Category Archives: Uncategorized

Homosexuality part 2

This is part two of the homosexuality subject. I’m focusing on the three verses that Matthew uses from the NT.
Let’s recap the three verses Matthew uses from the NT. They are: Romans 1:26-27, 1st Corinthians 6:9, and 1st Timothy 1:10

Romans 1:26-27 “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”

1st Corinthians 6:9 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,”

1st Timothy 1:10 “for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,”

Let’s start with the verses from Romans. Matthew tries to make the claim that what Paul really is condemning is lust and lustful behavior. If that was true, then Paul would have plainly stated that. If you read the Bible, people are pretty clear in what they mean. They don’t say one thing and mean another. Paul also clearly states that men with men and women with women is unnatural and that men with women and women with men is natural.

Matthew claims that Paul never mentions love, commitment and faithfulness. Why would he? Paul was clear that it’s a vile passion and unnatural.
Now, Matthew only quotes verses 26-27 and claims Paul is targeting the issue of lust, but if we back up and add verse 25 for context, it changes the context. This is what 25 says: “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” If you add verse 26 and read verses 25 and 26 together, this is what you have:

25-26: “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:”

Notice what 26 starts out saying: “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections” What Cause? According to Matthew, it’s lust. But, if you back up, the real reason is that they changed the truth of God for a lie, not lust, as Matthew says. The homosexuals claim we cherry-pick verses and leave things out, yet, it is Matthew who left out verse 25 and cherry-picked the verse he wanted. Matthew claims Paul is saying this all stems from a burst of excess, yet that’s not what Paul says. Matthew claims that in the ancient world, men who practiced homosexuality, were married and therefore it stemmed from lust. The problem with this reasoning is that you need to prove that. Bring in historical evidence to support this, otherwise it is simply your opinion and theory.

Even if you could somehow make the case for this theory, I have proved in part one, God condemned homosexuality in the OT, which is also part of the ancient world. Claiming you’re married and having gay sex on the side is still outside of God’s plan, and you’re not able to claim you’re a true believer in God living like this.

Matthew tries to use 1 Corinthians 11:14. “Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?”
This is the only verse in the Bible that says this, but many verses in both Old and New Testament claim homosexuality is wrong and condemned in the eyes of God. Paul does not say having long hair is a sin, or that it is an abomination. We’re not told men with long hair will be kept out of heaven. The verse claims nature declares men with long hair is a shame, not God. Also, as I said before, define long? One person has hair two inches long, and that’s long compared to a bald guy; but a guy with hair that’s 6 inches long is really long compared to the guy with hair that’s only two inches, and now that 2 inch hair is no longer long, but seems short.

Now, let’s look at 1st Corinthians 6:9-10.
1Co 6:9 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”

It is very plain that these verses say that homosexuals will not enter into the kingdom of heaven. It’s not just saying homosexuals but a list of other people who will not either. For Matthew Vines’ purpose and mine, were only talking about homosexuals.

Now, I will let Matthew speak for himself on this subject. This was taken from Matthew’s Tumbler account. http://matthewvines.tumblr.com/

Matthew Vines says:

The word translated as “abusers of themselves with mankind” in the King James is a compound word. In the Greek, it is “arsenokoites,” “arsen” meaning “male,” and “koites” meaning “bed,” generally with a sexual connotation. And so the argument is that we can determine the meaning of this term from its etymology: male plus bed in the plural form must, then, refer to men who sleep with other men. But there are several problems with this approach. First, simply looking at a word’s component parts doesn’t necessarily tell us what it means. There are many English words where this approach would fail: for example, the words “understand,” “butterfly,” “honeymoon.” The component parts here – “honey” and “moon” – really don’t tell us anything about what that word actually means. In order to understand what a word means, you have to consider how it’s used in context. The problem with the word “abusers of themselves with mankind” – arsenokoites – is that it was used extremely rarely in ancient Greek. In fact, Paul’s use of it in 1 Corinthians is considered to be its first recorded use anywhere. And after Paul, the few places that it appears tend to be in lists of general vices, which are not the most helpful of contexts. Fortunately, however, many of these lists are grouped by category, and this Greek word consistently appears among sins that are of a primarily economic nature rather than those that are primarily sexual. This and some other contextual data indicate that this term referred to some kind of economic exploitation, likely through sexual means. This may have involved forms of same-sex behavior, but coercive and exploitative forms. There is no contextual support for linking this term to loving, faithful relationships. The other word, “effeminate,” in the King James is “malakos” in the Greek. This was used a lot in ancient Greek, and it means “soft.” It was a form of trash talking, like saying “You’re fat,” “lazy,” “marshmellow,” or “chicken.”

In the final passage, 1 Timothy 1:10, the first word meaning – “abusers of themselves with mankind” – reappears in a list of people Paul says the law was written against. Here, the translation is “them that defile themselves with mankind.” The translation issues and debates here are the same as those from 1 Corinthians. Again, the strongest inference that can be drawn from other uses of this term is that it referred to economic exploitation through sexual coercion — possibly involving same-sex activity, but a very different kind than what we are discussing.

Back to what Rick says:
We see this from blue letter bible Greek Lexicon: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G733

“one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual”

KJV Translation Count — Total: 2x
The KJV translates Strongs G733 in the following manner: abuser of (one’s) self with mankind (1x), defile (one’s) self with mankind (1x).
Thayer’s Greek Lexicon

G733
Word / Phrase / Strong’s Search
Concordance Results Using KJV

Strong’s Number G733 matches the Greek ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoitēs),
which occurs 2 times in 2 verses in the Greek concordance of the KJV

Tools specific to 1Co 6:9

1Co 6:9

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,” G733

Tools specific to 1Ti 1:10

1Ti 1:10

“For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, G733 for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

Lexicon :: Strong’s G733 – arsenokoitēs
ἀρσενοκοίτης
Transliteration
arsenokoitēs

Pronunciation
är-se-no-koi’-tās (Key)
Part of Speech
masculine noun

Root Word (Etymology)
From ἄρρην (G730) and κοίτη (G2845)

Vines points out that the word is a compound term made up of arsēn, which means “male” and koitē that means “bed” with it referring to a bed being used in a sexual manner (we get the word ‘coitus’ for sexual intercourse from it). To make his case against the word meaning homosexual sex, Vines argues that you cannot easily take compound terms and create a word that has an explicit meaning from them. He uses the words “Butterfly” and “Honeymoon” as examples.

However, this argument that Vines and other homosexual apologists use overlooks something critically important. They fail to mention that the Bible of Paul and of his readers in the first century was the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament. Why is that important?

When you look at the Septuagint’s translation of Leviticus 20:13, which is one of the verses condemning homosexual behavior, something very interesting is found: the compound word Paul uses for homosexual in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy:

The text could not be any more plain – arsēn and koitē are side by side and form the homosexual term that Paul used in his New Testament epistles. This fact devastates Vines’ argument that asserts a person cannot know the real meaning behind many words formed via compound terms. In this case, it is very clear.

Moreover, Vines and others promoting homosexual Christianity admit that the Leviticus passage condemns homosexual sex, but they attempt to diffuse the prohibition by saying there are “many things that these passages say that don’t apply to Christians today.”

Paul evidently disagreed where God’s holiness code is in view, and in particular, where homosexuality is concerned.

The passages in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy dealing with homosexual behavior do condemn homosexual sex and warns those practicing that lifestyle of the consequences that will come from living that lifestyle. However, it is interesting in Vines’ message that he didn’t keep reading in 1 Corinthians where Paul says: “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.” (1 Corinthians 6:11). Why does he ignore this verse?

Vines doesn’t cite the passage because Paul’s statement destroys the idea that homosexuals can be called Christians. Paul tells his readers that such practices were evidences of their old life, but now that they have been born again, they have new holy affections and desires, which stand in opposition to the way they used to live.

Now onto the final verse, 1st timothy 1:10 “For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

This is what Matthew Vines says about this passage:
In the final passage, 1 Timothy 1:10, the first word – “abusers of themselves with mankind” – reappears in a list of people Paul says the law was written against. Here, the translation is “them that defile themselves with mankind.” The translation issues and debates here are the same as those from 1 Corinthians. Again, the strongest inference that can be drawn from other uses of this term is that it referred to economic exploitation through sexual coercion—possibly involving same-sex activity, but a very different kind than what we are discussing.

Rick says, Go back and read my part 1 topic and re-read what I just wrote. Homosexual lifestyle goes against sound doctrine.

Homosexuality issue part 1

In part one, I cover the three verses from the OT that Matthew mentions. Part two will cover the three verses from the NT that Matthew mentions.

This newest post will cover again the issue of homosexuality and the ignorance of many people who try to defend it.
I have noticed a serious trend among people who range from atheists to people who claim many different various religions. Here is the issue. I was looking on a friend’s facebook account at the topic of homosexuality and how an author, Matthew Vines, had a video that talked about 6 bible verses that talk about homosexuality. According to him, this is what they really mean. So here is a link to view the video M-Vines. I posted that I have a website and some podcasts stating I did a two-part series covering these verses from a friend of Matthew; his name is Justin Lee. I simply said that I can and have addressed all the issues that Matthew brings up, and less than 5 minutes later someone posts that they will not go to my website and stated how ignorant I am.

I pointed out to this person a few truths. They were the ignorant person since they admitted they don’t care what I said and did not want to know what I said. They admitted they will not visit my website, so how can they claim I am ignorant when they don’t know what I said? This also shows a huge amount of hypocrisy since this person as well as many others claim we Christians cherry-pick Bible verses and don’t really know the Bible as well as we claim. All these types of people can do is call names and attack others, but have no real answers and cannot really defend what they believe. I sadly find that this happens way more often than people care to admit or think about. The issue is that people are claiming Christians are wrong or were ignorant, all the while these people won’t and cannot honestly debate people like me or show us where and how we’re wrong. In addition to my two podcasts on this issue, I will also write about it and add a few more things that were not in my radio shows.

First, I want to ask a question. Why do people, be it atheists or people of any given religion give Christians a hard time on the issue of homosexuality and claim we cherry-pick verses from the Bible, or claim we hate gay people, and they devote youtube videos and create websites to debate all of these things? Yet, when it comes to looking at what Muslims believe and teach, the homosexuals are silent on this issue. I think it’s really sad that even the homosexuals will not go after Muslims on this issue. I don’t see homosexuals going over to Iran, Iraq, or any heavy populated country that is run by Muslims. They openly claim that they kill homosexuals and do not tolerate them. Funny how I never meet a Christian that says, we will kill you for being gay. If you go over to Israel or any country that has lots of Christians running around, they’re not claiming that they will kill you. Muslims do, and guess what? The homosexuals target the Christians and not Muslims. Why? Are they scared? I bet that’s the case.

Secondly, why do homosexuals claim they love people of the same sex? Let’s use men first for this example. Why do we have two gay men, but one sounds and acts like a women? I’m not talking transgender. I’m talking two gay men, but one starts to act as if he is a female, talks with a feminine voice, grows his hair long as a women, and/or tries walking almost like a women. Or take two lesbians- one acts like a man, dresses like a man, cuts her hair real short, tries talking with a masculine voice, etc. If you’re a man and want a women, get one! Or if you’re a women and want a man, get one! Don’t be a man who finds another man and then has them act like a women, or a women who finds a women and has her act like a man. To me, that’s no different than the vegans and vegetarians who claim to hate eating meat, yet start naming vegetable and plant based meals after meat products, like Toufurkey or making vegan cheese or soy bacon. Either eat meat or don’t; either claim to want to be gay and own it or don’t.

In Matthew Vines’ book, “God and the Gay Christian,” the author addressed six passages that he argues are the main barriers to homosexuals being embraced as Christians: Genesis 19:5; Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9; and 1 Timothy 1:10. His goal is to give a fresh view of old words, “to clarify…understanding of Scripture” (424). In Vines’ view, sexual orientation cannot be changed (489), but meaning of Scripture can. I believe that God’s Word doesn’t change, but sexual orientation can. How come Matthew claims sexual orientation cannot be changed, yet he ignores the fact that many homosexuals have come to know Jesus as Lord and then stopped living that life style, they either have married the opposite sex, or they admit that they will remain celibate and claim they no longer have feelings for the same sex. So, on that point, as with others, Matthew is clueless.

Vines neglected verses about homosexuality. He only discussed six passages summarized above. He side-stepped important verses like: 1 Cor. 6:9-10 that states homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of heaven or 1 Cor. 7:2 (“But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband”); Mark 10:6-9 (God made male and female in the beginning to join together as one flesh; “Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate”); and Hebrews 13:4 (“Let marriage be held in honor by all, and let the marriage bed be kept undefiled; for God will judge fornicators and adulterers”). Also, he did not address debatable, but challenging verses, about sexual immorality (Acts 15:29; 1 Cor. 5:1; 1 Cor. 10:8; 2 Cor. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 5:3; Col. 3:5; 1 Thess. 4:3-5; and Rev. 21:8). Even liberal Christians acknowledge that sexual immorality includes homosexual pederasty, which means, “sexual activity involving a man and a boy.”

Let’s go over all the verses Matthew uses and start with Genesis 19:5: “And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.”

Matthew claims that this verse in Genesis is the start of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and he claims that many people claim that God destroyed these cities for the reason of them being homosexuals. He claims this is false. Now, as a Bible believing Christian I agree with Matthew on this point, the cities were not destroyed for the reason of homosexuality. The Bible says pride is the first reason why the cities were destroyed by God.

“Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.” (Ezekiel 16:49, 50 KJV)

Now, I agree with this passage and want to say this: when homosexuals use this verse to say Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for these other reasons, they don’t tell the whole story. Here is what they don’t tell people, and I believe they purposely ignore all the things I am going to say, the first word in the Ezekiel passage is pride. That’s the first and foremost reason God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Homosexuals are full of pride and the Bible condemns pride and says that pride is the sin of the devil. All over the United States we have gay pride parades, homosexuals claiming gay pride, bumper stickers stating gay pride, etc. There’s a reason why the homosexuals don’t mention these things. It’s because they know what the Bible teaches and if they mention these things, then they know they will be held accountable and really cannot refute them or change them to say what they want.

Now, let’s look at some verses that mention pride.
Proverbs 8:13 “The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.”

Proverbs 11:2 “When pride cometh, then cometh shame: but with the lowly is wisdom.”

Mark 7:21-23 “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.”

1st Timothy 3:6 “Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.”

1st John 2:16 “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.”

Now the word pride appears in the KJV of the Bible 49 times, and almost every use of Pride is equated with evil in some way. The few times it is not are when it talks about a sea creature in the book of Job and when it speaks of Israel. If Matthew and Justin Lee were really truly honest and want the truth, they would address these issues. It is no real surprise that they cannot or will not. These types of people accuse Christians that don’t agree with them of cherry-picking verses. I added verses that they never touched, so it seems they are the ones cherry-picking, not me.

Now onto these verses: Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13.

Lev 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

Lev 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”

Lets start with Lev 18:22 first. Matthew claims there are other things in the O.T. that are abominations, like eating shellfish and having intercourse with a women while she is bleeding. Then, he uses Hebrews 8:13: “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”

Matthew, along with many other people, most likely have either never read the Bible, or they read it and either understand what it says, and simply mislead people by claiming things they know are wrong, or they don’t understand it and that’s why they believe what they do. So to explain all of this better, let’s go back to the beginning: Genesis.

We we start from the beginning and we find only the human race – no Jew, and no Gentile existed. The laws and priesthood did not exist. Here is the start of the Jewish nation:
Gen 17:9 “And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.”

Gen 17:10 “This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.”

Gen 17:11 “And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.”

Now, over in Exodus we find God saying:

Exo 19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

Exo 19:6 “And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.”

This was never said about any other people group or nation. The Jews were set apart and are being used by God.
The point of all of this is to help explain the purposes of all of the laws that many seem to fail to understand. The whole purpose of the nation of Israel was to be a light to the people and nations around them. But if they lived and acted like everyone else, how could they be a light to the nations?
Part of all of this was having a high priest who could stand before God and hear from God, then the priest would speak to the people. But the priest is like everyone else, he is a sinful human being and needed to have his sins removed. So they would sacrifice animals, like bulls and sheep.

Now all these laws given to the Jews, like not eating shellfish or having intercourse with a women who is bleeding or sleeping with animals or homosexuality, were to help keep the Jews separate from all the nations that did these things, and to keep them clean and pure.

Matthew either has no clue what he is talking about, or he is purposely leaving out information so he can believe what he wants and convince people his lifestyle is ok in the eyes of God. God did not create this old system and just toss it away as if it was a mistake, and then have this new system. This is where many people go wrong. Here is what Jesus said to the religious leaders: John 5:39 “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me.”

When Jesus said this, the NT did not exist yet, and Jesus was talking about the OT. All these laws and rules and ways of doing things speak of Jesus. The passover is all about Jesus, and Jesus is our high priest who can never die. In the OT, the children of Israel and even the people in Egypt who were not Jews could be saved if they were under the blood of the lamb. But again, both Jews and Gentiles who were not under the blood would die. So after Jesus died on the cross, we need to be covered in His blood in order to be saved. Jesus is our Passover Lamb.

John 6:53 “Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.”
John 6:54 “Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Eph 2:16 “And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:”

In the OT, we also see Moses speaking to God in the burning bush, and God says to Moses, I AM. Jesus said that He is that I AM of the burning bush and called Himself God: John 8:58 “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, ‘Before Abraham was, I am.'”
Jesus also claimed to be the Manna that fell from Heaven, and many other references to the OT are about Jesus.

So now Jesus is our high priest that can never die, and He also was the passover lamb that was slain for us. We read in Heb 10:1, Paul says, “For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.”

Heb 10:2-4 “For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.”

Now that Jesus is here, we no longer live by the OT laws. The 10 commandments are still in effect and we still live by them. We don’t have the list of ten and follow them that way, but Jesus said this:

Matthew 22:36-40 “Master, which is the great commandment in the law. Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

Now, I can put up a list of the ten commandments and sit here and say, I did not lie today, I did not murder today, I did not steal today, etc.
Or I can do as Jesus said and love God and love my neighbor, and then I won’t want to do all the rest of the stuff. If I love God, I won’t lie, or kill, etc. If I love my neighbor, I won’t covet his stuff, his wife, or anything else.

When Matthew mentions the two verses in Leviticus, he purposely left out this verse, (Lev 18:27) “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is an abomination.” He also left these other two verses out:

Lev 18:24-25 “Defile not yourselves in any of these things: for in all of these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: The land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.”

If you back up a few verses you will find the verses on Homosexuality, so it seems by leaving these verses out, Matthew is lying by omission and by being deceitful.

Matthew uses Romans 10:4 “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” Matthew should have also added these verses, yet no surprise he left them out.

Rom 10:5-6 “For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)”

Paul declares Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believes. The law cannot make a person righteous before God, nor can it give a person a righteous standing before God. For if the law could give a man a righteous standing before God, then it was not necessary for Christ to die. Jesus, in the garden, prayed, “Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me.” If what is possible? If salvation for man is possible by any other means, if man can be saved by the law, if man can be saved by his own efforts, by his good works, if a man can be saved by sincerity, then, God, let this cup pass from Me. Let the cross pass.

The law ended as I said in the sense that we don’t follow a list of rules, but we still follow the laws in the sense that we do as Jesus said, and that’s love God and love our neighbor.

One purpose of the law was do works. In other words, it was a works based system. Now, we are under grace and live by faith.

Rom 3:20-31 “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Wherefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.”

Now while we are under grace and not the law, that does not mean we can simply do what we want and live however we want and sin all we want, as some feel thats how it works. Here is what Scripture says about that:

Romans 6:
1″What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.
11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13 Do not offer any part of yourself to sin as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to him as an instrument of righteousness. 14 For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace. 15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! 16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. 19 I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness. 20 When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. 21 What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Rom 8:3 “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:”

Rom 9:31-32 “But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;”

Gal 2:16 “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

Gal 2:21 “I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.”

Gal 3:24 “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”

Heb 7:11-12 “If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.”

So, all the verses that speak of homosexuality in the OT did not just vanish and cease to exist. We see in the N.T. that homosexual acts are still said to be an abomination and wrong in the sight of God. No matter how much a gay person wants that to be false, it simply is not and cannot be supported by the scripture.

Are Mormons Christians?

Latter Day Saints, also known as LDS, desperately want to be known as Bible-believing Christians. LDS will tell you that they believe the same gospel as Christians do, and they get highly offended if you tell them they have a different gospel and are not Bible-believing Christians. Sadly, more and more Bible-believing Christians are believing the LDS are in fact Bible-believing Christians just like us. It’s getting to the point that Christians are joining hands with LDS and allowing them to work with them in sharing the gospel of Jesus with non-believers.

Well, here are plenty of quotes from LDS leaders and prophets sharing exactly what they think of the Bible and Christians.  Read them and then tell me, do you honestly believe they are still Bible-believing Christians? And if you do, can you support it from the Bible?  I will break these quotes down into different subjects to make this a little easier to understand.  

What LDS prophets and presidents have said about Christians:
Read 1 Nephi 14:10 “behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the lamb of god, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of god belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.”

Brigham Young: “with a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called christian world” (Journal of discourses 8:199).

3rd president John Taylor (Brigham young quotes Mr Taylor) “Brother Taylor has just said that the religions of the day were hatched in hell, the eggs were laid in hell, hatched on its borders, and kicked onto the earth” (J.O.D 6:176).

 Heber C. Kimball “Christians-those poor, miserable priests brother Brigham was speaking about-some of them are the biggest whoremasters there are on the earth” (J.O.D 5:89).

Now, let’s think about what these quotes all just said.  LDS want to be known as and called Bible-believing Christians, but a few original LDS prophets and presidents have all clearly stated what they think of Christians, so why would LDS want to be known as Christians?   If these prophets were to come back from the grave and were alive today, then they would not even recognize the LDS church today.

The LDS prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley, stated that LDS do not believe in the same Jesus as we Bible-believing Christians do.


In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President [Gordon B.] Hinckley spoke of those outside the [LDS] Church who say Latter-day Saints “do not believe in the traditional Christ.   No, I don’t.   The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak.   For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. He, together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages.” (Church News, June 20, 1998, 7)

“It is true that many of the Christian churches worship a different Jesus Christ than is worshipped by the Mormons or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” (LDS Seventy Bernard P. Brockbank, Ensign, May 1977, p.26 ).

If the prophet claims that he does not believe in the same Jesus as we Bible-believing Christians do, then how can LDS claim to believe that the LDS prophet?  The LDS prophet is the only person who speaks for God in the LSD church, and he says we do not have the same gospel, so why do the LDS claim to believe in the same Jesus as we do?

A tract published by the LDS Church in 1973 says this:

Christians speak often of the blood of Christ and its cleansing power. Much that is believed and taught on this subject, however, is such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose one’s salvation. For instance, many believe or pretend to believe that if we confess Christ with our lips and avow that we accept Him as our personal Savior, we are thereby saved. They say that His blood, without any other act than mere belief, makes us clean. (What the Mormons Think of Christ, 22)


10th  LDS President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote that “man may commit certain grievous sins–according to his light and knowledge–that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ. If then he would be saved, he must make sacrifice of his own life to atone–so far as in his power lies–for that sin, for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail…. Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that men may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent” (Doctrines of Salvation 1:134, 135).

LDS at one time taught the blood of Christ cannot cleanse us or save us.  As a Bible-believing Christain, do you agree with that?  If so, we need to talk.  If not, then how can LDS claim to be Christians?

Sadly, many Christians no longer believe the Bible as the Word of God.  If you claim to be a Christian and dont believe the Bible, then I question your salvation.  But that aside, if you believe the Bible to be the Word of God, and you feel LDS are Christians, then read these quotes.


Article eight of the LDS Articles of Faith reads, “We believe the Bible as far as it is translated correctly …”

Joseph Smith, the founder of the LDS Church, declared, “Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 327).

According to the Book of Mormon, only fools believe the Bible is a sufficient spiritual guide.

 2 Nephi 29:6 states, “Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible.”

Probably one of the most vocal LDS critics of the Bible was Apostle Orson Pratt. He claimed, “… who in his right mind could for one moment suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?” (Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, pg. 47.)

The Book of Mormon states that “when it [i.e., the Bible] proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord” (1 Ne. 13:24), but “after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, . . . many plain and precious things [are] taken away from the book” (1 Ne. 13:28).

“The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances. There must be something to suggest or to draw forth the command to answer the circumstance under which we are placed at the time” (Apostle Orson Hyde, October 6, 1854, Journal of Discourses 2:75).

“…who in his right mind, could for one moment, believe the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?” (Apostle Orson Pratt, Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, p.47.)

“As all informed persons know, the various versions of the Bible do not accurately record or perfectly preserve the words, thoughts, and intents of the original inspired authors” (Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.383).

Bible-believing Christians teach and believe that God the Father is eternal, not created, nor did He just come to be, yet LDS teach otherwise.

Milton Hunter from the council of the seventy, gospel through the ages pg 104: “Mormon prophets have CONTINUOSLY taught the sublime truth that God the eternal father was once a mortal man.”

 President Joseph.feilding.Smith, in the improvement era, vol 18 pg 81;
The PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH, teachings, pg 345-346;
Apostle James Talmage, Articles of Faith, pg 430;
Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer
Presdint lorenzo snow, gospel through the ages, pg 104
Apostle Orson Hyde, Quorum of the twelve; all taught and believed God was once a man.

Galatians 1:8-9 says,  “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.  As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”

According to the Bible, if anyone teaches another gospel, they will be eternally damned.  Mormons teach another gospel.  People who claim to be Christians, but believe Mormons are also Christians, have and are teaching another gospel.

Abortion vs Murder?

Abortion vs Murder?

I read this article on the news page.

Here is what I want people to think about and post your thoughts. Why is it when we read about these type of things, we get outraged and think this person is evil?  Yet if this same women went to have a partial Birth abortion, Most people would think nothing of it.

Sadly it’s still murder and the Baby will be born part way and then brutally murdered. Yet if a Doctor does this and calls it an abortion, then it’s ok and called women’s right to choose. So think about that.

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/police-utah-mom-admitted-to-killing-her-6-babies

Police: Utah mom admitted to killing her 6 babies

Authorities investigate a crime scene at a house in Pleasant Grove, Utah, Sunday, April 13, 2014.

PROVO, Utah (AP) — Authorities say a Utah woman accused of killing six babies that she gave birth to over 10 years told investigators that she either strangled or suffocated the children and then put them inside boxes in her garage.

According to a probable cause statement released by police Monday, Megan Huntsman said that between 1996 and 2006, she gave birth to at least seven babies at her home and that all but one of them were born alive.
Huntsman, 39, said she killed them immediately after they were born, and put their bodies inside the boxes. The statement said each baby was wrapped in either a towel or a shirt, and placed in a plastic bag.
Huntsman is being held on $6 million bail — $1 million for each baby she’s accused of killing. It wasn’t immediately clear if she had an attorney.

 

we recommend

Huntsman was arrested Sunday on six counts of murder after police found the infants’ tiny bodies. A seventh baby found appears to have been stillborn, Utah County Attorney Jeffrey Buhman said.
Formal charges have not yet been filed against Huntsman and no other arrests have been made but Buhman said the investigation remains open.
Investigators were trying to determine if the seven babies had the same father or multiple fathers, Buhman said.

This photo provided by the Utah County jail shows Megan Huntsman, who was booked into the Utah County jail on suspicion of killing six of her newborn children over the past decade. Seven dead babies were found in a garage at a Pleasant Grove home where Huntsman lived up until 2011.AP: Utah County Jail

This photo provided by the Utah County jail shows Megan Huntsman, who was booked into the Utah County jail on suspicion of killing six of her newborn children over the past decade.

The gruesome case has raised a series of questions about how the killings occurred despite Huntsman carrying out what neighbors said seemed like a normal existence. Police declined to comment on a motive and on what Huntsman said during an interview with investigators.
Her estranged husband found the first infant’s body while cleaning out the garage after recently getting out of prison. Authorities do not believe he was aware of the killings and he isn’t a person of interest at this time.
Police Capt. Michael Roberts said officers responded to a call from him Saturday about a dead infant, and then they found the six other bodies.
Family and neighbors identified the estranged husband as Darren West, who has been in prison on drug-related charges.
Roberts said police believe West and Huntsman were together when the babies were born.
“We don’t believe he had any knowledge of the situation,” Roberts told The Associated Press
Asked how West could not have known about the situation, Roberts replied, “That’s the million-dollar question. Amazing.”
The babies’ bodies were sent to the Utah medical examiner’s office for tests, including one to determine the cause of death. DNA samples taken from the suspect and her husband will determine definitively whether the two are the parents, as investigators believe.
Huntsman also has three daughters — one teenager and two young adults — who lived at the house.
Neighbors in the middle-class neighborhood of mostly older homes 35 miles south of Salt Lake City say they were shocked by the accusations and perplexed that the woman’s older children still living in the home didn’t know their mother was pregnant or notice anything suspicious.
Late Sunday, West’s family issued a statement saying they were in a “state of shock and confusion.”
“We are mourning this tragic loss of life and we are trying to stay strong and help each other through this awful event,” the statement said before asking for privacy.
West pleaded guilty in federal court in 2005 to two counts of possessing chemicals intended to be used in manufacturing methamphetamine, court records show. In August 2006, he was sentenced to 9 years in prison, but appealed the term three times. He maintained his innocence and said he never had any intention to manufacture meth.
West’s sister Sarah Wright wrote to federal district court in 2006, saying West is a good father to his three daughters. She said he worked at an excavation company for 11 years and is an avid outdoorsman who likes to fish and camp.
“Darren is such an awesome dad,” she wrote.
Neighbors told the AP they were shocked and horrified by the accusations of what went on inside the home. None of them even knew Huntsman was pregnant in recent years.
The family members seemed like nice people and good neighbors, said Aaron and Kathie Hawker, who lives next door.
Huntsman moved out several years ago, leaving her three daughters to live alone, the Hawkers said. They weren’t sure where Huntsman has since been living.
Years ago, Huntsman baby-sat the Hawker grandchildren and they were friendly with each other.
“It makes us so sad, we want to cry,” Kathie Hawker said. “We enjoyed having them as a neighbor. This has just blown us away.”
Aaron Hawker said he talked with West on Saturday morning. He told Hawker he was cleaning out the mess in the garage.
“Two hours later, suddenly we had all these policemen here,” Aaron Hawker said.
Fred Newman, a neighbor whose cousin is the husband’s mother, said he’s perplexed how the three oldest daughters living there didn’t know about what police say was going on. He said the girls didn’t always park their cars in the garage, but did sometimes in the cold winter months.
He said he has used his snow-blower to clean off the driveway of the home and the young women would thank him.
The girls were normal youngsters, coming and going often, neighbor Vickie Nelson said.
“It’s shocking and kind of morbid and strange,” Nelson said as he looked across the street at the garage from her from lawn.
Roberts said the case has been “emotionally draining” and upsetting to investigators. He was at the home when the bodies were discovered.
“My personal reaction? Just shocked. Couldn’t believe it. The other officers felt the same,” the 19-year police veteran said.
“They got more and more shocked each box they opened,” Roberts said.
___
Associated Press writer Michelle Price in Salt Lake City, Martin Griffith in Reno, Nev., and Annie Knox in Salt Lake City contributed to this report.

Catholic priests who Molest?

Catholic priests who Molest?

Here is another thing to think about.

The issue of Catholic priests molesting young children is a huge problem.  For some strange reason, these offenders keep getting moved onto new churches to just keep doing what they do, hurting young children.

It seems to me there are priests or people in the church that know about these offenders and are doing nothing about it and not telling anyone.   I was thinking about this issue and happened to say to a friend who is both a pastor and a police chaplain, “If I went to a catholic church and said to the priest, ‘I would like to confess my sins,’ and I go sit in one of the booths, they are not allowed by law to tell anyone what I said.  So after I get in, what would happen if I said, ‘Father, I want to confess my sins?’ And he says, ‘What is it you would like to confess?’ And I say, ‘The fact that I am about to shoot and kill you, and then start killing other priests who molest these little children.'”

My pastor friend said that the priest would have a mandate by law to call the cops and turn me in for threatening to kill the priests.  So I said, “Let me get this straight.  They have a mandate by law to call the cops on me for saying I wanted to kill them, but they don’t have a mandate by law to call the cops on fellow priests for molesting little children.”  The pastor said that pretty much sums it up.

To me, this is the height of hypocrisy.  If it is your life on the line, you cry like a little girl and run and call the cops.  Yet, when you’re hurting young children, you don’t want anyone to know what your doing, so you cover it up and keep it quiet.  Why you priests who are not molesting kids allow others to do this and you cover for them, I don’t understand.  Wow, I would hate to be in your shoes when you stand before God.