Homosexuality is natural.

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Danae = Der Alter[/SIZE]

Kinda reminds me of a line from a Pee Wee Herman movie, "I know you are, but what am I." The difference between my posts and ALL the posts from that side of the fence. Not nobody, not no how has even attempted to address my evidence. OTOH I go through your, collective, posts, line by line, pointing out the contradictions, errors, assumptions, fabrications, fallacies, etc.

 

[PinkTulip]

Well, yes... have you read that article? quote]

So you answer with a Wikipedia article, which is not in your own words...OK..You have nothing to say, I guess?

 

[DMagoh]

blatant misuse of scripture to undermine innocent human beings!

To this day I have not seen one Bible verse that condemns loving monogamous homosexual relationships!

To this day I have not seen one Bible verse that condemns loving monogamous pedophilic relationships!


(Not comparing pedophilia to homosexuality, just pointing out the flawed logic of the poster.)

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]blatant misuse of scripture to undermine innocent human beings!

To this day I have not seen one Bible verse that condemns loving monogamous homosexual relationships![/SIZE]

To this day I have not seen one Bible verse that condemns loving monogamous pedophilic relationships!

To this day I have not seen one Bible verse that condemns a loving monogamous relationship between a man and his goat and a woman and her Belgian Malanois.

 

[Brieuse]

Thank you.







Man, you must not read your Bible! LOL!
Romans 1:27 - Men had sex with each other and were punished.
Leviticus 18:22 - God's command: Do nopt have sex with someone of your same gender.

(I have some more, but I have to go, so I will post them when I come back.)

I've got them all, thanks.

Like I said, none of them refer to loving monogamous homosexual relationships.

 

[ReformedChapin]

I've got them all, thanks.

Like I said, none of them refer to loving monogamous homosexual relationships.

They all refer to the plain sin of any homosexual activity.

 

[*Starlight*]

So you answer with a Wikipedia article, which is not in your own words...OK..You have nothing to say, I guess?

You obviously haven't even clicked on that link, so I'll explain it to you. Your post didn't make sense, because you presented two extremes as the only alternatives, without even realizing that there's a whole spectrum of possibilities between them. That's black and white thinking, also known as false dilemma, and it's a logical fallacy. That wikipedia article explains it, and you really should read it.

 

[Brieuse]

They all refer to the plain sin of any homosexual activity.

no.

They all refer to non-monogamous, none loving homosexual sex of a nature that was popular in those days.

 

[davedjy]

Homosexuality is natural. And i am sorry to step on toes but that makes it wrong. Our nature is sin, sin is who we are. Society has lied to us by saying that we should be ourselves. That is not right in any way shape or form. We are to be who God created us to be.

You have yet to prove by your Opening Post that homosexuality is sin, and such a statement doesn't really say much.

 

[davedjy]

To this day I have not seen one Bible verse that condemns a loving monogamous relationship between a man and his goat and a woman and her Belgian Malanois.

human/animal relationships are the standard upon which you compare a human/human relationship...brilliant!

ROFL!!!!!!

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]human/animal relationships are the standard upon which you compare a human/human relationship...brilliant!

ROFL!!!!!![/SIZE]

As you were saying?

. . . [SIZE=-1]Over 450 vertebrate species are born gay, lesbian, bi and transgender[/SIZE]...

And OBTW where do these "vertebrate species" go for their counseling, hormone treatments, and transgender surgery?

 

[david_x]

If experience meant anything, heterosexuality would be a sin for me. Because heterosexuality has caused me nothing but grief and hurt. Whereas all the men I've dated have be selfish, and all my attractions have been influenced by media, my attraction for women have been pure, and all my girlfriends have been loving and gentle. My current boyfriend is an exception, but he's special. My love for him is far beyond any sexuality.

Like I've said before, heterosexuality is a sin just as much as homosexuality. They both are the factors that create lust.

That is not heterosexual relationships that are making it a sin. You said it yourself, they were selfish.

Another pointless thread. Zero facts, many errors, crass assumptions, and attempts to condone judgmental homophobic opinions.

Is there a point to this flambing?

 

[david_x]

I haven't experienced homosexuality, because I'm not a homosexual. But according to homosexuals, their relationships don't inflict pain, and don't tear anyone to shreds. The love in their relationships is exactly the same as the love in heterosexual relationships. And it's better for two people who love each other in a romantic way to live together in a relationship than to break up and live miserable lonely lives... That's reality.

You can not learn that there is somthing wrong from an addict. Do sinners say they are unhappy with thier sin? It is in no means the same love. You can not have the same feelings for a woman that you have for a man.

Posting a Bible verse doesn't explain why homosexuality would be wrong. It's like saying:

"Why would homosexuality be wrong?

"Because it says so here."

That's not a logical reason...

You do not respect God? You would throw his word aside? The one that refuses to wear the appropriate attire for the great banquet will be thrown to haties.

That's your opinion, not fact. To this day, I have not seen one verse in the Bible that says loving monogamous homosexual relationships are a sin. I have been force fed out of context verses though in callous attempts for people to exert their small minded opinions and will upon me in able for them to feel superior to me. Now you tell me which would God prefer?

This is a perfect example of what a lie can do. After so long the person may acctually believe the lie to justify their actions. I am here to tell you that among sinners i feel like the chief sinner, you are probiably better than me. We are so small minded you know, not like we are walking a straight and narrow path or anything.

 

[david_x]

Like I said, none of them refer to loving monogamous homosexual relationships.

If only they exhisted...

You have yet to prove by your Opening Post that homosexuality is sin, and such a statement doesn't really say much.

What drives animals? Selfish nature. How can that in any way shape or form be considered good?

human/animal relationships are the standard upon which you compare a human/human relationship...brilliant!

They were not camparing the two, they were pointing out a flaw in logic.

 

[teen4jesus92]

I've got them all, thanks.

Like I said, none of them refer to loving monogamous homosexual relationships.

Let me know if you need anymore. And that goes for everyone. I'll be happy to supply them.

They all refer to the plain sin of any homosexual activity.

NewGuy is right. It's still homosexual sex. Which, duh!, is wrong. The Bible speaks so negatively about it anyway - why do you have to read, "homosexuality is wrong" in plain terms or you won't believe it?

You obviously haven't even clicked on that link, so I'll explain it to you. Your post didn't make sense, because you presented two extremes as the only alternatives, without even realizing that there's a whole spectrum of possibilities between them. That's black and white thinking, also known as false dilemma, and it's a logical fallacy. That wikipedia article explains it, and you really should read it.

Black and White thinking is equal to what scholars call "absolute truth". You know, "this" and nothing else. Oh, and guess what, The Bible is filled with Absolute truth. Christianity is the main world religion that stresses that fact of absolute truth. That's a reason why we get picked on so much by the media and the like.
So... if Black and white thinking is a "logical fallacy"... What's that say about Absolute truth? God's absolute truth. I'd hate to think that self-professing Christians believe that way. Please assure me this isn't true.

...
They all refer to non-monogamous, none loving homosexual sex of a nature that was popular in those days.

Really? Leviticus 18:22 doesn't. It says, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman". (Since the Bible was written primarily for men at this time, it makes complete and perfect sense.) It's referring to one man sleeping (a.k.a. having sex with) one man. 1 man+1 man=two homosexuals. (same with women) That should be so simple.
But, of course, you'll say, "oh, no, that's Jewish law! It doesn't apply anymore!"
I'd say, "Since it is referenced elsewhere in the NT testament, it still applies."

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]no.
They all refer to non-monogamous, none loving homosexual sex of a nature that was popular in those days.[/SIZE]

Same old, lame old irrelevant copout. Show me the clause in scripture which excludes anyone, under any circumstances, from the proscription.

"They didn't know about so-called 'loving monogamous homosexual relationships.'" Yeah, right! Nobody, in 100s of years, ever left a pagan temple thinking, "Hey I liked that, think I'll do it at home."? Homosexuality as we know it did not suddenly appear on the scene within the last century.

According to one homosexual poster there are supposedly, "450 vertebrate species that are gay, lasbian, bi, or transgender." If that is true then scholars knew about every aspect of homosexuality, many centuries ago.

And I have posted evidence that the ancient Jewish scholars and the early church fathers all knew about, and condemned so-called "loving monogamous homosexual relationships."

 

[Brieuse]

Same old, lame old irrelevant copout. Show me the clause in scripture which excludes anyone, under any circumstances, from the proscription.

"They didn't know about so-called 'loving monogamous homosexual relationships.'" Yeah, right! Nobody, in 100s of years, ever left a pagan temple thinking, "Hey I liked that, think I'll do it at home."? Homosexuality as we know it did not suddenly appear on the scene within the last century.

According to one homosexual poster there are supposedly, "450 vertebrate species that are gay, lasbian, bi, or transgender." If that is true then scholars knew about every aspect of homosexuality, many centuries ago.

And I have posted evidence that the ancient Jewish scholars and the early church fathers all knew about, and condemned so-called "loving monogamous homosexual relationships."

they also condemned shaving.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]they also condemned shaving.[/SIZE]

Irrelevant to anything. Can you produce a relevant verse or are you referring to your misguided out of context attempt to address Clement?

 

[Brieuse]

out of context accusation again. lol. Clement said a man should be hairy. It was obviously stated, with little doubt to what he was trying to bring across. I don't have time for your blindness anymore.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]out of context accusation again. lol. Clement said a man should be hairy. It was obviously stated, with little doubt to what he was trying to bring across. I don't have time for your blindness anymore.[/SIZE]

The blindness is all on you. Two gay sites contradict your twisting and perversion of Clement, which is why you bug out of the discussion every time I post them. You keep trying desperately to make Clement say something, anything that will prop up your argument.

But you are out there all alone sawing the limb off behind you. Brieuse the super scholar who found things in Clement that no other scholar in history has found.