I think yes; there are many scriptural reasons why but I think this simple phrase was the most punctual and I just thought it a fun way to disapprove of homosexuality. "They basically want to rape the Angels, but Lot went out to the door way and shut the door behind him and said, 'Please my brothers do not do what is natural.' No Lot didn't say that, look what Lot said, He didn't say, 'You were born that way.' No Lot said, 'Please my Brothers do not act wickedly.'" Pretty cut and dry at least scripturally homosexuality is wrong.
-
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.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Is homosexuality wrong?
- Thread starter SouthernPlanter
- Start date
- Status
Axioma
Eccentric, Culture Ulterior (Absconded)
I worry about your sanity, Southern.
How divorced from reality is someone who sees a bunch of people wanting to gang-rape a pair of Angels, and thinks oh, it's wrong because they're gay.
How utterly CRAZY do you have to be to not think it's wrong because it's rape???
How divorced from reality is someone who sees a bunch of people wanting to gang-rape a pair of Angels, and thinks oh, it's wrong because they're gay.
How utterly CRAZY do you have to be to not think it's wrong because it's rape???
Upvote
0
Well you can't take "his" words so literally. In the Bible the men of Sodom merely wanted to have sex with the Angels, as was customary, they did not want to rape them. If they did they would have probably beat-up Lot and raped them anyway. Lot clearly was stating it was wrong to want to commit homosexual acts.
Upvote
0
Axioma
Eccentric, Culture Ulterior (Absconded)
Newsflash, SouthernPlanter: If you have sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you, that's rape. And unless people in the Olden Days really liked to have to have sex with the entire population of a city every time they visited one, that makes the people of Sodom rapists.
Lot is NOT stating that it's wrong to commit homosexual acts. Indeed, later on in the bible, the Sins of Sodom are specifically spelled out, and guess what - homosexuality isn't on the list!
Lot is NOT stating that it's wrong to commit homosexual acts. Indeed, later on in the bible, the Sins of Sodom are specifically spelled out, and guess what - homosexuality isn't on the list!
Upvote
0
So now you're claiming the Bible was stating that the men in Sodom wanted to rape the Angels and that is why Lot stood between them and the Angels? Is this your new theological view? Yes or no? The sins of Sodom is in fact; homosexuality before any other thing.
Now that that has been said, I want to mention this. I saw a comment on a youtube video that other religions like Hinduism are not trying to ban gay marriages, so I quote Hindu leaders just to show you what they say as it is so important.
Swami Pragyanand of Avahan Akhara, for instance, had this to say for a reporter from the Hinduism Today newspaper: Gay marriages do not fit with our culture and heritage. All those people who are raising demand for approving such marriages in India are doing so under the influence of the West we do not even discuss it. (p.308)
Upvote
0
I should like to finish also with the point that when the men of Sodom go to Lot to lay with his Angelic guests, Lot tells them not to be wicked. Then the Lord says, "But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly" Genesis 12:11.
The word used to describe the act of sleeping with the same sex is wicked, the Lord God sees wicked acts as being the damnation of both Sodom and Gomorrah. This should be the only evidence needed to know that the cities were destroyed for homosexuality. But more can be given.
The word used to describe the act of sleeping with the same sex is wicked, the Lord God sees wicked acts as being the damnation of both Sodom and Gomorrah. This should be the only evidence needed to know that the cities were destroyed for homosexuality. But more can be given.
Upvote
0
Axioma
Eccentric, Culture Ulterior (Absconded)
My new theological view? You imply that I once held a different view. Kindly point out where this was.
Homosexuality was not the chief sin of Sodom. 'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. Your own Bible shows that you are either a liar, or grievously misinformed.
Homosexuality was not the chief sin of Sodom. 'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. Your own Bible shows that you are either a liar, or grievously misinformed.
Upvote
0
First when referencing the Bible, please cite it. And second, please explain why the Bible in any version, uses the same words to describe homosexuality and the condemnation of the city itself by the Lord God which I have already cited.
Upvote
0
OphidiaPhile
Well-Known Member
- Sep 26, 2008
- 2,919
- 188
- 58
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
You do realize don't you that sodomy is defined as oral and anal sex and that those are performed just as often by heterosexual people, or did you not understand that?
Upvote
0
Just after your own quotation from Ezekiel 16:49, comes "And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me; therefore I took them away as I saw good." Ezekiel 16:50
From Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination."
So here we have even from your own quotations that scripturally, the Lord God is condemning Sodom for acts of homosexuality.
From Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination."
So here we have even from your own quotations that scripturally, the Lord God is condemning Sodom for acts of homosexuality.
Upvote
0
OphidiaPhile are you saying that the Angels were women and the men wanted to have sex with women but were turned away as being Wicked and abominable? Is that your claim? Just as the claim of your compatriot is that homosexuality was not the sin of Sodom?
Upvote
0
I would like to further point out that no Bible of any translation before the homosexual counter cultural craze that was born from San Francisco in the late 60s and early 70s, used the word Homosexual. It is therefore incredibly ignorant but convenient for people to say that the Lord did not condemn homosexuality when the word abomination is used, or the word wicked, even though both words are defined by substance earlier within the text of the Bible.
Upvote
0
Axioma
Eccentric, Culture Ulterior (Absconded)
No, Southern, that's just your prejudice showing.
You see God say "They committed an abomination" and you jump to the conclusion that he must mean homosexuality, but this tells us nothing about God and everything about you. You apparently read the Bible by mentally replacing every instance of the words sin, wicked and abomination with homosexuality.
Actually, no, you've probably never read the bible, otherwise you'd know there are a gazillion things described as abominations in Leviticus. Like eating shellfish, for an example.
You see God say "They committed an abomination" and you jump to the conclusion that he must mean homosexuality, but this tells us nothing about God and everything about you. You apparently read the Bible by mentally replacing every instance of the words sin, wicked and abomination with homosexuality.
Actually, no, you've probably never read the bible, otherwise you'd know there are a gazillion things described as abominations in Leviticus. Like eating shellfish, for an example.
Upvote
0
I know that when he says Abomination he means homosexuality because no where in the Bible is the word homosexuality used until the New American Translation which came after that whole homosexual movement got going. Lot referred to Homosexuality as "wicked" and so did God when he told Lot he was going to destroy Sodom for being wicked. Then Leviticus says men laying with men as they do with women is an abomination, and then Ezekiel is told that God destroyed Sodom for being among other things, an abomination. This is the best argument you can come up with?
Upvote
0
1) Not really a thread for American Politics :S
2) So God destroyed Sodom because it's inhabitants ate shrimp. You learn something new every day..
2) So God destroyed Sodom because it's inhabitants ate shrimp. You learn something new every day..
Upvote
0
And then what did Lot do?
He offered his daughters to the mob as if that is virtuous in some sick way.
The moral bankruptcy of the bible is totally mind boggling to me. I will never understand how any "thinking" person can see this dusty old book as a book holding much if any virtue at all.
Upvote
0
And after they escaped the cities, their mother having been killed, those same daughters decide to get their father drunk so he will sleep with them and they can continue the family line...which they couldn't have done otherwise....unless..um... Well I guess they needed male heirs. They must have got it in their heads that females don't count for anything. Possibly around the time their father offered them up for gang rape.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
