What is a Woman?

[Mountain Man]

You claim that a lot regardless of how abusive your language. So perhaps you are correct - you don't know what your sin is and you need someone to tell you.

I suspect the Pharisees thought the same about Jesus when he publicly exposed their hypocrisy. Clean up your own act instead of always blaming everybody else.

[Sparko]

I'm talking about a person tharmt recognizes some element as sin but the can't quite get a handle on it. Maybe its alcoholism like you suggest below. Clearly the encouragement I speak of is not encouragement to 'continue in their sins




My answer is the obvious smanswer Sparko.





Well there you go. When a person harms themselves they are both abuser and the abused. So they deserve compassion as one abused, and that need wisdom, and help, and all sorts of positive things. But what they de not need is condemnation. And the don't need to be told what they are doing is wrong or stupid, they already know that

I never advocated condemnation nor has anyone else. Just not enabling their sins without calling out that they are indeed sinning and need to change. Truth in love, not hate. You seem to be saying that it's better to let someone continue in their sin and if you tell them what they are doing is a sin then you are condemning them. I think letting someone, especially if that someone is someone you care about, continue in their sin without telling them they are sinning that you are enabling their sin and are actually harming them because how will they know what they are doing is wrong if nobody tells them so?

I have a gay friend. We were friends for years before I found out he was gay. I have had a talk with him and explained that I think that homosexuality is a sin and that the bible says it is. I told him I am still his friend, but that I can't be involved in his lifestyle, but I am still there as a friend in every other way. He appreciated my honesty and we are still friends. He doesn't flaunt his lifestyle in front of me and I don't continue to preach at him. He knows what I think and if he wants to change or know more about Christ he knows he can come to me. Did I condemn him? No. I also didn't leave him living in his sin without knowing it was a sin. I didn't enable him or participate in his sin.

Happens all the time to rape victims. I've seen or been aware of examples were a pastor takes the side of an abusive husband and even publicly shames the abused wife when she refuses to take the risk associated with returning to live with that person after he claims to have changed.

Nobody here is doing that.

No, im not.

It sounds like it to me and the others.

Well again, you use an example of sin that is both abusive of others, violent, and illegal to try to make a case for what happens with more subtle and more private, personal issues.

Because all sin hurts someone. Either others or the person themselves. That is what is so bad about sin. It may seem pleasurable, but in the end it not only harms people in this life, it separates them from God and eternal life. They deserve to be told the truth and be made aware of their sin, especially if the world it doing it's best to convince them that the sin is perfectly fine to the point they should be proud of it.


S

o, let's forget such extremes and talk about something more real. Repentence is part of coming to christ, it is absolutely necessary. But it is an attitude. Not a checklist. and not one of us fully repents of all our sins on that day. Not only are we not fully aware of all we've done that might be sin, we will stumble in the future- we are not done sinning. So the repentance that saves is not some one time im sorry, but a lifetime of willingness, when the Holy Spirit convinces us, of turning from sin. And guess what, even when we get stubborn and refuse at some point, at least for the moment, His grace is still there.

I never said completely stopping a sin was a condition on being saved. I agree that repentance is an attitude and an ongoing process. But if someone doesn't even think that what they are doing is a sin, how can they ever be repentant? If they think being gay is perfectly fine and something to be proud of, how can they ever repent of it unless someone tells them? It is not loving to leave them in ignorance. It is not condemnation to tell them what they are doing is sinning.

You are correct here. The repentance that saves is something that for the most part will manifest as a lifelong desire to do that which is pleasing to God.

I am glad we agree on something. But as I said above, you can't be repentant if you don't know you are sinning.

Well, you are assuming they necessarily believe what they are doing is sin or that they believe you in your assessment, or that they believe that section of the Bible still applies, or that it represents God,'s word as opposed to an accommodation to culture.

Each of you debating me here today has areas were legitimate, bible believing Christians disagree on those sorts of things. And most of us recognize that there is grace in many of these things. Take divorce. Some believe remarriage is completely forbidden, a sin.. others do not see it that way. But most agree we can differ in our opinions on that things and still be following Christ.

So you need to come up with why if we can disagree on certain non core tenets like divorce and remarriage, but still hold to the core tenets of the faith we can still claim to be saved, and others who still agree on the core tenets of the faith but disagree about the sinfulness of monogamous lifelong gay relationships can't.

I think the bible is pretty clear that homosexuality is a sin. Transgender, I am not as sure about. They didn't have any such thing in Jesus' time. The OT did say that cross-dressing was a sin, but I can see that there are arguments about what the purpose of that was and whether it was a moral law or something just for that society. I mean, where is the line drawn? Can a woman wear pants? Basically both sexes wore robes back then that we would think of as "dresses" today. But then again, Transgender is kind of like declaring to God "You made a mistake in making me a man/woman and I am going to fix it" which is definitely hubris at the least. And the lifestyle itself leads to other sins, mostly things like extramarital sex. And if a man becomes a transwoman and has sex with a biological woman is s/he still straight or is s/he now a homosexual? Or if s/he dates a man, is s/he homosexual? It's very confusing and I think it still falls under "sexual immorality"

[Mountain Man]

Should a pastor not preach against sin from the pulpit because it might upset those who are actively committing that sin?

[Mountain Man]

The OT did say that cross-dressing was a sin, but I can see that there are arguments about what the purpose of that was and whether it was a moral law or something just for that society. I mean, where is the line drawn? Can a woman wear pants? Basically both sexes wore robes back then that we would think of as "dresses" today.

Don't over complicate it: If someone is wearing a certain attire specifically for the purpose of mimicking the opposite sex, then it is sin. And, yes, that's clearly a moral law because God says it is detestable to him in contrast to ceremonial laws like not eating pork where he says, "You shall consider this detestable."

[seer]

Disney axes 'boys and girls' from all park greetings to promote inclusivity

https://www.foxnews.com/us/disney-ax...te-inclusivity

[Sparko]

Don't over complicate it: If someone is wearing a certain attire specifically for the purpose of mimicking the opposite sex, then it is sin. And, yes, that's clearly a moral law because God says it is detestable to him in contrast to ceremonial laws like not eating pork where he says, "You shall consider this detestable."

But it doesn't actually give a reason does it? It just says the wearing of the opposite sex's clothing is a sin. So why wouldn't a woman in the army wearing the same fatigues as a man be sinning? Or your wife putting on one of your shirts and wearing it around the house?

[Mountain Man]

But it doesn't actually give a reason does it? It just says the wearing of the opposite sex's clothing is a sin. So why wouldn't a woman in the army wearing the same fatigues as a man be sinning? Or your wife putting on one of your shirts and wearing it around the house?

The language indicates clothing that is intended for the opposite sex. The English Standard Version translates it as "a man's garment" and "a woman's cloak", so there was obviously some marked distinction between them, unlike military fatigues or a simple t-shirt.

As for why, we can look back to Genesis where God clearly distinguishes between male and female. From this we can infer that crossdressing is detestable to him because it contradicts his created order.

[Gondwanaland]

But it doesn't actually give a reason does it? It just says the wearing of the opposite sex's clothing is a sin. So why wouldn't a woman in the army wearing the same fatigues as a man be sinning? Or your wife putting on one of your shirts and wearing it around the house?

Hell, wasn't all that long ago that high heels were worn by men.

[Gondwanaland]

Don't over complicate it: If someone is wearing a certain attire specifically for the purpose of mimicking the opposite sex, then it is sin. And, yes, that's clearly a moral law because God says it is detestable to him in contrast to ceremonial laws like not eating pork where he says, "You shall consider this detestable."

So women who wear pants are sinning.

And wrt eating pork he said “You shall not eat any abomination."

[oxmixmudd]

I never advocated condemnation nor has anyone else. Just not enabling their sins without calling out that they are indeed sinning and need to change. Truth in love, not hate. You seem to be saying that it's better to let someone continue in their sin and if you tell them what they are doing is a sin then you are condemning them. I think letting someone, especially if that someone is someone you care about, continue in their sin without telling them they are sinning that you are enabling their sin and are actually harming them because how will they know what they are doing is wrong if nobody tells them so?

There are two facets to this conversation, one is grace and sin and the parameters for Christ's finished work. And the other is what actions, thoughts, attitudes are in fact sin. I'm trying to stick with what we agree on in the definition of sin so tgatvwe can explore on a more objective manner the first facet - grace and sin and the parameters of Christ's finished work.

I have a gay friend. We were friends for years before I found out he was gay. I have had a talk with him and explained that I think that homosexuality is a sin and that the bible says it is. I told him I am still his friend, but that I can't be involved in his lifestyle, but I am still there as a friend in every other way. He appreciated my honesty and we are still friends. He doesn't flaunt his lifestyle in front of me and I don't continue to preach at him. He knows what I think and if he wants to change or know more about Christ he knows he can come to me. Did I condemn him? No. I also didn't leave him living in his sin without knowing it was a sin. I didn't enable him or participate in his sin.

Sounds to me like you did exactly the right thing wrt your conscience and understanding. You were honest with yourself and with him, but loving. And that will show your friend Christ and His mercy and love.

Nobody here is doing that



It sounds like it to me and the others.

mostly that is because of your perception of me, not because of what I've actually said. Where I have been ambiguous, your mind has filled in the details based on what you think I would have said if I was more specific.

Because all sin hurts someone. Either others or the person themselves. That is what is so bad about sin. It may seem pleasurable, but in the end it not only harms people in this life, it separates them from God and eternal life. They deserve to be told the truth and be made aware of their sin, especially if the world it doing it's best to convince them that the sin is perfectly fine to the point they should be proud of it.

We agree on the principle. But that is also why forgiveness and love as well as the inner motives driving an action are often more important that the actions themselves - especially with regards to following prescriptions for good. Romans tells us that sin is so utterly sinful that it will turn even that which is good into evil.

I never said completely stopping a sin was a condition on being saved. I agree that repentance is an attitude and an ongoing process. But if someone doesn't even think that what they are doing is a sin, how can they ever be repentant? If they think being gay is perfectly fine and something to be proud of, how can they ever repent of it unless someone tells them? It is not loving to leave them in ignorance. It is not condemnation to tell them what they are doing is sinning.

if a person is repentant, then if they discover that what they have been doing is sinful, destructive, dishonoring to God, they will immediately try to find a way to stop doing that thing. OTOH, an unrepentant person will not. And so, it is quite possible for the unrepentant person to be 'better according to a set of rules than a truly repentant person. But that will change over time - to the degree the list of rules actually reflect God's view of what they address.

I am glad we agree on something. But as I said above, you can't be repentant if you don't know you are sinning.

I disagree. We all do things we don't understand as sin. God will reveal that to us in time one way or the other. But those things we understand as sin, if we are repentant, those things we strive to avoid and as a result, over time, if we abide in Him, we become more like Him.

I think the bible is pretty clear that homosexuality is a sin. Transgender, I am not as sure about. They didn't have any such thing in Jesus' time. The OT did say that cross-dressing was a sin, but I can see that there are arguments about what the purpose of that was and whether it was a moral law or something just for that society. I mean, where is the line drawn? Can a woman wear pants? Basically both sexes wore robes back then that we would think of as "dresses" today. But then again, Transgender is kind of like declaring to God "You made a mistake in making me a man/woman and I am going to fix it" which is definitely hubris at the least. And the lifestyle itself leads to other sins, mostly things like extramarital sex. And if a man becomes a transwoman and has sex with a biological woman is s/he still straight or is s/he now a homosexual? Or if s/he dates a man, is s/he homosexual? It's very confusing and I think it still falls under "sexual immorality"

I understand the dilemma's you raise Sparko. I really do.

[Sparko]

The language indicates clothing that is intended for the opposite sex. The English Standard Version translates it as "a man's garment" and "a woman's cloak", so there was obviously some marked distinction between them, unlike military fatigues or a simple t-shirt.

As for why, we can look back to Genesis where God clearly distinguishes between male and female. From this we can infer that crossdressing is detestable to him because it contradicts his created order.

What about an actor in a play dressing like a woman? They used to do it routinely in Shakespeare's time. And do you notice we seem to get more upset with men dressing like women than the other way around? Nobody minds if a woman wears overalls or a pant suit. Except maybe some KJV only type churches. My mom's old baptist church had a rule that women could only come to church wearing dresses. No pants allowed.

[Sparko]

So women who wear pants are sinning.

And wrt eating pork he said “You shall not eat any abomination."

Both sexes wore "dresses" in bible times. I remember going to an Easter pageant at my church with a friend and her young daughter a while back. The little girl looked up at me and said, "Why is Jesus wearing a dress?"

[Sparko]

There are two facets to this conversation, one is grace and sin and the parameters for Christ's finished work. And the other is what actions, thoughts, attitudes are in fact sin. I'm trying to stick with what we agree on in the definition of sin so tgatvwe can explore on a more objective manner the first facet - grace and sin and the parameters of Christ's finished work.




Sounds to me like you did exactly the right thing wrt your conscience and understanding. You were honest with yourself and with him, but loving. And that will show your friend Christ and His mercy and love.

See? I wasn't advocating any condemnation. Just speaking truth in love. We are God's ambassadors on Earth. We need to be his voice not only to show grace and love but truth even if the truth is not something someone wants to hear. It is better than letting them continue in ignorance and sinning without even knowing it.

mostly that is because of your perception of me, not because of what I've actually said. Where I have been ambiguous, your mind has filled in the details based on what you think I would have said if I was more specific.

Seems you are doing the same thing in regard to me and others in this thread.

We agree on the principle. But that is also why forgiveness and love as well as the inner motives driving an action are often more important that the actions themselves - especially with regards to following prescriptions for good. Romans tells us that sin is so utterly sinful that it will turn even that which is good into evil.

Which is why there is no sin that doesn't hurt someone. No private sin that is not harmful in some way.

if a person is repentant, then if they discover that what they have been doing is sinful, destructive, dishonoring to God, they will immediately try to find a way to stop doing that thing. OTOH, an unrepentant person will not. And so, it is quite possible for the unrepentant person to be 'better according to a set of rules than a truly repentant person. But that will change over time - to the degree the list of rules actually reflect God's view of what they address.

Are we not to help them discover what they have been doing is a sin? How are they to know if all they hear is lies that what they are doing is not only fine but something to be proud of? If I am sinning in some way and don't even know it, I would welcome someone pointing it out to me in a civil manner (as you said, with compassion like I talked to my friend, not like the Westboro church does with gay people). And as you said, I would repent.

I disagree. We all do things we don't understand as sin. God will reveal that to us in time one way or the other. But those things we understand as sin, if we are repentant, those things we strive to avoid and as a result, over time, if we abide in Him, we become more like Him.

So you want to wait on God to somehow reveal it to them? Don't you know that God uses US to do such things too? You can't just sit on the sidelines and say "I will just let God take care of it"
because you are afraid to hurt someone's feelings. I am not saying being mean, or even driving them away. You can do like I did and tell them you still care about them no matter what but you can't participate in their lifestyle because you believe it is a sin. Not go "hey you are a sinner! God is going to send you to hell!" - just let them know that your faith prohibits you from participating in certain things that Christians believe are sinful and that is one of them. That way you are not accusing them, but just putting the 'burden' on yourself because of your faith.

I understand the dilemma's you raise Sparko. I really do.

[Gondwanaland]

Both sexes wore "dresses" in bible times. I remember going to an Easter pageant at my church with a friend and her young daughter a while back. The little girl looked up at me and said, "Why is Jesus wearing a dress?"

Heck, you can today go to a Highlands competition full of burly brawny men throwing entire trees around whilst wearing "dresses"

[Sparko]

Heck, you can today go to a Highlands competition full of burly brawny men throwing entire trees around whilst wearing "dresses"