Can You At Least Admit that The Act is Wrong?

[MrPirate]

Have you noticed anything positive in the scripture about homosexuality? No one has ever answered that question.

It doesn’t say anything positive about people with dark skin either….does this make racism acceptable to you?

 

[MrPirate]

Isnt that cute. That pagan and a lot of the liberal Christians on this forum seem to be in agreement an awful lot.

Its easy to agree about the truth

To answer your question, I dont expect you to hang on every word, but I do believe the Bible and believe in Jesus so I am qualified to enter the debate, just like you. However, someone who disregards my Savior as someone no more real than Bugs Bunny, is hardly someone ANY Christian should receive advice from about the fictious Jesus.

Just because you can’t respond the points made by Wiccan_Child is no reason for him …or anyone else … to excluded form the discussion.

Perhaps if you were to address the post rather than attack the person…

 

[MrPirate]

[1 Corinthians 6:8-10]

8Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

The bible is clear but the truth is not going to set well with the lovers of darkness.

Nothing about gays or lesbians here….thanks for bringing it up

 

[Zaac]

It doesn’t say anything positive about people with dark skin either….does this make racism acceptable to you?

They were in the Middle East. A lot of them had dark skin. And there is a lot of positive stuff about a lot of them.

But let me say again, God is a God of ORDER. He speaks to acts of homosexuality and not homosexuality in the same way as He speaks to acts of heterosexuality and not heterosexuality.

 

[MrPirate]

The Bible is very clear when you are using Its FULL COUNSEL. God does not author confusion. It's clear. Folks just don't want to accept it.

But it ISN’T clear on the topic.

Such problems arise when trying force a dead language to embrace modern concepts. Translation problems crop up time and time again.


Shakab (rape) is not the same as shakhabh (to lie with) or mishkabh (to have sexual/carnal relations with)


And arsenokoites doesn’t translate as homosexual and there is no reason to believe that is what Paul meant when he wrote it. Ancient Greek has a handful of well known words meaning homosexual…but he didn’t use them


Your OP demands everyone agree with your personal interpretation but anyone who has studied the topic cannot in good conscience do so because of the numerous translations problems of the topic. I cant say homosexuality is “bad” because the bible never says it is. And demanding that people ignore the facts and adhere to your views just because you wish them to is poor form.

I'm not at all deterred from dealing with God's truth for the sake of being called discriminatory. The same measure is applied to the committing of homosexual acts as is applied to the false doctrines of Islam, Jehovah's Witnesses and others.

The club is EXCLUSIVE. And Jesus Christ holds the key. And if by His standard of truth it appears that Christians are discriminating, then so be it.

Only some Christians advance the cause of discrimination. a god many of us reject such things and follow the command of Jesus

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." John 13:34-35

discrimination against a minority is never an act of love.

If the Black acts were identified in God's Word as wrong, I would point out that wrong too.


And what's with the "attack" language? Who has been attacked? I asked a question.

Obviously you didn’t do as I suggested.



Simply put there are those who use key biblical verses to support racism just as you are trying to use a few verses to support your personal prejudice against homosexuals.

Does the use of the bible make racism OK?

Before you answer, remember racists are doing nothing different from what you are attempting to accomplish here. They seek to have others agree that because of verses in the bible, racial equality is wrong and they want to know why others just can’t admit that.

How is pointing out that the committing of homosexual acts as wrong as identified in Gods Word an attack?

The point being that they are not identified in God’s word.

What would you call using the bile to justify racism?

 

[MrPirate]

Now you know you need to stop. Why would God give you His Word if you got to pick and choose which parts are relevant? He could have kept ALL of it if you would be allowed to do this.

But this is what you are doing

You have picked a few badly mis-translated verses and ignored the actual message of Jesus.

A God of order does not intend for His children to wallow in confusion. And that's exactly what would happen if every person got to decide that certain parts of His Word were only relevant to the time period in which they were written.

So tell me…do you shave? accept people into your church who wear glasses? Eat all manner of seafood? Wear poly cotton blends? Own slaves? Practice animal sacrifice? Murder disobedient children? or have you decided that certain parts of His Word were only relevant to the time period in which they were written?

You have taken your stance on this issue and infused it into Paul's response and made PAul to be saying something that he was not saying.

“It is good for a man to not touch a woman” 1 Cor. 7:1

 

[MrPirate]

1) When a verse specifically condemns homosexuality in black words on white paper, you dont believe it. Such as...

In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Romans 1:27

Which specifically says...

• They abandoned natural relations with women;
• They are inflamed in lust for other men;
• They have commited indecent acts with other men; and
• They will receive the due penalty for their perversion.

BUT​

2) If homosexuality is NEVER mentioned, like in the story of David and Jonathan, then you read into it that they are homosexuals.

the Greek words physin and paraphysin have been translated to mean natural and unnatural respectively. the word paraphysin does not mean "to go against the laws of nature", as you are trying to force it rather it means to engage in action(s) which is uncharacteristic for that person. An example of the word paraphysin is used in Romans 11:24, where God acts in an uncharacteristic (paraphysin) way to accept the Gentiles.

So no one left the “natural” use of women. rather individuals left THEIR natural or characteristic selves behind.

The only thing this verse condemns is the evils of ex-gay ministries

 

[MrPirate]

They were in the Middle East. A lot of them had dark skin. And there is a lot of positive stuff about a lot of them.

But let me say again, God is a God of ORDER. He speaks to acts of homosexuality and not homosexuality in the same way as He speaks to acts of heterosexuality and not heterosexuality.

Biblically speaking persons of the middle east were considered Caucasians…or more properly the descendants of Shem. Marking them as different form the descendants of Ham or Blacks and the descendants of Japheth or Orientals


Now…do you wish to answer the question I posed to DMagoh?

 

[DMagoh]

Have you noticed anything positive in the scripture about homosexuality? No one has ever answered that question.

It doesn’t say anything positive about people with dark skin either….does this make racism acceptable to you?

You know, the Bible doesn't say...
In the same way people with dark skin abandoned natural white skin and were inflamed with lust for having dark skin. Men with dark skin committed indecent acts by getting dark skin, and received in themselves the due penalty for their dark skin.

So there's no real reason to try to find something positive about dark skinned people. BUT since the Bible does say...
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Romans 1:27

...if you choose to believe homosexuality is a-ok with God, looks like you'd want some positive verses that prove it.

Again, I say...the only time homosexuals are mentioned in the Bible, God is either destroying them or condemning them.

Can anyone say anything different?

 

[Zaac]

But it ISN’T clear on the topic.

It's actually very clear on the topic. The confusion comes when folks don't want it to say what it says.

Such problems arise when trying force a dead language to embrace modern concepts. Translation problems crop up time and time again.

God's Word is ALIVE because he is ALIVE. There was never any attempt to make a dead language embrace modern concepts because there is no modern concept that hasn't always been. There is NOTHING new under the Sun.

Shakab (rape) is not the same as shakhabh (to lie with) or mishkabh (to have sexual/carnal relations with)

Now use the Full Counsel of God's Word to see how each is used and where if you want to know God's intent. The Bible gives the best testimony to the Bible.

And arsenokoites doesn’t translate as homosexual and there is no reason to believe that is what Paul meant when he wrote it. Ancient Greek has a handful of well known words meaning homosexual…but he didn’t use them

Of course it doesn't translate as homosexual. God's Word doesn't say anything about homosexuals, but rather acts of homosexuality and homosexual offenders.

Arsenokoites, if my Greek is correct, is descriptive of a person who lies with a man as with a woman. That's what the word meant back then. Today, the word homosexual is ascribed to it.

Looking at the Greek, is the descriptor one of just the person, or the person who does an act?

Your OP demands everyone agree with your personal interpretation but anyone who has studied the topic cannot in good conscience do so because of the numerous translations problems of the topic. I cant say homosexuality is “bad” because the bible never says it is. And demanding that people ignore the facts and adhere to your views just because you wish them to is poor form.

Again, my OP nor anything that I have said demands your agreement with me. Forget me. Align yourself with God's Word.

And as much as you purport to have done these word studies of the Greek, no one who looks at the Full Counsel of God's Word will conclude what you have unless they are looking for excuses to justify wrong actions.

discrimination against a minority is never an act of love.

If all haved sinned, how does one stand in discrimination against a minority for calling sin sin?

Are homosexuals not sinners? If they are, how are they being discriminate dagainst by calling their sin sin?

Obviously you didn’t do as I suggested.

Sure did and it still didn't make a point.

Simply put there are those who use key biblical verses to support racism just as you are trying to use a few verses to support your personal prejudice against homosexuals.

Simply put, in your rush to be the personal defender of all things homosexual, you missed that I did not speak to homosexuals but the committing of homosexual acts.

In that regard, you've erected a strawman comparison.

Again, i'm asking folks about homosexual acts. Now if you want to construct a defense comparing the committing of Black Acts and homosexual acts, then we're on the same page.

Does the use of the bible make racism OK?

Nope. Folks in the past tried to use God's Word to justify racism in much the same way as you're trying to use it to justify homosexuality that I have not asked about.

Deal with the homosexual acts. Folks can try a million different ways to justify the committing of homosexual acts. In every language, God still identifies tha acts as wrong.

Before you answer, remember racists are doing nothing different from what you are attempting to accomplish here. They seek to have others agree that because of verses in the bible, racial equality is wrong and they want to know why others just can’t admit that.

Then you have once again assumed something that is not true. AGREE WITH GOD, not me.

When you can show, using God's Word instead of excuses of poor translation, that the committing of homosexual acts is right, then talk to me.

As it stands, your poor translation excuse is just that. If your premise of bad translation didn't breed confusion in folks and a tragic distrust of God's Word and dealing with what it says, then you might have a foundation upon which to stand.

But I can tell ya without fail, anytime someone starts to make understanding Gods Word overly complicated, it ain't of God.

The point being that they are not identified in God’s word.

Point being, they are. And you can manipulate the text all you like. It is what it is.

 

[Zaac]

Biblically speaking persons of the middle east were considered Caucasians…or more properly the descendants of Shem. Marking them as different form the descendants of Ham or Blacks and the descendants of

Biblically speaking, where does God's Word say they were Caucasians?

 

[MrPirate]

You know, the Bible doesn't say...
In the same way people with dark skin abandoned natural white skin and were inflamed with lust for having dark skin. Men with dark skin committed indecent acts by getting dark skin, and received in themselves the due penalty for their dark skin.

So there's no real reason to try to find something positive about dark skinned people. BUT since the Bible does say...
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Romans 1:27

...if you choose to believe homosexuality is a-ok with God, looks like you'd want some positive verses that prove it.

Again, I say...the only time homosexuals are mentioned in the Bible, God is either destroying them or condemning them.

Can anyone say anything different?

Does the fact that the bible says nothing positive about blacks make racism acceptable to you?


Please answer the question

 

[Zaac]

Biblically speaking persons of the middle east were considered Caucasians…or more properly the descendants of Shem. Marking them as different form the descendants of Ham or Blacks and the descendants of Japheth or Orientals


Now…do you wish to answer the question I posed to DMagoh?

Now…do you wish to answer the question I posed to DMagoh?

If you'll specify which one, I'll answer it.

 

[DMagoh]

That pagan and a lot of the liberal Christians on this forum seem to be in agreement an awful lot...

Its easy to agree about the truth …

So, are you saying that you and the self-professed pagan agree on truth, or that liberal Christians and the self-professed pagan agree on truth.

(Either way, that would be pretty scary, and dont know if I would admit it. )

 

[DMagoh]

Does the fact that the bible says nothing positive about blacks make racism acceptable to you?

Nope.

 

[MercyBurst]

A major point is that what the bible says is not clear.

The bible is clear to everyone except those that want to justify their own sin.

While the pro-discrimination group will wail loudly and gnash tier teeth at this it doesn’t change the fact that there is serious questions about the translation of the four verse generally used to justify their personal prejudice.

As if bible scholars singled out gays concerning sin, and nobody else.

The best argument the pro-discrimination group can provide

Oh I see, it's not a moral issue but a political one *wink *wink "pro-discrimination group" * cute little label * wink*

is an appeal to history, that is stating that since many have always hated this particular minority

Minority of which you are a member *wink *wink *hint *hint . Nice use of the hot-word "always." Goes well with words like "never", "idiot", "only"

and forced certain interoperations of key verses then it is all right to continue.

Anybody ever seen a "gay-affirming" translation of the bible? I know what -- it must be a conspiracy. Yeah that must be it.

The bible is much clearer on many topics that are rejected by modern Christians.
Slavery
Racism
Animal sacrifice
The use of rape to force marriage on a woman

ok so now it's the ole culture renders the bible obsolete argument. *wink*

These and many other topics are publicly condemned as “wrong” despite their biblical support.

But the souls from sodom, gomorrah and neighboring towns are burning in hell today as an eternal example of what? (not that we expect an honest answer from you).

Take your post and exchange the references to homosexuals to blacks

Most of the blacks in church don't side with you.

Would you attack people who support racial equality as you are attacking people who reject discrimination against homosexuals?

non sequitor -- race is not a moral issue, and gay is not a racial issue, though gays desperately plead that point as the Gay Titantic continues sink.

tootles

 

[Zaac]

non sequitor -- race is not a moral issue, and gay is not a racial issue,

Thank you. So why do folks continue to make this false analogy?

 

[MercyBurst]

Thank you. So why do folks continue to make this false analogy?

Desperation.

 

[MercyBurst]

The Gay Titanic is sinking and they're grasping for straws.

 

[MercyBurst]

Is there a homosexual on this board who, regardless of how you think you were born, can agree with God's Word about the committing of homosexual ACTS?

No way they'll confess it as sin. Even when they stand before Jesus they will not be confessing it as sin. I think they all agree with that, because they don't believe it is sin.

We know they have not repented. Some gays on this forum will tell you point blank that repentance is not necessary for salvation.

At least we all agree on something -- gays will not be confessing their lifestyle as sin before Jesus, not in this world, or in the world to come.