Evidence of God's Punishments?

Originally posted by s0uljah
Its the Word of God. Jesus is God, thus, they are the words of Jesus.

Click to expand...

The Old Law is the Word of God. Jesus is God, thus they are the words of Jesus.

How, then can you dismiss the Old Law as "irrelevant"?

Originally posted by s0uljah
I hope thats not true, else I am in trouble!

Click to expand...

You are in trouble.

Ezra 10:2-3:

And Shechaniah the son of Jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said unto Ezra, We have trespassed against our God, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land: yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing.

Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of my lord, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law.

Click to expand...

Originally posted by s0uljah
Hmmmm, according to the Law, huh?

Jesus replaced that Law, try again.

Click to expand...

The please give us Jesus' view of homosexuality.

I've seen the New Law described as "love God and thy neighbor." Where does sexual behavior and cotraception enter into it?

Originally posted by s0uljah
Hmmmm, according to the Law, huh?

Jesus replaced that Law, try again.

Click to expand...

So then he replaced "be fruitful and multiply", too. So contraception isn't sinful after all, right?

Oh, so you all want to claim they are acting by nature when they are gay but not when they are promiscuos?

Click to expand...

Ummm.. I'm saying that there is no evidence that gay men are promiscuous by nature. The fact that more gay people are promiscuous can be explained in a number of ways.

Now it is true that men are more promiscuous (in our society, for whatever reasons)... and that heterosexual men must find women (who are less promiscuous in our society for whatever reasons) willing to engage in extramarital sex with them.

Since gay men are not allowed to marry, and since their potential partners (men) are more promiscuous than the potential partners of straight men (women), there is ample explanation for homosexual promiscuity among men without the hypothesis of a "promiscuity gene".

So, did you say that people meddling in other people's love lives was "OK" with you?

Originally posted by s0uljah
I hope thats not true, else I am in trouble!

Click to expand...

I think it's true that the case is stronger. I don't think it's true that God has any objection. Seriously, read up on the Loving vs. West Virginia case. It's heartbreaking, but the affirmation of God's love is powerful.

Loving v Virgina

In June 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, a Negro woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia pursuant to its laws. Shortly after their marriage, the Lovings returned to Virginia and established their marital abode in Caroline County. At the October Term, 1958, of the Circuit Court [388 U.S. 1, 3] of Caroline County, a grand jury issued an indictment charging the Lovings with violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty to the charge and were sentenced to one year in jail; however, the trial judge suspended the sentence for a period of 25 years on the condition that the Lovings leave the State and not return to Virginia together for 25 years. He stated in an opinion that:


"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

Click to expand...

Originally posted by s0uljah
Homosexual acts are condemned in Romans and Coritheans.

Click to expand...

What exactly did Jesus say when He condemned them?

I'm surprised noone has called souljah on this:

Where's your science? How is this even relevant to this forum? I've yet to see anything but apologetics from you justifying your position, souljah!

I have absolutely no idea what color Adam was, and I can't see how we can do more than speculate. I would actually guess, based on my understanding of human physiology, that he was black; the loss of pigmentation came later.

Originally posted by s0uljah
I posted the references.

Click to expand...

And I posted references refuting you.

The judge was wrong, God created Adam "reddish" actually. Everyone was the same color and then adapted to their differing ammounts of sunlight exposure.

Click to expand...

Tell me exactly where in the Bible does it say what color Adam was?

Of course, it doesn't matter what color God created Adam because god established separate races after the tower of babel. I believe that instance is what the judge was using to support his point.

Now if this judge can be wrong about the bible not supporting interracial relationships, why can't you be wrong about the bible not supporting homosexual relationships?

Originally posted by s0uljah
I posted the references.

Click to expand...

I missed 'em, could you repost the links? I'm particularly interested in methodology and sample space questions.

I just went back to get his references. Here they are:
A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg, Homosexualities, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978.

USA Today, Nov. 1984.

The Advocate, Friday, April 28, 2000.

Paul H. Harvey, "A Bestiary of Chaos & Biodiversity" Nature, 397, Feb. 4, 1999.

"Homosexualities" A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, 1978.

American Medical Association, 1990.

American Journal of Public Health, 1981.

Dr. Robert Renfield and the Center for Disease Control.

World Magazine, March 1993.

The Homosexual Lifespan, June 1993.

Scientific American, Nov. 1995, P. 26, "Gay Genes Revisited."

Archives of General Psychiatry, 50, no. 3, "Human Sexual Orientation: the Biologic Theories Reappraised."

S. Goldberg, When Wish Replaces Thought: Why So Much of What You Believe is False, Buffalo, New York, Prometheus Books, 1994.

J. Satimover, M.D., The Journal of Human Sexuality, 1996, p.8.

L. Bowles, "Refuting the Lie of the 'Gay Gene,'" National Liberty Journal, Sept., 1999.

Notice the Advocate is on there (not a single article, but the whole issue from April 28, 2000).. I'm suprised to learn that s0uljah read anything from the advocate, much less a whole issue (which I assume is a special issue devoted to homosexual mortality rates). I will try to find one or two of these references that I can check without too much trouble & see if they actually support his claim. Anyone else wants to work on it, jump in!

http://www.godsaidmansaid.com/topic3.asp?Cat2=244&ItemId=596

Where s0uljah's original "average lifespan" quote came from. It's also where the list of references came from, although there is no specific reference cited for s0uljah's quote.