EnemyPartyII
Well-Known Member
Why? Because gang rape is specifically mentioned and rampant homosexuality isn't?
Thats... unusual logic
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Why? Because gang rape is specifically mentioned and rampant homosexuality isn't?Because it makes no sense that the sins of those cities and the other cities in the plain was gang rape of angels. How many angel tourists do you think they received? No, clearly, the sin in question was rampant homosexuality.
Why? Because gang rape is specifically mentioned and rampant homosexuality isn't?
Thats... unusual logic
Because it makes no sense that the sins of those cities and the other cities in the plain was gang rape of angels. How many angel tourists do you think they received? No, clearly, the sin in question was rampant homosexuality.
Hmmm . . .you're obviously not a Bible scholar, Brennin. Both Jesus (Matthew 10:14-15; Mark 6:11; Luke 10:8-12) and Ezekiel (Ezekiel 16:49) are quite clear about what the sin of Sodom was ...and it sure was not homosexuality. What you believe is purely a mainstream Christian construct that has become so popular over the years that people really believe it to be true.
Please, check out the scriptures I gave and see if you're ready and willing to ditch this Christian 'myth'.
I am more of a Bible scholar than you.
Jude
Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
As for the verses from the Synoptic Gospels you cited, they say nothing about the sin of Sodom being 'inhospitality.' As Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown rightly note:
15. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable--more bearable.
for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city--Those Cities of the Plain, which were given to the flames for their loathsome impurities, shall be treated as less criminal, we are here taught, than those places which, though morally respectable, reject the Gospel message and affront those that bear it.
Do not waste my time with such inanity.
How can that be, when Genesis was written thousands of years before Christ, before there were Christians?To destroy the cities had been God's plan BEFORE the story of Lot and the angels. The 'homosexual' part of the tale is little more than a Christian 'beat up'.
You don't even know me.
Wishful thinking for you. It says nothing about homosexuality. It says nothing about Lot and the 'incident' with the angels. You also choose Jude and ignore what Jesus and Ezekiel have to say about it. Also, between you and me, I believe the story of Sodom & Gomorrah to have been a myth. Can you prove that they ever existed?
Sure, the 'myth' of Sodom & Gommorah demonstrates that God gets angry enough to destroy if He deems it necessary and THAT is basically what the moral of the story is. SIN and NOT homosexuality was the reason God supposedly destroyed these cities. To destroy the cities had been God's plan BEFORE the story of Lot and the angels. The 'homosexual' part of the tale is little more than a Christian 'beat up'.
Jesus and Ezekiel more than imply that 'inhospitality' WAS the reason for the destruction of the twin cities.
And, please ...don't talk to me like that. I'm your equal ...Okay?
How can that be, when Genesis was written thousands of years before Christ, before there were Christians?
Hmmm . . .you're obviously not a Bible scholar, Brennin. Both Jesus (Matthew 10:14-15; Mark 6:11; Luke 10:8-12) and Ezekiel (Ezekiel 16:49) are quite clear about what the sin of Sodom was ...and it sure was not homosexuality. What you believe is purely a mainstream Christian construct that has become so popular over the years that people really believe it to be true.
Your refusal or blindness with what Genesis 19 itself says, along with 2 Peter 2 and Jude 1 would be similar to us saying that Ezekiel shows what the sin of Sodom was and sure it was not hospitality… in other words rank denial. You dont want ot address or admit the verses and words we point you to because they incrminate homosexual practice. Of course Ezekiel 16 refers to inhospitality and so does Matt 10, Mark 6 and Luke 10, but Ezekiel 16 also refers to pride, greed and idleness, but it also in 16:50 refers to abominations as in Leviticus 18:22, a man shall not lie with another man as with a woman, that is an abominatuon. (tow`ebah) do you see that?Please, check out the scriptures I gave and see if you're ready and willing to ditch this Christian 'myth'.
`KCKID said:To destroy the cities had been God's plan BEFORE the story of Lot and the angels. The 'homosexual' part of the tale is little more than a Christian 'beat up'.
How can that be, when Genesis was written thousands of years before Christ, before there were Christians?
No you arent, modern day Christianity knows that Genesis was written thousands of years before Christ and before there were Christians. We know Christ refered to Genesis, not least God's creation union of man and woman (Gen 2, Matt 19, Eph 5, 1 Cor 7 etc) but also of the particular same sex immorailty outside that. (1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1) Without any references I would question what your concept of 'modern-day Christianity' isI'm referring to modern-day Christianity
I know your lack of scholarship.
Yes, it does. Read it again. (Repeatedly, if necessary.) And it does not matter if it is a 'myth.' Myths can be used to illustrate points just as surely as historical events.
You are not a Bible scholar. The cities were guilty of rampant homosexuality and the incident with the angels only serves to confirm their gross homosexual debauchery.
Ezekiel mentions inhospitality; Jesus does not.
To KCKID,
No you arent, modern day Christianity knows that Genesis was written thousands of years before Christ and before there were Christians.
We know Christ refered to Genesis, not least God's creation union of man and woman (Gen 2, Matt 19, Eph 5, 1 Cor 7 etc) but also of the particular same sex immorailty outside that. (1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1) Without any references I would question what your concept of 'modern-day Christianity' is
What are you talking about, Christians have always seen the text says the men wanted sex with men. … in modern terms that’s homosexual, not heterosexual.What ARE you talking about, bms? Of course Christians know that Genesis was written thousands of years before Christ. It's just that MODERN Christians have given Sodom and Gomorrah a 'homosexual' slant that was not previously intended.
That’s irrelevant as I agree we are not programmed robots we can choose to believe or disbelieve You haven’t addressed my point because it destroys your argument. We know Christ refered to Genesis, not least God's creation union of man and woman (Gen 2, Matt 19, Eph 5, 1 Cor 7 etc) but also of the particular same sex immorailty outside that. (1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1) If God’s creation purpose was Adam and Eve it wasn’t Adam and Steve. There is no man/man marriage countenanced in the Bible and there is direct condemnation of homosexual unions, so as a guide, as Romans says, people are without excuse.Try to get it in your head, bms, that human beings are NOT programmed robots that are driven by every letter of the Bible.
Yes but that’s an irrelevant generalisation as adulterers and a paedophiles are attracted to people but it doesn’t make what they do right either, adultery and paedohilia are, like homosexual practice, outside faithful man/woman marriage.Now, surprise, surprise ...we have people who are attracted to whoever they are attracted to ...NOT necessarily for mating purposes but just because they like and feel comfortable with one another.
That’s not a Christian view, for the Christian knows that God sees what we do in secret, Romans 2:16, 1 Cor 14:25, 2 Corinthians 4:2, Ephesians 5:12.What they might get up to in their bedrooms is none of our business, nor should it be.
Well because we believe they are the word of God even if you don’t, and before I believed, I used to think homosexual practice was ok, so your assumption is totally wrong and the wrong way round, I never had a phobia, I just came to believe the truth of God’s word.Why should we begrudge people from loving whoever they might love just because we seem to come across some ancient texts that appear to support our OWN particular phobias?
What are you talking about, of course He did, Jesus Christ’s NT teaching excludes homosexual practice and unions as in Matthew 19, Mark 10, Ephesians 5 as God’s purpose was man and woman, offers celibacy as the alternative Matt 19, 1 Cor 7, and condemns same sex activities, 1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1, 2 Peter 2, and Jude 1.By the way, Christ never breathed a word about homosexuality. Why do you keep insisting that He DID as if the more times you say it somehow makes it so? He didn't ...okay?
It was your views as Christian I was asking you about as they are baseless, not the era of the baselessness. Men committing indecent lustful acts with men is homosexual rather than heterosexual isn’t it. Yes or no?Incidently, my concept of 'modern-day' Christianity is 'present-day' Christianity.
God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Same God of Genesis and today.
God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Same God of Genesis and today.
Prove this. Post reliable sources.It's not God that I'm talking about. It's people and their interpretations of the scriptures that I'm talking about. I would like someone who might know the time in history when Sodom and Gomorrah became equated with homosexuality to post this information on the forum. When the story was authored I'm confident that it would never have been intended to make a case against homosexuality. People (MODERN-DAY Christianity) has done this.
It's not a "catch cry." It's Scripture.By the way, I know it's a popular Christian catch-cry that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. But a catch-cry is all it is.
I can prove very little from the Bible. Can you?Prove this. Post reliable sources.
It's a catch-cry of Christians. They say this with regular monotony but then ignore commands such as the one I gave. I doubt that you'll be keeping the Sabbath this weekend which the God who is the same yesterday, today, and forever initiated for 'man' at Creation. By the way, it starts Friday sundown and ends Saturday sundown. You must do it right as long as you take God at His word ...It's not a "catch cry." It's Scripture.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?