it is breaking the law. As per not going to heaven,I am not God and will not sentence.

striktlymi: Afternoon Sync,

Apologies for seemingly 'brushing off' your second post...my intent was different...



You are right, no one has any excuse for not doing what is right because like you suggested, 'natural laws' are firmly entrenched in the heart of every individual.

However, the principles of right or wrong conduct varies in each society and before the evolution of morality there have been some inherently wrong acts which were 'overlooked' by even God himself.

Lets take the case of Abram as an example. He took up another wife at the request of Sarai...God never condemned him for doing that but if we do it today, it would be regarded as adultery and the individual would be in danger of losing his/her soul.


In ancient China and some other communities, homosexuality is not seen as a morally reprehensible act...even some sect in taoism do not see it as a sin against God...

Nah mehn...it's not about being intolerant; I get put off when someone implies a different meaning from my comments.

Lol!!!

You don't need my permission to defer from my views...I also express my disagreements with some viewpoints when it is appropriate.

I will not talk about Abram and his other wife,'cos we all saw God's stand there. But I thank you for the bolded, will do a little study on that.

Syncan:

I will not talk about Abram and his other wife,'cos we all saw God's stand there. But I thank you for the bolded, will do a little study on that.

Cool!!!

striktlymi:


Cool!!!

Bro, here is what I was afraid of:

1. Ancient China- "Writings from the Liu Song Dynasty claimed that homosexuality was as common as heterosexuality in the late 3rd century: All the gentlemen and officials esteemed it. All men in the realm followed this fashion to the extent that husbands and wives were estranged. Resentful unmarried women became jealous".[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_China

2. Ancient Greek- "...however, was seen as demeaning for the passive partner, and outside the socially accepted norm.[6]
"Given the importance in Greek society of cultivating the masculinity of the adult male and the perceived feminizing effect of being the passive partner, relations between adult men of comparable social status were considered highly problematic, and usually associated with social stigma"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greece

3. Tao religion - "All major religions in ancient China have some sort of codex, which have traditionally been interpreted as being against exclusive homosexuality when it interferes with continuation of the family lineage..."
http://history.cultural-china.com/en/171History11947.html

The above raises a red flag in my head, it could be a trend at a time but I still doubt if it was ever right.

^^^^Hmmm. Interesting how u put it. Striktlymi over to u.

Hmmmm...I see your point but let's analyze your findings...

Syncan:

Bro, here is what I was afraid of:

1. Ancient China- "Writings from the Liu Song Dynasty claimed that homosexuality was as common as heterosexuality in the late 3rd century: All the gentlemen and officials esteemed it. All men in the realm followed this fashion to the extent that husbands and wives were estranged. Resentful unmarried women became jealous".[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_China

From the above, we can see that the people do not regard homosexuality in itself as morally wrong...it is accepted by the community...

The first case has to do with men who are bisexuals...they are married already and still decide to 'cheat' on their wives. If cheating is morally wrong in that community, then the men necessarily do wrong and they will be held culpable for it.

For the case of the single ladies being jealous, I will take that as a none issue because even with heterosexual relationships, we see ladies who are jealous because of the attention being shown to their female friends by males...

However, if someone is strictly a homosexual and decides to be with one partner (assuming it is against morals for them to have more than one partner) then the individual, in my opinion, has no case to answer because what he does is not against what he or she knows to be in line with good morals.

Syncan:
2. Ancient Greek- "...however, was seen as demeaning for the passive partner, and outside the socially accepted norm.[6]
"Given the importance in Greek society of cultivating the masculinity of the adult male and the perceived feminizing effect of being the passive partner, relations between adult men of comparable social status were considered highly problematic, and usually associated with social stigma"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greece

If in line with good conscience the society above see homosexuality as morally inappropriate then those who engage in the act necessarily do wrong and can be held liable for the wrong committed; imo.

Syncan:
3. Tao religion - "All major religions in ancient China have some sort of codex, which have traditionally been interpreted as being against exclusive homosexuality when it interferes with continuation of the family lineage..."
http://history.cultural-china.com/en/171History11947.html

The above really does not state that Taoist see homosexuality as wrong...Taoists have a god they call 'the rabbit god' who fell in love with a man and is kind of like the patron god for homosexuals.

Syncan:
The above raises a red flag in my head, it could be a trend at a time but I still doubt if it was ever right.

Homosexuality in all its form is WRONG!!! But whether an individual would be punished for this goes beyond what we see as wrong, but what the individual 'know' to be wrong...for some of the cases above, homosexuality is not regarded as a morally unacceptable act.

PhenomenonVFX: @bizmahn
What I seem to understand from the OP is that it asserts that every sin committed in ignorance will most likely be forgiven by God. He gave homosexuality as an example to make his point but he extends it to every other sin.
"Any sin committed in ignorance will not be held against the sinner" is what it seems to be saying.
Now I dont believe in biblical folktales, like the story of Soddom and Gomorrah, but indulge me for a moment. In that story, we are NOT told that the people committed their sins in ignorance. It was like they knew what they were doing was wrong and I doubt homosexuality was d only wrong thing they were doing. Even when the angels came to visit Lot, they wanted to r.ape the angels. That means they would have still rap.ed visiting women also. For Lot not wanting to give the angels to them shows that he knew what was right from wrong. That shows that most of the men there knew the same too. They just wanted to r.ape the men. If ra.ping of men had been a usual practice there I dont think Lot would have settled there because they would have raped him too. Or maybe they did
But the OP is talking about a situation when the gays know no better. Such as is the case in some ancient cultures where homosexuality is norm.
So u see u are the one reading this all wrong. Or maybe it is me.

I can tell you that I'm quite sure he is just trying to change direction now that he knows that even morally backward folks here disdain his mind jolting willful error.His original intention was fully directed at all homosexuals & prostitutes.You know this by scripture he quoted regarding prostitutes carefully leaving out the actual meaning directed at repentant prostitutes.

striktlymi: ^^^

Spot on man...you are spot on!!!

Abeg make we hear.You are just trying to change direction now.I've always had strong reservations about you beyond the niceties you portray.Its good God allowed this to happen so we know where everyone belongs.Maybe God is answering my prayer to expose all false teachers on this forum.

bizmahn:

Abeg make we hear.You are just trying to change direction now.I've always had strong reservations about you beyond the niceties you portray.Its good God allowed this to happen so we know where everyone belongs.Maybe God is answering my prayer to expose all false teachers on this forum.

Never mind!

PhenomenonVFX: @bizmahn
What I seem to understand from the OP is that it asserts that every sin committed in ignorance will most likely be forgiven by God. He gave homosexuality as an example to make his point but he extends it to every other sin.
"Any sin committed in ignorance will not be held against the sinner" is what it seems to be saying.

I tell you moreover that if this fella was only trying to address the sin of ignorance he would have fully indicated it as the topic of this thread but by the way he specifically chose homosexuals without clearly pointing to the sin of ignorance while everybody else yelled, you know clearly he had something else in mind.Or are you now suggesting striktlymi has suddenly began to lack vocabulary because of ga'ys.

bizmahn:

I tell you moreover that if this fella was only trying to address the sin of ignorance he would have fully indicated it as the topic of this thread but by the way he specifically chose homosexuals without clearly pointing to the sin of ignorance while everybody else yelled, you know clearly he had something else in mind.Or are you know suggesting striktlymi has suddenly began to lack vocabulary because of ga'ys.

Damn dude. U would make one fine conspiracy theorist.

striktlymi: Evening peeps,

First of, I am a Christian and I believe firmly that homosexuality is wrong in its entirety...

Having said that, I believe firmly that some persons who have this intimate orientation will also find their way into God's kingdom...

I know the subject of ones intimate orientation is a touchy one for most Christians (if not all), and it is strongly frowned against in sacred scriptures, to the extent that St. Paul explicitly reveals that 'they' will NOT make heaven...or did he now?

Having had cause to reflect on the words of Paul and matching this against the justice and mercy of God, I have reasons to believe that God's word as revealed by the spirit through Paul is taken out of context...

Whether we like it or not, there is evidence to suggest that homosexuality predates sacred scriptures. The act was practiced by many who had no knowledge of God or of Christ. I am of the opinion that a number of those who practiced it then believed that the act does not negate their sense of morality as it was seen in their time...

Taken this as a given, it can be said that some gay persons practised homosexuality with the purity of intention without knowing any better...it would hence be absurd to hold such persons responsible for any wrong act with respect to homosexuality...

As it stands today there are persons who are unaware of God as seen in the light of Christianity and for some of those persons, being gay is as natural as it comes...

I believe firmly that God will NEVER turn his 'back' on them as long as they are sincere in their resolve and do what is right in line with the dictates of 'good' conscience.

wow!

Have you forgotten that since they forgot to retain God in their knowledge, He gave them over to a reprobate mind to do what seems right in their own counsel? #Think on it...

Oxygenmayo: Have you forgotten that since they forgot to retain God in their knowledge, He gave them over to a reprobate mind to do what seems right in their own counsel? #Think on it...

Sorry Oxy, I am trying hard to understand your post but it's not working out for me...

striktlymi:

Sin is never permissible! Sin is always wrong irrespective of who commits it or whether it is done in ignorance or not; but not every sin one commits would merit eternal damnation...there are some factors to consider.

If one commits fornication without knowing any better, then the individual can be excused, if and only if, the individual is sincere. The sincerity of each person can only be determined by that individual and God.

Sorry,it's taken me a while

@1st bold: What are these factors?

@2nd bold: Consider that some Islamic terrorists act with utmost sincerity. They really do believe they are fighting God's cause. Would they make heaven too?

Also, I'd like your view on Leviticus 4.

striktlymi: Hmmmm...I see your point but let's analyze your findings...

1.From the above, we can see that the people do not regard homosexuality in itself as morally wrong...it is accepted by the community...


2.For the case of the single ladies being jealous, I will take that as a none issue because even with heterosexual relationships, we see ladies who are jealous because of the attention being shown to their female friends by males...


3.The above really does not state that Taoist see homosexuality as wrong...Taoists have a god they call 'the rabbit god' who fell in love with a man and is kind of like the patron god for homosexuals.



4.Homosexuality in all its form is WRONG!!! But whether an individual would be punished for this goes beyond what we see as wrong, but what the individual 'know' to be wrong...for some of the cases above, homosexuality is not regarded as a morally unacceptable act.

Thanks for your response.I have tagged the above as still grey since we agreed on the others:

1. What I see in those places are a tolerance for it and not acceptance as right. It's just like the society tolerate what we call fornication in the christian parlance. Not that any tradition supports it as right.

2. Had the unmarried ladies grown up with the acceptance that some men are to be with fellow men, It wouldn't have warranted a situation strong enough to be recorded in history that "Resentful unmarried women became jealous". Be sure to note that the historian called it a "Fashion" and not a "culture", More so note the use of "became" in his narrative.

3. I think the answer to the second question of musKeeto above will take care of this, so I'll wait for that answer.

4. Ignorance of the law under which you are, does not seem an excuse to me. Well...For God I still leave the judgement anyway.

SMH
I reserve to comment

musKeeto:
Sorry,it's taken me a while

@1st bold: What are these factors?

@2nd bold: Consider that some Islamic terrorists act with utmost sincerity. They really do believe they are fighting God's cause. Would they make heaven too?

Also, I'd like your view on Leviticus 4.

Syncan:




Thanks for your response.I have tagged the above as still grey since we agreed on the others:

1. What I see in those places are a tolerance for it and not acceptance as right. It's just like the society tolerate what we call fornication in the christian parlance. Not that any tradition supports it as right.

2. Had the unmarried ladies grown up with the acceptance that some men are to be with fellow men, It wouldn't have warranted a situation strong enough to be recorded in history that "Resentful unmarried women became jealous". Be sure to note that the historian called it a "Fashion" and not a "culture", More so note the use of "became" in his narrative.

3. I think the answer to the second question of musKeeto above will take care of this, so I'll wait for that answer.

4. Ignorance of the law under which you are, does not seem an excuse to me. Well...For God I still leave the judgement anyway.

Permit me to respond to these later on...I am quite tired from the day's activities.

Morning musky,

musKeeto:
Sorry,it's taken me a while

No P!

musKeeto:
@1st bold: What are these factors?

For those who sincerely have no knowledge of the Christian viewpoint of God and his moral code, the following are some factors we need to consider before we can adjudge a wrong to be grave:

1) Does the wrong go against the moral code of this individual?

2) What does the individual's conscience tell him, even when the society view the wrong as okay.

3) Was the individual coerced to perform the wrong or did he do it deliberately.

4) What was the individual's disposition after knowing what he did was wrong?

5) Is the wrong serious?

6) Is the individual favourably disposed to 'repentance'?

7) Is the individual sincere or is he feigning sincerity and making himself believe it?

8.) There are some other factors too which may need to be looked at on a case by case basis

musKeeto:
@2nd bold: Consider that some Islamic terrorists act with utmost sincerity. They really do believe they are fighting God's cause. Would they make heaven too?

It has been my view that not every terrorist will be damned.

If a terrorist is sincere, does what he believes to be right in line with the dictates of good conscience and truly does not know any better then I hold the opinion that this individual will not be damned.

musKeeto:
Also, I'd like your view on Leviticus 4.

The underlying theme of Leviticus 4 is that every sin whether done knowingly or unknowingly is wrong and needs to be purged.

Jesus gave us a summary of Leveticus 4 when he said:

Luke 12:48
New International Version (NIV)
48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

Every sin committed is wrong and needs to be 'purged' whether we are aware of the wrong act or not...There is a difference between a toddler who poo in his pants and a healthy adult who does the same.

The toddler performs the act without knowing what he is doing but the adult has foreknowledge of this deed. This wrong will not count against the toddler in the same way as it would count against the adult.

Now, this toddler, though not guilty of any wrongdoing, still needs to get cleaned up because poo is definitely not 'delicious'...

That is what Leveticus 4 and Jesus were saying in essence...Though not everyone can be held liable for a wrong but everyone needs to be cleansed when a wrong is committed.

Morning Sync,

Syncan:

Thanks for your response.I have tagged the above as still grey since we agreed on the others:

Okay, cool!

Syncan:
1. What I see in those places are a tolerance for it and not acceptance as right. It's just like the society tolerate what we call fornication in the christian parlance. Not that any tradition supports it as right.

I agree to some degree but the society did not just tolerate, they see it as not being against morals. I have learnt to appreciate various cultures and their sense of morality...

What the Christian might call fornication might just be what the next culture esteem as perfectly good.

In our sample society, we should realize that there would be kids who would be brought up to believe that there is nothing wrong with being gay.

We know only too well the level of influence a society can exert on children and their belief system...considering this, it won't be out of place to say that there would be people who would practice the gay act without knowing that it is wrong.

Syncan:
2. Had the unmarried ladies grown up with the acceptance that some men are to be with fellow men, It wouldn't have warranted a situation strong enough to be recorded in history that "Resentful unmarried women became jealous". Be sure to note that the historian called it a "Fashion" and not a "culture", More so note the use of "became" in his narrative.

The case for the unmarried women is really not peculiar to gays only as I have pointed out before. We can't say that heterosexuals should stop getting married because some persons feel jealous and resentful...its just normal.

I agree that the historian called it fashion but you should realize that fashion is still part of culture...culture is the way of life of a people...we can't rule out the way the people view fashion as not being part of their culture or way of life.

Syncan:
3. I think the answer to the second question of musKeeto above will take care of this, so I'll wait for that answer.

Okay, cool!

Syncan:
4. Ignorance of the law under which you are, does not seem an excuse to me. Well...For God I still leave the judgement anyway.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse for those who are old enough to get a copy of this law and read them. But do note that what one society considers to be good laws might be frowned at by another society.

The law in itself is a subjective measure...like for our sample community, being gay is not against the law or any moral...so when one performs the act, he or she is not against any known law.

Anyways, Jesus himself has given us reasons to believe that ignorance can be an excuse in God's way of judging.

striktlymi: Morning Sync,



Okay, cool!



I agree to some degree but the society did not just tolerate, they see it as not being against morals. I have learnt to appreciate various cultures and their sense of morality...

What the Christian might call fornication might just be what the next culture esteem as perfectly good.

In our sample society, we should realize that there would be kids who would be brought up to believe that there is nothing wrong with being gay.

We know only too well the level of influence a society can exert on children and their belief system...considering this, it won't be out of place to say that there would be people who would practice the gay act without knowing that it is wrong.



The case for the unmarried women is really not peculiar to gays only as I have pointed out before. We can't say that heterosexuals should stop getting married because some persons feel jealous and resentful...its just normal.

I agree that the historian called it fashion but you should realize that fashion is still part of culture...culture is the way of life of a people...we can't rule out the way the people view fashion as not being part of their culture or way of life.



Okay, cool!

Ignorance of the law is no excuse for those who are old enough to get a copy of this law and read them. But do note that what one society considers to be good laws might be frowned at by another society.

The law in itself is a subjective measure...like for our sample community, being gay is not against the law or any moral...so when one performs the act, he or she is not against any known law.

Anyways, Jesus himself has given us reasons to believe that ignorance can be an excuse in God's way of judging.

"Father forgive them for they know not what they do". Though some of your arguments I can puncture quite easily,I will not deny that I understand you very well as you can see from the bold. However I have understood that not all laws can a man be Ignorant of, except through his own fault,for St. Paul says it is written in our hearts (Rom2:14). Case includes "Honour your father and mother", "Thou shall not commit Adultery" etc. It indeed still remains academic to me that a person could have same sex with clear conscience, and never having heard or known it to be wrong. If such exists,I hope God forgives, "for they know not what they do". Thanks.

Syncan:


"Father forgive them for they know not what they do". Though some of your arguments I can puncture quite easily,I will not deny that I understand you very well as you can see from the bold. However I have understood that not all laws can a man be Ignorant of, except through his own fault,for St. Paul says it is written in our hearts (Rom2:14). Case includes "Honour your father and mother", "Thou shall not commit Adultery" etc. It indeed still remains academic to me that a person could have same sex with clear conscience, and never having heard or known it to be wrong. If such exists,I hope God forgives, "for they know not what they do". Thanks.

Cool and thanks!

Roman 2:15:-which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.(Authorized KJV bible).
-
Sodom possibly never had gospel ministers but I believe on account of the above scriptures they merited destruction.

striktlymi: Evening peeps,


it can be said that some gay persons practised homosexuality with the purity of intention without knowing any better... it would hence be absurd to hold such persons responsible for any wrong act with respect to homosexuality...

Lobatan...

Ishilove:
Lobatan...

Lol!!!

striktlymi:

Lol!!!

Smh