Gay wedding

I feel you on "staying in & tapping out"...it feels like cowardice and powerlessness.

At the same time there are certain things that have more "grime" than we can really see. I sit in that same boat at times with not so grueling of a choice but the same concept behind it. I have a cousin that calls herself a Christian but is living with her boyfriend. I struggled a lot about whether or not I should even enter her apartment (as though that would show that I support them) so in a way it is similar, because I was invited to a dinner party. I went and just felt sort of odd.

My sister had the same conscience choice at a different time when helping them move in.

I was trying to go to church with her one sunday and we were supposed to meet there and then she said I could just come to her place and we could just watch it there. I vacillated back and forth and eventually just went over. I wasn't really praying and asking the Lord about it, I was just trusting my own conscience and hoping the Lord would work it out because I too get tired of having these situations in our current world.

In any case, we watched the sermon, I had some coffee, I felt uncomfortable the whole time and tried to get some discussion going about the message but it didn't really go anywhere. The odd thing is people feel like I'm far away and I need Jesus. We all do. Things are confusing. Eventually (and this has happened when I've been at bars and parties) I just felt almost a magnetic pull to leave and so I did.

I've brought stuff like that before the Lord and it's just so confusing and heartrending because I want to speak to them in love that they are living in sin and are being deceived but not come across as judgmental. To kind of "leave the line open" so to speak (in case they ever need me and the Lord wants to use me with them) and not completely close the door.

^I actually feel like this approach is wrong. It's lukewarm Christianity. I haven't been back over but it's still on the back burner in a way.


As I'm typing this (as I typically just sort of disconnect and forget about things like this) I feel condemnation or perhaps it is the Lord drawing me to make a move and let her know that she is living in sin (because maybe no one has said). Probably something of a mixture.

How do we rebuke in Love and yet not turn someone off?



I think a letter is a good approach. Partly stating your position and how it's caused such an internal debate and whatever else you feel led to write.

It's tough in this day and age to make a stand and actually make the hard choice...not just make a sort of blah "oh well, I hope the Lord works in them and love them where they are" kind of choice. I feel that way about even people that I'm friends with online.

I then find myself looking at how Jesus lived and thinking back through acts. Definitely much to think about. EPH 6:12-13

Hey Jesus, guess what, we caught an adulterous woman, the law says we need to stone her

Sound familiar?

Read John 8:1-11

And at the end "neither do I condemn you, go and leave your life of sin"

The thing was, the people that were going to stone her were guilty of the same sins, so they would have ended up stoning each other if they were all judging righteously.

It was Jesus who chose to forgive and not condemn...but the woman, what we dont hear is did she ask Him for forgiveness? jesus also wrote something on the ground but we dont know what he wrote.

Greetings theanonitedwinner,

Thanks for the reference scripture. We have been looking at that one. Below is a copy of one of the replies:

>>>>>>Greetings Magenta,

I appreciate your desire for mercy, but it is important to recognize that while Christ exemplifies perfect love and is the embodiment of mercy, to use this story as an illustration of Christ’s love and mercy would be a failure to take into account the context in which the story takes place.

Remember that Jesus Christ gave Moses the law. He, as YHWH commanded that adulterers should be put to death. Death by stoning as punishment for adultery was part of the Hebrew canon of laws at the time of Christ. It would be curious if He who gave the law was now advocating that the law not be enforced, don't you think?

This passage is likely a lesson from Jesus that everything must be done in accordance with the Laws He gave to Moses.

First, the law required that the man and the woman be stoned. Where was the man? Jesus saw this and knew there was something amiss.

Second, the witnesses must be pure, non malicious witnesses.

Note the provisions in the law regarding this:

(Deu 19:15) One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

(Deu 19:16) If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse a man of a crime,

(Deu 19:17) the two men involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the LORD before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time.

(Deu 19:18) The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against his brother,

(Deu 19:19) then do to him as he intended to do to his brother. You must purge the evil from among you.

(Deu 19:20) The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you.

(Deu 19:21) Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.


and;

(Exo 23:1) "Do not spread false reports. Do not help a wicked man by being a malicious witness.

(Exo 23:2) "Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd,

There is so much more here than meets the eye, but when it comes right down to it, you were correct when you quotes that Jesus did not condemn the woman, but did he forgive her?

Perhaps Jesus was writing the passages above in the dirt, and then stood and made the statement; "ye who are without sin, cast the first stone. It is in the law that the witnesses who bring the accusation cast the first stones and that they be "non-malicious"!

The New Testament has very little to offer without an intimate knowledge of the Old Testament.

I hope this helps. <<<<<<<

It is important to note that the doctrine of Grace was introduced after the formation of the Catholic (merger between Christian and Pagan Babylonian religions) under Constantine. It was introduced by Augustine of Hippo in the 400's. Before that it didn't exist.

So many contradictions among us!

Jesus said heaven and earth would pass away before the Law. He taught that those who teach against the law are the least in the kingdom of heaven and those who taught the Law were the greatest? This is difficult to reconcile with the doctrine of grace. Jesus also declared;

Mat 7:22-23 KJV Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? (23) And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.


That word iniquity is anomia. a-without, nomia the Law.

Jesus forewarned us not to fall into the category of those who work without the Law.

Most people I know who adhere to the doctrine of Grace have one thing in common; they never study the Law in the first 5 books of the Bible. Never! Once a man commits to reading to know the law and then sees the beauty of Gods instructions for every day living and follows them he realizes the significance of;

Joh 14:21 KJV He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Here is the gateway to fellowship with Jesus and the Heavenly Father!

Notice how John 14:21 and Matther 7:22-23 compliment and confirm one another and confront the doctrine of grace!

I hope you will accept the challenge. Just read the book of Exodus and Deuteronomy a couple times and if you find the Heart of God there then read the first 5 books over and over! You will find God in a whole new way!

That is talking about false teachers. It's not saying to not be kind/polite/well-wishing to non-believers.

I also has a gay cousin if this were to happen isn't this too complicated? When you were the one who is getting married he was there to congratulate you but you you didn't go there to congratulate but say he will surely die isn't this kind of stepping on our conscience he throws you a bread but you returned and threw him a stone

QwQ what exactly should be done in this kind of complicated situation

MessageOfTheCross said:

Because there faith is in Christ and not the Cross.

Click to expand...

Pray tell when did Jimmy start preaching false doctrine? I'm hoping you have his message mixed up. Otherwise he's gone off the reservation.

Greetings R29,

First of all, God does not recognize two men as a marriage. Second, if a gay person was to come to a wedding between a man and a woman to congratulate them, that would be normal and acceptable, because in the beginning, God created them male and female. For this reason a man is to leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two will become one flesh.

There is only one purpose to go to a wedding, which is to congratulate, to wish well and celebrate the couples marriage. Therefore, just showing up at a so-called marriage between two men or two women would be to support them, to condone and celebrate the marriage, that is unless of course one went there to specifically to denounce it. As a reminder, I would mention Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities that God destroyed with fire because of their homosexual acts. Regarding this, God has not changed. In fact Jude reaffirms this when he says:

"In like manner, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, who indulged in sexual immorality and pursued strange flesh, are on display as an example of those who sustain the punishment of eternal fire."

Regarding homosexuality and the other sins that Paul listed, he said:

"Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things are worthy of death, they not only continue to do these things, but also approve of those who practice them."

Homosexuality is a sin

Man shall not lay with Man it is a sin

Um do people not know the difference between a wedding and a GAY wedding. Sorry I think it would be completely obvious something is not right.

I beleive most are in agreement; do not go, but their is a larger question looming in this matter; What action is expected of you in this matter?

So, basically, what you’re saying is that we can keep throwing stones at sinners committed by a few, while the sins committed by many should go unpunished because we then would have to face the beam in our own eye?

I get it, some sinners are more righteous than others.

Umm pretty sure that's what I said. Please read the post before commenting.

You can get angry all you want MOTC but you're sharing false doctrine. Jimmy didn't preach this back in the day,if he is now he's preaching false doctrine.

Anal sex is a sin whether done to a man or a woman