EnemyPartyII
Well-Known Member
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?
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.
normative, not proscriptive.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?
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.
you're wrong, because the self contradictory, yet totally inerrant local context tribal laws of bronze age goat herders says so!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 bethe 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.
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.But on the other hand...I'm convinced that if God sees two people who happen to bethe 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."
Leviticus is irrelevant, New Covenant buddy *smiles sweetly*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.
Um, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of inhospitality, not homosexuality, THAT, is a fiction. Nice try thoughBut 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
If your deliberately going to misconstrue what I say, I'm not going to talk to you anymore.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.
I have demonstrated from the Bible in what way it is fulfilled so it is relevant.Leviticus is irrelevant,
Do you observe all Levitical laws?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.
does not mention homosexual sex as being the cause for Soddom's destruction.Genesis 19
Homosexual RAPE, maybe. However, whether raping an angel can truly be said to be homosexual rape or not is a whole other ball game3 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."
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!Do you observe all Levitical laws?
Genesis 19
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 Judedoes not mention homosexual sex as being the cause for Soddom's destruction.
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.Homosexual RAPE, maybe.
If our God exists, yes thats what our God does care about. If you believed in the God we know you would thinks 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.Um, I know quite few Christians and other religious people who don't think so too.
Dear Wednesday,
Well thats just heresay, are you sure they are Christians? As you havent 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
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?