So, where’s the “condemnation”?

No, I didn’t.

==… and completely changed its meaning.==

No, I didn’t.

== The verse does NOT suggest that “a person is what they think” ==

Yes, it does.

==I think much more of God than to think that a person’s thoughts are as abominable as his actions. ==

A person’s thoughts are words. His thoughts make him what he is because of his inner dialogue. His “talking to himself,” inevitably, translates into conduct.

==I have made two comments now about your mis-quoting and mis-representation of Proverbs to imply that it is a biblical teaching that a person’s thoughts are equally as sinful as their actions, and you have merely disagreed that you have mis-quoted instead of offering any kind of scholarly or third party evaluation of the text to validate your use of it (as I have). Since you refuse to acknowledge or address that very important and basic assault on your argument, then I think we should now agree to disagree and move on. ==

You go first.

==I expect you to want to have the last word, feel free, I won’t spend any more time replying.==

Gee, I’m crushed.

“Proverbs 23:7.

‘For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee. ‘

This verse is usually used to teach that you are a product of your thinking; you become what you think. However, reading this verse in its context makes it clear that it is speaking about nothing of the sort.

Proverbs 23:6-8.

6 Eat thou not the bread of him that hath an evil eye, neither desire thou his dainty meats:
7 For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee.
8 The morsel which thou hast eaten shalt thou vomit up, and lose thy sweet words.

This passage is talking about dealing with a man who has “an evil eye,” that is, a stingy man. The passage is talking about eating a stingy man’s food, but it also applies to borrowing a stingy man’s money, or borrowing his car. The warning in this passage is not to be deceived by his friendly attitude and his generous words. Instead, remember what kind of man you’re dealing with, and modify your behavior accordingly, because he’s keeping track of every little thing you’re getting from him, and he’s going to make sure that he gets every bit of it back, one way or another.

So what does this have to do with becoming what you think? Not a thing. This is a case where, because a verse sounds similar to something we believe or want to teach, we we don’t examine it too closely. Instead, we cite it as evidence and move on.”
————————————-
Yes, you took the verse COMPLETELY out of context and completely changed its meaning. The verse does NOT suggest that “a person is what they think”

I think much more of God than to think that a person’s thoughts are as abominable as his actions.

I have made two comments now about your mis-quoting and mis-representation of Proverbs to imply that it is a biblical teaching that a person’s thoughts are equally as sinful as their actions, and you have merely disagreed that you have mis-quoted instead of offering any kind of scholarly or third party evaluation of the text to validate your use of it (as I have). Since you refuse to acknowledge or address that very important and basic assault on your argument, then I think we should now agree to disagree and move on.

I expect you to want to have the last word, feel free, I won’t spend any more time replying.

Where’s the “condemnation”?

Romans 8:1

Of course it isn’t. We’re talking about whether what a person thinks is part of being a person, whether one can think/be “homosexual” and not be responsible, biblically-speaking. It’s one thing, biblically, to let a thought pass through, and it’s another to harbor it.

==… is the kind of thing that gives religion and the use of the bible a bad name in some circles.==

They give it a bad name, but I don’t give it a bad name.

== And, in my opinion…==

Romans 1:18

==… this is a most glaring example of “Taking the Lord’s name in vain”…==

Not quite.

==… because you are citing the word of God in a way…==

In your worldly opinion, remember.

==… so that it seems to validate your position in condemning a group of people…==

I condemn nobody. I merely report what the Word of God says about the subject.

==… and yet, the actual context of God’s words does no such thing.==

You don’t have to accept what the Word of God says. Your not accepting it doesn’t impact MY Salvation, and it doesn’t change what God says, that what we now call “homosexuality” is an abomination, that separation of iniquitous people from Him leaves them in Hell and that THEY will go to Hell, not their conduct, for their thinking is not separate from them, for, as they think, they are.

Another example of thinking making the person:

(Mat 5:28) But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

(Rom 1:27) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

– that is, they thought about it, then acted. Their thoughts and behavior were THEM.

And, then…

(Jas 1:15) Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Here is one explanation: http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~cmadd01/thinketh.html

But, I suggest you “Google” ‘Proverbs 23:7, interpretation’ and you will see the error of your ways. Though, I do not expect humility or an apology from you based on the hubris you display in your comments.

Pro 23:7 For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he…

Words lead to thoughts lead to conduct. So:

(Pro 18:21) Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.

“I think, therefore I am,” someone said.

So, thoughts are the most part, if not all of what the person is, or, in the case of those who claim to be homosexual, who, or what, the person SAYS he is. This is where the choice to go homosexual comes in. It’s an inner dialogue the thinker believes includes God’s voice even though the scoffer cannot possibly know God’s voice without reading the Word of God, according to His intention. The choice to go homosexual is the result of a corrupt, inner conversation, what the Word of God calls, “filthy conversation.”