Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

bear2be2 said:

---

EDIT: Sicem doesn't recognize Greek text.

But the notion that a document that has been translated and retranslated as many times as the Bible has is clear, unambiguous and closed to alternative interpretation is an odd one to me.

---

Super weak spin attempt .

Try again.

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

Baylor just needs to come out and admit that it is not interested in having conservative students express themselves....they are to go to Baylor and pay the outrageous tuition...but other wise comport themselves like good progressives and never stray far from the party line on delicate pc issues.

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

Are there any red letters where Jesus said incest was a sin? I don't recollect any offhand. If not, would you say incest is not a sin?

Booray said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

So saying something as obvious as Scripture condemns homosexuality is now controversial and off-limits at a Christian University? It requires a review by Baylor?

---

Baylor YCT claimed that others they disagree with about the perceived sin of homosexuality are probably not Christian. Given that we are all sinners, I find that line of thinking dumb and offensive. I assume that we all agree that you can be wrong on the issue and still be a Christian? (Not that I agree with the underlying premise of the YCT argument either).

---

I agree the statement was a little over the top, though it does find some support in scripture.

---

I am going to stick with the "Judge not" principle. Baylor YCT should also.

---

You will just ignore that part where Jesus, repeatedly, said "sin no more", I see.

---

No, I am not. I will try to sin no more. I will fail.

Why would you think that trying to be not judgmental is ignoring sin?

---

Because the story where Jesus speaks on not judging (the woman caught in adultery), also includes Jesus' specific command to 'sin no more'.

---

Saying we should not be judgmental is not the same as saying we should ignore sin in in our own lives. I said we should not be judgmental; your inference makes no sense.

---

Clearly identifying what behaviors are or are not Christian is not 'being judgmental' of the person. It clarifies the decision.

And to be very clear, it's not 'my inference', it's the specific words of Christ with the meaning pretty indisputable.

I have struggled with some scriptures, especially when Scripture says things I do not understand or would prefer said something different. But I will not condemn someone for accurately quoting Scripture.

---

You can identify sins without being judgmental of the actor. Having humans decide who (likely) qualifies as a Christian is not part of the scripture you are citing. It is the exact opposite of what Jesus was talking about.

The tweet that said support of homosexual behavior is not consistent with scripture was wrong imho, but I have no problem with it. The tweet that said if you support homosexual behavior you are likely not a Christian was a perfect analogy to those who wanted the adultress stoned. Jesus said to them and he would say to Baylor YCT: that is not your judgment to make.

---

You do not get to say that Jesus would have condemned YCT, unless you can find verses in support of homosexual behavior.

You can disagree on the basis of your personal ethics, but not in terms of Christian tradition or doctrine.

---

This is just not that difficult. Jesus condemned those who wanted to stone the adultress, not because adultery was ok but because humans should not be int he business of rendering judgments that belong to God. Same thing here. regardless of whether homosexual behavior is a sin or not a sin, humans (the YCT in this instance) should not be in the business of rendering judgments that belong to God. God alone gets to make that call.

---

Again, you are free to believe what you want,

Stop pretending you speak for Christ, you don't fit the job description.

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

I am with you here, Booray. I love pork. I also love me some creatures from the sea that don't have scales. They are yummy!!!!

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

---

Jesus affirmed that people are either to be single and celibate or married and faithful to one spouse of the opposite gender.

He denounced the former (e.g., Matt. 5:28; 15:19) and defined the latter according to Genesis 2:24: "For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh" (Matt. 19:5 AT; par. Mark 10:78).

Jesus never said anything explicit about abortion, same-sex marriage, or child molestation. But it would be an incredible claim to conclude from that fact that Jesus's teaching is irrelevant to our ethical assessment of those issues.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Bet YCT gets cancelled/removed and Baylor G.A.Y. is officially recognized.

---

To the Baylor G.A.Y. representatives credit, she said that she thought YCT had a valid voice and shouldn't be disbanded, but that she thought their group should be recognized too.

OTOH, what the hell is controversial about a Conservative Christian group on a Christian University campus stating they thought the LBGTQ stance was in conflict with God's written law, or that an organization that has in their core statements, they want to dismantle the hetronormative construct, dismantle police, dismantle capitalism, dismantle the nuclear household model, support abortion for the entire term of pregnancy etc.

Where is the controversy? It would be controversial if they supported these groups.

Still, I give the Baylor G.A.Y. person credit for stating she though YCT had a valid voice too. Usually those groups want to shut other down. Props for her being better than that.

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

Ironically, one can look at the red letters to see where Jesus said, eating pork is no longer a sin. So, I think he delivered a clear message on that one.

If we are going to start judging right and wrong by what Jesus specifically mentioned, then we are going to have to revisit the morality of a bunch of conduct that society has generally deemed evil. By way of example, Christ never specifically mentioned child molestation or rape. Does that mean it's not evil? Of course not.

Scripture's message on homosexuality is clear as day. It takes eisegesis to suggest otherwise.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

---

Jesus affirmed that people are either to be single and celibate or married and faithful to one spouse of the opposite gender.

He denounced the former (e.g., Matt. 5:28; 15:19) and defined the latter according to Genesis 2:24: "For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh" (Matt. 19:5 AT; par. Mark 10:78).

Jesus never said anything explicit about abortion, same-sex marriage, or child molestation. But it would be an incredible claim to conclude from that fact that Jesus's teaching is irrelevant to our ethical assessment of those issues.

---

You are actually citing the passages where Jesus says that looking at another woman with lust is committing adultery and that re-marriage on most grounds is adultery. I noticed that the YCT was not claiming that those who lust after other women and who remarry are "probably not Christians."

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

---

Jesus affirmed that people are either to be single and celibate or married and faithful to one spouse of the opposite gender.

He denounced the former (e.g., Matt. 5:28; 15:19) and defined the latter according to Genesis 2:24: "For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh" (Matt. 19:5 AT; par. Mark 10:78).

Jesus never said anything explicit about abortion, same-sex marriage, or child molestation. But it would be an incredible claim to conclude from that fact that Jesus's teaching is irrelevant to our ethical assessment of those issues.

---

You are actually citing the passages where Jesus says that looking at another woman with lust is committing adultery and that re-marriage on most grounds is adultery. I noticed that the YCT was not claiming that those who lust after other women and who remarry are "probably not Christians."

---

I haven't heard of any groups encouraging people to become allies of the practices of lusting after other woman or remarrying.

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

---

Jesus affirmed that people are either to be single and celibate or married and faithful to one spouse of the opposite gender.

He denounced the former (e.g., Matt. 5:28; 15:19) and defined the latter according to Genesis 2:24: "For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh" (Matt. 19:5 AT; par. Mark 10:78).

Jesus never said anything explicit about abortion, same-sex marriage, or child molestation. But it would be an incredible claim to conclude from that fact that Jesus's teaching is irrelevant to our ethical assessment of those issues.

---

You are actually citing the passages where Jesus says that looking at another woman with lust is committing adultery and that re-marriage on most grounds is adultery. I noticed that the YCT was not claiming that those who lust after other women and who remarry are "probably not Christians."

---

...because nobody has that message bro.

But right now in the eyes of Jesus I could marry and man, take it in the ass and he'd find no sin in that?

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

I am with you here, Booray. I love pork. I also love me some creatures from the sea that don't have scales. They are yummy!!!!

---

Yes catfish is great.

br53 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

I am with you here, Booray. I love pork. I also love me some creatures from the sea that don't have scales. They are yummy!!!!

---

Yes catfish is great.

---

Yes. And if there are no shrimp and lobsters in Heaven, I'm not sure if I wanna go!

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

Ironically, one can look at the red letters to see where Jesus said, eating pork is no longer a sin. So, I think he delivered a clear message on that one.

If we are going to start judging right and wrong by what Jesus specifically mentioned, then we are going to have to revisit the morality of a bunch of conduct that society has generally deemed evil. By way of example, Christ never specifically mentioned child molestation or rape. Does that mean it's not evil? Of course not.

Scripture's message on homosexuality is clear as day. It takes eisegesis to suggest otherwise.

---

As to child molestation, it means it has always been clear enough that it was abhorrent so he didn't need to say anything.

This is what the red letters say to me: We are all fallen, God loves us anyway,we should try our very hardest to do the same to him and each other and God will take care of us if we do. The business of identifying others as sinners, defining their sins and judging them is all opposite of what I perceive as Jesus' core message.

The idea that the Bible is magic and holds the only correct answer to these specific questions is just superstition. As we are likely not starting with the same assumptions, we are likely not getting to the same conclusion.

BearlySpeaking said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

---

Jesus affirmed that people are either to be single and celibate or married and faithful to one spouse of the opposite gender.

He denounced the former (e.g., Matt. 5:28; 15:19) and defined the latter according to Genesis 2:24: "For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh" (Matt. 19:5 AT; par. Mark 10:78).

Jesus never said anything explicit about abortion, same-sex marriage, or child molestation. But it would be an incredible claim to conclude from that fact that Jesus's teaching is irrelevant to our ethical assessment of those issues.

---

You are actually citing the passages where Jesus says that looking at another woman with lust is committing adultery and that re-marriage on most grounds is adultery. I noticed that the YCT was not claiming that those who lust after other women and who remarry are "probably not Christians."

---

I haven't heard of any groups encouraging people to become allies of the practices of lusting after other woman or remarrying.

---

That doesn't need to be encouraged because it is universally accepted.

Changing your course of action is part of contrition and repentance.

Saying 'I'm sorry' then going back and doing it again is not following Christ.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

br53 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

I am with you here, Booray. I love pork. I also love me some creatures from the sea that don't have scales. They are yummy!!!!

---

Yes catfish is great.

---

Yes. And if there are no shrimp and lobsters in Heaven, I'm not sure if I wanna go!

---

I never really cared for lobster that much. Always ran thru me like oats thru a goose. Shrimp are great, though. But aren't both covered under the scale part by having shells?

br53 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

br53 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

I am with you here, Booray. I love pork. I also love me some creatures from the sea that don't have scales. They are yummy!!!!

---

Yes catfish is great.

---

Yes. And if there are no shrimp and lobsters in Heaven, I'm not sure if I wanna go!

---

I never really cared for lobster that much. Always ran thru me like oats thru a goose. Shrimp are great, though. But aren't both covered under the scale part by having shells?

---

I never thought about it that way! Maybe so. Oysters might be covered too.

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

Ironically, one can look at the red letters to see where Jesus said, eating pork is no longer a sin. So, I think he delivered a clear message on that one.

If we are going to start judging right and wrong by what Jesus specifically mentioned, then we are going to have to revisit the morality of a bunch of conduct that society has generally deemed evil. By way of example, Christ never specifically mentioned child molestation or rape. Does that mean it's not evil? Of course not.

Scripture's message on homosexuality is clear as day. It takes eisegesis to suggest otherwise.

---

The business of identifying others as sinners, defining their sins and judging them is all opposite of what I perceive as Jesus' core message.

---

This is literally what the bible is...

It defines sin and shows gods judgment and Jesus/God tells us what is off limits.

Jesus tells us to encourage others to follow his rules. But you say we can't do that?

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

Ironically, one can look at the red letters to see where Jesus said, eating pork is no longer a sin. So, I think he delivered a clear message on that one.

If we are going to start judging right and wrong by what Jesus specifically mentioned, then we are going to have to revisit the morality of a bunch of conduct that society has generally deemed evil. By way of example, Christ never specifically mentioned child molestation or rape. Does that mean it's not evil? Of course not.

Scripture's message on homosexuality is clear as day. It takes eisegesis to suggest otherwise.

---

As to child molestation, it means it has always been clear enough that it was abhorrent so he didn't need to say anything.

This is what the red letters say to me: We are all fallen, God loves us anyway,we should try our very hardest to do the same to him and each other and God will take care of us if we do. The business of identifying others as sinners, defining their sins and judging them is all opposite of what I perceive as Jesus' core message.

The idea that the Bible is magic and holds the only correct answer to these specific questions is just superstition. As we are likely not starting with the same assumptions, we are likely not getting to the same conclusion.

---

If you deny that sexual morality has any basis in divine law, do you base your moral beliefs about sex on natural law, Kantian principles, your own subjective preferences, or something else? How do you judge one of your own actions as a sin or not?
I ask because you appeal to a divine foundation for morality, then reject the same moral foundation in your last paragraph.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Changing your course of action is part of contrition and repentance.

Saying 'I'm sorry' then going back and doing it again is not following Christ.

---

You just don't get it.

God will determine who is following God. Not you.

No need to offer your opinion on it. Just try to be good in your own life

That is what Jesus said to the would-be stoners and the adultress.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

br53 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

br53 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

I am with you here, Booray. I love pork. I also love me some creatures from the sea that don't have scales. They are yummy!!!!

---

Yes catfish is great.

---

Yes. And if there are no shrimp and lobsters in Heaven, I'm not sure if I wanna go!

---

I never really cared for lobster that much. Always ran thru me like oats thru a goose. Shrimp are great, though. But aren't both covered under the scale part by having shells?

---

I never thought about it that way! Maybe so. Oysters might be covered too.

---

I sure hope so cause I love them oysters too.

Booray said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Changing your course of action is part of contrition and repentance.

Saying 'I'm sorry' then going back and doing it again is not following Christ.

---

You just don't get it.

God will determine who is following God. Not you.

No need to offer your opinion on it. Just try to be good in your own life

That is what Jesus said to the would-be stoners and the adultress.

---

Nope, Jesus said what Scripture says.

Your opinion is not Scripture.

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Would allowing pro homosexual messages to be promoted at your institution be a sin?

Such as "it's ok to have gay sex".

---

I reject the premise of your question (that gay sex is a sin).

And a university should tolerate all sorts of messages, even if those messages contradict the fundamental principles of the school .The whole "unexamined life" thing.

So I think not.

But there is also nothing wrong with Baylor saying "we disagree and that is not what Baylor believes."

---

But god says it's a sin. So you disagree with gods word here?

And if they should tolerate all messages then that includes YCT. So wouldn't you be against BAYLOR G.A.Y who says they shouldn't have a voice?

---

People who think they understood God say it is a sin. They also said eating pork is a sin. I don;t believe eating pork is a sin. give me the red letters where Jesus said homosexuality is a sin and we can talk about it.

My recollection was that Baylor G.A.Y. only said that YCT should not be the only voice on campus, not that it should not have a voice. I am all for them both having a voice on the issue.

---

Ironically, one can look at the red letters to see where Jesus said, eating pork is no longer a sin. So, I think he delivered a clear message on that one.

If we are going to start judging right and wrong by what Jesus specifically mentioned, then we are going to have to revisit the morality of a bunch of conduct that society has generally deemed evil. By way of example, Christ never specifically mentioned child molestation or rape. Does that mean it's not evil? Of course not.

Scripture's message on homosexuality is clear as day. It takes eisegesis to suggest otherwise.

---

As to child molestation, it means it has always been clear enough that it was abhorrent so he didn't need to say anything.

This is what the red letters say to me: We are all fallen, God loves us anyway,we should try our very hardest to do the same to him and each other and God will take care of us if we do. The business of identifying others as sinners, defining their sins and judging them is all opposite of what I perceive as Jesus' core message.

The idea that the Bible is magic and holds the only correct answer to these specific questions is just superstition. As we are likely not starting with the same assumptions, we are likely not getting to the same conclusion.

---

So, Jesus had no need to speak regarding evils we all know to be evil (well, except the Greeks and some Romans), but he chose not to clarify scripture's consistent message on homosexuality in both New Testament and Old? Huh.

I agree for the most part with your second paragraph, though I think it invites a hands off approach not intended by scripture to the discernment and shrewdness I identified above.

Gold Tron said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Gold Tron said:

---

Surely nothing will happen officially since their stance is in line with the university's core beliefs.

---

Not sure about that. It's one thing to say these practices are sinful. It's another to say that if you are sympathetic to such people you're going to hell.

---

I guess by that definition, if your doctor warns you that smoking can give you a heart attack, that makes the doctor "hateful" and judgmental of a valid life choice.

---

No.

Going to hell is a little more severe than having a heart attack.

Plus, I don't believe being gay is a life choice.

---

Sure it is. You cannot help what you are attracted to but you can decide not to act on it. I find tall red headed women attractive but I am happily married to someone that does not bear that description

---

Right. You are attracted to attractive women. You were born that way. You choose whether to act on your feelings.

Gay people are born gay. Acting on their desires is also a life choice.

But you have a way to express your desire in a way that your church blesses.

Gays don't.

Also, the scriptures say only some have the gift of celibacy.

So why are you allowed to fulfill your desires in a blessed way when a gay person isn't and when the scriptures say only some have the gift of celibacy?

I'm not saying I have the answer to that question. But it deserves thought.

George Truett said:

---

Gold Tron said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Gold Tron said:

---

Surely nothing will happen officially since their stance is in line with the university's core beliefs.

---

Not sure about that. It's one thing to say these practices are sinful. It's another to say that if you are sympathetic to such people you're going to hell.

---

I guess by that definition, if your doctor warns you that smoking can give you a heart attack, that makes the doctor "hateful" and judgmental of a valid life choice.

---

No.

Going to hell is a little more severe than having a heart attack.

Plus, I don't believe being gay is a life choice.

---

Sure it is. You cannot help what you are attracted to but you can decide not to act on it. I find tall red headed women attractive but I am happily married to someone that does not bear that description

---

Right. You are attracted to attractive women. You were born that way. You choose whether to act on your feelings.

Gay people are born gay. Acting on their desires is also a life choice.

But you have a way to express your desire in a way that your church blesses.

Gays don't.

Also, the scriptures say only some have the gift of celibacy.

So why are you allowed to fulfill your desires in a blessed way when a gay person isn't and when the scriptures say only some have the gift of celibacy?

I'm not saying I have the answer to that question. But it deserves thought.

---

This is why there are catholic priests diddling little boys.

Doc Holliday said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Mothra said:

---

So saying something as obvious as Scripture condemns homosexuality is now controversial and off-limits at a Christian University? It requires a review by Baylor?

---

They went farther than this. They said that if you're an ally of the movement, you aren't a Christian.

I don't find a gay hate clause in John 3:16.

Furthermore, there are many Christ followers who interpret the Bible differently from you on this issue. This doesn't mean they aren't Christians. It just means they have a different interpretation.

There are many different nuances to this issue. These YCT pronouncements are basically ugly and mean-spirited.

This isn't even a core issue in the scriptures. The scriptures talk a lot more about greed, injustice, hypocrisy, hate, and the like.

Basically, the YCT is straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

Also, because they're young, they probably haven't learned the lesson that if you want a movement to gain sympathy and grow, attack it.

---

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

"Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

---

Okay. Let's run with that.

It says the "sexually immoral" and adulterers will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Donald Trump is twice divorced and remarried. Jesus said plainly that if you do that, you're guilty of adultery. Full stop. Furthermore, he has been unfaithful to all his wives. His current marriage is adulterous.

Is it then incompatible with Christianity to be an ally of Donald Trump, since by your standard he is guilty of adultery and has not repented? Does this mean he's not a Christian and is going to hell? And that if you're an ally of his, you're also not a Christian and going to hell?

Furthermore, Jesus defined looking at a woman lustfully as adultery. Under your standard pretty much all of us men are not going to be in the kingdom.

What about people who are greedy? What about slanderers (see the aforementioned Trump)?

You can't just camp out on the homosexual part of this text and ignore the rest.

bear2be2 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Mothra said:

---

So saying something as obvious as Scripture condemns homosexuality is now controversial and off-limits at a Christian University? It requires a review by Baylor?

---

They went farther than this. They said that if you're an ally of the movement, you aren't a Christian.

I don't find a gay hate clause in John 3:16.

Furthermore, there are many Christ followers who interpret the Bible differently from you on this issue. This doesn't mean they aren't Christians. It just means they have a different interpretation.

There are many different nuances to this issue. These YCT pronouncements are basically ugly and mean-spirited.

This isn't even a core issue in the scriptures. The scriptures talk a lot more about greed, injustice, hypocrisy, hate, and the like.

Basically, the YCT is straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

Also, because they're young, they probably haven't learned the lesson that if you want a movement to gain sympathy and grow, attack it.

---

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

"Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

---

Christian men are a core audience for most major porn sites. Yet the church finds grace for them. If I didn't know any better, I might conclude that the Bible is being weaponized against communities the church finds expendable.

---

Actually, the evangelical church is good at condemning sins it doesn't commit. That's why you don't hear much from it about greed, etc.

Friscobear said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Friscobear said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Mothra said:

---

So saying something as obvious as Scripture condemns homosexuality is now controversial and off-limits at a Christian University? It requires a review by Baylor?

---

They went farther than this. They said that if you're an ally of the movement, you aren't a Christian.

I don't find a gay hate clause in John 3:16.

Furthermore, there are many Christ followers who interpret the Bible differently from you on this issue. This doesn't mean they aren't Christians. It just means they have a different interpretation.

There are many different nuances to this issue. These YCT pronouncements are basically ugly and mean-spirited.

This isn't even a core issue in the scriptures. The scriptures talk a lot more about greed, injustice, hypocrisy, hate, and the like.

Basically, the YCT is straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

Also, because they're young, they probably haven't learned the lesson that if you want a movement to gain sympathy and grow, attack it.

---

Funny that you would type your first paragraph and then talk about nuance.

They did not say that if you are an ally of the movement that you aren't a Christian. They said that you likely aren't a Christian.

You can argue that point if you'd like, and I'm not saying that I agree totally with their statement, but at least don't misrepresent what they actually said.

You know, nuance and all.

---

Oh. Big difference.

So you're not certainly going to hell but likely going to hell.

That clears it up!

---

You wouldn't call that a nuance?

---

No. See above.

Doc Holliday said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Gold Tron said:

---

Surely nothing will happen officially since their stance is in line with the university's core beliefs.

---

Not sure about that. It's one thing to say these practices are sinful. It's another to say that if you are sympathetic to such people you're going to hell.

---

I guess by that definition, if your doctor warns you that smoking can give you a heart attack, that makes the doctor "hateful" and judgmental of a valid life choice.

---

No.

Going to hell is a little more severe than having a heart attack.

Plus, I don't believe being gay is a life choice.

---

Then you believe God made them gay and then held them to a different standard.

That would make God evil.

---

I don't believe God made them gay. I believe many were born that way.

There's also debate about the meaning of scripture passages about homosexuality. We've already had debates at length about that around here. So I won't get into all that, other than to say sincere Christ followers disagree on the interpretation and application of these passages.

---

So god made conditions in the Universe that would cause some to be gay without their control, and then states that engaging in that behavior is a sin...even though you can't control it.

That's screwed up. I think your message will turn people away from god.

---

Ah, you've arrived at something.

God created a universe in which men lust after women and then tells them not to act on it. That's not much different.

We also have to remember that this universe is broken. Some people are born pedophiles. I'm not saying that's the same as being born gay. But it's part of our broken universe.

Or, maybe the problem has been with us. If the scriptures, especially the teachings of Jesus, reflect God's priorities, then homosexual practices aren't high on his list.

What we've done is take a sin that only a few commit and elevated it above sins that many of us commit.

Oldbear83 said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

George Truett said:

---

Gold Tron said:

---

Surely nothing will happen officially since their stance is in line with the university's core beliefs.

---

Not sure about that. It's one thing to say these practices are sinful. It's another to say that if you are sympathetic to such people you're going to hell.

---

I guess by that definition, if your doctor warns you that smoking can give you a heart attack, that makes the doctor "hateful" and judgmental of a valid life choice.

---

No.

Going to hell is a little more severe than having a heart attack.

Plus, I don't believe being gay is a life choice.

---

You are entitled to your opinion. But quoting Bible verses in context is not something a Christian-inspired university ought to disparage.

---

Again, it's not the scripture quoting that's off base. It's taking the leap of pontificating about someone's Christianity.