Homosexuality: Right or Wrong? (read pg1)

Dear Davedjy,

It is anti-gay beliefs, whatever way you want to put it.

Click to expand...

Its anti-same-sex sex.

There isn't any point in saying "those who follow the Word of God", as both sides have given reasons for believing they are still following the Word of God.

Click to expand...

On the contrary this is the very key point it revolves around. The Bible for believers is the word of God, and we have shown that God’s purpose in creation is man and woman, sex outside marriage is error and same-sex sex is error.
Gen 2, Gen 19, Judges 19, Lev 18 & 20, Matt 15, 19, Mark 7, 10, Eph 5, 1 Cor 5-7, Rom 1, 1 Tim 1, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1.
You have consistently denied what those passages say or assumed they dont mean what they say and yet you have not provided one countenance for monogamous lifelong same-sex unions.
So on side has not given reasons except widespread disbelief and rejection of the word of God.

If God's Words were truly anti-gay, but I don't believe they are.

Click to expand...

The issue is whether you believe God’s word as the truth or not, your opinion of God’s word is just your opinion.

davedjy said:

It is anti-gay beliefs, whatever way you want to put it. There isn't any point in saying "those who follow the Word of God", as both sides have given reasons for believing they are still following the Word of God.


Homosexuality is not one of the 10 Commandments. Before you try indirectly relating it, my response will be the same...there isn't any DIRECT commandment in there against it.

[
Agreed...I have never stated that a secular opinion is above the Word of God. I have also given my reasons for believing the Bible does not condemn same sex, monogamous life-long relationships.

If God's Words were truly anti-gay, but I don't believe they are. I guess it would have to appear that way, because you believe they are one and the same. I disagree with those interpretations that just represent doctrine (the interpretation of the Word). Hence, I believe man has condemned same sex acts with interpretation and translation flaws, not God.

Click to expand...

You are right the differences are a matter of interpretation and everyone has a right to their interpretation. For me, its to defend the word of God as is. But at the end of the day, its not about the act or lifestyles itself its all about a person soul and being separated from God that is the issue. I guess when the Lord takes us home we will find out what he really meant about those passages. But it would be a tragedy if one was wrong for it will cost them their soul. As far as I am concern, I rather follow the Word as written then take a chance.

davedjy said:

The deception you have shown, is within yourself. Actually believing that a homosexual can be delivered is very deceiving. More so, not grounded on any proof whatsoever.

Click to expand...

I am not deceived!

A homosexual is purely disobedient, and one who defends it and also believes that they have God's approval is greatly deceived and in need of deliverance. Anyone who is deceived about sin has a stronghold, and its bonds need to be loosed supernaturally.

Floatingaxe said:

I am not deceived!

A homosexual is purely disobedient, and one who defends it and also believes that they have God's approval is greatly deceived and in need of deliverance. Anyone who is deceived about sin has a stronghold, and its bonds need to be loosed supernaturally.

Click to expand...

How do you propose to do this deliverance?

Brieuse said:

How do you propose to do this deliverance?

Click to expand...

I don't see that Floatingaxe has said she will perform this deliverance. She has said it must be handled supernaturally. To me that implies that God must perform the deliverance, not her.

davedjy said:

Homosexuality IS an orientation, whether you want to believe it or not, that is your problem, not mine.

Click to expand...

I'll take the bibles view on that rather than your thankyou. North is an orientation, doesn't make it the right direction.

Have you ever looked up the definitions of the word? By definition orientation requires one being in a position different than the initial. This means finding the direction you want to direct yourself in. Even "orientation" makes it a choice.

I have posted interpretation after interpretation which are actually grounded on historical backings.
Whether you believe those interpretations is in your own opinion.

Click to expand...

You have posted opinion after opinion, all of them grounded on everything other than what the bible teaches and what it has been believed it has taught for thousands of years.

The burden is on me? no, you haven't proven that same sex, monogamous relationships are sinful. You also haven't proven the definition of arsenokoitai, for your side of the debate. The burden is on both parties to prove their translations. I have used historical backings and historical context for my interpretations. I have yet to see any from you anti-gay debaters.

Click to expand...

Again it has been understood throughout history that it is considered sinful by Followers of God in the OT and NT. You have used misinformation as your backings, selecting only what is self-serving to your cause and not the whole of scripture or of its context. Fragments of truth don't count.

Right..again, post Scripture that doesn't directly pertain to what we are talking about.

Click to expand...

Why is every scripture always rejected with unabated disdain?

That is highly inaccurate, so I suggest you actually read the threads here before coming to that conclusion based on lack of evidence. I have posted Credible Biblical Scholars, and their stands, proof that the definition of Arsenokoitai is unknown, and historical backings for months here.

Click to expand...

This is a strawman since I never have made any claim as regards arsenokoitai. In that argument I discussed fornication, to which you were left defenseless.

...and your attitude resembles the 99.9% of the pro-gay arguers here. You don't have evidence or historical backings. You also don't have proof of your word definitions.

Click to expand...

I have the entire history of man through God's word and 99.9% of His followers at my back on this issue. You can not say the same. You have your opinions backed by secular reasonings and worldly philosophies.

Yet, that verse does not pertain directly to homosexuality, so why bother quoting it? I could use the same quote against heterosexuals.

Click to expand...

Your constant appeal to wanting the word homosexual in every verse in no way dulls the explicitness put forth.

Are you trying to say one can be freed from "homosexuality" as the orientation through Christ? ironic, the same person (you), who mentioned talk about false teaching. This would definitely be along those same lines.

Click to expand...

"What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of YOU were." - 1Cor 6:9-11

Yes a desisting is possible as Paul clearly says.



Your only backing in your claiming me a false teacher is your claim which, when measured to the bible, has been punched full of holes and is quickly taking on water.

Again you claim legitimacy because of categorization. Tell me, what category was homosexuality classified under before the 1970's? And what brought about that change? Science? Hardly.

Interestingly, you hide behind the word "orientation" yet its definition does not co-inside with your implied notions of its meaning.

The refutation of homosexuality goes all the way back to creation and the command to be fruitful and MULTIPLY. That was why women were brought into existence.

Homosexuality could not have existed at the time of Adam and Eve, because what man would there have been for Adam to sleep with? They're the only 2 people. They had sons, so if homosexuality existed back then, it would have also been the same as child molestation. Or how many generations would have had to pass for it to have been ok for Adam to be a homo? He lived several hundred years, how about some grandkids? No, homosexuality was never part of "the plan" nor is anyone "born that way".

It is temptation, just like the temptation to murder or steal, which is common to all men and all women. Some fall to the temptation, others resist it through prayer and the fear of the Lord. Inasmuch as we are born in original sin, we're all "born that way" - murderers, phags, thieves, adulterers, all vile.

Psa5:9 For there is no faithfulness in their mouth; their inward part is very wickedness; their throat is an open sepulchre; they flatter with their tongue.

Rom3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
Rom3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Rom3:13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Rom3:14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Rom3:15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
Rom3:16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
Rom3:17 And the way of peace have they not known:
Rom3:18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

Fear the Lord. He has commanded "be fruitful AND multiply". This is not possible in a homosexual relationship, and all homosexuality (based on the Adam/Eve/children argument above) is rooted in child molestation.

Right..again, post Scripture that doesn't directly pertain to what we are talking about.

Click to expand...

This is a typical demonic response to scripture.

Whenever you combat evil forces of unbelief, scripture is a mighty sword and the only effective weapon in the invisible realm.

Mat4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
Mat4:2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
Mat4:3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
Mat4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Mat4:5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
Mat4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Mat4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
Mat4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
Mat4:9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
Mat4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Mat4:11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

Jesus said unto him, It is written again,
Jesus said unto him, It is written again,
Jesus said unto him, It is written again,

Mat24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

walloffire said:

Jesus said unto him, It is written again,
Jesus said unto him, It is written again,
Jesus said unto him, It is written again,

Mat24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Click to expand...

Amen!

What goes on in the bedroom of other people is none of my business. As long as everything is consentual, I have never had an issue with homosexuality, heterosexuality, or whatever combination is put forth. And I can't see why anyone else should either.

Quirk said:

What goes on in the bedroom of other people is none of my business. As long as everything is consentual, I have never had an issue with homosexuality, heterosexuality, or whatever combination is put forth. And I can't see why anyone else should either.

Click to expand...

When these people force their aberration down our throats and call themselves respectable, and influence our children's minds about morality, you've gotta be kidding!

There is a militant fringe who refuse to keep it in the bedroom and have decided that they need to take it to the streets, to our schools, to television, to the big screen and to the legislature. Get real.

Floatingaxe said:

When these people force their aberration down our throats and call themselves respectable, and influence our children's minds about morality, you've gotta be kidding!

There is a militant fringe who refuse to keep it in the bedroom and have decided that they need to take it to the streets, to our schools, to television, to the big screen and to the legislature. Get real.

Click to expand...

THESE PEOPLE are respectable, even if to you, their sexuality is not.

As for this militant fringe...they can take it wherever the heterosexuals take it.

I'm not one for overt public displays of affection anyway...regardless of who the couple are.

Floatingaxe said:

When these people force their aberration down our throats and call themselves respectable, and influence our children's minds about morality, you've gotta be kidding!

There is a militant fringe who refuse to keep it in the bedroom and have decided that they need to take it to the streets, to our schools, to television, to the big screen and to the legislature. Get real.

Click to expand...

Bloody hell.

I can assure you - I'm in a liberal city, with a large LGBTQ population, and I'm heterosexual. It hasn't had an "undesirable" influence upon me. I'm also smart enough to realize that the flamboyant drag performers during the Pride parade don't represent the entire LGBTQ population.

Honestly, get out of the Dark Ages and realize that not everyone who thinks & lives differently to your militant ideal of what is right is an abomination.

Quirk said:

Bloody hell.

I can assure you - I'm in a liberal city, with a large LGBTQ population, and I'm heterosexual. It hasn't had an "undesirable" influence upon me. I'm also smart enough to realize that the flamboyant drag performers during the Pride parade don't represent the entire LGBTQ population.

Honestly, get out of the Dark Ages and realize that not everyone who thinks & lives differently to your militant ideal of what is right is an abomination.

Click to expand...

I agree with you, but the thing is that this isn't about something being an abomination to FloatingAxe: It's about her seeing it as an abomination to god.
This isn't an argument that can be won with her.
Of course, it is VERY fun to try. She gets really indignant.

LunarPlexus said:

I agree with you, but the thing is that this isn't about something being an abomination to FloatingAxe: It's about her seeing it as an abomination to god.
This isn't an argument that can be won with her.
Of course, it is VERY fun to try. She gets really indignant.

Click to expand...

My mistake. Ok! Thanks for the tidbit though!

Quirk said:

My mistake. Ok! Thanks for the tidbit though!

Click to expand...

Oh No, it wasn't a mistake!

I just thought I might tell you that, because you can't argue with FA about her own opinions. She doesn't argue her own, she argues god.

LunarPlexus said:

Oh No, it wasn't a mistake!

I just thought I might tell you that, because you can't argue with FA about her own opinions. She doesn't argue her own, she argues god.

Click to expand...

I can't help it - I can't see God as someone who wishes to punish abominations.

But I guess that's where I'll have to disagree with her. I thinks its much more about being a genuinely good person for salvation - I really don't believe it matters if one follows Allah or is homosexual or what have you.

But I'm sure FA will find something to disagree with here so to get back on topic...

Quirk said:

I can't help it - I can't see God as someone who wishes to punish abominations.

But I guess that's where I'll have to disagree with her. I thinks its much more about being a genuinely good person for salvation - I really don't believe it matters if one follows Allah or is homosexual or what have you.

But I'm sure FA will find something to disagree with here so to get back on topic...

Click to expand...

I agree. I think it's really all about the whole love and respect thing, at the end of the day.

Quirk said:

Bloody hell.

I can assure you - I'm in a liberal city, with a large LGBTQ population, and I'm heterosexual. It hasn't had an "undesirable" influence upon me. I'm also smart enough to realize that the flamboyant drag performers during the Pride parade don't represent the entire LGBTQ population.

Honestly, get out of the Dark Ages and realize that not everyone who thinks & lives differently to your militant ideal of what is right is an abomination.

Click to expand...

Yeah, well you must be in Toronto.

Yes, the undesirale effect on you has been your tolerance for evil. It's a slipery slope. It's the frog in the cauldron.

References to the Dark Ages when confronted by people with Godly viewpoints is typical. Living God's way is not an abomination! It's homosexuality that God views as abominable!

Your response is typified by this verse so well:

Isaiah 5:20
What sorrow for those who say
that evil is good and good is evil,
that dark is light and light is dark,
that bitter is sweet and sweet is bitter.