A re-examination of nothing

[davedjy]

There's no need to comment on such material. It comes from a website with a homosexual agenda. There is nothing that can discredit what Christendom has known since the beginning. There are no new facts about homosexuality that have been hidden from humanity over the ages. It is still the same perversion as it was 6 to 10,000 years ago!

This is foolishness.

Posting that something has an "agenda" over and over again STILL will not discredit it. The same goes for posting Bible verses here that are irrelevant to the discussion.

Regardless of what you feel the website is, I posted a webpage that has factual evidence of translation inconsistencies, Bible translation to translation. 100% of the information is factual about translations.

The only way you can discredit it, is by proving the information I posted is false, and you haven't demonstrated that in the least way.

Calling homosexuality a perversion, STILL does not make it one to God.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Posting that something has an "agenda" over and over again STILL will not discredit it. The same goes for posting Bible verses here that are irrelevant to the discussion.

Regardless of what you feel the website is, I posted a webpage that has factual evidence of translation inconsistencies, Bible translation to translation. 100% of the information is factual about translations.

The only way you can discredit it, is by proving the information I posted is false, and you haven't demonstrated that in the least way.

Calling homosexuality a perversion, STILL does not make it one to God.

It matters not what you say. God calls it an abomination. I believe Him over anyone. It most definitely is a perversion to God. God has the final word on the matter. Disagreeing with God is foolishness, and a waste of precious time, as well as a life.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Posting that something has an "agenda" over and over again STILL will not discredit it. The same goes for posting Bible verses here that are irrelevant to the discussion.

she doesn't need to discredit it, it discredits itself and changes nothing.

Calling homosexuality a perversion, STILL does not make it one to God.

perversion is a very broad term, and in the context of same-sex sex, it can be seen as a perversion against the intended use of genitalia.

 

[davedjy]

It matters not what you say. God calls it an abomination. I believe Him over anyone. It most definitely is a perversion to God. God has the final word on the matter. Disagreeing with God is foolishness, and a waste of precious time, as well as a life.

I don't disagree with God, but your faulty interpretation of God's Word. Abomination is not what it would be called in the original languages. Wearing clothing of mixed fabrics is abomination according to the same passage you cherry pick.

 

[Floatingaxe]

she doesn't need to discredit it, it discredits itself and changes nothing.


perversion is a very broad term, and in the context of same-sex sex, it can be seen as a perversion against the intended use of genitalia.

Yes...and love.

 

[Floatingaxe]

I don't disagree with God, but your faulty interpretation of God's Word. Abomination is not what it would be called in the original languages. Wearing clothing of mixed fabrics is abomination according to the same passage you cherry pick.

God has not allowed anyone to translate His word faultily. I trust My Father God to have orchestrated that excellent feat with precision and care so that this generation will know exactly the same things as the first churches knew, and the Hebrews before Christ knew.

My God is so able to do that. Easy peasy.

Cherry pick? My foot! God abhors=hates homosexuality. Those who disobey God and partake will reap what they sow---punishment.

 

[davedjy]

she doesn't need to discredit it, it discredits itself and changes nothing.

Nothing is discredited. Did you actually take the time to read the link that has non-biased, factual information on Bible version translations? Refute the actual translations, and you may actually have a proper debate rebuttal against what I posted.
I don't know why I take the time to respond to posts that are based upon lack of insight into the information at hand.

perversion is a very broad term, and in the context of same-sex sex, it can be seen as a perversion against the intended use of genitalia.

...and is masturbation the "intended use" of the genitalia either? yet, it is practiced by 95%+ of males. Just because something may be seen as "perversion" doesn't make it perversion.

 

[Floatingaxe]

...and is masturbation the "intended use" of the genitalia either? yet, it is practiced by 95%+ of males. Just because something may be seen as "perversion" doesn't make it perversion.

Masturbation is abuse of the natural use of the genitals and sex. It is a perversion as well. Why? Because it goes against NATURE...God's design for men and women!

 

[davedjy]

God has not allowed anyone to translate His word faultily. I trust My Father God to have orchestrated that excellent feat with precision and care so that this generation will know exactly the same things as the first churches knew, and the Hebrews before Christ knew.

My God is so able to do that. Easy peasy.

Cherry pick? My foot! God abhors=hates homosexuality. Those who disobey God and partake will reap what they sow---punishment.

Cherry picking Leviticus, and allll the things that the chapter calls "abominations"...slavery is quite acceptable according to the same chapter, which is the only "abomination" current day. Abomination isn't even the most suitable term to describe tow'ebah in the passage, but whatever.

Saying that God said something over and over again, does not prove God said anything you want Him to say at all.


Those who decided to trust false translations over what the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures said AND in their proper context will have to give an account to God for it. The same will be for those who have oppressed and/or tried to change gays and lesbians, or called their acts perversions.

 

[davedjy]

Masturbation is abuse of the natural use of the genitals and sex. It is a perversion as well. Why? Because it goes against NATURE...God's design for men and women!

Biased opinion...it has been proven to be healthy and in men it has been proven to be a preventative against prostate cancer.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Nothing is discredited. Did you actually take the time to read the link that has non-biased, factual information on Bible version translations? Refute the actual translations, and you may actually have a proper debate rebuttal against what I posted.
I don't know why I take the time to respond to posts that are based upon lack of insight into the information at hand.

I don't need to, unless you are telling me there is something there that I have not read yet. I'm not here to refute anything, I don't spend hours of the day explaining away passages. If you think your link has something rational that shows that God blesses same-sex sex, or does not speak out against it at all, then I'll take a look.

...and is masturbation the "intended use" of the genitalia either? yet, it is practiced by 95%+ of males. Just because something may be seen as "perversion" doesn't make it perversion.

yes masturbation is a type of perversion of the physical function. perversion is a very broad word, thats all I was saying, it is not necessarily derogatory as much as it is descriptive.

 

[davedjy]

I don't need to, unless you are telling me there is something there that I have not read yet. I'm not here to refute anything, I don't spend hours of the day explaining away passages. If you think your link has something rational that shows that God blesses same-sex sex, or does not speak out against it at all, then I'll take a look.

I don't spend "Hours a day" explaining away passages of Scripture. This isn't about that. You said that something I posted is already discredited and it is factual information on what different versions of the Bible say, and shows the inconsistencies.

yes masturbation is a type of perversion of the physical function. perversion is a very broad word, thats all I was saying, it is not necessarily derogatory as much as it is descriptive.

The way it is meant by the said poster is definitely derogatory, that is the context we are speaking in, so why change the focus? Calling something abominable and perverse sort of shows you the intent in meaning.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Biased opinion...it has been proven to be healthy and in men it has been proven to be a preventative against prostate cancer.

That is false. It is not healthy. A healthy sex life between married men and women is sufficient for optimal prostate health.

I do not believe the studies that show prostate cancer prevention in masturbators. They are fallacious.

 

[David Brider]

Jesus wants to save us from our sin and have us live pure and peaceable lives in His power.

Where is the purity and the peaceable nature to the lifestyles of homosexuals?

That rather depends on the individual homosexual, and the lifestyle he or she is leading.

They are impure in their relationships

Not all of them are in relationships anyway. Ohioprof, for example, has stated repeatedly that she's single. Others are in monogamous relationships.

and certainly not peaceable regarding their relationships with the Body of Christ---they antagonize her by living in open disobedience and flaunting sin before her.

Most non-Christian homosexuals that I know of don't have anything to do with the Body of Christ (unsurprisingly, given the amount of grief that Body has given them over the years), whilst most Christian homosexuals that I know of belong to denominations that don't harass and harangue them for being homosexual.

So I'm not sure how the charge of "living in open disobedience and flaunting sin before her" applies. Seems to me they're keeping themselves to themselves.

David.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I don't spend "Hours a day" explaining away passages of Scripture. This isn't about that. You said that something I posted is already discredited and it is factual information on what different versions of the Bible say, and shows the inconsistencies.

examined by who? Someone with an agenda to prove homosexual actions sinful? Someone who is trying to disprove the stance held by the majority of the church? Just because a couple people claim bad translation on 1cor6:9, does it mean all the others who agreed on its translation are in error? The word in itself can be vague and approached and tacked on with whatever angle the translators wish to push it with. So in dealing with 1cor6:9 if someone translates it 'homosexual offenders', I can see that. If someone translates it 'masturbators', I can see that. If someone says 'I have no idea what it means', I can see that as well, but I'd still ask them to give it their best shot. God doesn't author confusion, and I believe that God gives us His Spirit to guide us through these kinds of issues.

 

[davedjy]

I do not believe the studies that show prostate cancer prevention in masturbators. They are fallacious.

It is iron clad fact. You can choose to not believe factual evidence, but your claims do not change the truth. Perhaps if you actually had some counter claim against this we may be able to look at it, but my guess is you don't, hence you don't have a claim that holds water.

You can't call something fallacious and thereby making it fallacious!

 

[Floatingaxe]

Most non-Christian homosexuals that I know of don't have anything to do with the Body of Christ (unsurprisingly, given the amount of grief that Body has given them over the years),

I have no problem with them.

whilst most Christian homosexuals that I know of belong to denominations that don't harass and harangue them for being homosexual.

Such churches are secular and not spiritually in tune.

So I'm not sure how the charge of "living in open disobedience and flaunting sin before her" applies. Seems to me they're keeping themselves to themselves.

The Church of Jesus Christ is everywhere, and when she encounters homosexual "Christians" it is an affront to her.

It is the mark of a group gone astray when they find they must "keep to themselves."

 

[davedjy]

examined by who? Someone with an agenda to prove homosexual actions sinful? Someone who is trying to disprove the stance held by the majority of the church? Just because a couple people claim bad translation on 1cor6:9, does it mean all the others who agreed on its translation are in error? The word in itself can be vague and approached and tacked on with whatever angle the translators wish to push it with. So in dealing with 1cor6:9 if someone translates it 'homosexual offenders', I can see that. If someone translates it 'masturbators', I can see that. If someone says 'I have no idea what it means', I can see that as well, but I'd still ask them to give it their best shot. God doesn't author confusion, and I believe that God gives us His Spirit to guide us through these kinds of issues.

A translation can only be one thing, so obviously someone is in error, and that is my point.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Brieuse,

I guess nobody knows the answer then

Well I do, as I can see and believe the word of God.
So from your post #899 which of the translations/interpretations of 1 Cor 6:9 do you believe then? The concensus is homosexual offenders.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear *Starlight*

Let's say... if there's you and you believe that you know God and His Word, and there's someone else who also believes that they know God and His word, but they disagree with you about something, then it's possible that they are correct and you are wrong.

Not if they disagree with the word of God.
What you are actually meaning is they either don’t believe if they disagree with the word of God, or they have a different god.