Just a question on the matter

[EnemyPartyII]

Dear EnemyPartII
Jesus said it and I believe Him not you. Genesis 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5 etc. Have you not read? In the beginning He made them male and female, it was for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be united with his wife and the two shall become one flesh.
Tell me, who do you think a man and his wife are if not married?

normative, not proscriptive.

If you believe the Adam and Eve paradigm is the ONLY acceptible family layout, do you intend to breed with your siblings?

 

[David Brider]

Ok. Let's pretend for a moment that some sort of deity that you people call God exists.

Do you honestly think that someone who is supposed to be *allmighty* would be superficial enough to care for what two (or more) consenting adults are doing in the privacy of their own bedroom? And that artificial, human-made institution of marriage? I think that you people (fundie/conservatives) are oversimplifying theology a little too much.

In short, let people live their lives, leave them alone and live your own lives.

Well, put it this way - my understanding of what God is like is that He cares for each and every one of us, loves us, wants the best for us, and knows every intimate detail about us (which frequently freaks me out...)

But on the other hand...I'm convinced that if God sees two people who happen to be the same gender and who happen to be very much in love with each other and who happen to have decided that sexual intimacy with each other is the best expression of their love...well, y'know, I think he probably smiles and thinks, "They're happy together. It's good."

I realise, of course, that other people may believe otherwise.

David.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Well, put it this way - my understanding of what God is like is that He cares for each and every one of us, loves us, wants the best for us, and knows every intimate detail about us (which frequently freaks me out...)

But on the other hand...I'm convinced that if God sees two people who happen to be the same gender and who happen to be very much in love with each other and who happen to have decided that sexual intimacy with each other is the best expression of their love...well, y'know, I think he probably smiles and thinks, "They're happy together. It's good."

I realise, of course, that other people may believe otherwise.

David.

you're wrong, because the self contradictory, yet totally inerrant local context tribal laws of bronze age goat herders says so!

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear EnemyPartyII,

Not only do I believe it is proscriptive but its God’s very creation purpose, this is why I believe your view is one of such great disbelief. But if this were to be normative what other unions could there be as for example man and beast and man and man are both condemned. Please tell me why man and man is ok and bestiality isn’t.? By the way if you are looking to harm and consent please show where consent and harm in Biblical text deals with the Levitucus prohibitions differently.

 

[Phinehas2]

But on the other hand...I'm convinced that if God sees two people who happen to be the same gender and who happen to be very much in love with each other and who happen to have decided that sexual intimacy with each other is the best expression of their love...well, y'know, I think he probably smiles and thinks, "They're happy together. It's good."

But the Biblical evidence shows God doesnt. God detests same-sex unions so much that they are a barrrier to belonging to God, Lev 18 & 20, worthy of destructon, Gen 19, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1 and a barrier to the Kingdom of God 1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1. I have to say if one can disbelieve all that one could claim paedophilia was ok, indeed we have already had a debate thread along these lines last year.
No the church needs to cast off same-sex sex acceptance, it cant be a holy people as witness to God when its perverting itself promoting what God finds detestible

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Dear EnemyPartyII,

Not only do I believe it is proscriptive but its God’s very creation purpose, this is why I believe your view is one of such great disbelief. But if this were to be normative what other unions could there be as for example man and beast and man and man are both condemned. Please tell me why man and man is ok and bestiality isn’t.? By the way if you are looking to harm and consent please show where consent and harm in Biblical text deals with the Levitucus prohibitions differently.

Leviticus is irrelevant, New Covenant buddy *smiles sweetly*

 

[EnemyPartyII]

But the Biblical evidence shows God doesnt. God detests same-sex unions so much that they are a barrrier to belonging to God, Lev 18 & 20, worthy of destructon, Gen 19, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1 and a barrier to the Kingdom of God 1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1. I have to say if one can disbelieve all that one could claim paedophilia was ok, indeed we have already had a debate thread along these lines last year.
No the church needs to cast off same-sex sex acceptance, it cant be a holy people as witness to God when its perverting itself promoting what God finds detestible

Um, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of inhospitality, not homosexuality, THAT, is a fiction. Nice try though

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear EnemyPartyII,

I do not think Levitucus is irrelevant to Christians, Leviticus 19:18 says to love ones neighbour as oneself, Matthew 5:16-18, 5:42-44 Matthew 19: 18-20, Matthew 22:38-40, Mark 12:30-33, Luke 10:26:28, Romans 13:8-10
don’t you believe in loving your neighbour? How much of the Bible don’t you believe?

Christians believe Jesus Christ fulfilled the OT law and prophets, Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” Jesus fulfilled Leviticus Christians believe that.
There were many sins at Sodom and Gommorah, if you can see the sins of inhospitality in Ezekiel 16 and Matthew 10 and 11, then you can see the sin of same-sex sex at Sodom in Genesis 19, and reference to it in 2 Peter 2 and Jude 1.
If you cant you must have an agenda to only be prepared to see and believe what suits you.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Dear EnemyPartyII,

I do not think Levitucus is irrelevant to Christians, Leviticus 19:18 says to love ones neighbour as oneself, Matthew 5:16-18, 5:42-44 Matthew 19: 18-20, Matthew 22:38-40, Mark 12:30-33, Luke 10:26:28, Romans 13:8-10
don’t you believe in loving your neighbour? How much of the Bible don’t you believe?

Christians believe Jesus Christ fulfilled the OT law and prophets, Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” Jesus fulfilled Leviticus Christians believe that.
There were many sins at Sodom and Gommorah, if you can see the sins of inhospitality in Ezekiel 16 and Matthew 10 and 11, then you can see the sin of same-sex sex at Sodom in Genesis 19, and reference to it in 2 Peter 2 and Jude 1.
If you cant you must have an agenda to only be prepared to see and believe what suits you.

If your deliberately going to misconstrue what I say, I'm not going to talk to you anymore.

Now, you want to address what I say, have a fair and open conversation, or what?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear EnemyPartyII
I am not even misconstruing what you wrote let alone deliberately, you wrote

Leviticus is irrelevant,

I have demonstrated from the Bible in what way it is fulfilled so it is relevant.
I am trying my level best to debate with you but you dont seem to want to address much of what I wrote directly. As to Sodom, the Bible says the sins were many, inhospitality as Ezekiel and matthew 10-11 and same-sex sex in the Sodom account itself. If you dont think men wanting sex with men is same-sex sex then dont expect others to accept that inhospitality invloves a lack of hospitality.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Dear EnemyPartyII
I am not even misconstruing what you wrote let alone deliberately, you wrote I have demonstrated from the Bible in what way it is fulfilled so it is relevant.
I am trying my level best to debate with you but you dont seem to want to address much of what I wrote directly.

Do you observe all Levitical laws?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Genesis 19

does not mention homosexual sex as being the cause for Soddom's destruction.

3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."

Homosexual RAPE, maybe. However, whether raping an angel can truly be said to be homosexual rape or not is a whole other ball game

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear EnemyPartyII,

Do you observe all Levitical laws?

If I have already told you the answer to that question on more than one occasion before why do you still ask me? See my post to you Post #76 on 31st January 2008, 07:34 PM in the ‘re-examination of 1 Cor 6’ thread and stop trolling!

Genesis 19

does not mention homosexual sex as being the cause for Soddom's destruction.

I didn’t say it did, I said it mentions men wanting sex with men and Lot saying that was wicked. Do you think men wanting sex with men is heterosexual or homosexual ? “ 2 Peter 2 refers to this, so does Jude

Homosexual RAPE, maybe.

Nope, the word is yada, to know carnally, when Adam knew his wife Eve she conceived and bore Cain…no mention of consent. Oh sorry I forgot that is another bit of the Bible you dint believe. But the text says the men wanted sex with the men not the angels, you don’t want to acknowledge it says men not angels, again you don’t believe what the Bible says.

 

[Wednesday]

If our God exists, yes that’s what our God does care about. If you believed in the God we know you would thinks so too

Um, I know quite few Christians and other religious people who don't think so too.

Sure, there is genocide, epidemies, starvation, corruption, wars, religious hypocrites etc.

But, but that is all nothing compared to the gays, compared to them all above is perfectly fine by God.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Wednesday,

Um, I know quite few Christians and other religious people who don't think so too.

Well that’s just heresay, are you sure they are Christians? As you haven’t recognised what the God we know has revealed I suspect you may not be able to properly identify Christians.

Nevertheless this is a Christian section, Christians here will be posting the Christian response to homosexuality, you really need to put forward the non-Christian arguments

 

[Wednesday]

Dear Wednesday,
Well that’s just heresay, are you sure they are Christians? As you haven’t recognised what the God we know has revealed I suspect you may not be able to properly identify Christians.

Ooops, my bad. I forgot about whole True Christian (tm) thing. I'm so very sorry.

 

[Wednesday]

Nevertheless this is a Christian section, Christians here will be posting the Christian response to homosexuality, you really need to put forward the non-Christian arguments

I don't have to discuss it with people who already understand something so blindingly obvious.

I ask this quetion to you people, in a vain hope to make you think for yourself a little.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Wednesday,
We do think for ourselves, we think God is real. Incidentaly, It seems you believe same-sex sex is acceptable, there are atheists who dont

 

[Wednesday]

Yes. Except that, they lose the priviledge of using 3000 year old anthology of myths, put together by bronze-age goat herders, as an excuse

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Wednesday.
God appeared in the flesh and dwelt among us, men have seen the evidence.
Happy ot discuss this with you in another section but not here.