The Marchers - Homosexuality part 4

Continuing in my discussion of my observations from the Gay Pride Parade in Rochester this year, I wanted to write today about the participants. Outside of the expected pro-homosexual advocacy groups, I want to mention three groups.

First of all, let's talk about the businesses...

There were a couple of those "artsy" kinda theater type entities there. You know, the kinds of places that would use Macs. (I'm gonna hear it for that one!) There was a car dealer, Bob Hastings, but I understand that one of our pastors or church members contacted him about that one, and it won't be happening again. And, then there was the least likely group, The Humane Society... I mean, really, are they there to the defend the rights of gay animals? I mean, they don't even have any gay animals (because animals do what is natural). Again, I believe someone contacted them, and we'll see if they're back next year.

Those two or three aside though, and there really were very, very few businesses this year.

...Interesting -

Second, let's talk about the politicians...

I can only assume that since these people are marching in the parade that they are in agreement with the cause of the parade. I really, honestly, know very, very little else about any of these candidates. But their marching in agreement with this pro-homosexual crowd really puts a tarnish on their record. I just thought I would list them for you all. You can see the list of names under the pictures of them, and some other pictures of the same parade they were at.

Family Court Judge Jon Kohout

Monroe County Court Judge Frank P. Geraci

Rick Dollinger, running for NY State Senate

Tom Hasman, running for Monroe County Clerk

Dave Garretson, running for NY State Assemblyman

Monroe County Legislator Dick Beebe

Jon Powers, running for US Congressman

NY Supreme Court Judge Elma A. Bellini

Ok, last category... Oh, you know what... I think I'm going to post that category on Monday... let the blood cool down and all before I do!

Just a straight thought...

The AIDS Float - Homosexuality part 3

One of the floats that was in the Gay (sin) Pride (another sin) Parade (I guess parade's are ok) was "AIDS Rochester presents Happily Ever After with (crossed out Hansel) Heather & Gretel, a Queer Fairy Tale!!!" You can see it in the picture on the right.

Now, I have been to, not many, but a few different parades. In none of those parades,have I seen AIDS Rochester advertise anything. It could be that I just missed it, I'm not sure. I mean, in this parade they happen to be advertising for a "queer fairy tale." (On a side note, I just want to be sure that I am politically correct - calling sodomites "queers" is acceptable?) Why did I not see them in the other parades? Why are they not presenting a Pot at the End of the Rainbow fairy tale during the St. Patty's day parade? Why aren't they out there talking about the flowers during the Lilac Festival's parade?

Why does the AIDS place only advertise during the Gay Pride Parade?

The answer is obvious - The AIDS place advertises among the homosexuals because they are the ones that most need their services. From the little I read on the subject, the consensus is still out that homosexual sex and sharing drug needles are the causes for AIDS. Ok, so, let me get this straight... A horrible disease can be caused be spread by homosexual sex, yet people still think it is just an alternative lifestyle?

Maybe there's more to it, but all I know is that AIDS Rochester recognizes its base of people. Oh, and God calls the recompense of homosexuals' error meet.

Just a thought...

The Parade - Homosexuality part 2

This is my 2nd part in my string of thoughts on homosexuality. Back on July 19 of this year, there was a Gay Pride Parade in downtown Rochester. As usual, our church joined with some other Bible believing churches in the area and made a presence at a couple of the intersections along the parade route. I think it's neat because they advertise two sins in the title of their parade: Gay and Pride. Both are wrong before God. Maybe that's where I ought to begin this post, by demonstrating that homosexuality is wrong.

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

Ok, let's move on to my next post...

Just kidding. While that verse does in fact plainly demonstrate that God views homosexuality as "abomination," I will go ahead and receive the argument that the same book of the Bible tells us that certain foods are "abomination." Yet, we would feel comfortable eating them today. So, to discuss the whole Old Testament / New Testament law issue, see my other posts, but are we limited to this being an Old Testament principle? I am going to post a larger passage from Romans now. There are groups that claim they are Christian, and try to get away passages in the Bible that speak on the subject of homosexuality (claiming they're all OT would be one way). I think they probably miss this passage because they're not using the right words in their concordance. I'm quite certain they're not getting their beliefs from their daily Bible readings, so I'll assume they're using a concordance to look up key words. Anyway, notice the words used to describe what these people did, after they turned away from God: (And, can I just remind you that God's words are much more important than my words, and that your time would be much more profitably spent if you read the following verses carefully and skim my blog, rather than the converse.)

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Romans 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Romans 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Romans 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Romans 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Romans 1:25 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.
Romans 1:26 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:
Romans 1:27 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.

"uncleanness," "lusts of their own hearts," "dishonour their own bodies," "vile affections," "against nature," "burned in their lust," "unseemly," "error"

Those are the words that God uses to describe homosexuality in the New Testament. We can throw in the following verses just to further enforce the point:

1 Corinthians 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,

1 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;

Then there's Sodom. This city was destroyed by God's judgment, bringing fire and brimstone to the people there. Now, Sodom had plenty of sins (Ezekiel 16:49-59 -- and for those of you that want to use verse 49 to say that Sodom's sins were only the things found in that verse, just keep reading, and you'll see that verse 50 is adding more things to the list, and includes that they did "abomination."). But when the angels from God came to take Lot out of the city, the men of that city wanted to have sexual relations with them. They were so taken by their homosexuality that when Lot offered his two daughter, they didn't even want to take them! That story can be read in Genesis 19. Jude 1:7 goes on to use Lot as an example of of the judgment that God will bring on all workers of iniquity. The Bible uses the word "sodomite" to describe a homosexual, and they're constantly being told to drive them out. The sodomites were not to be allowed in the land.

I would just like to add to this topic that transvestism (if there is such a word) is also considered abomination before God: Deuteronomy 22:5.

See, the Bible is pretty STRAIGHT on the matter. If you could forgive my puns here, we are told in Matthew 7 that "straight is the gate" that leads to life. It's really not an issue whether or not the Bible is for against homosexuality (because it is clearly against it). The issue that people have is whether or not they are going to believe the Bible, and therefore God, or if they are going to make their own religion, create their own image of God, just to suit their lusts.

Homosexuality is a sin. God says so, and frankly He is Who decides what is sin or not. Let's not forget that lying and heterosexual lust is just as much of a sin! That sounds like it will be another post though!

Hey, let's just submit our wills to God in every thing. Let's stop pretending that what we want to do so much, is acceptable in God's eyes, and instead surrender to the Almighty God Who loved us enough to send His Son to die in our places on the cross.

Just a thought...

Homosexuality - part 1

Ok, I said a while back, after I had gone to evangelize at the Gay Pride Parade this year in Rochester, that I would be writing down some thoughts on that parade, and on the issue of homosexuality in general.

Well, yesterday, I got a Christian News brief in my email, and one of the articles was about a CCM musician that publicly announced that he's living a homosexual lifestyle. I knew I recognized the name of the artist, but I wasn't sure who it was. I looked up some of his songs and was surprised that they were some of the songs that I'm familiar with that have been sung many times in our church and the churches I've been around to. Anyway, that news article reminded me to get busy on writing my thoughts on the subject.

So, my first thought, will be based on that news article, and carry on from there. I hope you don't get too sick of the subject, and I will try to be original enough on the subject that you don't lose interest. Maybe even I'll throw in some stupid humor so you can at least laught at me in the process!

Anyway, my thought/question for the day is this: What do we do with the songs from this songwriter? I mean, someone comes out and says they're living in something that the Bible speaks negatively about (that will be tomorrow's post, I imagine), what do we do with the the music that they already created? The same could be asked about music that a musician brought about, what appears to be good, godly, Christian music, and then they go and leave their husband or wife? Do we throw out the music with the reputation that the artist has thrown away?

What do you think?

(Let's see how many readers I really have anymore!)

As always, anonymous comments are more than welcome.

"I'm Just a Bible-Believer!"

1 Corinthians 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

How many times have you heard good preachers say things like, "Yeah, some people say they are X and others say they are X. But, bless God, I'm just a Bible believer!" (You can plug in your choice of doctrinal differences for the X's.) The idea is this, both parties have problems with them, so I'm simply going to follow what the Bible says.

Now, this is the right stance to take - let's get that out of the way. However, when you look at 1 Corinthians 1:12, the contentious people at the church of Corinth were following different personalities, if you will, and saying that "I'm a Pauline, I'm an Apollite, I'm a Cephan, I'm a Chrisitan..." (I had fun making up those names!) Notice that one of the contentious group of people which Paul is chargin here was saying, "I am of Christ."

That group of people, the "I am of Christ" group, is just as guilty as those that are saying to be of Paul. The fact of the matter is that we all should follow Christ and not just say that we are. Don't be mad when people are willing to accept "labels" to simply help establish their beliefs - that's not the problem. Now, when you follow your group-label to a contentious point, well, now you really have stopped following Christ's example.

Anyway, just a divisive thought...