| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Gerald Nash" |
| Date: |
10 Jul 2005 12:37:42 PM |
| Object: |
Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is
abomination.
Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
their blood shall be upon them.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even
their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
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 recompense of their error which
was meet.
Rom 1:31-32 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural
affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that
they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same,
but have pleasure in them that do them.
How can homosexuals be Christians when the Bible *clearly* states that
homosexuality is wrong?
Finally, why can't *anyone* answer questions like these with the truth?
.
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
10 Jul 2005 08:41:11 PM |
|
|
"Gerald Nash" <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com> wrote in message
news:darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net...
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
No, it is not, troll.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Easily. I'm not gay. Yet I see nothing wrong with homosexuality. Why?
Because it's harmless. No harm, no bad.
I do see something very wrong with anti-gay bigotry like yours. It is
nothing short of evil.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
10 Jul 2005 01:01:57 PM |
|
|
"Gerald Nash" <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com> wrote in message
news:darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net...
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
Finally, why can't *anyone* answer questions like these with the truth?
The truth is that the U.S. is not a theocratic nation, we are, therefore,
not subject to your bible, nor your inane biblical interpretations.
There, that is truth.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "turk" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
10 Jul 2005 01:01:00 PM |
|
|
"Gerald Nash" <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com> wrote in message
news:darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net...
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is
abomination.
Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both
of
them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
their blood shall be upon them.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even
their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
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 recompense of their error which
was meet.
Rom 1:31-32 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural
affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that
they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same,
but have pleasure in them that do them.
How can homosexuals be Christians when the Bible *clearly* states that
homosexuality is wrong?
Finally, why can't *anyone* answer questions like these with the truth?
Have you ever eaten shellfish? Then you're to be stoned to death.
Ever worked on a Sunday? Yep, you're stoned to death.
Didn't stone your child when he/she talked back to you? That's the sound of
you being stoned to death.
Grow the ***** up. I'd suggest you throw out your belief in the tooth fairy
and Santa Claus as well, but that might be too traumatic to do all at once.
Baby steps.
turk
--
My last vestige of "hands off religion" respect disappeared in the smoke and
choking dust of September 11th 2001, followed by the "National Day of
Prayer," when prelates and pastors did their tremulous Martin Luther King
impersonations and urged people of mutually incompatible faiths to hold
hands, united in homage to the very force that caused the problem in the
first place.
-- Richard Dawkins, The Devil's Chaplain (2004)
.
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
10 Jul 2005 05:58:03 PM |
|
|
turk wrote:
"Gerald Nash" <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com> wrote in message
news:darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net...
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is
abomination.
Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both
of
them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
their blood shall be upon them.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even
their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
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 recompense of their error which
was meet.
Rom 1:31-32 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural
affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that
they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same,
but have pleasure in them that do them.
How can homosexuals be Christians when the Bible *clearly* states that
homosexuality is wrong?
Finally, why can't *anyone* answer questions like these with the truth?
Have you ever eaten shellfish? Then you're to be stoned to death.
Ever worked on a Sunday? Yep, you're stoned to death.
Didn't stone your child when he/she talked back to you? That's the sound of
you being stoned to death.
Grow the ***** up. I'd suggest you throw out your belief in the tooth fairy
and Santa Claus as well, but that might be too traumatic to do all at once.
Baby steps.
To begin with, Romans 1:25-27 shows that same-sex sexual relationships
are a consequence of idolatry. In other words, same-sex sexual
relationships are a consequence of disobeying the 1ST COMMANDMENT, a
major aspect of the greatest commandment! And this makes sense as
homosexuality evidently leads people into the trap of having more
passion for another human than they do for God, especially after God
has forbidden same-sex sexual relationships in the first place.
Also, it is not surprising to see homosexuality advocates pointing a
hypocritical finger at Christians as homosexuality advocates try to use
the harsh aspects of OT law to justify homosexuality. Homosexuality
advocates seem to think that Christians are deciding on a whim which OT
laws people should be obeying while simply ignoring others. They think
along the line that if Christians can eat forbidden foods then why
can't perverts engage in forbidden gay sex?
The bottom line is that homosexuality advocates don't know the Lord or
the Scriptures. So they remain clueless that God had planned for
certain OT laws to expire with respect to the life, death and
resurrection of Jesus Christ, while other laws remained in effect.
For example, homosexuality advocates complain that Christians don't
offer animal sacrifices in their backyards. But if homosexuality
advocates would take their Bibles out of the cellophane they might
discover Hebrews 10:1-18, specally verse 18. This passage indicates
that God accepted Jesus' sacrifice of himself as the unlimate atonement
sacrifice - so animal sacrifices are no longer necessary.
Again, homosexuality advocates also complain about the forbidden foods
that Christians eat. But concerning forbidden foods, homosexuality
advocates have evidently never read the following passages:
Mark 7:1-23, especially verse 19 (NIV)
Acts 10:10-16
Romans 14:3,14
1 Corinthians 10:25-27
These passages indicate that OT food restrictions also expired with
respect to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. (Thank you
Jesus)
But while animal sacrifice laws and food restrictions expired, 1
Corinthians 5 indicates that the forbidden sexual acts of the OT are
still in effect. This passage gives the example of a sexual offender
getting kicked out of the congregation. Note, in fact, that 1
Corinthians 5:13 is actually a reference to God's OT command to "purge
the evil from among you" (eg., Deuteronomy 21:21).
It is important for homosexuals to note that although the example of 1
Corinthians 5 concerns a case of incest, 1 Corinthians 5 concerns
homosexuality in the following way. Both incest (Leviticus 18:7-8) and
homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22) are included in the levitical list of
forbidden sexual acts (Leviticus 18:6-23). This means that the example
of the person getting the boot in 1 Corinthians 5 could just as well
have been an unrepentant homosexual as opposed to an incest offender.
Homosexuals need to keep in mind, however, that the good news of the
gospel is not about how God despises homosexuality. In fact, 1
Corinthians 6:9-11 indicates that certain members of that early church
had formerly been slaves to same-sex sexual relationships but had been
cleansed in Jesus' name. So they had evidently repented and accepted
God's grace to straighten their lives out.
John 3:16
Revelation 3:20
turk
--
My last vestige of "hands off religion" respect disappeared in the smoke and
choking dust of September 11th 2001, followed by the "National Day of
Prayer," when prelates and pastors did their tremulous Martin Luther King
impersonations and urged people of mutually incompatible faiths to hold
hands, united in homage to the very force that caused the problem in the
first place.
-- Richard Dawkins, The Devil's Chaplain (2004)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wobblemetits Wibblewobble.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
10 Jul 2005 04:59:32 PM |
|
|
"Gerald Nash" <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com> wrote in message
news:darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net...
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is
abomination.
Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both
of
them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
their blood shall be upon them.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even
their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which
is
unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which
was meet.
Rom 1:31-32 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural
affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that
they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same,
but have pleasure in them that do them.
How can homosexuals be Christians when the Bible *clearly* states that
homosexuality is wrong?
Finally, why can't *anyone* answer questions like these with the truth?
If I wanted to lick ***** instead of Lamey does this makes me a sinner?
--
Wobble
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
11 Jul 2005 05:02:33 AM |
|
|
"Gerald Nash" <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com> wrote in message
news:darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net...
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
Yes....
Your god is *so* unbelievably petty that he really gives a damn about who
loves who. Why do you worship such an egomanically monster?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
23 Jul 2005 10:28:58 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: Gerald Nash <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com>
Date written: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:37:42 +0100
MsgID:<darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net>
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Because the Bible isn't a very good argument against homosexuality and only a
gullible believer would think it was.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"Toward no crimes have men shown themselves so cold-bloodedly
cruel as in punishing differences in belief"
-- James Russell Lowell
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
23 Jul 2005 10:44:59 PM |
|
|
The_Sage <The_Sage@msn.com> wrote in
news:gm26e1dgkl594e5kqbj76t1eqog6h5fd9f@4ax.com:
Reply to article by: Gerald Nash <42h3orgbsl@05bk74zy.com>
Date written: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:37:42 +0100
MsgID:<darmd0$rj$0@pita.alt.net>
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Because the Bible isn't a very good argument against homosexuality and
only a gullible believer would think it was.
The Sage
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a very
good argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an orientation
(also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run afoul of the Bible's
teachings is to remain celibate. But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or
she will not enter the kingdom of God.
I don't know how much better arguments can get than that - for believers,
that is. You can say what you like about "wise" or "gullible" believers.
Such rubbish is only an ad hominem anyway. What I said is in black and
white on the page of any Bible translation out there. I think only a
"foolish" believer would ignore those teachings at their own risk.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 10:20:55 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com>
Date written: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 03:44:59 GMT
MsgID:<Xns969CD31CB1BF1hohn@207.217.125.201>
It *IS* wrong. So VERY, VERY WRONG.
How *can* anyone (other than a homosexual) claim otherwise?
Because the Bible isn't a very good argument against homosexuality and
only a gullible believer would think it was.
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a very
good argument against homosexuality.
That isn't an example of an "argument", that is an example of blind faith
obedience.
Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an orientation
(also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run afoul of the Bible's
teachings is to remain celibate.
....or have sex with the opposite sex.
But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or
she will not enter the kingdom of God.
The Bible does not single out just homosexuals, it also includes fornicators,
idolaters, adulterers, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners.
It is only Christians who single out homosexuals to the exclusion of the rest.
That is called "bigotry" and "sexism" but I guess it is okay if bigots or
sexists enter the kingdom of Heaven.
I don't know how much better arguments can get than that - for believers,
that is.
It isn't an argument, it is simply a statement of belief. Nothing in the Bible
explains what is wrong or harmful about homosexuality, it just says don't do it.
You can say what you like about "wise" or "gullible" believers.
Such rubbish is only an ad hominem anyway.
It would be ad hominem if I said "they are wrong because they are gullible" but
I am saying "they are wrong and can't see they are wrong because they are so
gullible", therefore it is objective observation.
What I said is in black and
white on the page of any Bible translation out there. I think only a
"foolish" believer would ignore those teachings at their own risk.
What you said was a logical fallacy. You believe homosexuality is wrong because
you believe the Bible is right. That is not an argument, that is a statement of
belief. A believer can only follow the Bible if they do so blindly and without
question...in other words, only if they are gullible.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"Toward no crimes have men shown themselves so cold-bloodedly
cruel as in punishing differences in belief"
-- James Russell Lowell
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 01:13:31 AM |
|
|
The_Sage <The_Sage@msn.com> wrote in
news:jfl8e113kfkqu42s20atr97of7o6k57jcf@4ax.com:
<Snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a
very good argument against homosexuality.
That isn't an example of an "argument", that is an example of blind
faith obedience.
Sin leads to death - even for believers. (Romans 8:13.) Same sex
intercourse is a sin. (Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy
1:9-10.) Therefore, if one practices same sex intercourse - even if one is
a believer - he or she brings damnation on himself/herself.
THAT is an argument.
Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an
orientation (also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run
afoul of the Bible's teachings is to remain celibate.
...or have sex with the opposite sex.
Not true, unless the two are married. Sex between unmaried heterosexuals
is fornication - which is also a sin. (1 Corinthians 6:9.)
But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he
or she will not enter the kingdom of God.
The Bible does not single out just homosexuals, it also includes
fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, thieves, covetous, drunkards,
revilers, and extortioners.
I totally agree that the Bible doesn't single out homosexuals. Anyone who
practices unrighteousness - including all of those you just listed - have
something to worry about from God too. I have said so many times.
In fact, the prohibitions in the New Testament related to sexual activity
aren't directed at a person's sexual orientation - they are directed at
those who practice certain acts. Thus, even a person with an heterosexual
orientation who practices same sex intercourse (also known as situational
homosexuality) is still a sinner by the authority of the same passages.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .It is only Christians who single out
homosexuals to the exclusion of the rest. That is called "bigotry" and
"sexism" but I guess it is okay if bigots or sexists enter the kingdom
of Heaven.
We are in a damned if we win damned if we lose situaiton here. The focus
turns on homosexuality - as opposed to other sins on Paul's lists - because
same sex intercourse is the only behavior that people are willing to
champion against Church teachings and the Bible. No Christians are willing
to champion fornication or adultery. There are no Church groups asking for
the promotion to Bishop of a person who is a known, unrepentant bank robber
or swindler. Homosexual behavior is one of the important, "hot button"
issue in Church circles today. That is why it is getting the attention.
I'm sorry if you or anyone else feels picked on.
I don't know how much better arguments can get than that - for
believers, that is.
It isn't an argument, it is simply a statement of belief. Nothing in
the Bible explains what is wrong or harmful about homosexuality, it
just says don't do it.
See my ARGUMENT, above.
You can say what you like about "wise" or "gullible" believers.
Such rubbish is only an ad hominem anyway.
It would be ad hominem if I said "they are wrong because they are
gullible" but I am saying "they are wrong and can't see they are wrong
because they are so gullible", therefore it is objective observation.
And if I reject your factual/logical conclusion that they are wrong for any
reason, then the point de-evolves into an ad hominem. Which is where it is
- because I challenge the claim that believers are wrong in believing that
same sex intercourse is a sin.
What I said is in black and
white on the page of any Bible translation out there. I think only a
"foolish" believer would ignore those teachings at their own risk.
What you said was a logical fallacy. You believe homosexuality is
wrong because you believe the Bible is right. That is not an argument,
that is a statement of belief.
No. I said same sex intercourse is wrong. I said that the practice of sin
leads to spiritual death. Ergo, practicing same sex intercourse leads to
spiritual death. That is hardly a logical fallacy or a blind statement of
belief.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A believer can only follow the Bible if
they do so blindly and without question...in other words, only if they
are gullible.
And you would advocate that everyone gets a pen-knife and start whittling
out all the parts of the Bible that they don't like. Right?
Or, how are we to decide what parts to keep and what to discard?
Should we depend on moral relativism - and determine what is a sin and what
is not by the standards of current mores?
How can we do such a thing in light of the fact the Bible is so anti- or
counter-culture at every turn?
You see, your method causes many more problems and raises many more
questions than it could ever hope to answer.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomIntern" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
26 Jul 2005 12:38:24 AM |
|
|
It was a dark and stormy night in alt.politics.homosexuality, when J.W.
wrote:
The_Sage wrote:
<Snip>
I don't know how much better arguments can get than that - for
believers, that is.
It isn't an argument, it is simply a statement of belief. Nothing in
the Bible explains what is wrong or harmful about homosexuality, it
just says don't do it.
See my ARGUMENT, above.
Sorry, but your argument is supported only by your argument. Because your
Sky Pixie says it's a sin, people who do it will go to Hell. There is no
explanation as to what makes it "sinful", only a contention that it "is".
You can say what you like about "wise" or "gullible" believers.
Such rubbish is only an ad hominem anyway.
It would be ad hominem if I said "they are wrong because they are
gullible" but I am saying "they are wrong and can't see they are wrong
because they are so gullible", therefore it is objective observation.
And if I reject your factual/logical conclusion that they are wrong for
any reason, then the point de-evolves into an ad hominem. Which is where
it is - because I challenge the claim that believers are wrong in
believing that same sex intercourse is a sin.
And your challenge is based on the Buy-bull saying it's a sin, because the
Buy-bull says it's a sin. *****.
<snip>
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A believer can only follow the Bible if
they do so blindly and without question...in other words, only if they
are gullible.
And you would advocate that everyone gets a pen-knife and start whittling
out all the parts of the Bible that they don't like. Right?
Sounds like a plan. Thomas Jefferson did it...
Or, how are we to decide what parts to keep and what to discard?
Should we depend on moral relativism - and determine what is a sin and
what is not by the standards of current mores?
How can we do such a thing in light of the fact the Bible is so anti- or
counter-culture at every turn?
You see, your method causes many more problems and raises many more
questions than it could ever hope to answer.
Oh, not at all -- TJ, after all, merely eliminated "God" and St. Paul from
it. Very simple. Now, *****.
--
_______________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Superfaggot; GGGHD; MWFA; HCNB; MU; BCB; FI
Economic Left/Right: -5.71
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -7.23
Killfiled by: directory
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
26 Jul 2005 01:46:56 AM |
|
|
The Secretary of HomIntern <ykransepop@woem.gro> wrote in
news:k%jFe.43771$%K2.24153@pd7tw1no:
It was a dark and stormy night in alt.politics.homosexuality, when
J.W. wrote:
The_Sage wrote:
<Snip>
I don't know how much better arguments can get than that - for
believers, that is.
It isn't an argument, it is simply a statement of belief. Nothing in
the Bible explains what is wrong or harmful about homosexuality, it
just says don't do it.
See my ARGUMENT, above.
Sorry, but your argument is supported only by your argument. Because
your Sky Pixie says it's a sin, people who do it will go to Hell.
There is no explanation as to what makes it "sinful", only a
contention that it "is".
When God says something is a sin, it is a sin. It is God's say so that
makes it a sin. If God doesn't say something is a sin, then it isn't a
sin. Isn't that simple?
That God has said that same sex intercourse is a sin, makes it a sin. If
you don't like it, take it up with him. You will eventually.
And if I reject your factual/logical conclusion that they are wrong
for any reason, then the point de-evolves into an ad hominem. Which
is where it is - because I challenge the claim that believers are
wrong in believing that same sex intercourse is a sin.
And your challenge is based on the Buy-bull saying it's a sin, because
the Buy-bull says it's a sin. *****.
Very nice. Classy too.
<snip>
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A believer can only follow the Bible
if they do so blindly and without question...in other words, only if
they are gullible.
And you would advocate that everyone gets a pen-knife and start
whittling out all the parts of the Bible that they don't like.
Right?
Sounds like a plan. Thomas Jefferson did it...
T.J. was no believer. He was a deist.
Or, how are we to decide what parts to keep and what to discard?
Should we depend on moral relativism - and determine what is a sin
and what is not by the standards of current mores?
How can we do such a thing in light of the fact the Bible is so anti-
or counter-culture at every turn?
You see, your method causes many more problems and raises many more
questions than it could ever hope to answer.
Oh, not at all -- TJ, after all, merely eliminated "God" and St. Paul
from it. Very simple. Now, *****.
Somehow I knew you would show your colors.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
PS I put alt.bible back on the list of NGs and deleted the rest just so you
can shine your light before all men.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 02:48:54 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 06:13:31 GMT, "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote:
The_Sage <The_Sage@msn.com> wrote in
news:jfl8e113kfkqu42s20atr97of7o6k57jcf@4ax.com:
<Snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a
very good argument against homosexuality.
That isn't an example of an "argument", that is an example of blind
faith obedience.
Sin leads to death - even for believers. (Romans 8:13.) Same sex
intercourse is a sin. (Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy
1:9-10.) Therefore, if one practices same sex intercourse - even if one is
a believer - he or she brings damnation on himself/herself.
THAT is an argument.
Albeit an heretical one: everyone, whether a believer or not, sins
daily, according to Paul, yet believers are not damned for it.
---
"This is how liberty dies: with thunderous applause"
- Padme Amidala, Episode III
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 12:21:45 PM |
|
|
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:sa69e1tpd8nqa5te2u7ucf91uapmm058ne@4ax.com:
<Snip>
Sin leads to death - even for believers. (Romans 8:13.) Same sex
intercourse is a sin. (Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1
Timothy 1:9-10.) Therefore, if one practices same sex intercourse -
even if one is a believer - he or she brings damnation on
himself/herself.
THAT is an argument.
Albeit an heretical one: everyone, whether a believer or not, sins
daily, according to Paul, yet believers are not damned for it.
"Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the
flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the
Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live."
(Romans 8:12-13.)
Paul wrote this to a Church of BELIEVERS. Thus, this it was meant to be
understood as a warning to believers.
And it is very plain. If one accepts Jesus but then abandons himself or
herself to the practice of unrepentant sin, then that person will die.
The same is said in Hebrews 10:26-31:
"For if WE sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth,
there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful
expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the
adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses' law dies without mercy on the
testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you
suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God
underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a
common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said,
"Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. And again, "The Lord will
judge His people." It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the
living God." (Hebrews 10:26-31)
The writer includes himself ("WE") in this warning. The only group
addressed here is believers.
If there is any heresy out there it is the notion of "once saved always
saved." The scripture is very plain: leaning on God's love as an excuse to
lead a life of sin is a ticket to the infernal regions. A prayer to heaven
followed by a life of hell is a receipe for disaster.
That is to be contrasted with those who seek to stay in God's love, yet
struggle against sin on a continuous basis and fail. Those who fight the
good fight, and pursue, lay hold of, grasp and hold fast to salvation are
those who will attain it. (Romans 2:7;1 Corinthians 15:2; 1 Timothy 6:17-
19; Hebrews 3:6, 14; 4:14; 6:18; 10:23; Revelation 2:13, 25; 3:3, 11).
Such are those whom the Lord has elected to salvation.
Now that you have my meaning, you were saying somehthing about heresy?
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tersono" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 11:57:41 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 03:44:59 GMT, "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote:
<snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a very
good argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an orientation
(also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run afoul of the Bible's
teachings is to remain celibate. But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or
she will not enter the kingdom of God.
<snip>
So this loving God equips people with propensities which he forbids
them to indulge.
Not quite the same category as the actions forbidden in the Ten
Commandments, is it?
Ah! I've got it! *That* must be why we don't get as many posts
condemning transgressions against the Ten Commandments as we get
against homosexuality. If the eleventh commandment is "Thou shall not
be found out", then a good candidate for the twelfth must surely be
"Thou shalt not be different."
--
Citroen C3. It's French! It's fuel-efficient!
What have *you* done to irritate Dubya today?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 12:11:47 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:57:41 +0100, tersono
<ethel.thefrog@ntlworld.com> spake thusly:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 03:44:59 GMT, "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote:
<snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a very
good argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an orientation
(also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run afoul of the Bible's
teachings is to remain celibate. But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or
she will not enter the kingdom of God.
<snip>
So this loving God equips people with propensities which he forbids
them to indulge.
God did not create man gay. God did not create man
and tell him to fornicate. God created man "good".
Man made a choice to sin and since the Fall, man
has a sinful nature. But as usual, the unbeliever
blames God for the actions of man.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "RainLove" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 09:36:51 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:11:47 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:57:41 +0100, tersono
<ethel.thefrog@ntlworld.com> spake thusly:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 03:44:59 GMT, "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote:
<snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a very
good argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an orientation
(also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run afoul of the Bible's
teachings is to remain celibate. But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or
she will not enter the kingdom of God.
<snip>
So this loving God equips people with propensities which he forbids
them to indulge.
God did not create man gay. God did not create man
and tell him to fornicate. God created man "good".
Man made a choice to sin and since the Fall, man
has a sinful nature. But as usual, the unbeliever
blames God for the actions of man.
Since your god has NEVER created a human who has been unable to resist
sin, then your god has created a one-sided rule book.... NO ONE can
play by the rules.
Your god either made mankind too WEAK or created 'temptation to be too
Strong. Either way, your god is a poor excuse for a creator.
If Ford made an SUV that *ALWAYS* overturned when negotiating a curve
(at any speed), would we blame the driver for driving the SUV or would
we blame FORD for a defective product?
It seems your god's 'responsibility' is right up there with ENRON's.
James, Seattle
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 03:59:55 PM |
|
|
RainLove <SP-AMB-LOCKrainlove@raincit.com> wrote in
news:1ut9e15hokgq9ottr9sutpu438m7l2fid4@4ax.com:
<Snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a
very good argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality is
essentially the phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one
has such an orientation (also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way
to not run afoul of the Bible's teachings is to remain celibate.
But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and practices same-sex
intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or she will not
enter the kingdom of God.
<snip>
So this loving God equips people with propensities which he forbids
them to indulge.
God did not create man gay. God did not create man
and tell him to fornicate. God created man "good".
Man made a choice to sin and since the Fall, man
has a sinful nature. But as usual, the unbeliever
blames God for the actions of man.
Since your god has NEVER created a human who has been unable to resist
sin, then your god has created a one-sided rule book.... NO ONE can
play by the rules.
You are absolutely correct here. None are righteous. (Romans 3:10, citing
Psalms 14:1-3.) "[A]ll have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
(Romans 3:23.) The only man to walk the earth and lead a sinless life was
Jesus the Christ. (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22.)
Your god either made mankind too WEAK or created 'temptation to be too
Strong. Either way, your god is a poor excuse for a creator.
That is not even a consideration. God is sovereign. He makes the rules.
He is responsible to no one but himself. (See Daniel 4:35.) Nor is he
subject to the judgments or ethical standards that men create. (See Job
40:1-14.) We can judge God and find fault with him when we can save
ourselves without him - which is to say: never. (Ibid.)
You judge God without knowing his purpose or will. And, you cannot know
such things. His mind is not knowable to us. (Isaiah 55:8-9.)
If Ford made an SUV that *ALWAYS* overturned when negotiating a curve
(at any speed), would we blame the driver for driving the SUV or would
we blame FORD for a defective product?
Not a very apt analogy, is it?
Jesus Christ is the way to make things right. Jesus came into the world to
save sinners. (1 Timothy 1:15.) He died so that those who trust in him
can be redeemed, be forgiven their sins and come to eternal life. (John
3:16; Colossians 1:14.) This is God's free gift by which men might be
saved. (Romans 5:15-18; Ephesians 2:8-9.) So, there is a way for sinful
man to become right with God.
The more apt analogy would be the foolish man who buys a defective SUV and
drives it off the lot, ignoring the free repair offered on site to fix the
defect that causes SUVs to overturn.
It seems your god's 'responsibility' is right up there with ENRON's.
As already shown, this is simply not true.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 06:26:27 PM |
|
|
J.W. wrote:
You are absolutely correct here. None are righteous. (Romans 3:10, citing
Psalms 14:1-3.) "[A]ll have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
(Romans 3:23.) The only man to walk the earth and lead a sinless life was
Jesus the Christ. (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22.)
Modifications:
There was a man... whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and
upright. (Job 1:1)
God "takes Enoch with Him" (Genesis 5:24)
....and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. (2 Kings 2:11)
The two witnesses ascend (Revelation 11:3-12)
(God doesn't take sinners, which is what the Hebrew strongly implies is
what He literally did in the cases of Enoch, Elijah, and the two
witnesses.)
The Catholics would also put Mary in that group.
Of course, there is a small conundrum when one considers: "And no one
hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, [even]
the Son of man, who is in heaven. (John 3:13)"
That is not even a consideration. God is sovereign.
In His domain, perhaps. This isn't it. And if such is claimed: The word
"slumlord" might be uttered.
He makes the rules. He is responsible to no one but himself.
Not even His followers? Hmm... That would explain why the membership
roles are shrinking.
You judge God without knowing his purpose or will. And, you cannot know
such things. His mind is not knowable to us. (Isaiah 55:8-9.)
Well, if we can't know Him, then what are we left with? His actions. We
can certainly be said to know those.
Hmm... The Aztecs -- and their lovely rituals -- come in a distant
second in regards to the bloodthirst angle. Not precisely the most
comforting of observations.
I shall now don a turban and imitate Johnny Carson making a prediction:
"Hmm... <Taps envelope to head> Umm... Ah. 'An inconvenient
observation!'" <Opens envelope> "Matthew 7:16."
Oh, dear.
--
Civilians, and Grunts, and Zombies, Oh My!
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Dionisio
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 08:38:16 PM |
|
|
Dionisio <moc-rr-thgisniTA@5ellimd.com> wrote in
news:DyeFe.39225$zY4.7346@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:
J.W. wrote:
You are absolutely correct here. None are righteous. (Romans 3:10,
citing Psalms 14:1-3.) "[A]ll have sinned and fall short of the glory
of God." (Romans 3:23.) The only man to walk the earth and lead a
sinless life was Jesus the Christ. (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter
2:22.)
Modifications:
There was a man... whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and
upright. (Job 1:1)
The word "perfect" is one of several possibile correct words to use, but
not necessarily the best one. The Hebrew word used in Job 1:1 is the
adjective "tam" - which means "complete," "morally innocent," "having
integrity...." (Brown, Driver & Briggs, Eds. (A Hebrew and English Lexicon
of the Old Testament (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1951 reissue), pp. 1070-
1071.) This is the likely reason that other versions use the word
"blameless" instead of "perfect." (See NAB, NASB, NIV & RSV vers. of Job
1:1.) Blameless does not mean "sinless."
God "takes Enoch with Him" (Genesis 5:24)
...and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. (2 Kings 2:11)
The two witnesses ascend (Revelation 11:3-12)
(God doesn't take sinners, which is what the Hebrew strongly implies
is what He literally did in the cases of Enoch, Elijah, and the two
witnesses.)
The modifications don't fly. Not being a sinner and being sinless are two
different things. If God didn't take sinners - i.e. people who never
sinned - then heaven would remain empty, and the lake of fire would contain
the entire compliment of men, save one.
The Catholics would also put Mary in that group.
Bully for them. Find it in the Bible, show it to me and I will believe it.
Otherwise, their phony man-made edifice can go to blazes.
Of course, there is a small conundrum when one considers: "And no one
hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, [even]
the Son of man, who is in heaven. (John 3:13)"
Very, very small - even non-existent. You have pulled this way out of
context. When Jesus said this, he was lightly chastising Nicodemus for not
understanding what he meant. (See John 3:9-13.)
The expression "to ascend into heaven" is a Hebrew colloquialism for one
who understands a spiritual teaching and can explain it (as if the person
had gone to the source "heaven" to discover the divine and spiritual
meaning.) It was used precisely that way in Deuteronomy 30:11-12 and
Proverbs 30:4. (And see also Romans 10:6.) This non-literal meaning makes
perfect sense in the context of Jesus' talk with Nicodemus with regard to
his inability to understand Jesus' teachings. Thus when Jesus said:
If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe
if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven, but He who
descended from heaven: the Son of Man"
- he was telling Nicodemus that he (Jesus) was imparting a spiritual truth,
and that he was the only one who could shed light on its meaning.
That Jesus meant it in the colloquial and non-literal sense is also
supported by the fact that Jesus hadn't physically "ascended" into heaven
yet. If he hadn't physically ascended, he certainly couldn't have
physically descended either. Remember, he was born. He didn't fall out of
the sky.
And you guys always twit fundamentalists for being too literal. Sheesh!
That is not even a consideration. God is sovereign.
In His domain, perhaps. This isn't it. And if such is claimed: The
word "slumlord" might be uttered.
He makes the rules. He is responsible to no one but himself.
Not even His followers? Hmm... That would explain why the membership
roles are shrinking.
In your wildest dreams.
You judge God without knowing his purpose or will. And, you cannot
know such things. His mind is not knowable to us. (Isaiah 55:8-9.)
Well, if we can't know Him, then what are we left with? His actions.
We can certainly be said to know those.
Hmm... The Aztecs -- and their lovely rituals -- come in a distant
second in regards to the bloodthirst angle. Not precisely the most
comforting of observations.
I shall now don a turban and imitate Johnny Carson making a
prediction: "Hmm... <Taps envelope to head> Umm... Ah. 'An
inconvenient observation!'" <Opens envelope> "Matthew 7:16."
Oh, dear.
"Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you will answer me.
Would you discredit my
justice?
Would you condemn me
to justify yourself?
Do you have an arm like God's,
and can your voice thunder like his?
Then adorn yourself with glory and splendor,
and clothe yourself in honor and majesty.
Unleash the fury of your wrath,
look at every proud man and bring him low,
look at every proud man and humble him,
crush the wicked where they stand.
Bury them all in the dust together,
shroud their faces in the grave.
Then I myself will admit to you
that your own right hand can save you."
(Job 40:7-14.)
You can go ahead and scoff all you like. You'll have to explain it to him
sooner or later. I prefer not to - and live.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 09:38:32 PM |
|
|
J.W. wrote:
Blameless does not mean "sinless."
Well cut me another hair.
The modifications don't fly. Not being a sinner and being sinless are two
different things.
And splice in some Rogain...
Of course, there is a small conundrum when one considers: "And no one
hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, [even]
the Son of man, who is in heaven. (John 3:13)"
Very, very small - even non-existent. You have pulled this way out of
context.
Well, we'll have to leave that to the opinions of the readers then.
The expression "to ascend into heaven" is a Hebrew colloquialism for one
who understands a spiritual teaching and can explain it
Ah. Sort of like the colloquialism "to know," yes?
Oh, dear, did I just say that?
That Jesus meant it in the colloquial and non-literal sense is also
supported by the fact that Jesus hadn't physically "ascended" into heaven
yet. If he hadn't physically ascended, he certainly couldn't have
physically descended either.
Gotta start someplace though. And one hears that Jesus "came from on high."
Oh those bothersome details...
And you guys always twit fundamentalists for being too literal.
"Tweak," my dear fellow. "Tweak."
He makes the rules. He is responsible to no one but himself.
Not even His followers? Hmm... That would explain why the membership
roles are shrinking.
In your wildest dreams.
Which appear to be mirrored in those niggling little things known as
membership counts... By why mention bothersome little items like those?
You can go ahead and scoff all you like. You'll have to explain it to him
sooner or later. I prefer not to - and live.
Ah, yes. The myth of immortality. Strange how even Jesus died...
Fortunately there is Romans 6:7 ("For he that is dead is freed from
sin.") Perversely enough, I know that I shall die. Ain't that ever the
monkey wrench?
--
Civilians, and Grunts, and Zombies, Oh My!
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Dionisio
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
26 Jul 2005 09:34:16 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 01:38:16 GMT, "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote:
Dionisio <moc-rr-thgisniTA@5ellimd.com> wrote in
news:DyeFe.39225$zY4.7346@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:
J.W. wrote:
You are absolutely correct here. None are righteous. (Romans 3:10,
citing Psalms 14:1-3.) "[A]ll have sinned and fall short of the glory
of God." (Romans 3:23.) The only man to walk the earth and lead a
sinless life was Jesus the Christ. (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter
2:22.)
Modifications:
There was a man... whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and
upright. (Job 1:1)
The word "perfect" is one of several possibile correct words to use, but
not necessarily the best one. The Hebrew word used in Job 1:1 is the
adjective "tam" - which means "complete," "morally innocent," "having
integrity...." (Brown, Driver & Briggs, Eds. (A Hebrew and English Lexicon
of the Old Testament (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1951 reissue), pp. 1070-
1071.) This is the likely reason that other versions use the word
"blameless" instead of "perfect." (See NAB, NASB, NIV & RSV vers. of Job
1:1.) Blameless does not mean "sinless."
Of course not, and "dry" does not mean "without water".
God "takes Enoch with Him" (Genesis 5:24)
...and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. (2 Kings 2:11)
The two witnesses ascend (Revelation 11:3-12)
(God doesn't take sinners, which is what the Hebrew strongly implies
is what He literally did in the cases of Enoch, Elijah, and the two
witnesses.)
The modifications don't fly. Not being a sinner and being sinless are two
different things.
Just like "not raining" and "rain-free" are two different things.
If God didn't take sinners - i.e. people who never
sinned - then heaven would remain empty, and the lake of fire would contain
the entire compliment of men, save one.
Is "one" the same as "single"?
snip
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 03:27:07 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
God created man "good".
And -- according to some -- made women better. But that would start a
hissy-fit, wouldn't it?
--
Civilians, and Grunts, and Zombies, Oh My!
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Dionisio
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 04:36:40 PM |
|
|
"Dionisio" <moc-rr-thgisniTA@5ellimd.com> wrote in message
news:vQSEe.33819$yC5.32495@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
Pastor Dave wrote:
God created man "good".
And -- according to some -- made women better. But that would start a
hissy-fit, wouldn't it?
Well, except for that whole Lilith debacle... :c)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 09:25:53 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:57:41 +0100, tersono
<ethel.thefrog@ntlworld.com> spake thusly:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 03:44:59 GMT, "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote:
<snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a very
good argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an orientation
(also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run afoul of the Bible's
teachings is to remain celibate. But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or
she will not enter the kingdom of God.
<snip>
So this loving God equips people with propensities which he forbids
them to indulge.
God did not create man gay.
Cite.
God did not create man
and tell him to fornicate.
You're half right. God did not create man.
God created man "good".
You just said that God did not create man. Which is it?
Man made a choice to sin and since the Fall, man
has a sinful nature. But as usual, the unbeliever
blames God for the actions of man.
How can an unbeliever blame God for anything? The unbeliever doesn't
even believe that this thing exists, and, therefore, cannot blame that
doesn't exist.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Day" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 11:06:44 PM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
[snip]
God did not create man gay.
Cite.
God did not create man
and tell him to fornicate.
You're half right. God did not create man.
God created man "good".
You just said that God did not create man. Which is it?
Sorry, DanielSan, I have to step in here.
You don't get to take sentence fragments out of
context; we're supposed to leave that to theist
liars like PD.
Up to now, you've been doing fine. Don't start
using their dishonest tactics - it undermines
your credibility.
--
R
Atheist Chair,
EAC Disciplinary Committee
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 03:31:28 AM |
|
|
Randy Day wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
[snip]
God did not create man gay.
Cite.
God did not create man
and tell him to fornicate.
You're half right. God did not create man.
God created man "good".
You just said that God did not create man. Which is it?
Sorry, DanielSan, I have to step in here.
You don't get to take sentence fragments out of
context; we're supposed to leave that to theist
liars like PD.
Up to now, you've been doing fine. Don't start
using their dishonest tactics - it undermines
your credibility.
Sorry. I only do it to preestablish morons like PD. 8-)
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AcesLucky" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 02:45:28 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:57:41 +0100, tersono
<ethel.thefrog@ntlworld.com> spake thusly:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 03:44:59 GMT, "J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote:
<snip>
If a person is a "beilever," then what is written in the Bible is a very
good argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality is essentially the
phenomenon of same-sex sexual orientations. If one has such an orientation
(also known as an SSA or SSO) the only way to not run afoul of the Bible's
teachings is to remain celibate. But, if one with and SSA acts on it, and
practices same-sex intercourse, the Bible assures that person that he or
she will not enter the kingdom of God.
<snip>
So this loving God equips people with propensities which he forbids
them to indulge.
God did not create man gay. God did not create man
and tell him to fornicate. God created man "good".
Man made a choice to sin and since the Fall, man
has a sinful nature. But as usual, the unbeliever
blames God for the actions of man.
---
Hi, pastor dave. You made a few statements of which, I beg to differ.
You stated:
1. God did not create man gay.
Your scripture proves you wrong, so you can't blame these tendencies on
sin. Here's proof:
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he
him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:27 (KJV)
According to biblical lore, man was created both male AND female. "male
and female created he them." Notice, the "he" is not capitalized, so it
is not referring to God but to man as it says "created he them."
Male AND female tendencies would therefore be an inherent part of our
being "created" as such. (Since God can't err, your tits are not a
design flaw, dude; they are to remind you of your female side, can I get
a witness, Hah.)
You stated:
2. God did not create man and tell him to fornicate.
Your scripture proves you wrong again; that's EXACTLY what He said to
do. How else could the world be populated with the sons and daughters of
Adam and Eve except through incest? Celibacy? Nope. Fornication! Hah.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply,
Gen 1:28 (KJV)
That's gotta be pretty damn self explanatory, it'n it? Hah.
You stated:
3. God created man "good". Man made a choice to sin and since the Fall,
man has a sinful nature.
Lemme see:
A "good" man made the "choice" to sin. (I like that at face value.)
But check this out: a sinless man made the "choice" to sin. That means
by default, man had a sinful nature PRIOR to the actual sin, or the sin
could never have been made!
You see, if a sin was made by mistake...that's one thing. But this sin
was made ON PURPOSE! And by a "good" man, Hah. So there's no error in
the design, just error in your statement, hallelujah, can you hear me
NOW, pastor dave?
You stated:
4. But as usual, the unbeliever blames God for the actions of man.
The unbeliever blames God? Pastor Dave, what do think the unbeliever
doesn't believe there is?
(I'll let you slide on this obvious lapse of ability to reason.)
But just for the record, unbelievers blame man for the folly of man.
That's why we see red when ignorant religious fundamentalist kill in the
name of God, while expecting some heavenly reward for it, like God's
some sort of idiot.
No, pastor dave. PEOPLE are the idiots.
Now go look in the mirror, lift your shirt, and wonder why God gave a
full blooded man like you TITS! Surely pastor dave has a little bit o
***** in him. Design flaw?
Your Huckleberry,
AcesLucky.
Come on.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
24 Jul 2005 10:54:24 PM |
|
|
AcesLucky wrote:
Now go look in the mirror, lift your shirt, and wonder why God gave a
full blooded man like you TITS! Surely pastor dave has a little bit o
***** in him. Design flaw?
For those that disbelieve in evolution, please describe to me the
purpose of a coccyx.
Here, I'll help the uninitated.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/images/ahd/jpg/A4pelvis.jpg
This is a view of the pelvis of a human being. The coccyx is that bone
that is stick straight into the "O" formed by the pelvis, below and to
the left of the bone marked "B" and directly above the bone marked "E,"
in this picture.
Go ahead. Please describe the purpose of this bone.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "AcesLucky" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuality *IS* WRONG! |
25 Jul 2005 11:40:54 AM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
AcesLucky wrote:
Now go look in the mirror, lift your shirt, and wonder why God gave a
full blooded man like you TITS! Surely pastor dave has a little bit o
***** in him. Design flaw?
For those that disbelieve in evolution, please describe to me the
purpose of a coccyx.
Here, I'll help the uninitated.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/images/ahd/jpg/A4pelvis.jpg
This is a view of the pelvis of a human being. The coccyx is that bone
that is stick straight into the "O" formed by the pelvis, below and to
the left of the bone marked "B" and directly above the bone marked "E,"
in this picture.
Go ahead. Please describe the purpose of this bone.
You mean the "tail bone?"
Ask pastor Dave. He gets 'inside' information from God all the time.
But the son-of-a-blank hasn't spoken to me since I took the challenge he
made "you" on 7/17/2005 in alt. politics.homosexuality, Subject:
PING:DANIELSAN:I'm still waiting...
So am I. He said he wanted the loser to admit being wrong (publicly) and
never bring the subject up again. I accepted the challenge even with HIS
rules; but he ducks me and hides.
I think he's embarrassed before his peers.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
