If looking in from a nonbeliever, the nonbeliever says that genetics determine everything. I had one tell me that rape is genetic. Therefore they are saying that it is not possible for a person born into homophilia. All who stop being such, are either fooling themselves or never were homophiles. It's circular logic without any basis of truth. Had they such, they would provide it rather than trying to interpret brain patterns when they cannot even figure out how the Lord caused a lump of fat to retain memory and critical thought.
While I do think that nonspecific urges are encouraged by genes, that does not imply how these are expressed. You're referring to the heart of a person, their soul, which is not bound by genes and I agree that, should God change this, these expressions would eventually be curved, urges finally conquered with His blessing.
Isn't He omnipresent? I would suggest Genesis to prove that. "Let US make man in OUR image." Not to mention that Jesus assures his deity (is that the right term?).
If you download, esword from the internet, you'll have a quick reference Bible to find any number of supportive verses. Have fun, sister.
I'm not sure I'm understanding, but will give it a try.
I don't think his body ever rotted or was soiled, so there would be no renewel. The wounds might be a sign as said before me. Consider the man who pierced his ear as a sign of his loyalty to his kind master. Since this is Jesus, and the master and servant of Himself, he's done no wrong and marked himself to honor the Father and His will, a physical sign of his sacrifice. This is certainly for us to see as with many things done, since the Lord only needs to see the heart.
Unfortunately, not all Christians think that homosexuality, bisexuality or pansexuality is wrong. Personally, I think it should all end with -phile along with heterosexual as it is a desire, just that. Nothing we are born with and science proves this easily--Yes, please, find a gene. For over five years I had the belief that it was okay, but the Bible is very clear on this matter. The Christians I have found that think that homophilia, biphilia and panphilia are okay, are those who think the Bible is corruptible because of man's freewill and God's lack of influence. Their basis is wrong so it's near impossible to change the mentality, especially if they indulge in that lifestyle.
This is coming from a panphile of five or more years (it wasn't something immediate), struggling with it even after becoming a Christian since it was much like an addiction. I can tell you that there are some that would hate you, but Christians should hate the sin and love the sinner. We all fail, but that's no reason to give into sin without a fight. Seek out help and avoid any chance that the sin would stir in your mind. There is a discussion on here concerning it, but I couldn't tell you where off the top of my head. It spoke of lust and how to overcome it. Please check it out. :)
Aard, I don't know if that is a question for the post, but, if not, it depends on the person I guess. I would suggest three to fourth months IF it has been many deep conversations, but then I guess another woman would like it within a week or waiting for almost a year. You just have to ask. *shrug* Sorry for not being more help.
Was trying to work up examples for another post and decided to list these off. Are these definitions right? Is the list missing any? Which are you? Why do you support it?
i) Historic Premillennialism: Christ will return before the 1000 years (literal) and establish His earthly kingdom. The church does not play a part in building the kingdom and Christ's return takes place at an unknown time.
ii) Dispensational Premillennialism: Like Historical Premillennialism, except DPM believe in the rebuilding of Jewish temples and traditions during the millennia. Note that there are many subcatagories involving Rapture, such as Pre-tribulation, Mid-tribulation, PreWrath, Post-tribulation, Pan-tribulation and Partial Rapture.
iii) Classical Amillennialism: 1000 years is figurative and describes the lengthy time before Christ returns. The church and Israel are synonymous, and the removal of the church is merely the greeting of Christ. The gospel must fill the earth before Christ returns, and the struggles are the historic struggles and growth of Christianity.
iv) Optimistic Amillennialism: Like Classical Amillennialism, except OAM states that the next main event will be the Second Coming and soon.
v) Temple Amillennialism: Like Optimistic Amillennialism, except TAM agrees with Premillennialism that the physical church ends, though that it has already with the surge of false doctrine within.
vi) Classic Postmillennialism: Christ will return after a figurative 1000 years to establish the new earth and new heaven. The Church is the Kingdom of Christ and the 1000 years begins through the preaching of the gospel by the church. The removal of the church is merely the greeting of Christ, and the struggles are the historic struggle of Israel and the growth of the church.
vii) Liberal Postmillennialism: Like Classic Postmillennialism, except LPM promotes that the world is becoming better from humanistism rather than through the power of God and His Word.
viii) Theonomic Postmillennialism: Like Classic Postmillennialism, except TPM says that the 1000 years begins some time after the church's influences take hold of society with Mosiac Law and civil law in subjection to God's law, before handing it over to Christ.
This is a great site, but there are always backseat drivers who wish for certain improvements, especially in searching.
Some people do not fall into a denomination, or at least a large one, and others claim a denomination but that denomination is split on issues.
So questions could be used to narrow it down, as long as more answers could be provided if the current answers do not cover all beliefs, and maybe a definition.
If there are further splits in the question, such as below where there are Historic Premillennialists and Dispensational Premillenialists, another question could open up below to ask which. Going on from that, another question to determine which of the six different types (or more) Dispensational Premillenialists the answerer is.
Also an option on whether or not it is important or not important to the person who answers. An example would be...
#. Do you believe one or a version of one of the following?
i) Premillennialism: (Definition).
ii) Amillennialism: (Definition).
iii) Postmillennialism: (Definition).
Is this question important or not important to you? (In other words, is it something your significant other must have?)
i) Important
ii) Not Important
(If a person choose Postmillennialism, this could be under the original question) #b. Which version of Postmillenialism more closely matches your beliefs?
This is a great site, but there are always backseat drivers who wish for certain improvements, especially in searching.
Some people do not fall into a denomination, or at least a large one, and others claim a denomination but that denomination is split on issues.
So questions could be used to narrow it down, as long as more answers could be provided if the current answers do not cover all beliefs, and maybe a definition.
Hypothetically, if still on a Christian dating website, what would be your deal-breaker question? What would be your preferred answer? What are some other choices besides yours so we know the uniqueness of yours?
This is a great site, but there are always backseat drivers who wish for certain improvements, especially in searching.
Some people do not fall into a denomination, or at least a large one, and others claim a denomination but that denomination is split on issues.
So questions could be used to narrow it down, as long as more answers could be provided if the current answers do not cover all beliefs, and maybe a definition.
Hypothetically, if still on a Christian dating website, what would be your deal-breaker question? What would be your preferred answer? What are some other choices besides yours so we know the uniqueness of yours?
What is it? How would you define it so it cannot be identified as fantasy? How would a crazy person's perception of the world, with pink flying unicorns, be excused from your definition.
Lastly, is there reality according to your definition?
