Well the old phrase; "ignore it and it will go away" is definitely true, but unfortunately its only a term that applies to mankind, it is not valid under divine standards.
You can be silent and keep that activated and there is nothing anyone can do to convince you otherwise, but when God finally brings on the Great Tribulation and begins the very last major prophecy of exposing and destroying all false religion on earth, he means exactly what is said in Revelation 18: 4.
On that day I'll reassure you, silence will not be in your heart, because wailing and nashing of teeth will be your vocal point when you learned that you have been deceived from your church leaders and congregation that appeared so rock solid.
You'll also learn that the true God has a name and a Son and is not part of a Trinity and he will not tolerate any excuses why you did not seek him before hand.
Your stubborness will seal your fate!

Agreeing to disagree is a worldly thing that points directly to man's inability to solve problems that he has created for himself.
Agreeing to disagree according to scriptural matters, God expects you to vigorously keep searching for truth, as his word clearly points out that there will be false prophets and false religions that will dominate man's spirituality, moreso after the death of his Son Jesus Christ.
I've given you examples from experience and you should be able to interpet those scriptures in the proper context of what God is saying, not the leader of your church. You have the God given right to question your teachers if their teachings does not harmonize with scriptures and what you are telling me, it doesn't.
Were living at a time where your silence would be critical to your salvation. Whether you heed it or not, its your choice.

To Ronald Fleming:

Sometimes it is necessary to agree to disagree, and that is what my silence means.

I can truly understand your silence for so long because you cannot argue with truth, especially God's truth. Better me to tell you than God himself, because God's decision is final.
Now heed his warning in Revelation 18: 4. before its too late!

This is the problem with the Catholic faith, the congregations have been teaching false doctrines for so long that even if a devoted Catholic was shown truth, the power of deception is so strong that any apposed reasoning keeps you blind from the truth.
There is absolutely nothing that is evident in John chapters 14-17 that pertains to the Trinity, nothing. But it does disclose the Father and the Son in union with each other, but never a part of a Trinity.
The Catholic faith has so many discrepancies in its teachings, its no wonder its membership has been dwindling over the years.
You teach that the soul lives on when you die, yet the scriptures clearly point out very bluntly that the soul that is sinning (which means all have sinned) it itself will die. Ezekiel 18: 4, 20.
It doesn't even mention the word purgatory in scriptures, another false doctrine used to enrich the church, while it deceives the deceased family into making payments to heaven, what BS, and you believe this crap?
Your heavenly Father is the only titlement to deserve the word Father applied to his authority, no man is deserving of that honour when it comes to God's word.. Matthew 23: 8.
You confess your sins to God, not man, especially mortal man who's shortcomings are becoming apparent more times than enough with the abuse of young boys.
God doesn't even dwell in man made temples, Acts 17: 24.
During WW II the Catholic churches throughout occupied Europe gave allegience to Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party, (actual orders from the Vatican) rather than stay true to God's Kingdom. I'm sure God was more than pleased with that insult, and just with these simple examples (there are many more) and you have the gull to remain a Catholic.
Sorry about the bluntness, but you are a large part of Christedome that is false and you should, like others, heed to the warning in Revelation 18: 4 to remove yourself from among those deceivers before you share the destruction with them. The Great Tribulation mentioned in Matthew 24: 21 is almost upon us.
These are the words of the true God in scriptures, not man made doctrines used solely for their own selfishnesses and purpose.

To RONALD FLEMING:

Please read the Gospel of John, chapters 14-17 for the words of Jesus on the Trinity and His role in salvation.

Confession, when done correctly has a therapeutic effect. Don't we all feel better when there is someone we can talk to about the things that weigh on our hearts the most, and the knowledge that the dark secrets of our heart is safe with the person? Confession gives human beings an opportunity to examine their conscience, ackowledge their sinfulness, and hear the priest say the words as coming from God that they are forgiven because they have repented. After all we are all sinners and sin before God from whom nothing is hidden. It is God who calls us to a life of holiness, to live like children of God imitating His holiness and love. Just as an Emperor would like his sons and daughters to live in a way worthy of their father, God would like us to live lives worthy of His image in us - to do it out of love for Him, not out of fear. It is by living for Him in the way He would like us to, that we truly become true images of God reflecting Him through our lives. Jesus said, "If you love me, you will obey my commandments." It is in obeying His commandments that we demonstrate our love for Him, not by mere lip service that we believe He died for our sins while living a life of sin just like anyone who doesn't believe in Jesus and His work of salvation. A priest who is bound by the vow of silence in confession is no different from a medical doctor or therapist, who help people to deal with their dark sides in a safe manner, while helping them to improve. It would be ideal if every Catholic priest who hears confession were a trained clinical psychologist, so that they could give practical guidance to help deal with the sinful nature, and recommend that the person contact a health professional for help to deal with a recurring problem when the situation warrants it.

Noted by the lengthy silence of comments, I can correctly assume what I have seen and heard for decades,..."truth is not a popular message these days!"
Whatever religion you honour, just be the best there is and when God's Son finally calls for accountability, he won't be taking excuses for your decisions, John 15: 22.

"We will never really know for sure whether we did the right thing or not" is an honest statement say the least. Considering the Bible mentions only one religion, I believe making the right decisions at times can be very difficult, but then understanding God's standards can also be misinterpetated very easily.
Your hymn, "and they'll know we are Christians by our love," is actually a favourite statement by many religions and its rather an odd understatement to itself considering the lack of love in the world today and 90% of the population claims some sort of religious belief that intiates that love.
With those odds we should be living in a utopia paradise, yet we're far from it, or could it be there are alot of liars out there that do not share the dedication as you have indicated to the person in question, (no offense to no-one)!
Bringing as many as you can to Jesus Christ is a commendable feat and also very difficult in a godless world, but then also you must go further than that, you must worship God through Jesus Christ, because he said in his own words that the Father is greater than him and is deserving of all devotion. Other words, Jesus Christ is not the Heavenly Father.
We are expected to give an account of our lives to God, yes true, so why do Catholics insist on confessing their sins to man?
What clairifications are you talking about, what he has been taught, or whats in the holy scriptures, there is a world of differences.

To CANYON SHEARER

ADDENDUM

Canyon

Thank you for your kind words on 8 March 2007 7:37 AM. I got so carried away in my attempt to state my difference in views, that I overlooked mentioning it in my response to you. Even if I may disagree with you on some matters, I wish to have you know that I respect your stand and truly admire your dedication and your zeal at bringing everyone you possibly can to Jesus Christ. I appreciate the patience with which you clarified points of differences with Ronald Fleming.

My conviction is that until we really stand before the throne of Jesus Christ and see our lives as it really was through the eyes of God, we will never really know for sure whether we did the right thing or not. And we should be prepared for some real big surprises when God judges human beings according to His standards. But I believe we only have the duty to do the best we can in accordance with the light that has been given to us in this life. One line of a hymn I learnt as a Catholic Charismatic pops up in my mind now - "And they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love; and they'll know we are Christians by our love." Let's as Christians have rather erred on the side of "too much" love rather than too little, and leave all judgement to an infinitely just, loving and merciful God, whose mind we can only vaguely imagine on this side of eternity, despite all the indications that have been given in the Bible. Luckily we are exptected to give an account of only our lives to God, not the lives of others.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Why would you say this is ridiculous, because you couldn't convert me over to one of Babylon's succumbing religions. Told you, I've been a "Born Again Christian and their method of teaching is more inline of brainwashing rather than extracting the accurate knowledge of truth that just happens to be available when you ask God himself.

As I have told you also, I am not a JW, therefore its not my religion, I affiliate with no organized religions on this planet, but that does not exclude me knowledge of knowing who they are. Their faith does not coincide with world courts, because they are no part of the world, just as Christ was no part, but, they have won many cases in world courts just by examples of their conduct and mannerism on presenting the word of God as truth.

Well my friend, if I continue in my present course, you are correct, I'm not heading for anywhere good, I know my fate and unfortunately I know yours also. I'm almost certain we won't meet paths on the day of the Great Tribulation, but I hope you remember our interesting converse here when you finally realize that you ignored Jehovah's warning in Rev. 18: 4. Its unfotunate for you because I believe you deserve better, but you will learn by God's intervention that you have been deceived all these years by the god of this system of things.
When you were in the Kingdom Hall the spirit was there, it wasn't in you because your intentions were to rebuke, not learn, remember the heart is a very threacherous thing and Jehovah can read you very clearly.

My arguements don't make sense to you, how could they, the truth is not in you?
Yes, I'm more than familiar with Matthew 3: 10 also James 2: 17 and finally 1 Cor. 13: 1-4.

How do JW's stake up to those requirements? If you would have paid more attention to learning about them instead of mocking and ridiculing, you'd find that they honour all those requirements very well, at least that's the impression I got.
No, I believe you are quite wrong about them spreading a new age lie, mainly because just with scripture alone I've contrasted your Trinity, heaven and hell concept, whether you wish to accept it or not is irrelevant, but I would assume correctly they have been spreading new age exposure to lies of which your religion is saturated with. Hense, the reason they are hated so much by so many of the population and why Satan attacks them so often.

Why would I be allowed to live eternity on earth? My goodness friend, how simple can you get.
Its Jehovah's purpose for mankind to live forever in a paradise earth. Adam and Eve lost that privilege temporarly to prove that man cannot live independently of his creator.
We just happen to be living at a era in human history where God's due time for correcting all matters pertaining to that delay of his purpose.
Unfortunately his purpose does not include homosexuals, false religion, murderers, liars, etc, I'm sure you are quite familiar with those verses.
Because of our indifferences, I guess the most practical method to end this conversation would be for us to just "wait and see!" I know my fate!

Anyways CANYON, its been a privilege to converse with you, sorry your conversion didn't fair too well, people don't aways get coverted to JW's either. For the duration of your life, I do hope sincerly things will prosper for you and good fortunes come your way!

Ronald,

With all due respect, this is ridiculous. Your religion has no atoning value, does not work in a court of law, and is anti-Biblical.

I know Christ, I've been born-again, I've been filled with the Holy Spirit. These events are promised and required in the Bible; if you can't say those things are true of you, you're not headed for anywhere good.

I've been to a Kingdom Hall, and trust me, the Holy Spirit is NOT there(Matt 18:20).

I won't refute each of your arguments because they don't make sense and don't bear consideration.

Please realize though that Christ said that good trees would produce good fruit, that James said faith without works is dead, and Paul said that without love, everything else is in vain.

How do JW's stack up to those requirements? The only work I see coming from them is spreading a new-age lie, which involves no love because it's an effort to bring themselves safely through the tribulation.

Here is the million dollar question; according to your theology, why will you be allowed to live eternally on Earth?

Yes CANYON SHEARER, I hope your weekend is going well for you and you are getting the proper rest and nutrients to keep the mental faculties alert. By the sounds of your opening statement that you are perhaps getting a little short on this conversation, not because of me, its because your theories, as you wish to exploit onto me, are falling apart.
When it comes to interpeting the Bible, anyone can read it, but to be able to have the ability to recognize symbolical from literal and to be able to distinguish illustrations that Christ used to set examples and guidance for others and to take it as a literal account you must follow what you have been taught, or your faith theoretically would be vanity.
The rich man and Lazarus is not a literal account, as the dead are conscious of nothing at all and there is no such place as hell.
With your faith you must believe you are going to heaven, even though the Bible clearly brings out that only a few will. You must believe in hell, not just because your leader told you, because the hell concept keeps people in submission. I have explained the meaning of hell to you which is the common grave of mankind. God punished the tribes of Judah in the Valley of Hinnom under kingship of King Ahaz, followed by his grandson King Manasseh severly for sacrificing their sons and daughters alive in the fire. Jehovah addressed it as detestable to him and it never came up into his heart to ever do such a thing.
Now, do you really think for a minute that God would torment a person in a firey hell for eternity to compensate for a meer 70-80 years of an unrepentful life. Its clear, you may be worshipping a god, but you certainy aren't rendering service to the true one.
Gehenna was a sulphur fed dump outside of Jerusalem to dispose of refuse and to burn bodies of deceased criminals not worthy of a Christian burial. Gehenna was used by Christ figuratively as a reprsentative of utter destruction resulting from adverse judgement by God, hense with no resurrection to life as a soul being possible. He never once used it as a place of torture, rather of a complete cutting off. The hell concept is dead in the water, just as your Trinity theory, not by me, but by the word of God himself.

Interesting to see you quoting Rev. 14: 3,4 and being aware of the 144,000 redeemed from the earth to be with Christ. Even though following Christ wherever he goes could be literal sense as following in footsteps, but its obvious they are heaven bound, but the verse also brings notice of following Christ's examples. Ever notice the Bible stays consistant with the 144,000 and if you are not of this annoited class, you are not going to heaven.

Your Gnostic Doctrines were a meer corruption of Christianity, they had of course nothing in common at all with the teachings of JW's because they never came along in title form until 1935. Acts 15: 14. There were a few Christians that managed to keep the examples and words of Christ alive through the dark periods of human history, (which is described by Jesus of the weeds in the field) Matthew 13: 36-40.

Repentance and payment and you say JW's don't have that. On yeah, I'm sure that came from the leader of your church who knows less about them than you do. Instead of speculating and assuming in your own mind, why don't you find out the facts yourself, because lying and bearing false witness is a serious offense in God's eyes. If you keep giving false reports to others about these people, it just may be time for you to repent yourself. (no offense)!

When it comes to the thief on the cross, (stake in the Greek Bible) I guess you weren't listening too well about the change of the coma in many translations huh? In Luke 23: 42,43 verse 43 says
And he said to him: :Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in paradise."
See where the coma has been changed, if its not changed in your Bible, get an updated copy. The reason is obvious, not to you perhaps, but to ones who follow scriptures accurately would realize Jesus was not referring to that very day, as he would spend three days in the grave, (hell) so to speak. The robber and Jesus both would be conscious of nothing at all, remember the condition of the dead, Ecc. 9: 5. Jehovah resurrected his Son on the third day. Now, if Jesus was to be in paradise as he quoted to the robber, then what would be the reason for God to resurrect him if he was already alive as you would assume to say. Definitely common sense reasoning.

Exodus 12: 5 (Israelites only) Before the Messiah was to make his sacrifice for mankind, the Nation of Israel needed atonement for sins by animal sacrifices, whereas a healthy, (perfect) ram was needed out of respect for God's forgiveness. Unhealthy rams were unacceptable to God.
Revelation 5: 12 Jesus is also referred to the lamb, so sacrificing his perfect life for the sins of mankind in order to make the resurrection possible, he is deserving of all honour, above the angels and above all mankind.
You really should try and vision Christ as God's Son, rather than God himself and the scriptures would be more practical to learn.
Luke 18: 19 Jesus was being humble to a lessar human person to show them he isn't comparable to God by saying, only God is good.

I would say in appropriate terms you should remove yourself from whatever faith you belong to and get real my friend, you're religion has alot of discrepancies to it.
Those JW's you said you saved, they were probably inexperienced unbaptised publishers, because an elder, or pioneer would not be swayed so easily, but it has known to happen, but very rare.
Seen the statistics lately, world church attendance is way down and decreasing every year, yet statistics for JW's increases yearly. Jehovah is preparing to remove Babylon the Great, I think you should heed his warning in Revelation 18: 4.
Thanks again for replying to my comments and here again, take care and if you have a family, good fortunes to them also.

y

Ronald,

Thanks once again for the reply. I can't see how we are going to have a real conversation if you are going to decide scripture that doesn't agree with your theology is only a parable.

The problem with the rich man in Hell verse from that standpoint is that Jesus doesn't say, "Consider this parable". It reads like History, it is clearly a literal account. But more importantly, the Bible uses the term Gehenna to explain in real terms how terrible Hell will be, expounding on that name by saying 'everlasting fire'. Even how terrible the garbage dump was at Gehenna, the fire was not eternal; only in Hell will it be real.

"The hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth...These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth."
- Rev 14:3-4

Perhaps the most terrible and convincing reason the JW faith is wrong is because it looks like the Gnostic doctrines of the early centuries AD. Somehow JW's think they have a better understanding of scripture than anyone else, let alone that the Gnostics religion died out, then resurged, then died out, then rose as the JW faith, and died out in about 2012(speculation). There is no special knowledge given to men; but rather the revealed revelation of God in the Scriptures. There is no reason whatsoever that 'learn about Jehovah' would get anyone into Heaven, none at all. That's like telling the Judge that is sentencing a murderer to death that he was born on July 15th, 1957 in Denver Colorado, and he went to Colorado State University taking 4.5 years to graduate with his pre-law degree...yada...yada...yada...it has no bearing on the issue at hand how much you know about the judge, the real issue is that the criminal is a criminal and is going to the gallows. What is needed is repentance and payment.

JW's don't have that, they may say they do, but unless you're a part of the 144,000, a JW won't take part in communion, which is an outward symbol of inward faith in the sacrifice of Christ. It's not bound in scripture, and it's another reason a JW won't go to Heaven; because they're rejecting Christ.

The thief on the cross was PROMISED paradise TODAY, not in 2012 years.

More importantly, explain to me how these verses fit together in your theology:
Exodus 12:5 "Your lamb will be without blemish(perfect)."
Revelation 5:12 "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain."
Luke 18:19 "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God."

Andy, as you can see CANYON SHEARER and I are (not fighting), rather debating this important issue among ourselves and we are respectively leaving everyone else alone.
Thank you for asking!

Nice to know you could reply so quickly, I'm impressed, really. Now with regard to JW's coming to your home and they quit going to the Kingdom Hall, I would say they were apostates and you managed to save 4 from possible salvation to deliever them to obliviation. You either are very good, or they were easily led, the later being more appropriate. You wouldn't have a hope in hell around my community, lord knows they tried.
I think you have your Lazarus accounts confused there bud, but to set the record straight, the first Lazarus account was the brother of Martha and Mary and he died before Christ could come to the aid of his friend. His miracle was to illustrate and stress the resurrection possiblity when this system comes to an end and the main resurrection of all dead souls previously passed on centuries before. Lazarus never went to heaven, he went to Hades, the creek word for hell meaning grave.
The second Lazarus account was just an illustration, known as the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, explained by Jesus for the purpose of individuals to vigorously search for truth and not become depended on others for self gradification. The rich man was informed by Abraham that his 5 brothers had Moses and the prophets when he requested them being spared of this experience. Apparently another scripture you don't understand.
With all your spiritual training you can't find that verse that identifies the great crowd, why its in Revelation 7: 9,10 right after Revelation identifies the sealed annoited 144,000 prior before in verses 4-8.
Yes Charles Russel indeed thought they would be going to heaven when the ending of The Appointed Times of the Nations came about in 1914. If he and his staff would have studied the Bible more thoroughly they would have found that the prophecies quoted in Matthew 24 by Christ had not taken place yet. That's what happens when instant gradification takes over common sense reasoning, you being a prime example, (no offense)!
I'm not sure where you are obtaining your information from friend, but there is no comparison to chap. 7 and 14 to suggest anyone worshipping Jesus. JW's worship God (Jehovah) they do not worship the Christ as a god. You must get that Christ-god thing out of your teachings, no wonder you are mystified by so many simple scriptures. If people die, they go to hell, correct, Christ went to hell for 3 days, then was resurrected by his heavenly Father(Jehovah).
Sheols and Hades meaning hell in the Hebrew and Greek text refer to grave when translated back to modern day english. There is no such place as a firey tormenting hell, another lie instigated by your honourable church.

If you do not want to argue every last point, then why are you?. There is a heaven, there is no hell and the resurrection was made possible by Christ dying for the sins of all mankind. If Christ never died, there would be no resurrection, therefore no hope. People when they die do not go directly to heaven, or hell as you are led to believe, they go to their grave until the resurrection becomes possible after Armageddon.
The explanation of the heavenly calling in Revelation is referring to the 144,000 only.
JW's do not view Jesus as a hinderance, they view him as a spokeman for God and they humble themselves by giving reference to him everytime they say a prayer to Jehovah. How many times must you be reminded that Jesus is not God, he is the Son of God.
To be a born again as reference in scriptures, you have to die and become spirited, no flesh can enter into the Kingdom of heaven. John 3: 1-13. I hope you aren't getting those verses mixed up with that phoney evangelical group who call themselves "Born Again Christians,"... been there, done that and they are the almighty religions nutcases, believe it. Pay particular attention to verse 13 and understand that no man has ascended into heaven, at least ones that weren't part of the annoited.
The thief asked Jesus "to remember him when he got into his Kingdom" and when the Kingdom is turned over to Christ after Armageddon, I believe in all sincerity, he will do just that.

I can't believe you claim that John 14: 9 refers to Jesus as God. It suggests nothing of the kind, it only relates Jesus in the likeness of his heavenly Father, just as we are created in their image.
1 Tim. 3: 16 refers "God manifest in the flesh," (KJV) as the Christ being in the likeness of his heavenly Father. Two scriptures come to mind while contemplating your nonsense of Jesus being God are John 14: 28 and Luke 22: 24. There are many more that contradict your Trinity lie, but these two are sufficent enough to warant a change in your spirituality, if not you are the one that is wrong, not the scriptures, and definitely not JW's.
Philippians 2: 9,10, the name suggests nothing of God's name. God is exalting his Son because of the great scarifice he made for the benefit of all mankind. Even this verse kills your Trinity theory. Verse 6 also suggests that Christ never thought of himself being equal to God. Your Trinity theory is dead in the water my friend and basically so is your knowledge of scriptures. If you want to understand the Bible accurately go visit the youngest member of the JW's, you just may learn something.

The Watchtower has many articles that are backed up entirely with scriptures, (nice try)!
JW's do not believe in the rapture.
Definition: The belief that faithful Christians will be bodily caught up from the earth, suddenly taken out of the world, to be united with the Lord in the air. 1 Thess. 4: 17 was thought to mean the rapture. The word rapture does not occur in the inspired criptures.
I think in theory if waiting for 1977 years was a foundation of something that doesn't esist is about the same period of time you and your congregation would be waiting for to happen if we had that time left and people claim I'm 2,000 years behind the times, good joke.
Hell would indeed be a hot place if they were buried in the dessert, but as you should know by now, that the dead are conscious of nothing at all.
Yes, conversing with you is rather interesting at best, but believe me, I've had more fanatical ones than you and I haven't compromised a single thing in what I believe. I haven't accomplished anything worth while to make myself presentable in Jehovah's eyes either, but non the least when that time comes where I may be burning with sulphur because I had made an unwise decision, even though it will be a messy terrifying scene, I might be able to muster up a laugh before I expire when I see you burning along side of me, lol!
Be safe my friend and good fortunes to you this weekend.

Melissa,

I'm not believing this "lesbian" story one bit. Do you have any, um, "photos", to prove it? I'd love to see them. :)

Hey, this is what I like to see!! Religious nuts quibbling over their respective mythologies. Yes!!! Please just fight this out among yourselves and leave the rest of us alone. Thanks!!

Ronald,

Once again, thanks for your thoughtful reply and causing me to think. I didn't want to give too much away when I said I think I'm blacklisted from JW's visiting my house; if thats true, its because when JW's come to my house, they stop going to their Kingdom Hall. So far I've only been fortunate to have saved four, but I hope and pray that they will expand to a great multitude.

As for the Lazarus account, long ago that portion of scripture is a great mystery to all those who contemplate scripture. Lazarus was a truly special case in scripture, and the first question I'm asking God when I get to Heaven is, "Where did Lazarus go when He died the first time?" But we know that another Lazarus went to Heaven and undoubtedly his brother went to Hell, from Luke 16:22-24; there is no denying that scripture, he died, he went to Hades, he still had thoughts and emotions. In Ecc 9:5, the NWT added, "Nothing at all" is a poor translation to say the least. As I posted before, it should be translated, "very little" or "nothing". The extra, "at all", is not in the Hebrew original and is pure speculation. See also 2 Sam 12:22-23, Psa 16:10, Matt 10:28, Luke 23:43, Rev 14:13 "Happy are the dead who die in union with the Lord."

As for the Great Crowd living on Earth, exactly which verse says that? Charles Russel thought they'd live in Heaven, Judge Rutherford came up with the doctrine that they'd live on earth. More importantly, the great crowd ended up in Heaven AFTER JW's would have left the earth; it seems rather odd that an incalcuable number of people could get to Heaven if the JW religion is true yet all the JW's weren't around to go door-to-door. Please also compare the 144,000 in chapt 7, which is kind of vague, to chapt 14, where it is clear that they are Jesus worshippers to the end, not Jehovah worshippers.

Truly, most people aren't going to Heaven, most are going to Hell, but all that are sanctified by the blood of the Lamb will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. Luke 23:42-43, Matt 4:17, 5:3-20, 8:11, 18:3, et al.

I don't want to argue every last point, what is important here is Heaven and Hell and resurection. I believe quite certainly that JW's view Jesus as a hindrence between God and them; they may say they have reverence to the Son, but if they would humble themselves before Christ, they would be born again, and flee from their faith, which teaches that reading the autobiography is enough to get into Heaven. How many times did the thief on the Cross read the scriptures? How many times did He say, "Jehovah is God, this Jesus is only His Son."?

John 14:9 clearly says that Jesus is God; but I'd really like your opinion on 1 Timothy 3:16, preferably from the KJV, which is the proper translation of that verse.

As for the Lord's prayer and which name we're speaking of, Philipians 2:9-10 answers that question. What's your take on that verse?

Calling God Jehovah all the time strikes me as blasphemous. You wouldn't call the president, "George" all the time, at press conferences, to people who don't know him, to leaders of other nations, it'd be disrespectful in the highest degree. Especially since God never told us to call Him Jehovah. Mr. President is the formal, appropriate term; just as Lord is God's preferred formal name.

Christ was not created, there is no other verse besides that First-Born verse that says anything of the sort, and I've already explained that verse in context. Christ as a manifestation of God is the only way the New Testament makes sense, it's the only way Salvation makes sense, and it's the only way the Old Testament makes sense.

Finally, because I am fast running out of time for this reply, JW's may say they have trust in God, but they really have trust in the Watchtower Society and EVERY converted JW I met has said the same thing, "I was always terrified I'd mess up the day or week before the Rapture, or that I hadn't prayed enough, and that I wouldn't be good enough to be remembered." JW's put COMPLETE trust that the Rapture will be in five minutes. It hasn't happened in 150 years, I have two opinions on this, one, it may happen in the next five years, if not then, then probably in about 600 years. I'd like to explain that to you, but it's pure conjecture on my part from extra-Biblical examination. To put full trust in something that hasn't happened in 1977 years is a little prideful to think we're the last generation, especially since the majority of the "144,000" JW's are no longer with us, but have realized Hell is a very real, very hot place.

I like conversing with you, I appologize for having to cut this short. In closing, if the Lamb had to be without blemish(perfect, good), and no one is good, how did Jesus fulfill the Passover prophecy?

I still stand that you should do your best to know where you're going before you end up in Hell. If you're right, I'm going to be fine, if I'm right, you're in awfully hot sulphur.

Hypocrisy, sure the world's religion's are satturated with it.
No, you are correct about not releasing any personal information, but you do share the same attitudes of the generation of 33 years and below, please correct me if I'm wrong, I will apologize.
Once again, I'm not trying to make the same impression that you seem to imply, I'm not always right! Par for the course has so many significant meanings huh?
Motivating people to be compeling is only as thick as the agreement between two party's. As I have found in many others, that even proving another wrong is not always feasable, because there are many who stubbornly adhere to what they want to hear and how it benefits them, rather than be submitted to something they are unsure of. Meism, the product of self and instant gradification, I'm sure you are familiar with that term, if not, then maybe we both share the same moronic qualities, you're just a smarter one, that's all!
Have a good weekend!

Hypocrisy, sure the world's religion's are satturated with it.
No, you are correct about not releasing any personal information, but you do share the same attitudes of the generation of 33 years and below, please correct me if I'm wrong, I will apologize.
Once again, I'm not trying to make the same impression that you seem to imply, I'm not always right! Par for the course has so many significant meanings huh?
Motivating people to be compeling is only as thick as the agreement between two party's. As I have found in many others, that even proving another wrong is not always feasable, because there are many who stubbornly adhere to what they want to hear and how it benefits them, rather than be submitted to something they are unsure of. Meism, the product of self and instant gradification, I'm sure you are familiar with that term, if not, then maybe we both share the same moronic qualities, you're just a smarter one, that's all!
Have a good weekend!

By all means my friend, thank you also for the lengthly reply, at least they can't accuse us of losing the art of communication can they?
With your Chevrolet emblem, just leave it on, most components for those cars are manufactured in Japan, Mexico and a few oriental islands in the Pacific west coast , but are assembled in Detroit. I have relatives who work on the assembly line plant and an uncle who is a CEO for the Chevrolet Division of General Motors.
You have difficulty with Ecc. 9: 5 which is perhaps the most straight forward of all verses. It says the "dead are conscious of nothing at all." It doesn't mention anything about wiping memories out, it is in reference to Jesus words about death as a deep sleep. compare John 11: 11-13. Any doctrine can be contradicted if a person spends enough time at it. Look at the Catholic church, they've had centuries to contradict the scriptures according to the doctrines of man.
That's why God made the Bible relatively simple, so it can be understood easily, its man and his religions that has complicated it.
I often wondered about the 144,000 myself and it took several years before I pin-pointed it accurately. The 144,000 was the little crowd mentioned in Revelation along with the great crowd.
The small crowd would be in heaven with Christ, Re. 20: 6 and the great crowd are the survivors of Armageddon. Re. 7: 13,14.
One thing you fail to see when it comes to scriptural reference is, not all people are going to heaven. You may be unaware of it, but you aren't either, neither am I!

Apparently also you do not understand the New Heavens and New Earth concept, it deals strictly with matters pertaining to the populations on earth, it does not refer to a literal new heaven and earth. If you wish to believe otherwise, then that is your perogative.
What do you mean JW's do not bow to the Son? Have you ever attended their meetings, or are you one who relies on others to inform you. They worship Jehovah God through his Son Jesus Christ, so in that worship the Son is also included. Sounds like you worship Jesus as the heavenly Father and he clearly enphasizes that he is not. John 14: 28. There are many more verses that totally collapses the Trinty theory, but that one in John is straight forward and simple.
Thank you for your interpetation of the right relationship with Christ, but I already know the heavenly calling is not mine, you, on the other hand have not realized that yet, but very soon you will!
You are correct Matthew 7: 22,23 does say exactly that and of course you realise that goes more than one way, so a personal examination of your own faith to make sure the scriptures match would be a very wise decision on your part. You don't want to be so sure of yourself that you do not stumble. Daniel 11: 35 (my favourite)There are many more, but this one is exclusive for you.
Some of the names that you used to render the name of God is quite contrary for recognizing the heavenly Father.
YHWH is a part of the tetragrammaton which of course was used during the covenant arrangement with the Nation of Israel. It referred to the Hebrew word of God as Yehowah (Jehovah in english). The other names you addressed below Yesuha are in reference to Jesus Christ, the firstborn of creation, the Son of God, or Jehovah if you like. The plural content King of Kings and Lord of Lords is to his entitlement of authority of all creation. In other words, God's Kingdom has been handed over to Christ by Jehovah himself to extract judgement of humankind in our day. He has been exaulted over all creation by God.
I'm amazed that you do not understand this, yet not surprised.
True, we have no idea how to pronounce the Jewish name of God, but using the name regardless is a requirement. Have you not recited the Lord's prayer where it says to sanctify his name..."what name?" Definitely not GOD, LORD, ALMIGHTY, those are titlements, not names.
Suppose you are a welder, do people call you Mr. Welder. Why do you insist on complicating an issue that is so simple.
I guess grief at death is a common emotion that does affect everyone, even JW's, but when it comes to trust in God, you hit the nail on the head when it comes to most organized religion, they don't trust God to fulfill his promises, yet every prophecy has come true, hmmm.
One thing about the JW's and you can take this to the bank with you, is they have complete trust in God and they are long suffering, just as God himself is, awaiting the promised new system.
Most religions have no concept of the times we are living in, so its understandably so why that trust would fall short.
Jesus Christ was created before the angels, before man and possibly before the earth that makes him the firstborn of all creation, as it refers to all creation being for him. Even though the Bible does not actually say it outright that he existed in the very beginning, it does refer to man being created in "OUR" image which suggest that Christ was with God before man. There are other references in scripture that support it, I just haven't found it yet.
The Trinity is a false teaching and it cannot even be explained by expert scholars of the Catholic faith.
The Trinity is very simple to understand, it doesn't exist!
You cannot understand how I interpet the Bible and I equally cannot understand how you uphold the lies of the church when facts are in front of you in scriptural form.
When you set out time in which to learn scriptural content and you vigorously strive at seeking truth, with my experiences with the Catholic church and other religions, you go to another sourse of information, you ask the author, yet you follow the course of man and his doctrines and mock others because they differ from what you have been taught and you do it without question. Typical of Babylon the Great!
Its obvious that you have had no experience concerning JW's, so the information you receive of course would be speculative. I suppose you never followed up any of these accusations yourself huh? Well my friend, I did and even though I am not in association with their faith or attend anymore of their meetings, they have taken the mystery out of the Bible that I set out to learn almost 45 years ago on my own. Everything just fell into place, the Bible is only a mystery to ones who believe falsehoods.
If I, during my conquest to learn truth, had stopped at the Catholic level, then maybe I may be more in-tuned to your thinking, but I went beyond man's religions and found the scriptures in the text that God originated.
But there is one reasoning we both could agree with, when God decides about his due time and brings this system to a conclussion, we'll know for sure then won't we?
Thanks for the reply comments, they were surprising easy. Have a nice weekend.

"You have a certain self explanitary aspect that seperates you from other ridiculers,...yet, smart as you think you are, you have no idea of me as a person. Which is par for the course."

...soon to be followed with...

"And I realize that you are fairly young in age so you haven't lived long enough to extract personal experience and practicality about life in general. You have been academically taught and you are motivated by thoughts of others, perhaps even brainwashed by the system."

You familiar with the word, "hypocrisy", Ronald?

Funny, I don't recall giving my age anywhere here (or any other personal information). I suppose you believe me to be some "Hippy, Pepsi Generationer" because I am incapable of taking your beliefs seriously. Well, once again you've proven how limited your powers of inductive reasoning are. "Par for the course" as they say.

Oh, and yes, other people do have the power to motivate me if I find them compelling enough. I guess I'm not as lucky as you, for you have written all of those scriptures that you incessantly plaster throughout this forum to make your points, and I'm just left with my own "faculties" as you like to say. Those are all of YOUR ideas, right?

I don't get it. As much as I love the church I attend, as well as the other spiritual groups to which I belong, if any of them told me that I had to choose between my love of the church or group and my love of the person I had chosen as a life partner, I would be out the door.

Tonio: "In my view, marriage should be partnership between equals, instead of one member following the other's lead. As to what God intended, such claims have no credibility."

Exactly right. Having an ex-husband who felt that we had to agree on everything, and that if we couldn't come to an agreement, then his will should prevail because he was the man, and that was the way his parents' marriage had worked, and now being married to a man who values my autonomy as much as his own, I have to say that the latter is better. He does not attempt to lead me, and I do not follow. Sometimes our paths are the same, and we walk side by side. sometimes our paths parallel each other, and we eventually arrive at the same destination. Sometimes our paths cross, and sometimes they go in completely opposite directions. And it's ALL good.

So you analyze a few words on a message board, words that were opinionated and now you become an expert in human ideaology traits. Most times I would just pacify the person in question, but you are slight different than the average intellect who takes delight in discrediting others.
You have a certain self explanitary aspect that seperates you from other ridiculers,...yet, smart as you think you are, you have no idea of me as a person. Which is par for the course.
First of all, I'm very tolerable to many things, many people and somewhat to regulations and laws.
Since this thread probably deals with homosexuals, I can honestly say I tolerate them, not because there is a law that protects their lifestyles, but I know that they will not be part of God's new world order, ahhh, that's God's new world order, not President Bush.
And I realize that you are fairly young in age so you haven't lived long enough to extract personal experience and practicality about life in general. You have been academically taught and you are motivated by thoughts of others, perhaps even brainwashed by the system.

My assumptions that you presume are my weaknesses are things you do not understand and quite typical of our younger generation today who have built their own world consisting of meism.
So if you have an updated copy of the Bible go 2 Timothy 3: 1-5 and pick out the choice descriptions that are right on the money about you. I've already done that, got a couple for myself also.
Wow, we agree on one thing, but in reality, we agree with all things, its just you haven't learned it yet and you don't have to sink to my level, nah, you keep your pride puffed up in the clouds there and one thing about it that is a certainty, when the day of the tribulation begins, its you who will fall the hardest, ..."ME"...I'm already here...remember...only yours will be permanent.
Since we cannot argue before the fact without speculating, why not wait and see, were on the threshold of that day, you haven't long to wait.
Thank you for your reply.

Ronald,

A bigot is a person who is intolerant of others of differing opinions, lifestyles, ethnicity, etc. Nothing vague about the definition of a bigot, which seems to describe you accurately.

"If there's was nothing to indicate that you weren't quick to do anything, if that's the case, why did you bring it up, looking for reassurance."

No, just correcting one of your many weak assumptions.

"and I did get you to spell my name right, I'd say that was pretty clever."

You corrected someone who misspelled your name. Pack your bags, you're going to Harvard.

"Tell me,... what's to understand about today's world other than the more education and advanced people become, the more stupid they are and that son, you can't argue with, I've been there, done that and seen it all.:

Here we are in complete agreement. I can't argue with you on this because it would first require me to have a labotomy in order to "think" on your level.

Mr. Mark wrote:

"Mindfully mendacious" better describes Dobson."

Hmmm, I don't know. I mean, I think he actually believes what he says to be true, so I'm not sure that description fits. Intolerant and delusional maybe...

"In closing, I was shocked to learn that JW's don't build hospitals because they expect the Rapture to happen any second, and wasting 'THEIR' money on something like a hospital would be foolish."

I don't pretend to understand the theological differences between Jehovah's Witnesses and other Christian denominations. I do know that it's wrong for any religion to treat fulfilling the will of deity as more important than preserving life and alleviating suffering.

Ronald,

Thanks so much for the lengthy and compelling reply. No offense meant, but I'm not seeing where you differ from a JW; after all, if I take the Chevrolet emblem off my car, it's still a Chevrolet.

Ecclesiastes 9:5 is a difficult verse for me, that's true; but becaus ALL of scripture says something different, there must be a different interpretation of that verse, by no means does it say their memory is wiped out or existence stops. The word translated nothing is "muwmah" which means the "opposite of something"; it can also be translated as "very little" or "negative". You can't base a whole doctrine on a single Bible verse when you have a hundred more that contradict your doctrine; it doesn't harmonize and it's bad hermeneutics.

I have to admit, the 144,000 is something I completely don't understand of the JW doctrine...they said there would be 144,000 JW's in Heaven...then when the faith grew over that number, the religion should have collapsed and become a memory. But amazingly there are JW's who are happy to worship a God who is going to blot them out of existence for their faithfulness. The 144,000 has nothing to do with JW's, it clearly states these people will be from the tribes of Israel, which doesn't include Gentiles. Rev 7:9 is very clear there will be an uncountable number of people in Heaven.

There is a major event to happen before the Earth becomes new, that being great tribulation of earthquakes, asteroid impacts, plaque, war, and ultimately a complete burning of the Earth; only then will there be a new Heaven and new Earth; the first Heaven and the first Earth will be passed away, and we will live on the new Earth; but that doesn't mean Heaven can't sufficiently hold a few Billion people while awaiting that event.

JW's are the same as every other works based, self-righteous religion. It is the epitomy of pride that a JW won't bow to the Son despite commands. It looks just like Islam and just like Mormonism. Pushing Jesus away to get to God is futile(Matt 10:23). Without a right relationship with Jesus, you're not going to Heaven, take this analogy as proof for that.

Imagine someone has read all of George W. Bush's biography's, watched all of his speaches, knows the names of his wife and children and dog, knows his favorite color, his favorite song, knows EVERYTHING about him.

Is that going to get them into the White House? No, in order to be invited into the White House is dependant on if the President knows YOU.

"When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you;

Depart from me, thou workers of iniquity, I never knew you."

YHWH is indeed ONE of God's names, but as Philipian's 2:9-10 says it's far from the most important. The mistranslation of the NWT includes many words such as "Lord" and "Master" and calls them Jehovah in an effort to somehow make that name more important.

A few names of God:
YHWH
Adoni
Yeshua
Messiah
Faithful
True
Emmanuel
King of Kings
Lord of Lords
and at least one that is not yet known...

Amazingly, several of these names are always used in PLURAL! How do you account for that and still be monotheistic if you don't believe in the Trinity? The best the Muslims can do is say, "Allah doesn't have a gender, so the plural describes God as "We" to avoid gender bias." You know a much better way to avoid gender confusion? I, Me, God. There is a reason these wild and crazy theologies can't match up with the Bible, it's because THEY ARE NOT PATHS TO GOD.

More importantly, we have NO IDEA how to pronounce the Jewish name for God, because they held it in such high reverence, they not only didn't dare say it, but they were hesitant to write it down as well! Is Jehovah going to let you into Heaven if His name is actually pronounced Joshua?

Moving on, the reason there is grief at death is because people don't trust God. If I promised you a million dollars, you probably wouldn't get too excited because you don't believe I could give you a million dollars. If Donald Trump promised you a million dollars on natrional tv, you might get a little more excited, because you trust that he has the money and that he will give it to you. People are afraid of death and grieve over it because they don't trust that God will keep His promise. Don't blame God for the faithlessness of His followers.

As for the firstborn of all Creation. That is an easy verse to misread and misunderstand. Christ was not God's firstborn, He was the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON. It's pretty rare and strange and odd to refer to an only son as, "My firstborn." Rather, firstborn speaks about birth-rites, as I'm sure you know, in Jewish custom, the firstborn inherits the things of the Father. In no way does firstborn signify the Christ wasn't at the beginning of time. See the NWT John 1:1, which says, "In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." The word that the NWT translators translated to "a god" is Theos. The word they translated to God is Theos. Why would they choose to blatantly modify scripture to try to deny the deity of Christ? They couldn't reconcile that one is my guess.

The Trinity is a difficult concept to understand if you are not a child of God. "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." I, for one, am conforted that the nature of God is difficult to understand, if it were easy, I'd be afraid I were worshipping an idol. But more importantly, there is no way the Bible can make any sense if you read it with the presupposition that Christ is not God; for one, the sacrificial Lamb had to be PERFECT, and Christ Himself said, there are no perfect men. The only one Perfect is God, the only one that could be the sacrificial Lamb for all the world was God; otherwise it's cosmic child abuse.

I still really have a hard time believing you've gotten the Bible so wrong on your own, it's really hard to read the Bible the way JW's do unless you've got a definite eisegesis agenda working on your side.

JW's do follow the commands of the Bible as closely as possible, which should be commended, except they are not doing it out of love for God or of man, but rather in hopes of attaining Heaven. Truthfully, the whole religion doesn't make sense to me; they deny the existence of an afterlife then spend their whole lives trying to attain it...

In closing, I was shocked to learn that JW's don't build hospitals because they expect the Rapture to happen any second, and wasting 'THEIR' money on something like a hospital would be foolish.

No SB, those two typos don't do a thing, I just look where it comes from!
People like you haven't a clue what bigotry is, unless of course its in agreement to the said party, in this case you.
If there's was nothing to indicate that you weren't quick to do anything, if that's the case, why did you bring it up, looking for reassurance.
Hiding behind a book, as you say, is quite practical and rather appealing to me than hiding behind ignorance. I kinda got you riled with meer words, and I did get you to spell my name right, I'd say that was pretty clever.
Tell me,... what's to understand about today's world other than the more education and advanced people become, the more stupid they are and that son, you can't argue with, I've been there, done that and seen it all.
You have a good nights sleep, cause tomorrow (figuratively speaking) you won't sleep at all.

mispelling = *misspelling*
mispelled = *misspelled*

Hope these two typos didn't cause you too much grief, Ronald.

Ronald Fleming:

"people ridicule you just as they did to great individuals in the past"

That's a comparison. You need english spoon-fed to you?

"I'm quite astonished that you would be so quick to criticize me without actually paying attention to what you are typing."

This makes no sense. There is nothing in my post that indicates I was quick to do anything, or that I wasn't paying attention to what I was typing. Please don't try to act more clever than you actually are.

Oh, and stop trying to spread bigotry through god's name. We already know that you're incapable of understanding today's world outside of what is told in some ancient texts, but at least have the courage to say what you truly feel without hiding behind your "good book".

As for mispelling your name:

So I mispelled a bigot's name. Not exactly something I'll lose sleep over.

Actually CANYON SHEARER, I kinda suspected you were going to come out with a comment as you did, hense, the excuse of delaying.
Because my theology is exclusive to their teachings that does not automatically bring on an assumption that I am a Jehovah's Witness, nor does that affiliate with them according to your examples.
I have 25 versions of the holy scriptures including the King James, The Living Bible, (Tynsdale), New International, Webster's Edition, New World Translation (England copy) etc. and all of them interpet Ecc. 9: 5 exactly as it says in the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures.
The 144,000 is very straight forward to mean exactly how many will be in heaven. If there were more, the Bible would indeed speak of more.
God speaks of the earth being created not for nothing, rather to be inhabited to times indefinite, or even forever. Do you suppose his purpose would be for everyone to go to heaven, despite we were created solely for our earthly home?
Prayer to the Father? Do you think JW's are exclusively reserved for praying to the Father through Jesus Christ when practically every other religion does likewise?
Jehovah is God's name. That name was used long before Christ walked the earth, just as it disappeared from use after the apostles died off, but resurfaced in the The Living Bible copied by William Tynsdale in 1535 and once again in the King James Version in 1611.
The name was restored almost by complete text in the early 20's by The New World Translation copies in England that turned out to be the ground work for the modern english reference of The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures which had complete revised editions in 1961, 1981 and 1984. Jehovah's name was completely restored in these copies.
You may not be aware of it, but Jehovah's name has been used in many other religious texts including the Pentacostals.
To set the record straight and to avoid confusion on your part, I am not affiliated with the Jehovah's Witnesses sect, even though I have attended many of their meetings, assembly's and conventions, just as I had associations with the Evangelical free church, been a Catholic in my younger days, attended practically every other congregation claiming to be the one spiritual enlightening to God, all for bitter disappointment, "WHY?" Because long before I ever knew about the JW's, my Bible studying became consistantly similiar to their teachings. Mind you, I didn't come to a conclussion on those texts over night, I first had to learn the discrepancies and lies of the churches before I could learn to interpet them correctly. I went through 50 plus years of anguish living watching my relatives dying off and listening to their cries of dispairity from loosing loved ones. If heaven was such a calling, then why the grief, shouldn't dying be a happy occasion? This is when I got the conclussion of heaven.
When I first met JW's in 1984, I was thrilled to relate my material with theirs. mind you, I wasn't totally accurate, according to them at least.
My indoctrination process as you bring out was not always taught by man, most of my learning came from a heartfelt desire to learn Bible truths, so the most accurate measure would be assistance from the author himself,... telepathy if you wish, (a practice forbidden by JW's)! Also JW's are discouraged (advice from their elders) from associating and commenting on computer message boards and chat lines.
Of course there are numerous issues I had with the elders, just as I had with other church congregations as well.
I'm very familiar with John 8: 19 and 1 Tim. 2: 5, but since you are in denial of my convictions, tell me, what is a right understanding and relationship with the Son?

Jehovah's Witnesses do not blacklist anyone unless it is requested by the person in question.
If you are conversing with me, you are not conversing with a JW. Sounds almost like Peter denying Christ 3 times huh!
If you say their teaching of prophecy is sound, then being 100% wrong must be slightly off balance a shade here. If you are interested in scripture maliciously and balantly taken out of context, then you should visit the Catholic church, in fact any church that teaches similiar doctrines. I'm not saying the JW's are perfect, far from it, but they adhere to scriptural content more than any other faith on this planet and that you could not deny.
You are out to convert me, ha ha, you haven't got enough money to make me change my way friend.
Two different Christ's, yes I can relate to that. The Jesus Christ that I'm familiar with is the firstborn of all creation, Jehovah God's Son. He is not part of a Trinity which has got to be the most deceptive lie ever to come out of the doctrines of man, yet there are many who are stubbornly convinced of it, even though the Bible clearly points out many times the discrepancies of that teaching.
I know the book of Romans almost as well as the chapter of Revelation and there is no mystery to its meaning, in fact the Bible is relatively very simple to understand providing a person can clear out the deceptive messages that are spewed by organized religions.
Nice converse, I thank you for your interest and hope you have a rewarding weekend.

One last note before I head off to sleep, so you know where I'm coming from;

Jehovah's Witnesses no longer come to my door anymore, I'm pretty sure I'm on a nationwide blacklist, so it's nice to find one I can converse with.

I've got a New World Translation of the Bible; a "What the Bible Really Says" study book, and a stack of "the Watchtower" magazines. I've bounced every doctrine of the JW's against scripture, and only in prophecy is their teaching sound, in all other ways scripture is maliciously and blatantly taken out of context.

I'm out to convert you, because the Jesus you believe in and the Jesus I believe in are completely different. If your Jesus is real, I'll be dead, and maybe I'll be resurrected in Heaven as a memory of myself. If my Jesus is real, you'll spend an eternity in Hell. You've got a lot riding on the bet that Jesus isn't God, and I would fully appreciate you ensuring you are right. If you would, please spend a few nights reading through the Book of Romans; that one single Epistle seems to have an extra bit of magic in converting the JW to the Truth than the rest of the Bible.

Ronald,

I read in another post that you are not a Jehovah's Witness; I find that rather odd, as your theology is 100% conclusive with their's, which is 100% wrong. If perhaps it was just Ecc 9:5 or the 144,000, prayer to the Father, the term Jehovah God, the use of the word ransom and Romans 3:23. Maybe one wouldn't give away your upbringing(if not your current faith), but together they could only have been transplanted by a tried and true indoctrination process.

Those six verses I posted destroy the JW interpretation of scripture, and I wanted to see if you have somehow reconciled them to your faith or if you ignore them completely.

I'd just like to remind you, if you don't have a right understanding and relationship with the Son, you don't have a right relationship with the Father. (John 8:19; 1 Tim 2:5)

Canyon Shearer, I'm not entirely sure what it is you are asking of me concerning those Bible verses.
Are you looking for accuracy, interpetation, or what they mean according to biblical text. Please varify?

SB, your reply comment is somewhat confusing on the question of great individuals,... as I never impplied that I was one, just exemplifying as a reference only. I never thought for a moment I would have to spoon-feed a person through a rather simple comment, but for the sake of clarification I will do just that.
I was implying about greater individuals in the past who were subjected to ridicule just as this person who created this thread has been through with various comments. Notice the word "past," which of course would not apply to me. I should have referred to some familiar names such as Noah, Lot and Jesus Christ and possibly that may have concluded it with better understanding.
So what is the obvious this person Meerkat is stating SB? That God is supposed to love everyone regardless what sexual orientation they are, even though he makes it very clear that he does not support homosexuals or even sexual relations outside of marriage. Maybe old school my friend, but they still apply in these times also.
Resorting to name calling has its justifications some times and I'm never offended by what a person may impply even though their own ignorance is probable cause, but on rather simple terms, I'm quite astonished that you would be so quick to criticize me without actually paying attention to what you are typing.
That's quite alright, many people jump to conclusions without balancing their faculties.
Oh by the way, even though it was in clear sight, my last name only requires one "m," but typo errors are frequent when one is in a hurry to discredit morons who are not concerned about reasoning.

Maybe there is a god after all: Bob Ragan's anti-gay screed spent nigh unto a week on On Faith's front page. Ms Fryrear's, less than a day.

Thank you, Lord!

D.:
"Mr. Mark,

"Your website reference regarding ES cell research gives those of us against it nothing new that will magically change our minds."

Do you think I actually expected to change your mind? I know there's no hope of that whatsoever. You've confused my desire to yank your chain with a hope that I might make a convert.

I do appreciate your at least taking a look at the link I provided. Most theists on this board don't bother.

Anonymous wrote:
"Mr. Mark,

"Ignorance is a term that is used more and more, but not everyone uses it correctly. Ignorance means being uninformed or uneducated. Dobson is neither of those."

You're right. "Mindfully mendacious" better describes Dobson.

Mr. Mark,

Your website reference regarding ES cell research gives those of us against it nothing new that will magically change our minds. It seems to spell out quite clearly why some of us do not agree with this type of research.

Mr. Mark,

Ignorance is a term that is used more and more, but not everyone uses it correctly. Ignorance means being uninformed or uneducated. Dobson is neither of those. Now, the fact that he comes to different conclusions than you do based on the information available on the subject is something completely different. But you can't call him ignorant because his conclusion is different than yours.

Anonymous wrote:
"Mr. Mark,

"Stop pretending that James Dobson speaks for all Christians, and inferring that all Christians are bigots. Those are not valid arguments for or against any "side" of this discussion."

YOU are the one who asked for proof of Dobson's ignorance. I simply provided the proof. Maybe you shouldn't ask the question if you don't like the answer.

Where have I said that Dobson's views are the views of all Xians? They certainly aren't the views of many of the Xians on this blog. No, that's something YOU just made up out of whole cloth to bandy about as an accusation. Shame on you for bearing false witness...or is that a Commandment you routinely ignore?

"Anonymous wrote:

"Let me see.. embryonic stem cell research involves cloning 100 baby embryos and then destroying/killing all of them and harvesting their potent cells so that bigger people can benefit.

"Sounds like NAZI behavior to me."

You're even more ignorant than Dobson! Please, stop. You're embarrassing yourself. If you wish to educate yourself on stem cells and cloning, you could start at the NIH's website here:

http://www.genome.gov/10004765

Tonio, you are one of the few in these forums who consistantly does not attack the poster, and for that I am grateful. I always see thoughtful discussion in your posts, without trying to make others look stupid, which is as it should be.

Anonymous, I try to use what I hope is a respectful tone toward the authors of the articles and the posters on this site. As I implied earlier, I think Focus on the Family and James Dobson are fair game for criticism, although I oppose making the discussion about Fryrear personally. I apologize for any offense I may have given.

My goal is to make a distinction between the person and the belief. I reserve my hate for the doctrine of hell for unbelievers, and I have a strong personal objection to any religion even having such a doctrine, but I think I can still respect individuals who believe in that doctrine.

Ronald Flemming wrote:

"Melissa, never take a ridiculing heart seriously, people ridicule you just as they did to great individuals in the past who shedded their plagues of deception just as I view this Some Meerkat character as a person dellusioned with no hope.
What are words huh? They are nothing to the accountability they will eventually face for their foolishness, because in all sense of the word, who are you accountable too, "God, or them!"

Actually, I agree 100% with this Some Meerkat 'character' as you put it. See, this person is simply stating the obvious. Some people here do a disservice to themselves by actually trying to explain reason to you, for you have only demonstrated that you are incapable of reason. You are yet another ignorant person who's mode of thinking is outdated by about 2000 years.....a moron as the common man would put it.

You think you're one of the "great" individuals? Sorry, but the great people were contributors to society whose contributions arose from free thinking and original ideas. You have no ideas, and all you are capable of is parroting old ones.

And Melissa, what you see isn't hate. Hate is too strong of a word, and I know that I personally don't hate this Flemming character. I feel sorry for him. One thing to keep in mind though is that reasonable people do not tolerate ignorance in any form. Ignorance is the real enemy of mankind, not homosexuality.

Maurie Beck (and others who say there is no "agenda"),

Maybe you should do a little more research. Try checking out the book "After the Ball" by Kirk and Madsen. Here are a few snippets of the strategy of this agenda:

"As cynical as it may seem, AIDS gives us a chance, however brief, to establish ourselves as a victimized minority legitimately deserving of America's special protection and care." "gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector."

"We argue that, for all practical purposes, gays should be considered to have been born gay -- even though sexual orientation, for most humans, seems to be the product of a complex interaction between innate predispositions and environmental factors during childhood and early adolescence." Alas, "To suggest in public that homosexuality might be chosen is to open the can of worms labeled 'moral choices and sin' and give the religious intransigents a stick to beat us with. Straights must be taught that it is as natural for some persons to be homosexual as it is for others to be heterosexual: wickedness and seduction have nothing to do with it."

And before the "pro-gay" posts start flying about how most of them have never heard of this book, and that all "anti-gays" think it's some kind of manifesto that the gay community all follow - just because you haven't heard of the book does not mean that the strategies laid out in it haven't been followed almost to a "T". It is fact that there has been a concerted effort to sway the minds of the majority, and that certain tactics were and are being used to accomplish this.

Ronald Fleming,

I don't want to drag this conversation off-topic, but I need to know what you think of the following 6 Bible verses:

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

God(Theos) was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."
-1 Timothy 3:16 (NWT translates God(Theos) as "He")

"And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame."
- Luke 16:22-25

"And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit."
- Acts 7:59 (verse 60 is a favorite of YHWH's Witnesses)

"Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow..."
-Philipians 2:9-10 (ABOVE EVERY NAME, even YHWH)

"Your lamb shall be without blemish."
-Exodus 12:5 (NWT mistranslates the word blemish, which means, perfect)

"And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God."
-Luke 18:19

If you'd reply, either here or please feel free to e-mail me at noworries88@gmail.com

Thanks!

Let me see.. embryonic stem cell research involves cloning 100 baby embryos and then destroying/killing all of them and harvesting their potent cells so that bigger people can benefit.

Sounds like NAZI behavior to me.

Mr. Mark,

Stop pretending that James Dobson speaks for all Christians, and inferring that all Christians are bigots. Those are not valid arguments for or against any "side" of this discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

"Now, sir, bring forth evidence that Dr Dobson is ignorant and bigotted."

You should do your own research. Dobson's ignorance and bigotry are well documented. How could they not be? He displays them every time he opens his mouth.

But I'll play along a bit. Here's just a few examples:

IGNORANCE:

On Aug 3, 2005. Dobson compared stem cell research to the Nazis experimenting on human beings. Thats prompted this remark from Colorado Congresswoman Diana DeGette: " James Dobson's remarks were extremely ignorant and insulting. While it's sad that they warrant a response, his comments diminish the enormity of the Nazis' atrocities and are an appalling distortion of the debate."

In June, 2004, Dobson called Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy "The most dangerous man in America." That promoted this response from Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge, Aberdeen: " A recent article by Professor Art Marmorstein displayed an alarming misunderstanding of the nature of our government. He stated that judges are either of the John Lennon school or the Bolshevik school. I know judges in South Dakota and most federal judges. The professor is badly mistaken.

"He praised James Dobson's Family Policy Council. Dobson in Sioux Falls last year stated that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is "the most dangerous man in America." Does that sound like a rational statement? Outlandish statements by Dobson, Pat Robertson and others encourage deranged people to act violently against judges and relatives of judges."

Then there's Dobson's vile practice of citing scientists and the research by name, distorting their positions to support his own idiotic beliefs: "In his Time magazine piece, Dobson criticized Mary Cheney’s decision to become pregnant. “[T]he majority of more than 30 years of social-science indicates that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father,” he wrote last week. Dobson backed up his claims by citing Gilligan’s work. Gilligan is a renowned expert on gender and human development and is a professor of education and law at New York University.

“I was stunned to hear that James Dobson quoted me in Time magazine,” Gilligan says in the video. “I had no idea. I was mortified.” She says that there is nothing in her research that would lead anyone to agree with Dobson’s claim that same-gender families are unhealthy for children." http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/12/19/gilligan

Here's Dobson on Larry King, sowing pearls of unscientific wisdom on homosexuality:

DOBSON: I said that on your program one time and both of us got a lot of mail for it. I don’t blame homosexuals for being angry when people say they’ve made a choice to be gay, because they don’t. It usually comes out of very, very early childhood, and this is very controversial, but this is what I believe and many other people believe, that is has to do with an identity crisis that occurs too early to remember it, where a boy is born with an attachment to his mother and she is everything to him for about 18 months, and between 18 months and five years, he needs to detach from her and to reattach to his father.

It’s a very important developmental task, and if his dad is gone or abusive or disinterested or maybe there’s just not a good fit there, what’s he going to do? He remains bonded to his mother and ...

KING: Is that clinically true or is that theory?

DOBSON: No, it’s clinically true, but it’s controversial. What homosexual activists, especially, would like everybody to believe is that it is genetic, that they don’t have any choice. If it were genetic, Larry—and before we went on this show, you and I were talking about twin studies—if it were genetic, identical twins would all have it. Identical twins, if you have a homosexuality in one twin, it would be there in the other.

KING: Right.

DOBSON: So, it can’t be simply genetic. I do believe that there are temperaments that individuals are born with that make them more vulnerable and maybe more likely to move in that direction, but it usually is related to a sexual identity crisis.

I could go on all day. If you want to read about his bigotry, I suggest you do a search for yourself.

"I feel badly for your children and your wife."

Yawn...

Anonymous,

"Homosexuals ARE trying to convert children. Ever heard of the GAY agenda."

And Jews drink the blood of Christian babies. Ever hear of the communist, Jewish, atheist conspiracy of international bankers; you know, the ones who control the world's media and finance.

Opps, forgot to sign the above comment!

Anoynomous, your comment about unnessasary remarks is a true form of communication, but you must remember, with threads dealing in religious subjects, (and politics as well) that there are so many indifferences, that very few have to ability to reason in an intelligent manner because of arrogance, ignorance, discrimination and plain old fashion lack of knowledge.
People do have a tendency to ridicule threads that they either do not understand, or their attitude surpasses their ability to communicate in an intelligent way.
The problem with these people, is they do not see themselves as individuals fools of poor judgement, but we do, thereby making it our right to ignore them.

Melissa, never take a ridiculing heart seriously, people ridicule you just as they did to great individuals in the past who shedded their plagues of deception just as I view this Some Meerkat character as a person dellusioned with no hope.
What are words huh? They are nothing to the accountability they will eventually face for their foolishness, because in all sense of the word, who are you accountable too, "God, or them!"

"What journey? She told us where she started, but not where she went or how she got there."

Valid point, John. I simply couldn't think of the right word. I was trying to distinguish between Fryrear's personal experience and her stance on Biblical doctrine.

Trigeminal, I agree that "orientation" and "preference" put different spins on the issue. I think of it this way - no matter what the cause of homosexuality, it is still wrong to subject gays to hate crimes or to discrimination in housing and employment.

Why are so many of the non-Christian posts in these forums so full of hatred? So many of the Christian posters are reduced to having to defend themselves against the attacks here. I think a lot of people come to this forum because it's called "On Faith", and they think they will be able to have intelligent discussion regarding faith. What I'm finding instead are Christian panelists and posters being attacked, being called liars, uneducated and bigots, and having their views discounted as blind faith.

I really thought this place would be a good place for intelligent exchange of thoughts, ideas and beliefs. Instead we are forced to find our way through an endless barrage of unnecessary comments like the following: "Considering that you work for Focus on the Family, were you ever Lesbian at all? Any chance you're just a shill?" "Every night I pray to the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster to make me into who I really was supposed to be." "All you religious nuts can get off your bandwagons." "I do believe in fairies. I do believe in fairies. I do believe in fairies." "gullible little puppies you are." "your pathetic employer and its hate-mongering leader - the incredibly ignorant and bigotted James Dobson." "I wish Focus on the Family nothing but ill will." "Oh, Ronald Fleming, you're a moron."

James, you seem to be a spiritual person in the way you address the comments of others and its obvious you are aware of the heaveny Father and his Son Jesus Christ and its equally commendable to pray for others, but you lack very much on accurate Knowledge of the scriptures.
Let me explain: Very few will ever see the Christ, he will not return to earth as a man (his sacrifice as a man was done once for all times). The only ones who will ever see the Christ in our time is when the entire annoited ones (144,000) are finally united with him in heaven. Revelation 7: 4-8.
His return will be seen with spiritual eyes, not literal.

(1) If you would die today, Ecclesiastes 9: 5 a explains the condition of the dead;...
For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all,...
Romans 6: 23 a..."The wages sin pays is death."

Many religions teach when you die, your soul lives on, that is a false teaching. Ezekial 18: 4 a...The soul that is sinning-it itself will die.
To support that verse 4 in Ezekial 18 is Romans 3: 23..."All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Hense, for a certainy, neither God or his Son will be questioning you on the day of your death, death has aquitted you of your past deeds!
(2) If you were to die today, you will not see God. Exodus 33: 20...And he added: "You are not able to see my face, because no man may see me and yet live." Rather, you would remain conscious of nothing in your grave, just as King David is to this day in the tomb, Acts 2: 29 awaiting the promise resurrection, John 11: 25.
The resurrection is one of the sole reasons why Christ gave his perfect life as a ransom sacrifice for all mankind.
Now, because we are nearing the end of this system of things, it is important that you understand the Bible's view on religion, it accepts only one, Ephesians 4: 4-6.
It is obvious emphasizing on these scriptures alone (there are many more) that you are not in the acceptable faith recognized by God.
He has a warning for you in Revelation 18: 4 to remove yourself before the coming great tribulation Matthew 24: 21.
If you need assurance to search for the true faith, then you must do this Matthew 6: 6.
Do not delay, good fortunes to you.

There is no consensus in the medical community that the etiology of sexual preference/orientation is genetic. In fact, most research believes homosexual feelings to be a combination of genetics and environmental experience, although there is heated debate has to how much each area may play in sexual desire. Both areas are still not definitive.

In fact, orientation is a loaded term and a political one that Gays pushed in the early 1990s, as a replacement for "sexual preference." Orientation means a starting point which implies a genetic cause. Someday this may be proven or it may not be proven, however it is more intelligent and less political to simply say "preference."

This woman ain't gay. She's been Saved!!

PRAISE!!

PRAISE!!

Dam - O - Crats canit take it!!!!

Gay no more!

To Canyon Shearer:

Canyon

I share the opinion of the medical community with regard to homosexuality, that it is NOT a disease (unlike scurvy which could be treated with vitamin C), nor is it a lifestyle choice. Homosexuality is a sexual orientation just like heterosexuality. It is not for me to judge the efficacy of the church programs meant to change the sexual orientation of homosexuals, but I have read negative reports from the medical community when they tried to verify such claims. As mentioned earlier, I have no doubt that there must some pseudo-homosexuals who might be healed, but I doubt if all homosexuals belong to that category. I'm now beginning to get more interested in the aetiology of homophobia and am wondering how best to address the problem which seriously threatens the well being of homosexuals who cannot change their sexual orientation.

As a Christian it is my sincere hope that homosexual Christians will have the courage to join churches that will accept and love them as they are and allow them to lead the normal and fulfilling lives they deserve - emotionally and sexually.

I belong to the Catholic church (and my family have been Christians since 52 AD). I feel quite blessed to be a part of it. I'm not looking to join another one. Thanks anyway for reminding me that we are all sinners.

The CDC website is a good source of reliable information on matters related to HIV/AIDS. I provide a couple of links for information on the issues you mentioned:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/transmission.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/women/resources/factsheets/women.htm

-----------------
Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Tonio, this is where we part. God bless you

Franco,

In my view, I find no merit in any claim that any scripture is the literal or inspired word of any deity or deities, and this applies to all religions. Instead, I believe that scripture should be evaluated on its own merits. I find Genesis 1-3 rich in meaning from an allegorical standpoint.

Willem, if you have any kindness in your heart please show it. Do not be so hateful. Be civil and make your arguments in a quiet manner. thanks

Tonio, what God intended is clear. His Book makes it clear. You only need to read Genesis Chap1-3, to discern what He intended regarding marriage. Spiritual leadership in marriage is critical, and God gives man that role, but it must be read with humility. Ephesians 5 charges that man ought to love his wife as Christ loves the Church. That is a tall order. When that kind of love exists in marriage, the wife will naturally follow. I am so convinced, in my heart and mind, that when one reads Ephesians 5, in total, the beauty of the marriage relationship will become evident. Then read the purpose of marriage as outlined in Genesis, it all fits together. Ah, the beauty and consistency of God's word!!

OH JESUS PLEEZE COULDNT YOU HAVE FOUND A NON HOMOPHOBIC ORGANIZATION?? ANY WELL THINKING LIPSTICK EX-LESBIAN SHOULD KNOW THAT THIS IS A DOBSON HOMEPHOBIC MONEYGRABBING HOKUS POKUS SCAM FULL OF HATE ! THIS DUDE NEVER EVER MENTIONS JESUS/GOD ALL HE THINKS OF IS GAY AND LESBIANS AND HOW TO DENIGRATED THEM! GET A LIFE!

Sorry, Franco - that was me in the 9:05 a.m. post.

Mr. Mark: You are all that you accuse Dr. Dobson to be. You're hateful accusation towards him make you a laughing stock. Now, sir, bring forth evidence that Dr Dobson is ignorant and bigotted. Your hateful disdain for Christians is pathetic. I feel badly for your children and your wife.

Franco, I read a third of the way through "Love of a Lifetime." I thought some of the ideas in the book had some mert. But when I got to the rant that I mentioned, I was horrified and I tossed the book aside in disgust. It isn't necessarily about the meaning of Ephesians or anything else about the Bible. It is about Dobson's interpretation of scripture.

In my view, marriage should be partnership between equals, instead of one member following the other's lead. As to what God intended, such claims have no credibility.

I didn't know that I am supposed to reflect God's image. I thought I'm supposed to follow the teachings of Jesus.

Tonio, you've "seen" his books? Maybe reading them thoroughly may help. In your reference above, never does Dobson calls women inferior to men. What he does say is that God intended (See Eph 5)for men to be the spiritual leader in the family. When a man follows the familial principles outlined in the Holy Book, his wife will willigly follow his lead. If you carefully read Ephesians 5, you will see that Paul says that men and women should submit to each other. The femminists have taken this chapter to mock the Bible. Read with "spiritual" eyes, it has one beautiful message for families everywhere. I urge you to read it, meditate upon it, then we can discuss if you will. thanks

Now that I know what Jesus thought about homosexuality, does anyone know the Easter Bunny's position - or the Tooth Fairy's or Santa Claus'?

Franco, I've never heard Dobson's show. I've only seen his books.

Tonio, I listen to my radio every morning driving to work. Focus on the Family with James Dobson comes on at 6:30-7:00, exacly how long it takes me to drive to work. I have never heard, in six years, a hateful message from Dobson or any other. His and his guests messages are uplifting to our families, they have helped me with my own family and brought me closer to God.

Mike, you are one crude individual. You probably have no shame

Melissa, may God bless you and keep you.

Norrie Hoyt: You completely miss the Christian message. Jesus says to deny yourself and follow him. Melissa is following Jesus, not her own selfish lustful desires. That is exactly what is wrong with the world today...going after our own lusts and desires with no bounderies, no rules.

Soja,

As always, I respect your opinion and recognize the intelligence behind it.

I, like you, believe that human beings are born with a tendency to be homosexual. God did not create us this way, our inherited sin nature has mutated our creation. Genesis 3 focuses on this event, culminating when God refuses to let sinful humans eat of the tree of life and banishes them from the Garden of Eden.

Just as human beings are born with the tendency to lie, steal, and covet, so is the innate function to ignore the conscience and chase after lust. While we recognize the human tendency towards lying, we do not fall down and accept it when someone lies. We know lying is wrong, it abhors us, it is the #1 'pet-peeve' on eHarmony by both men and women. We don't tell the pathological liars, "Go ahead, it's your nature, keep on lying." or demean them when they are able to curtail their lying.

Just as I won't stand to accept murders on the predisposition that, "It's not his fault, he was born with an anger issue." or rapists based on the fact that they're just trying to populate the planet by fulfilling a carnal urge.

This is why homosexuality is so despicable and wrong. There is no scientific evidence that supports homosexuality as being hardwired, certain studies such as the 2d:4d hypothesis flip-flop frequently on their findings, the test doesn't work in Caucasians, and many scientists agree that there is no correlation to sexuality and finger length ratio. Even still, there are unfortunate mutations where girls are born with an enlarged clitoris or boys with a malfused perineum; but always in these cases the subject has testes or ovum; never both.

Science has concluded that it is impossible to convert a homosexual to heterosexuality using modern science, which being are electroshock, hypnosis, head-shrinking, testosterone/estrogen/androgen/adrenaline shots; of course none of these work, because science is attacking a life-style of sin. There is one cure for sin, that cure being the new heart given by Jesus Christ.

Proof positive, Jesus Christ has converted innumerable homosexuals to a righteous life. Every manner of homosexual; flaming, closet-case, monogomous, promiscuous; some are married now, others choose to remain celibate. There is a terrible disease called Scurvy which affects sailors, PoW's, and others. The results of this disease are heinous, in mild cases, bones warp and bend; in major cases the feet and hands rot off. Science attempted to cure this disease by many ways that didn't work; cider, nutmeg, vinegar, an elixir of vitriol, myrrh, URINE, mustard, garlic...the list goes on. Scurvy today is nearly unheard of, it's probably the easiest of diseases to cure. Most people think you need oranges, but onions will work, and anything containing vitamin C.

An incurable and horrible disease, cured easily...

By why is there such animosity against homosexuals? After all, aren't they just hurting themselves? 1 in 4 AIDS deaths is a child. I was shocked to learn the #1 spreader of the HIV virus; and I think you will be to: Lesbians. How so? You can't contract HIV from kissing or hugging or licking...Lesbians are the number one carrier of HIV because while they affirm their sexual attraction towards women, rampant lust and promiscuity leads to many man/lesbian sexual encounters. If homosexuals (and heterosexuals that engage in homosexual acts) were the only ones dying of AIDS, would I be more empathetic to legalizing their sin; if babies weren't suffering from their selfishness? Maybe, possibly, probably not. It'd still be disgusting, but since that isn't the case, I can't overlook millions of babies dying because someone else couldn't keep their penis out of someone else’s anus and lesbians can't remain true to their lesbian lifestyle.

There is a cure, it is all encompassing, it works perfectly, it's free.

Christ came to the world without inheriting the sin nature of a human father, lived a perfect, sinless life, but on a false charge allowed Himself to be hung on a cross, where He took the sins of ALL the world upon Himself, including every homosexual deed done in darkness, every lie, hatefilled word, covetous lustfilled glance; He died a humiliating death for crimes that He didn't commit, He died in your place, choosing to endure unimaginable suffering so that you wouldn't have to. Christ was placed in a tomb where He stayed for three days, but on the third day He defeated man's greatest enemy, death, by rising from the grave.

This gift is free, because there is no way a man could possibly pay for it; in order to receive this priceless gift, Christ demands that you repent of your wickedness and confess everything you can remember that was in direct contrast to His nature and law. Once you have humbled yourself before Christ, if you'll put your trust in Him to save you from your sin and judgement, He will lift you up; you will be given a new heart.

You will despise the unGodly things of the world and love the things of Christ, you will be a new person in the eyes of God, and your everlasting life will be ascertained.

"Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
2 Corinthians 5:17

Dear Melissa,

I feel so sorry for you. God is suppose to love each and everyone of use equally, no matter on their sexual preference. If this was false, than why would he have given us our on minds.

Oh, Ronald Fleming, you're a moron.

Anonymous,

In his book "Love for a Lifetime," Focus on the Family founder James Dobson goes on a two-page rant where he lists the supposed inferiorities that God intentionally gave women. He writes that these are "proof" that men are supposed to be in charge in marriages as well as in society.

And Dobson has claimed repeatedly, notably in "Marriage Under Fire," that gays seek to overturn pedophilia laws and indoctrinate children to turn them gay. Claims like that only serve to needlessly prey upon the fears of parents, and could lead to public lynchings and other retaliations against people suspected of being gay.

Dear Ms Fryrear

I congratulate you on your success in becoming a heterosexual woman if your lesbian lifestyle was not genuine and you happen to be one of the pseudo-homosexuals who adopted the lifestyle as a teenager only due to environmental factors, temperament, childhood influences, peer interaction etc. One does not fail to notice however that you have not mentioned a male partner in your life, so would one be right in assuming that you live a celibate life in order to honour God because you are convinced He does not wish you sexual happiness and fulfilment as a lesbian? I do believe that there must SOME pseudo-homosexuals out there who could be helped to find their way through their confusion and discover their true heterosexual orientation.

The debate was settled for you long ago, but what about the GENUINE HOMOSEXUALS for whom there is no debate at all because their orientation cannot be changed, homosexuals who belong to the group who have no history of the factors that could influence sexual orientation? Science tells us that such cases exist and medical experts gave up trying to “cure” them after having failed in spite of using extreme measures. Please read the article written by medical experts: Drs Bazemore PH, Wilson WH, Bigelow DA, on homosexuality:
http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic3359.htm

You quote Genesis to prove that God approves of only male-female relationships. What exactly do you think God might have had in mind when He created homosexuals? On what basis do you conclude that God considers His own creation an abomination, or that at best He created homosexuals in order to deny them the joy and satisfaction in a sexual relationship, and withhold from them the benefits of bonding in a committed partnership like heterosexuals? The Ten Commandments do not mention homosexuality although it refers to adultery twice; neither does Jesus mention homosexuality although He was asked to clarify His stand on divorce. There is no doubt in the mind of Christians that it is wrong for genuine heterosexuals to seek out homosexual experiences for hedonistic reasons, and neither homosexual promiscuity nor sexual orgies or abuse of any sort are being recommended.

How ethical and humane is it to demand that genuine homosexuals remain celibate all their lives, and to impose on them a burden so heavy that they are an abomination to God, a God who created them that way, if they don’t? How fair is it to a heterosexual partner if a homosexual chose to marry one simply because they are not permitted to marry a homosexual and they chose the security of a committed relationship however false? Does the Jesus of the Gospels have so little compassion and understanding for legitimate human needs, which is what the longing for sexual pleasure and companionship in a committed relationship between two consenting adult homosexuals who do not hurt anyone with their love, ultimately is about?

I have no doubt in my mind that God loves the homosexuals He created, and they are as much a part of His plan for humanity as heterosexuals are. I am confident too that God wishes homosexuals as much happiness as He wishes the heterosexuals He created. Our ways are surely not God’s ways, for His love is infinite and unconditional.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Hey. It looks like Nigeria may well be THE place to relocate to for gay-hating Xians:

Denying Rights in Nigeria

Published: March 8, 2007

A poisonous piece of legislation is quickly making its way through the Nigerian National Assembly. Billed as an anti-gay-marriage act, it is a far-reaching assault on basic rights of association, assembly and expression. Chillingly, the legislation — proposed last year by the administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo — has the full and enthusiastic support of the leader of Nigeria’s powerful Anglican church. Unless the international community speaks out quickly and forcefully against the bill, it is almost certain to become law.

Homosexual acts between consenting adults are already illegal in Nigeria under a penal code that dates to the colonial period. This new legislation would impose five-year sentences on same-sex couples who have wedding ceremonies — as well as on those who perform such services and on all who attend. The bill’s vague and dangerous prohibition on any public or private show of a “same sex amorous relationship” — which could be construed to cover having dinner with someone of the same sex — would open any known or suspected gay man or lesbian to the threat of arrest at almost any time.

The bill also criminalizes all political organizing on behalf of gay rights. And in a country with a dauntingly high rate of H.I.V. and AIDS, the ban on holding any meetings related to gay rights could make it impossible for medical workers to counsel homosexuals on safe sex practices.

Efforts to pass the bill last year stalled in part because of strong condemnation from the United States and the European Union. Now its backers are again trying to rush it through, and Washington and Brussels need to speak out against it. Nigeria is Africa’s most populous country and one of the most politically influential. If it passes a law that says human rights are not for every citizen, it will set a treacherous example for the region and the world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/08/opinion/08thu2.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Melissa -

You may think what you will about the time you spent as a lesbian. You may think it was an awful time and the wrong way to live, but at least you weren't working for a hateful, knuckle-dragging organization like Focus on the Family during the time that you had the guts to be true to your real self.

BTW - I am a married-only-once husband with a wife of 18 years and two kids, aged 9 & 13. We are a family, and your pathetic employer and its hate-mongering leader - the incredibly ignorant and bigotted James Dobson - no more represent the interests and beliefs of my family than does Osama bin Laden. I absolutely loathe your company and everything it stands for. If there is a god, she'll see to it that you're out of business sooner rather than later.

I wish Focus on the Family nothing but ill will. along with my hopes for its timely and ignoble demise.

P.S. Mike, I will be praying for you...

Melissa,
I am proud that you have allowed God to change you. For those that have written in this blog site in a negative way or those that don't understand or believe what has happened will never understand until they Truly submit their lives to Jesus Christ.
To those of you who are skeptical or just plain mean, realize this. One day we will all see Jesus Christ face to face. Do you ever wonder what He will say to you or you to Him?
I have 2 questions for you>>>
1) Have you come to the place in your spititual life that you know for certain that if you died today you would go to Heaven?
2) Suppose you were to die today and you stood before God and He were to ask you 'Why should I let you into my Heaven?'./..What would you say to Him?????
One day, the Bible says...Every knee shall bow and every tongue confes that Jesus Christ is Lord!!!
In Christian love I write this.
James

Dear Melissa,
No matter what the others say about your past, continue to walk in the path that's approved by GOD. Run the race and finished it well. It's a fallen world but we are to be the salt, the light, the star. Keep shining even though you're misunderstood. You had repented and are forgiven. Continue to be a blessing. Don't be discouraged if people say all kinds of evil things just because you chose to follow His Word but REJOICE because great is your reward in Heaven (LUKE 6:22)
He will be our strength to face anything.
PSALM 73:26 My flesh and my heart fails: but GOD is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.

Paul,

So...sound bites and T-shirt slogans are all we have time for now?

Rufus, you are one messed up dude. I am quite a patient reader and searcher for argument and fact within the body of a work but even I could not get through that crap you spew.

Oh please, a small break won't you give me?

Dear Melissa says: 'God was right and I was wrong'...Ms. Melissa writes such simple-minded words as to defy all credibility. Please do address 'what happened' in the smallest details if we are to believe you...and to all those who write, 'Thank you for your testimony'...and oh Melissa, 'I am so happy to hear...' gullible little puppies you are...what a joke this blog.

can you say 'fake' or 'suppression of biological identity'?

Melissa,

I am with some of the others. This is the second gay conversion article I have read, and I still don't know what that conversion consists of. Are you still gay, but celibate? Or do you believe that you have changed your orientation?

Rufus Hill,

Don't pay any attention to Anonymous. He/She will criticize with a Peanut Gallery type comment, and not even bother to type in a name.

I was very impressed by your understanding of your faith and how you can reconcile it with your participation in the great secular society of The United States.

I only wish more of my fellow citizens could see what we see.

So...you are....celibate? By choice? By...wrote/rote?

Whatever. And what does this have to do with religion?

FREE WILL comes to mind here.

Dear Ms Fryrear -

Here we go again.

I haven't the time, the energy or the inclination to comment so soon after Bob Ragan's column. See here:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2007/03/like_many_my_faith_journey.html

I propose the WP change the name of this blog to ON HOMOPHOBIA...or maybe HOMOPHOBIA WELCOME.

I have to admit Melissa Fryrear, you got more balls and guts than those gay male pastors who claim they know God and his word. At least your words are authentic truth where theirs are plagued with lies.
Good for you, Jehovah God has cleared your conscience of immorality, now pray to him in private and he'll show you the congregation he is using on earth today!

Tonio:

"I respect Fryrear's journey"

What journey? She told us where she started, but not where she went or how she got there.

Have you fundamentalists ever heard of the term
Anecdotal Evidence?

There are *thousands* of scientific studies
*as opposed to Christian conversion stories*

that conclusively show that
Sexual Orientation is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to change.

It is, of course, possible to repress.

I try to be tolerant of these view that take no cognisance of the "reality based world".

But you are trying my patience.

I do believe in fairies. I do believe in fairies. I do believe in fairies.

This all proves it. Ain't no thing such as Gay. ITs A CHOICE!!

The woman showed corage to come forward. Dam o crats cain't take it!!

Gay is A CHOICE!!!

A CHOICE!!!

I knew it. thank you Mrs. Freyrear.

All you religious nuts can get off your bandwagons. This woman was probably bi-sexual. It is the answer to her conversion.

do you think anyone would read such a long winded piece?

Melissa: I do also congratulate you. I pray that the Trinity will always sustain you and that you will now live either a celibate or heterosexual life. I wish that all homosexuals
might be lifted to either celibacy or heterosexuality.

But for those who do not want to come out of the lifestyle or feel they cannot, I think homosexual marriage should not be prohibited. Let him who is without sin cast the first vote for the proposed anti-American, freedom-squashing Amendment that effectively prohibits homosexual marriage.

This 71-year-old Christian American heterosexual bit of flatulence (2d dictionary definition, of course) puts the Gospels first, then the Epistles, then Revelation, and then the Old Testament. Teaching "mechanics" of homosexuality in schools is anathema, but certainly there should be neither promotion nor deprecation of it. There should be teaching in schools of heterosexual "mechanics" to those age 13 and above. But there should be a ban on even consensual sexual activity between a minor less than 16 and any adult and between a 16-year-old or above and an adult more than 6 years older than the minor. Jesus Christ said, "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones...it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6 KJV). And, surely any hetero- or homosexual orgy is an abomination.

As to same-sex marriages, imagery of their sexual act is repugnant to many of us who consider ourselves to be heterosexual. But public policy toward such marriages must be approached as coolly as possible.

Homosexual relations between two consenting single human adults is a far cry from polygamy (virtual adultery) or sex by a human with a lower animal (bestiality); sex should be between human and human, dog and dog, cat and cat, etc..

In homosexual relations between childless never-married singles there is no "victim," while it could be alleged that in abortion there is a "victim," the fetus, which apparently can feel pain 5 months into gestation and thereafter. And, while Jesus spoke of God's making people "male and female," that a man should leave father and mother and "cleave to his wife", and "her" as a wife (Matthew 19:4-5, 7, 9), Christ was speaking from the perspective of 2,000 years ago when "traditional family values" related to a "wife" who was subservient to the "husband" and usually remained home to raise children while the "husband" would often leave home (sometimes for extended periods) to make the livelihood for the family. (Indeed, in Christ's time women were considered so secondary to the men that it is reputed that in one non-Biblical "Gospel," that has been discovered, it is said that Jesus was going to convert Mary Magdalen into a man so that [s]he could be admitted into heaven.)

Nowadays "traditional family values" are such that it is unlikely that the Woman is subservient to the Man and sometimes "traditional" roles are reversed where the Man stays home and raises the children and keeps house while the Woman makes the livelihood because she is better prepared to do so. Accordingly, while heterosexual marriage seems preferable because of procreation, nevertheless, homosexual marriage is virtually not that different before society than a heterosexual marriage where the couple takes steps not to have children or even is unintentionally childless.

The American psychological and psychiatric communities largely agree that homosexuality cannot be defined as a mental disorder. And although homosexuals are not "heroes" -- an idea that some "red-herring" commentators claim that gays promote -- they are, of course, our equals.

Actually it would seem that in sexual "orientation" everyone--male or female--is on a continuum of percentage of homo- to hetero-sexual (perhaps 0.5% homo- to 99.5% hetero- and maybe, unhappily, vice versa for some -- with percentages varying all along the line in different people).

A woman I overheard once spoke of another as "What a bod she has!"; and more recently a male, in discussing a church meeting he had with several different-gender people, referred three times--maybe without realizing it--to a mutual friend as "...a very handsome man." Now neither of these two would ever have engaged in homosexual activity, but what kind of "orientation," if any, did that possibly display?

Citing John's Gospel about "the disciple Jesus loved," some say that Christ was homosexual. THAT SEEMS LIKE BALONEY IF NOT BLASPHEMY. Many theologians state that (1) in John's Gospel the word "love" in the phrase was translated "agape," not "erotica"; (2) the phrase was intended to embrace all DiscipleS; and (3) no one is clearly identified as the one Disciple Jesus loved.

That begs the question. Apparently in all the Gospels "love" was translated as "agape" and never "erotica"; so (1) proves nothing. As to (2), could not St. John, or the arguably later authors and translators of this text, simply have added "s" to make the "discipleS whom Jesus loved" if that were what was meant? And clearly as to (3), St John himself was meant when the phrase was written (See John 21:24; and verses 20-23; also John 13:23 and 19:26).

Maybe one might say St. John was simply claiming Jesus loved him more than the other disciples when Jesus did not. But it is eerie, eh?? --- (1) particularly when most might think St. Peter would be "the Apostle Jesus loved" because he built His church upon that "rock" (Matthew 16:18-19) and (2) especially since some historians say St. John was the only disciple to die a natural, rather than violent, death, much time after Nero (1) ordered him into a kettle of boiling oil, which action failed (miraculously?), and (2) ordered St John to sip poisoned wine, which also failed (intervention of Providence?).

If Jesus was fully human as well as fully Divine, then He may have had some sexual "orientation." But there seems nothing in the Gospels even to hint that Jesus Christ, in fact, had any sexual relationship. And there apparently is not a scintilla of VALID historical evidence that Jesus actually engaged in any sexual activity whatsoever.

Fundamentalist friends might argue that: (1)all of the Bible is the Word of God; (2)"sin is sin" and cannot be relative; and (3) one is to correct one's brethren who sin (such as in as in Matthew 21:12-13 and Mark 11:15-17). One must reply that: (1) much of the Old Testament passages, such as Exodus 21:1-7 and Leviticus 25:44-46, seem most unlikely to be the true Word of God and are not pertinent now, (2) there ARE degrees of sin (1 John 5:16-17); and (3) one CERTAINLY canNOT "correct" anyone PHYSICALLY, that he or she (perhaps sinfully himself, St. Matthew 7:1) "judges" to be sinful, in the manner God reputedly said to Moses in Leviticus 20:9-16 (such as against an abortion clinic) because Jesus Christ directed "Let him who is without sin [presumably any degree of sin] among you be the first to throw a stone at her," regarding the woman taken in adultery (John 8:3-11).

But note that in verse 11 of John 8 Christ told the woman not to sin again, which could equally apply to a situation described in Leviticus 18:22. Therefore, while Jesus Christ is not quoted as saying anything explicit about homosexuality, this is understandable because, without describing any physical punishment therefor, God said in Leviticus 18:22 that a man "...shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination", and Christ said that He did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it, and that not an iota would pass from the law until all is accomplished. (Matthew: 5:17-20).

At the same time, however, Christ uttered aplenty condemnation of divorce (apparently including "annulment" of a consummated marriage) and remarriage as "adultery." (Mark 10:11-12; Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9; Luke 16:1). Indeed, Saint Thomas More was decapitated because he opposed King Henry VIII's divorce and remarriage as against Christ's teachings, and King Edward
in the 1930s was forced to abdicate because he was going to marry a divorced woman.

Mercifully, we have progressed beyond this perspective about divorce and remarriage being adultery; otherwise many very fine ordained ministers would have to be defrocked. More practically, it would seem that, if there is domestic violence certainly or "just" emotional abuse, divorce might be best for both partners, and remarriage might make a more loving, stable relationship not only for the new couple but for children of the prior marriage. And isn't it ironic that Massachusetts has allowed gay marriages and is also the State where there are the least divorces, while Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, and Oklahoma of the "Bible Belt" [which seems quite eager to prohibit gay marriages] are four of the top five States for divorce rate, often after the couples have been "saved?" See the "Religious Tolerance" web site on "Divorce."

Jesus Christ is quoted in Mark 7:21(KJV, RSV, and Oxford Study Bible) and Matthew 15:19 (KJV, RSV, & OSB) as damning among other evils both "fornication" and "adultery" (they are somewhat different sins, else one of these words would be superfluous). Yet only "adultery" is prohibited in Exodus 20:14 (KJV, RSV, OSB, and GoodNews Bible) and Deuteronomy 5:18 (KJV, RSV, OSB, & GNB).

Apparently "adultery" must be defined as sexual relations between a married person outside marriage or between a divorced person and someone else he or she re-marries while a former spouse of the earlier marriage is still living [See Christ's teachings cited above]; and "fornication" must mean sexual relations between two life-long single, or married but widowed-by-death, people. While many would allow blessings of gay unions, this still implies that they continue "living in sin" (at least "fornication") and, thus, are not allowed full participation in God's love that complete vows of marriage provide.

Thus, it is saddening (if not hypocritical) that in America, "the land of the free," where "the weak [read minorities] are protected from the tyranny of the strong" that a majority of voters would apparently deprive homosexuals of their right to marry in God's sight whom they choose. And, spurning the "Golden Rule" (Matthew 7:12; Luke 6:31), the majority would despotically yoke their brothers and sisters with a virtually excremental, profane Amendment to our almost sacred United States Constitution. How would we like it if gays were the majority and prohibited heterosexual marriages?

Moreover, Matthew 7;1-2 states "Judge not that ye be not judged. {now my emphasis]FOR WITH WHAT
JUDGMENT YE JUDGE, YE SHALL BE JUDGED; AND WITH WHAT MEASURE YE METE, IT SHALL BE MEASURED TO YOU AGAIN."

To American chagrin, law prohibited interracial marriages in all but few States until 1967. Yet
both interracial marriage and gay marriage are civil rights. And to deny either types of marriage is to deny human beings their humanity.

Since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States does not refer only to race, any ban against same-sex marriage would run deeply contrary to the "due process" and "equal protection of the laws" as provided for in the Amendment. See also Loving vs.. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) where the Supreme Court of the United States said in Part II: "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men."

If divorce and remarriage when one of the former spouses is still alive is, in the sight of God, "adultery," then a fortiori that would seem to be more of an abomination in the sight of God than is a homosexual union between two consenting, life-long, single adults which, though sinful, would be "only" "fornication." (And, thus, isn't it a calamitous inconsistency for Nigerian Archbishop Peter J. Akinola to advocate jailing gays, who may be committing "only" "fornication", for at least some period of time but apparently NOT advocating the jailing of heterosexual "adulterers," perforce including the divorced and re-married when a former spouse of the divorced marriage is still living?)

On balance, if divorce and re-marriage of heterosexuals is not only accepted and perhaps even properly encouraged, should same-sex marriages be allowed especially of those who believe in God and likely Exodus 20:14 and Deuteronomy 5:18?? And can re-married divorced people honorably oppose gay marriages in view of Christ's teachings? If those single-digit percentage of gays who want such marriages had them, they could not at law be "judged" as "living in sin [even 'fornication']," as the proposed amendment to the Constitution would dictate. Most importantly to all, such marriages might reduce promiscuity that can lead to HIV/AIDS.

I am sure in my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as my Savior that He would condone most, if not all, heterosexual divorce and remarriage if He returned today. And, if He did so, I am certain that he would also approve gay marriage.

Of course, if no valid civil law prohibits gay marriages, this would NOT mean that Catholics, and all denominations of the Protestant churches, and Jewish and all other organized faiths could not prohibit such marriages under their church law . It would, however, seem most equitable to permit individual churches within each denomination to perform such marriages and not force any one individual church within such denomination to bow to such preventive denominational law; but, still, the hierarchy of each denomination should legally be able to deny such marriages in its churches if it chooses.

It would only be unconstitutional to prohibit any such marriages from being performed within civil law. That would allow marriages within civil law before judges and before any ordained ministers (including rabbis, of course) who chose to perform them as long as their religious denominational law does not prohibit it.

Homosexuals ARE trying to convert children. Ever heard of the GAY agenda. The gay agenda crowd knows this generation is lost so they get into the schools with "heather has two mommies" and gay sex ed and the rest they can indoctrinate kids into thinking that gay sex is good.

Try bringing Christianity into schools and you'll get a law suit. Bring the gay lifestyle in you get high fives.

Tonio, would you care to provide proof of your claims.

I respect Fryrear's journey but not her employer. Focus on the Family peddles hatred of gays with hysterical tales of vast homosexual conspiracies aimed at converting children. That is vastly different from simply being opposed to homosexuality based on Biblical doctrine. The group also peddles hatred of women by claiming that God created them as inferior and subservient to men.

Must have been tough Melissa. Congratulations, many of us are right there with you.

One more question. Considering that you work for Focus on the Family, were you ever Lesbian at all? Any chance you're just a shill?

Have you noticed these articles by converted homosexuals are utterly vague about what happened after their conversion?

Your life has never been the same? Pray tell, how is it different? Are you straight now? Celibate? On the down low? Have you lost interest in sex altogether? Are you sleeping with women and then tearfully begging God for forgiveness?

Please, tell us: WHAT HAPPENED?

I am so happy to hear a story about someone who is humble enough to admit they lived a life of sin and were able to change that through Christ. I'm sure that had to be a difficult transition and I commend you for allowing yourself to recieve God's grace. Just remember that because of this now you will probably be targeted by many who say you arent yourself or you betrayed the homosexual community. Just remember, even Jesus was hated. And so will we because of our love and devotion to Him. God bless you Melissa.

Quick question:

When filling out applications what do you put down as your occupation? Professional heterosexual?

Melissa Fryrear,

I am sorry for you. You have betrayed your God-given natural self, even as Judas betrayed our Lord. And all because of something you misread in a book.

I wish you the best for a recovered self.

Melissa,

It is so inspiring to hear your story!! It really does give courage to the rest of us who are trying to change into what God wants. I, for example, have always wanted to be a black woman. Every night I pray to the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster to make me into who I really was supposed to be. Unfortunately, I've only had marginal success so far. But your story gives me hope to continue on in the fight!!

Thanks again!!

Dear Melissa,

Thank you for your testimony, and especially for your work at Focus on the Family. It's shocking(and wonderful) to read about a Christian who actually reads their Bible!

Keep up the good fight.

So, God made you hunger for cock, huh? Congratulations!!