Okay, But What About My Gay %Familymember%?

The last post was a logical explication of the wickedness of “gay marriage” as relates to the Christian church.  This one will perhaps step on your toes, if that one didn’t.

****

VFD, I have a homosexual (brother/son/father/sister/daughter/mother/aunt/34th cousin twice removed) and I love them!  Shouldn’t I be accepting of them, even if I don’t accept their chosen lifestyle?

No.  No, you should not.

 

If a person preaches a different doctrine than the one found in the Bible, they can still call themselves Christian.  Call themselves.  They can’t actually be one, but they can speak the words and call themselves by the name*.   What they have is in fact “another gospel.”  Living under another doctrine is the same as not living under any doctrine.  There is only one way to get forgiveness of sins.

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.2 John 9-11

which, being in the New Testament applies directly.  Also:

12 The Lord will cut off the man that doeth this,” . . . “When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and he delighteth in them-Malachi 2

No, this is no longer the day of the Old Testament.  God doesn’t cut people off with no second chances any more.  But God does not change.  You say someone doing evil (homosexuality) is doing good because they love their homosexual partner.  You want to give them your approbation when you should not.  You are listening to your heart again.  But that’s not new.  You suck at being good, and you know it.

The standard is perfection.  You will fail.  Your speeding on the way to work is the same as accepting your homosexual %relative% into your house with open arms.  These are sin. God hates it.  So: you have a choice. Accept and show respect to the decision of your homosexual relatives, and be an intentional sinner. Go against the will of God – or don’t.

The question is, whom would you rather please? 

… your confused relatives, or a God who knows very well those things of which he disapproves.  You are given the choice.  Just remember what God thinks about intentional continuation of sin.

********

*I’m looking at you, LDS and JW churches.  The fun factoid is, there is only one true Gospel.  It does not belong to any church in particular, and membership in a particular church is not required.  Hint: There is just one step.

Advertisements

Let’s All Have Some Delicious Haterade!

A person who realizes their sin is sinful, and they want to stop it, and then they actually make a genuine effort to stop, is repentant.  If that person comes to believe the only way to have forgiveness is to ask God for it through Jesus’ payment around A.D. 30, they will have their sins forgiven and all will be well with their soul when they die.  This person is a candidate for admission to membership in a New Testament-era, Bible-believing Christian church.

A person who does something God says is wrong, is a sinner.  A person who does something God says is wrong and has no plans or desire to stop, is not repentant.  An unrepentant sinner is (by definition) not a Christian.  This person is not a candidate for admission to church membership.

To be married at a (good*) Christian church, you have to be a member in good standing – i.e., a Christian.  NOT an unrepentant sinner.

One of the (very few) things God said was abominable enough to warrant a death sentence under the Old Testament laws, was homosexuality.  God doesn’t change.  What used to be abominable to God remains abominable.  The government and the dispensation have changed and we don’t stone people to death under the New Testament for being homosexual.  The activity is still a sin but now they are given time and opportunity to repent.

Someone who is sexually and otherwise attracted to members of the same sex is not necessarily a sinner.  Someone who acts out on their attraction may end up a sinner.  One who engages in homosexuality and delights in it, revels in it, and announces to the world they intend to continue in it for the rest of their life, is an unrepentant sinner.  The “gay marriage” is a celebration of the fact they intend to live as an unrepentant sinner, openly and unashamed.

Marriage is the very first human institution ever invented. It was invented by God, and was “a man plus a woman is a family.”  A “gay marriage” is not only a celebration of open sinfulness, it is a perversion of the institution of Marriage.  For a Christian minister to marry a pair of homosexuals should violate his conscience in three ways at least.

If a person is a murderer in the middle of a killing spree, they will not be admitted to my church’s membership rolls.  Likewise, someone who has a hobby of getting high on heroin and driving at 100MPH through neighborhoods.  A whore.  A career burglar.  If an UNrepentant sinner seeks admission, they will be denied.  This is based on our religious belief.

*Courts have no business telling churches what to believe.  But they will, because the churches are not treating people equally.  Some “bad” churches let out their spaces for weddings to just-anyone without regard to anything BUT the homosexual/straight status of the participants.  That is asking for lawsuits.  This is the type of church that is going be sued with the lawsuit that gets my church’s tax-exempt status revoked in a broad-brush decision by an activist judge.  Wait for it.

The South Shall . . . um . . .

There has been much hoopla lately about the symbols of the Confederated States of America, and how “all” the press outlets, social media buddies, and people in general seem to think we should be busy erasing the blight of the historical events from our past from the collective national consciousness.

This is natural.  This is what happens when a war is fought to its true (military) end.  The victor writes the history, and the vanquished gets his penis stepped-on.  It is a little surprising to me that the Stars ‘n’ Bars battle flag has been allowed for so long.  The Union side won.  The Rebels lost.  Their ensigns will be taken from them, willy-nilly, a hundred-fifty years later.

Sure it is a symbol of heritage.  Your heritage is that you [deleted] LOST and your terms are still being dictated to you by the winners.  As the song says,

“If you don’t love it, leave it”

…again, if you can.  For the next few years I’ll just say “good luck with that” but the USA is headed for rocky shoals.  It will take Divine intervention and good leadership to steer us on a true course again.  We’re kicking God out every chance we get and, well, don’t get me started on our leadership.

********

Did I say I want to see the battle flag gone?  Did I say I want to see it stay?  Read it again.

Yes, God Talks To Me

Every once in a while, I get an urge.  A hunch.  A feeling.  An inclination to act or to not act, with no apparent basis in circumstances at the time.  Then it works out beautifully.

I can be driving along in perfectly-normal traffic and I get the urge to change lanes.  If I don’t, I end up behind a mile of cars at a red light, and if I do I drive by a mile of cars in the “wrong” lane at the green light.  An instinct to take one step, and then something comes crashing down where my foot used to be.  Tonight, I was going to do some intricate wiring on an electronics project, and I had a feeling I shouldn’t solder the wires down until I was done routing them all.  And I made a mistake.  If it had been soldered, it would have been a minor disaster.  It wasn’t soldered, so it worked out fine.

God made the universe.  God made the Earth, Sun, Moon and Stars.  By His wisdom, at His will, all things consist.  He can turn the heart of a King at His will . . . but you don’t give Him enough credit to give the occasional hint to his children?

Uncivil Disobedience

VFD Approves.

If you have someone ruining your life, what do you do?  If they are making you physically ill in your own home, what do you do?  If they are slaughtering endangered species, what do you do?  If they are taking profits away from your fossil fuel power plant, what do you do?  If a private company is destroying the natural beauty of public lands, what do you do?

Well, for some people apparently you take a potshot at the offending technology!  There are people with various motives who could all benefit from the destruction of wind turbines.  And, as I have no especial love for wind turbines of this sort, I approve of shooting them*.  I hope this sort of activity becomes more widespread.

If your government refuses to listen to legitimate science showing how a thing is a net-loss for everything they claim it is benefiting, and allows your %motive% to continue to exist, there is still a way to be heard.  To quote the sidebar at sipseystreetirregulars:

From MamaLiberty over at War on Guns:

“Here’s an idea…If nobody wants a ‘civil disturbance,’ why in heck don’t they quit disturbing us?”

Indeed.

“When Democracy Becomes Tyranny


I STILL get to vote.”

********

*I also disapprove.  I’m conflicted oh the internal drama!  Shooting other peoples’ stuff is bad, and these turbines tend to be privately owned.  I disapprove of doing illegal things in general really, but when you push people too far eventually violence will break out.  Not the violence of a wind turbine exploding and sending a 50 meter-long carbon fiber blade into your nursery – actual people-behaving-roughly violence.  The kind of wind turbine which looks like a big fan is pretty ridiculous really, and  I look forward to the eventual adoption of the kind of thing that looks more like a squirrel cage blower, which is both efficient and doesn’t pose nearly the danger to birds the big-fan looking ones do.

Wow. You Shouldn’t Have Kicked That Dude In The Nuts, Bro.

I’m laying here watching Fox Sports 1 which coincidentally was on when I turned on the TV, and had some MMA fighting action going.  They hooked me with a promise of the main event, so I’ve been watching knockout after knockout of lightweights.  This last one was illustrative of a good point:

Don’t make a passive enemy mad at you.

This one mexican dude was going to win by decision, because he was the aggressor through rounds 1 and 2.  The skinny white boy he was fighting was looking mighty comfortable on the ground, showing very little imagination.  He could have stood up a bunch of times, but the white boy wanted to set up a triangle or an arm bar.  It wasn’t happening.  The Mexican guy was bleeding and slippery* and too good to be caught besides.  But the white guy kept trying, like was a training session at the gym.  He wasn’t being aggressive.  He was going to lose.  I started thinking the Mexican was going to knock the white guy out eventually, or the time would run out.

Then he kicked the white guy in the nuts.

In this ring, they would have given him five minutes to recover.  He took a minute or so, and came back a changed man.  He wasn’t at some dojo going through a seminar on fighting on your back.  He was in a fight, and now he wanted it.  He would have won round 3 on aggression and striking – but he got a good punch in, rang the other guy’s bell, and went to ground and pound.  The mexican guy lost, because he, himself, had put some fighting-mad into the white guy.

To quote Rick Perry: “Oops.”

********

*blood is like grease, when it’s fresh.  If you are covered in blood, you are hard to grab a tight hold of.  It’s better if you can make sure it is the blood of an adversary vs. your own, but your own blood can let you slip out of hold after hold.