Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
CAIS (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) is a genetic abnormality; just as Downs Syndrome and many others. Does this mean that God created males, females, and others? No. God created them male and female (Genesis 1:27). When God created them male and female; He also created a perfect world for them to inhabit.

So, what went wrong? In creating male and female; God gave them free will; that they might choose to love Him on their own. God's love is perfect. Perfect love requires both a giver and a receiver. God's love for us is perfect; but, we must return that love to make it complete. Without free will, we could not return His perfect love. Without free will, we would be only robots or slave, forced to give love. Think about it. When you met your husband or your wife and fell in love, you offered your love to him/her. If your mate had been forced to love you in return; would that really be love -- or would it be rape or slavery?

God created male and female, gave them free will and asked for their love in return. In that free will, Adam and Eve also had the possibility of disobeying God; which is exactly what happened. Adam was disobedient to God -- and because of that disobedience many abnormalities came into being. The most obvious abnormality to be introduced through Adam's disobedience is death: both physical and spiritual. Also, man's environment was changed; he was expelled from the perfect Garden of Eden into the world which now had many hardships: hunger, hard work just to survive, illnesses, abnormalities, etc.

Down through the generations, the fallen body inherited from Adam has become vulnerable to many diseases, defects, and abnormalities. Is this of God's choosing or is this God's fault? No. Man, Adam and Eve, disobeyed God and brought this upon all mankind.

Is God just being nasty to impose such a punishment upon all mankind because of Adam's disobedience? Those of us who have children; when we give our children guidelines and rules by which they must live -- and they disobey and do something which is contrary to the rules of life we have established; what do we do? We punish them. Do we punish them because we enjoy it? No, we punish them to make them better people. This is what God has done for us. Adam was disobedient. God punished Adam, and his sin was imputed, or attributed, to us. However, then God gave us a way out of that punishment -- Jesus Christ.

God's solution for us -- is sort of like the parent who will punish little Johnny for doing wrong, by making him sit in the corner. Then, He comes over and gives little Johnny a soft cushion to sit on. That is our God; He punishes our wrong -- but, then gives us a marvelous cushion, Jesus Christ, to ease our pain.

I have known people who had CAIS; but, in those days medical science and psychiatry had not come up with the fancy names for it. When I was a teenager, we had a neighbor, a beautiful lady, whom I was told had this affliction. Her husband left her and she committed suicide. It was a tragedy. Was this God's fault? No. Yet, this lady suffered. Maybe, if she had known God, she would have had the strength to get through this bad time in her life. Can there ever be a better reason to evangelize, to share the Word of God with those who do not know Him?


Perhaps if the woman had been treated like a person instead a freak she wouldn't have been despondent. What would your advice had been to her, that God created her a man and she could blame Adam and Eve for her "affliction" as you call it?

I believe that it is people like you that cause such grief. You tell people like this that God loves them but hates their life. What life would you have had this women live? Should she have not had a husband?

quote:

Logical, CAIS, like all birth abnormalities is so sad; but, just as the child born with Downs Syndrome is not another type of person; neither is the person born with AIS or CAIS.


Another type of person? Such comparison is absurd. Gender is simply a single trait. Is it a physical trait, a mental one< or a combination of both? How do you define gender, Bill? The Bible does not define gender. It merely says male and female.

quote:

God created us male and female -- then, life happened. A person born with Downs Syndrome is not another gender; neither is a person born with CAIS. Their lives are much more difficult. They, of all people, need the love, peace, and comfort found only in Jesus Christ. But, they are not a third gender.


Comparing Down's Syndrome with CAIS is simply absurd. I disagree with your assertion that CAIS and related conditions are not genders other than male and female. Please give me the Biblical definitions of male and female and we'll see how it applies. If you can't give a definition then how can you make make such a claim? If you can, then we can test its accuracy.

You are right about their lives being more difficult. They are made more difficult by people like you.

quote:

You tell me, "These are real people, with real lives, and you act as if they don't exist all. God knows his creation. He loves all of them and I do not believe he thinks them immoral."

You are so right. These are real people, with real lives, and with real pain and suffering. But, they can find peace and comfort with God. Yes, He does love them just as much, maybe even more, than He loves Bill Gray. Yet, we know that God's love is perfect and that there is enough of it to cover every single person ever born.


I believe that God loves everyone the with the same selfless love. I do not believe that amount of love varies from person to person. People like you do bring peace and comfort to such folks. You bring pain and condescension.

quote:

Does God think that people with CAIS or people with Downs Syndrome are immoral. Absolutely not. Immorality has nothing to do with how you are born, or with what affliction you may have inherited at birth. Morality or immorality is what you choose to do with your life after you reach the age of accountability.


So, you STILL haven't answered the basic question I asked. You've danced around it, delivering various sermons, but no ANSWER. For a person with CAIS or similar conditions. Exactly what choice is the moral one? Was the lady you referred above immoral because she married a man?

quote:

And, you say, "I believe the only sin here is committed by you."

Yes, I have and still do commit sins. But, praise the Lord, I am a forgiven sinner. However, there is one sin which I pray that I will never commit -- that is the sin of seeing someone dwelling in depression such as my neighbor who committed suicide -- and not telling that person about Jesus Christ and the love He has for him or her; a love that just might have prevented her final act of giving up on life.


And just what exactly would you have said to her if you could have? How exactly was she to live her life so that it would a moral one?

quote:

Finally, you tell me, "My questions to Monette were about actions which could demonstrate one's sexual orientation and whether she truly believed that such things should be kept in the closet by *everyone*. You didn't address that either."

Well, I did. But, maybe you missed it. I do not believe that anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, should be showing too much affection in public. Get a room.


I don't believe that I did miss it. You jumped off the track, focusing on the degree of affection displayed. Especially extreme displays. The degree is irrelevant to the question asked. What you avoided answering was whether the same display of affection, regardless of degree, would be considered the same regardless of the displayed sexual orientation of the couple.

quote:

Now, I am not saying that a couple, male and female, should not be affectionate in public. By all means, show your love and caring to the world -- hold hands, hug, give her/him an affectionate kiss, etc.
/quote]

And if a same sex couple should so the same? What would that be?

[quote]
On the other hand, heavy petting, open mouth kissing, groping, etc., are better left to the privacy of your home. None of us appreciate seeing this kind of lewd exhibitionism in public -- and it is out of place.

Logical, I pray that I have answered your questions sufficiently; and once more, I apologize for not responding before.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
quote:
Originally posted by autumn1964: I thought this was an interesting article on the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...le_and_homosexuality
Hi Autumn,

Yes, it is interesting. However, the writer was obviously trying to paint Biblical text into another color -- so the it will be more palatable to various lifestyles. I can show you many web sites written by theologians attempting to justify aberrant lifestyles which use the same arguments, i.e., that the people of Sodom were only being inhospitable -- and that was their sin -- or that the sin mentioned in Leviticus was temple prostitution, etc.

Autumn, God is not such a God that he would destroy a city and all within it -- because they were not being hospitable or neighborly -- and nowhere in those Leviticus passages does it refer to temple prostitutes.

The Bible is very clear that God destroyed Sodom because of the rampant homosexuality -- not because they were not good neighbors. The Bible is very clear on how God views the homosexual lifestyle.

Does God condemn the homosexual lifestyle as a greater sin than other sins? No. Sin is sin; regardless of the severity or lack of severity. Sin is being disobedient to God; nothing more, nothing less. We either obey God -- or we disobey God. So, yes, stealing a pencil is just as great a sin as homosexuality. If a person lives a lifestyle based upon stealing; he is condemned. If a person lives a lifestyle based upon homosexuality, he is condemned. The only way to be saved from either is to turn from that lifestyle and turn to follow Jesus Christ. A person cannot follow Jesus Christ -- and continue to follow an aberrant lifestyle.

Can you walk both north and south at the same time? No. You must walk either north -- or you must walk south. But, you cannot walk in both directions simultaneously. The same is true of walking with Jesus. If you are walking in the opposite direction; you are not walking with Jesus.

As you said, Autumn, that is an interesting article. However, it is misleading and can be harmful to a person who is not mature in a personal knowledge of God's Word. It can be harmful because it leads a person to believe that there are multiple ways to interpret God's Word -- and there is not. God wrote the Bible in the sense that He inspired the men who physically wrote it -- that they would write, in their own personal styles, exactly what He wanted to be written. God said what He meant -- and He meant what He said. That is good enough for me.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROS_BIB
quote:
As you said, Autumn, that is an interesting article. However, it is misleading and can be harmful to a person who is not mature in a personal knowledge of God's Word. It can be harmful because it leads a person to believe that there are multiple ways to interpret God's Word -- and there is not. God wrote the Bible in the sense that He inspired the men who physically wrote it -- that they would write, in their own personal styles, exactly what He wanted to be written. God said what He meant -- and He meant what He said. That is good enough for me.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


I think behind all sly grin we imagine peeking over him, like someone with a turd sandwich, the Holy Unutterable Digrammaton (Bet Lamed) means, deep down, "I am right, you are wrong, you do not know how to interpret properly."

Attachments

Images (1)
  • trotskypen1
quote:
Originally posted by Neal Hughes:
quote:
As you said, Autumn, that is an interesting article. However, it is misleading and can be harmful to a person who is not mature in a personal knowledge of God's Word. It can be harmful because it leads a person to believe that there are multiple ways to interpret God's Word -- and there is not. God wrote the Bible in the sense that He inspired the men who physically wrote it -- that they would write, in their own personal styles, exactly what He wanted to be written. God said what He meant -- and He meant what He said. That is good enough for me.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


I think behind all sly grin we imagine peeking over him, like someone with a turd sandwich, the Holy Unutterable Digrammaton (Bet Lamed) means, deep down, "I am right, you are wrong, you do not know how to interpret properly."


Oh Good! I thought maybe I was the only one who got that impression.

I simply cannot wrap my mind around the concept that God is going to throw good people, who are Christians, into the fiery pit of Hell because they are gay. Sorry, I don't believe that. I may be wrong, (and I'm sure certain people will be more than happy to tell me that I am), but that is how I choose to believe. I didn't find anything in the four gospels where Jesus specifically said anything against Homosexuality.
Also from Wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/h.../Sodom_and_Gomorrah:

Classical Jewish texts do not stress the homosexual aspect of the attitude of the inhabitants of Sodom as much as their cruelty and lack of hospitality to the "stranger." (See Jewish Encyclopedia on the importance of hospitality.) The people of Sodom were seen as guilty of many other significant sins. Rabbinic writings affirm that the Sodomites also committed economic crimes, blasphemy and bloodshed[1]. One of the worst was to give money or even gold ingots to beggars, but to inscribe their names on them, and then subsequently refuse to sell them food. The unfortunate stranger would end up starving and after his death, the people who gave him the money would reclaim it.

A rabbinic tradition, described in the Mishnah, postulates that the sin of Sodom was related to property: Sodomites believed that "what is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours" (Abot), which is interpreted as a lack of compassion. Another rabbinic tradition is that these two wealthy cities treated visitors in a sadistic fashion. One major crime done to strangers was almost identical to that of Procrustes in Greek mythology. This would be the story of the "bed" that guests to Sodom were forced to sleep in: if they were too short they were stretched to fit it, and if they were too tall, they were cut up.

In another incident, Eliezer, Abraham's servant, went to visit Lot in Sodom and got in a dispute with a Sodomite over a beggar, and was hit in the forehead with a stone, making him bleed. The Sodomite demanded Eliezer pay him for the service of bloodletting, and a Sodomite judge sided with the Sodomite. Eliezer then struck the judge in the forehead with a stone and asked the judge to pay the Sodomite.

The Talmud and the book of Jasher also recount two incidents of a young girl (one involved Lot's daughter Paltith) who gave some bread to a poor man who had entered the city. When the townspeople discovered their acts of kindness, they burned Paltith and smeared the other girl's body with honey and hung her from the city wall until she was eaten by bees. (Sanhedrin 109a) It is this gruesome event, and her scream in particular, the Talmud concludes, that are alluded to in the verse that heralds the city’s destruction: "So Hashem said, 'Because the outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah has become great, and because their sin has been very grave, I will descend and see...'" (Genesis 18:20-21).

[edit] The view of Josephus

Flavius Josephus, a Romano-Jewish historian, wrote something along the lines of:

Now, about this time the Sodomites, overwhelmingly proud of their numbers and the extent of their wealth, showed themselves insolent to men and impious to the divinity, insomuch that they no more remembered the benefits that they had received from him, hated foreigners and avoided any contact with others. Indignant at this conduct, God accordingly resolved to chastise them for their arrogance, and not only to uproot their city, but to blast their land so completely that it should yield neither plant nor fruit whatsoever from that time forward.
—Jewish Antiquities 1:194-195

and Josephus recounts that when angels came to Sodom to find good men they were instead greeted by rapists[2]:

And the angels came to the city of the Sodomites...when the Sodomites beheld the young men, who were outstanding in beauty of appearance and who had been received into Lots’s house, they set about to do violence and outrage to their youthful beauty....Therefore, God, indignant at their bold acts, struck them with blindness, so that they were unable to find the entrance into the house, and condemned the Sodomites to destruction of the whole population.
—Jewish Antiquities 1:199-202

He says how beautiful it was before everything was burned up, and how rich the towns were in the area. Josephus described what had happened:

Now this country is then so sadly burnt up, that nobody cares to come to it... It was of old a most happy land, both for the fruits it bore and the riches of its cities, although it be now all burnt up. It is related how for the impiety of its inhabitants, it was burnt by lightning; in consequence of which there are still the remainders of that divine fire; and the shadows of the five cities are still to be seen, as well as the ashes growing in their fruits, which fruits have a colour as if they were fit to be eaten: but if you pluck them with your hands, they will dissolve into smoke and ashes
—The Wars of the Jews, book 4, chapter 8.


The view that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were a very elitist, selfish, and greedy people who were out of touch with God is shared by pastor Andy Stanley of NortPoint Community Church. You can listen to his sermon here for a $1 (http://resources.northpoint.org/store/shop.do?cID=59&pID=1218) or download it on iTunes as a podcast for free. I trust Andy to lead me through The Word and his take on the story of Lot is much different from our dear Bill's. Andy is more in line with the historic texts and has also researched historical accounts like the ones mentioned in the Wiki article referenced above. I've truly never seen a pastor so hell bent on talking about homosexuality as Bill. Newsflash Bill: homosexuality is NORMAL and NATURAL. God created them male and female, but he also created them both and neither. He created them gay, straight, and bi and he loves them all.
I thought the picture of Trotsky oddly appropriate for the Unutterable Digrammaton (Bet Lamed) aka, St. Bill of Pasadena, peace be upon him and his family; since no longer satisfied with "Billvation in one city" he wants to spread it all over the world: "Perpetual Billvolution" if one will.
But we remember what happened to poor old Lev in Mexico City after he tired of Frida Kahlo and let his guard down . . . not that such a gruesome fate should ensue poor old Sacred Digrammaton, but I fear he may have an artery burst with my foul language and unceasing hounding urging him to seek absolution and recant heresy!

St. Bill of Pasadena:

Attachments

Images (1)
  • trotskypen1
Yes, and I was born in 1961 and the TV show started after that. It was my father's middle name. It is in the family, a good old Scottish name carried down on the Alexander side of the clan. "Sir Kay" of King Arthur's round table is our fabulous ancestor, as is "Ole King Cole." I believe that like I believe that my dog can bark in Latin.
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Oh, for chrissakes, don't tell me Mr. Bill has moved to my fair city.

As if we don't have problems enough.

DF
Hi Deep,

Your Location says: HOLLYWOOD. Now, I am sure that most folks know that Pasadena is not HOLLYWOOD. Do you claim to be from HOLLYWOOD because it is so full of atheists -- or to see if it might impress those pore ole folks back in Alabamy?

Should we watch for you on the Red Carpet at the next Oscar Show?

Y'all come back now, ya heah?

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Snoopy_Running

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×