Pediatrician refuses to care for lesbians' baby

[genuineoriginal]

Actually, I have read them many times. Going to these two chapters in Romans to defend your stance shows how little you understand those chapters.

Your response shows that you have never bothered to try to understand those chapters.

Why do you assume that type of thinking comes from an attitude? I have observed on many occasions how unbelievers can, will, and have corrected believers on their actions and speech. Ever hear of the phrase, "but I thought you were a Christian!"? Even they know that many things we say and do are contrary to how we are supposed to act and speak.

Leviticus 19:17-18 17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord. ​

When Jesus said the second greatest commandment was to love thy neighbour as thyself, do you think He meant that we were to violate the verse right above it that said not to rebuke our neighbour so he could remain in sin?

That is what sinners claim that Christians should do.

(refer above)

You need to read your Bible more and try to see what sin looks like from God's perspective instead of the sinner's perspective.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The doctor is in error.

Should every doctor that has a conflict of interest be crucified by public opinion, some for recusing themselves and the rest for not recusing themselves?

 

[Ardima]

Your response shows that you have never bothered to try to understand those chapters.

I understand them perfectly. Those chapters were written to believers in Rome. The context being a rift between the gentile believers and the the Jewish believers because each group thought themselves better than the other. In the first two chapters Paul is explaining that sin is part of the human condition and reaches all people; Jews and Gentiles alike; thus eliminating any possibility of one group being better than the other. He also explains that the underlying cause of sin is a love and worship problem and that God has given men over to the desires of the flesh because they choose to love themselves more than they love God.

You need to read your Bible more and try to see what sin looks like from God's perspective instead of the sinner's perspective.

The problem is you do not see what sin looks like from God's perspective. Sin is anything that is motivated by something outside of the Love of God. Moreover, from God's perspective, sin has already been dealt with once-and-for-all through the the work of Jesus Christ. You ever wonder why the Bible never claims that sin is judged? It is because the issue of sin is no longer an issue in God's perspective. The Bible claims that every man will be judged according to his works; not according to his sin.

In order to comprehend the Bible we need to interpret it through the lens of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Trying to do so any other way only will only warp the Gospel.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I understand them perfectly. Those chapters were written to believers in Rome. The context being a rift between the gentile believers and the the Jewish believers because each group thought themselves better than the other. In the first two chapters Paul is explaining that sin is part of the human condition and reaches all people; Jews and Gentiles alike; thus eliminating any possibility of one group being better than the other. He also explains that the underlying cause of sin is a love and worship problem and that God has given men over to the desires of the flesh because they choose to love themselves more than they love God.

No, Paul is not explaining that sin is part of the human condition.
Paul is explaining that God will most certainly judge people according to whether they do good or whether they do evil.

The problem is you do not see what sin looks like from God's perspective. Sin is anything that is motivated by something outside of the Love of God.

You missed the mark on that one.
But, then again, sin means "missing the mark."

Moreover, from God's perspective, sin has already been dealt with once-and-for-all through the the work of Jesus Christ.

No, God has given judgment to Christ, who will judge in God's place.

You ever wonder why the Bible never claims that sin is judged? It is because the issue of sin is no longer an issue in God's perspective. The Bible claims that every man will be judged according to his works; not according to his sin.

God does not judge sin, God judges men to see whether their works are sin.
You are trying to avoid the judgment of God by claiming that God is not judging men according to whether their works are sin or not.

In order to comprehend the Bible we need to interpret it through the lens of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Trying to do so any other way only will only warp the Gospel.

Paul spent three years studying the Old Testament scriptures to learn about Christ after Jesus spoke to him on the road to Damascus.
The Old Testament scriptures are needed to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ is needed to fully understand the Old Testament scriptures.

Failure to use the Old Testament scriptures to understand the Gospel is the surest way to end up believing a different gospel than the one the Apostles believed.

 

[oatmeal]

Should every doctor that has a conflict of interest be crucified by public opinion, some for recusing themselves and the rest for not recusing themselves?

Should doctors be taking the Hippocratic oath if their beliefs do not agree with it?

I would say no.

Why make an oath that the person has no intention of carrying out?

Elected officials swear to uphold the Constitution, but do not do so.

Maybe doctors should rewrite the oath like couples write marriage vows?

People who take any public stand on any issue will be subject to public opinion

That's life.

People who do not wish to be under public scrutiny need to learn to avoid the public.

 

[Ardima]

No, Paul is not explaining that sin is part of the human condition.
Paul is explaining that God will most certainly judge people according to whether they do good or whether they do evil.

And you claim that I do not understand it. Read the context again...

You missed the mark on that one.
But, then again, sin means "missing the mark."

I did? What was the very first commandment? Hint: it is in the Old Testament... Genesis in fact.

No, God has given judgment to Christ, who will judge in God's place.

So you are saying that Jesus isn't God...

God does not judge sin, God judges men to see whether their works are sin.

This could not be a more false statement. God most definitely does judge sin; however the judgment for sin has already been passed. Sin is why we die. Death was, and still is, the judgment for sin.

You are trying to avoid the judgment of God by claiming that God is not judging men according to whether their works are sin or not.

I welcome the judgment of God. Judgment is the means by which he has reconciled the world. Christ fulfilled that judgment once-and-for-all... This is the Gospel.

Paul spent three years studying the Old Testament scriptures to learn about Christ after Jesus spoke to him on the road to Damascus.

Way to read into Galatians something that isn't there. Paul was a Pharisee. He knew the Old Testament scriptures. He didn't understand them until he came to know Christ. He thought he was defending the OT by killing believers.

The Old Testament scriptures are needed to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ is needed to fully understand the Old Testament scriptures.

You have this completely backwards. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is needed to understand the Old Testament scriptures; it is needed to understand anything about God. The Gospel of Christ is the only way we can understand the Love of God toward us. Everything that God has ever done from the beginning of time to its upcoming end has always been out of His Love. If The Old Testament scriptures were needed to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ we would all still be in unbelief. The Pharisee's would have been the first to know Jesus if the OT was needed to understand the Gospel. How did that work out for them?

Failure to use the Old Testament scriptures to understand the Gospel is the surest way to end up believing a different gospel than the one the Apostles believed.

Failure to use the Gospel to understand the OT is the surest way to remain focused on sin and damnation instead of the glorious Power, Grace, and Love of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Should doctors be taking the Hippocratic oath if their beliefs do not agree with it?

I would say no.

Should a Christian doctor ever swear an oath by the Roman gods and goddesses?

Hippocratic Oath
I swear by Apollo the physician, and Aesculapius the surgeon, likewise Hygeia and Panacea, and call all the gods and goddesses to witness, that I will observe and keep this underwritten oath, to the utmost of my power and judgment.​

I say no.

Why make an oath that the person has no intention of carrying out?

The Bible says not to swear any oath, merely let your yes be yes and your no be no.

People who take any public stand on any issue will be subject to public opinion

That's life.

People who do not wish to be under public scrutiny need to learn to avoid the public.

Are you really saying that Christians should hide their beliefs?

 

[genuineoriginal]

And you claim that I do not understand it.

You have already proven that you don't understand it.

So you are saying that Jesus isn't God...

I am saying you don't know what the Bible states.

John 5:26-27 26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.​

This could not be a more false statement. God most definitely does judge sin;

Not once does the Bible state that God judges sin, but over and over it states that God judges people for their sin.

however the judgment for sin has already been passed. Sin is why we die. Death was, and still is, the judgment for sin.

The Bible states that the judgment happens after we die. It also states that the last enemy to be destroyed will be death, but that doesn't happen until the great white throne judgment.

Failure to use the Gospel to understand the OT is the surest way to remain focused on sin and damnation instead of the glorious Power, Grace, and Love of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Failure to understand the Old Testament is the surest way to end up with a false gospel.

 

[Lighthouse]

I believe the doctor should have the right to do what she did.

I agree.

But was she right in doing so?

No.

 

[resodko]

the right thing to do would have been to report the perverted "couple" to the authorities to be arrested, tried and executed for the crime of homosexuality

and then the child could have been adopted by a decent, non-perverted, Godly, Christian couple and raised in the Lord


that would have been the right thing to do



unfortunately not a choice in the cesspool of a society in which we live