No need for so called "clobber passages" if:

[savedandhappy1]

I'm not using an argument from silence to back my viewpoint, I'm saying, how do you know He wasn't tempted with that also? My point is that by asking YOU the question, you cannot answer one way or the other.

I can answer it, because the Bible tells us He was tempted in all things and found righteous. It doesn't have to have been from the Pharisees, but He was tempted.

Interesting, your whole argument is one from silence, yet you are saying that I want to hear only what I want to hear? that is pretty ironic, coming from the fact that every argument you made on this thread is based upon an argument from silence.

Esp. that quote where the Pharisees asked Jesus the question "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?".
The question was specific, so it got a specific answer regarding what man was to do w/his wife. You might as well say that leaves out anything else off topic that wasn't asked of Jesus, like Steak dinners are sinful under that logic.

Ok, I will say it one more time and then no more. I am/was trying to point out how the silence argument can't work, so could you please stop trying to turn things around.

I even stated that finally you got it, so if you think you can confuse someone who truely reads all the post..............well it will only happen if they don't have or don't use the discernment God gives.

 

[savedandhappy1]

You are saying that automatically anything not mentioned is automatically "OK" with Jesus, so therefore it couldn't be true, it would have to be mentioned. Nobody is arguing that point but you, such as same sex divorce, and lust. I already showed you why that argument doesn't work.

You still don't see why your argument doesn't work though?

Nope that isn't what I'm saying and no matter how many times you say it it will not change.

The point I am making works for those who are seeking the truth, and who lean on the Lord for understanding.

 

[Zaac]

Nope that isn't what I'm saying and no matter how many times you say it it will not change.

The point I am making works for those who are seeking the truth, and who lean on the Lord for understanding.

Hang in there saved.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Davedjy,

All of your conclusions are based upon arguments from silence.

No his arguments are based on what the Bible says. You are wrong to say that. His question is, if silence means the same doesn’t apply to homosexuals as heterosexuals, adultery and any other sin mentioned about man and woman heterosexuals cant apply either. That’s a question for you to answer.

so why would Jesus mention same sex relationships there, if that wasn't the question asked?

So why would he need to mention same-sex relationships if they already knew what the law said .. Lev 18 & 20?
Besides if there is silence, why didn’t the Pharisees ask Jesus about same-sex relationships, and the answer is the Bible shows they knew it was a sin… Lev 18 & 20.

How do you know for sure that they didn't tempt Him with that also? you don't.

But we do know they didn’t need to. How do you know for sure that Jesus didnt also repeat ‘men lying with men instead of with women is detestible to God… you don’t.

 

[Phinehas2]

Again what is happening here in effect is the pro-gay posters rejecting the Biblical evidence and then asking the believers for proof.
The Bible condemns same-sex sex like it condemns adultery, fornication, theft, murder, we have given the evidence, Gen 19, Lev 18 & 20, Judges 19, 1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1,
There is no silence, only disbelief

 

[davedjy]

Nope that isn't what I'm saying and no matter how many times you say it it will not change.

It's found in your opening post, your argument from silence. You are saying since Jesus never spoke of it, we would have to say it is ok for homosexuals to divorce, lust, etc., THAT is an argument from silence. I don't need to say it a bunch of times, anyone reading this thread can see it for themselves:

because Jesus never spoke of it, and in doing so we would have to say that it is ok for homosexuals to divorce for no reason at all, it's ok to lust after people of the same sex, and it is ok for homosexuals to commit fornication and adultery.

The point I am making works for those who are seeking the truth, and who lean on the Lord for understanding.

Your point you are making works for those wishing to seek anti-gay interpretations based upon silence and nothing more.

I can answer it, because the Bible tells us He was tempted in all things and found righteous. It doesn't have to have been from the Pharisees, but He was tempted.

The Bible states that Jesus was tempted in all points (Hebrews 4:15). That does not necessarily mean that he was "tempted" with homosexuality. Jesus would've had to at least bisexual for that to happen. To be tempted on all points, it could just mean with a heterosexual lust, since He would've then be tempted on the level of sexual lust.

Ok, I will say it one more time and then no more. I am/was trying to point out how the silence argument can't work, so could you please stop trying to turn things around.

...yes, that is what ironic about the thread, because you use an argument from silence to disprove another one.

I even stated that finally you got it, so if you think you can confuse someone who truely reads all the post..............well it will only happen if they don't have or don't use the discernment God gives.

Finally got what? You use an argument from silence to say something not mentioned in the Bible must be in error to be possible (same sex marriage).

 

[davedjy]

Dear Davedjy,
No his arguments are based on what the Bible says. You are wrong to say that. His question is, if silence means the same doesn’t apply to homosexuals as heterosexuals, adultery and any other sin mentioned about man and woman heterosexuals cant apply either. That’s a question for you to answer.

Already answered. The Pharisees asked a specific question about a man and a woman, and nothing else.

So why would he need to mention same-sex relationships if they already knew what the law said .. Lev 18 & 20?

Now you are getting into the clobber passages which is not what this thread is about. I have already answered for the old Leviticus laws. I believe that passage to be referring to Canaanite idolatry ritual, hence tow'ebah (abomination) being ceremonial. Anyone using the old Leviticus laws is cherry picking at best.

Again what is happening here in effect is the pro-gay posters rejecting the Biblical evidence and then asking the believers for proof.
The Bible condemns same-sex sex like it condemns adultery, fornication, theft, murder, we have given the evidence, Gen 19, Lev 18 & 20, Judges 19, 1 Cor 6, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1,
There is no silence, only disbelief

Very brief summary, since been over this 1,000 times or more, everyday, and every thread.


Genesis 19, is not a proper passage to be used here, not a blanket condemnation on homosexuality

1 Tim and 1 Cor. rely on the same false translation of the word "arsenokoitai". Been over this before, not sure why you would quote me and ask again.

Romans 1 -- temple idolatry cult rituals

Jude 1 -- not a proper debatable passage, the strange flesh referring to the angelic hosts that came to earth. It isn't used by Scholars anymore.

Peter 2 -- never been used on this subject before, doesn't work, doesn't need an explanation.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Hi everyone.

Back in August some of you might remember me asking for prayer because a family friend was accidently shot by her husband on her sons birthday. She was killed instantly.

Well our crazy cops arrested the husband last night for 2nd degree murder.

The husband has many health problems which are life threating. In fact they stopped paying for his wifes life insurance and put all their money on life insurance for him. They had even made all the arrangements for his death and burial.

Anyhow I may not be on line much to try and help them, so if I miss a post please understand.

Please pray for my friend his 18 year old daughter and 14 year old son as they go through this nightmare that has been going on since August. Also lift his mother and brother up in prayer also. Thanks.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Davedjy,

Already answered. The Pharisees asked a specific question about a man and a woman, and nothing else

Why did you quote something your answer doesn’t address. , If silence means the same doesn’t apply to homosexuals as heterosexuals, adultery and any other sin mentioned about man and woman heterosexuals can’t apply either? That’s a question for you to answer especially as we don’t see silence we see clear condemnation of same-sex unions.
Quote:

Now you are getting into the clobber passages which is not what this thread is about.

The thread says ‘so called’ clobber passges, I don’t think they exist either, you are the one getting into them and this is what the thread is about.. so start debating!

I have already answered for the old Leviticus laws. I believe that passage to be referring to Canaanite idolatry ritual, hence tow'ebah (abomination) being ceremonial. Anyone using the old Leviticus laws is cherry picking at best.

That’s just what you think, yet it is concerned with idolatry but the passages say these acts are done by pagans and not God’s people, so you don’t really seem to believe Lev 18 & 20 either. No I am sorry Davedjy but Lev 18 & 20 describe acts God’s people are not to do, so it doesn’t just apply to Canaanite idolatry ritual, but if you think it does are you saying those acts such as incest, bestiality and same-sex sex are ok, or have you now got to apply another of your own criteria in order to isolate same-sex sex from the others to be able to justify it for yourself?

Very brief summary, since been over this 1,000 times or more, everyday, and every thread.

I am well aware of your dispute with the Bible passages evidence I have posted, I call it rank disbelief and I don’t need to hear it again as I have explained, debated and discussed it at length.
The proof we have is those passages, where is your proof that same-sex sex and unions are countenanced.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Don't know if there are any post I need to respond to here, but over the next few days will try to check this and anyother threads that I have posted on.

We laid my mother to rest yesterday. She went home to be with the Lord Tuesday night, and so it will still be a few days before I will probably have time or brain power enough to respond.

God Bless.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Davedjy,
I dont see any passages as clobber passages. I see that in Christ I am free not to sin. If I were want to ignore a sin or deny a sin I would no doubt be seeing the pasages that referred to that sin as a clobber passage, because it would clobbers me into having to avoid something I really wanted to do.

 

[KCKID]

Dear Davedjy,
I dont see any passages as clobber passages. I see that in Christ I am free not to sin. If I were want to ignore a sin or deny a sin I would no doubt be seeing the pasages that referred to that sin as a clobber passage, because it would clobbers me into having to avoid something I really wanted to do.

It's just that we don't see other 'clobber' passages used with the same enthusiasm as those aimed at 'gays'. What does that tell you?

For instance, I have yet to see a thread where the scriptures are used to condemn the practice of LYING. And this is something many of us do (and accept from others without too much hassle) on a daily basis. We could start with "Lying lips are abomination to the Lord (Proverbs 12:22)."

I bet the thread would not go the distance. The 'lying abomination' is not nearly as much fun to discuss as that 'abomination' that some (mistakenly) believe is aimed at 'gays'.

Come on ...let's get serious about upholding the Bible. Let us tear apart all the liars in the world.

 

[davedjy]

Dear Davedjy,
I dont see any passages as clobber passages. I see that in Christ I am free not to sin. If I were want to ignore a sin or deny a sin I would no doubt be seeing the pasages that referred to that sin as a clobber passage, because it would clobbers me into having to avoid something I really wanted to do.

+1 with what KCKID said.

You use those passages to condemn same sex behavior, hence the term "clobber passages".

 

[davedjy]

Don't know if there are any post I need to respond to here, but over the next few days will try to check this and anyother threads that I have posted on.

We laid my mother to rest yesterday. She went home to be with the Lord Tuesday night, and so it will still be a few days before I will probably have time or brain power enough to respond.

God Bless.

I'm so sorry to hear about your loss. You and your family will be in my prayers.

 

[savedandhappy1]

It's just that we don't see other 'clobber' passages used with the same enthusiasm as those aimed at 'gays'. What does that tell you?

For instance, I have yet to see a thread where the scriptures are used to condemn the practice of LYING. And this is something many of us do (and accept from others without too much hassle) on a daily basis. We could start with "Lying lips are abomination to the Lord (Proverbs 12:22)."

I bet the thread would not go the distance. The 'lying abomination' is not nearly as much fun to discuss as that 'abomination' that some (mistakenly) believe is aimed at 'gays'.

Come on ...let's get serious about upholding the Bible. Let us tear apart all the liars in the world.

You're right the threads about lying, greed, murder, etc. don't go very far, but it isn't because it isn't nearly as much fun.

It is because the majority of people know that lying, greed, murder, etc. are sins. There are a few here that try to say that white lies are ok, but on the whole everyone even those who don't know the Lord don't try to say they aren't sins. I haven't seen anyone say that it is ok to tell white lies and all the scriptures that say liars won't be in the Kingdom of God are only those who lie in the temple or that it is only the people that don't lie and then start lying that makes it a sin. No one says that they are born that way or that God made them that way, and if they tried it the majority of people would know it is a lie from the devil.

I can assure you that just the other day I questioned my own son about an answer he gave at work or was maybe going to make at work,(can't remember which right now) that he was really close to lying or deceiving in the answer. I told him to pray about it and to not think that because everyone at work does it that makes it right. Or that because they have to back eachother at work that makes lying ok.

 

[savedandhappy1]

I'm so sorry to hear about your loss. You and your family will be in my prayers.

Thank You.

 

[savedandhappy1]

+1 with what KCKID said.

You use those passages to condemn same sex behavior, hence the term "clobber passages".

Nope no +1 with what KCKID said, more like a -5. IMO.

 

[davedjy]

Nope no +1 with what KCKID said, more like a -5. IMO.

Do you hear liars referred to as depraved and not saved?

 

[Trashionista]

If a man and a woman become one flesh when they are joined together, according to Jesus, then what are a man and man or woman and woman? Just wondering sense Jesus only speaks of what happens when a man and a woman come together.

I don't really think there is a difference.

Well, obviously, everyone is aware male-female heterosexual intercourse is obviously different to same-sex intercourse.

But when one becomes one flesh, I would think there would be as much metaphor in there as much as being literal. If two people marry, and share their lives together, their hopes, their dreams - isn't that what marriage is fundamentally about? Two against the world? Unity? A couple-dom that isn't entered by anyone else?

Really, when you look at comitted homosexual couples there really is no difference, metaphorically. Homosexuals have long-term relationships, that if you removed gender, are no different to a heterosexual marriage.

So, I don't think the whole "One man and one woman" thing really holds that much clout. Really, I think its declasse to have wild, promiscuous sex - regardless of orientation. So, providing the homosexual couple in question are united, and are safe and devoted to each other, and aren't really hurting themselves or others around them, I think its a non-issue that the parties just happen to prefer the same gender.

 

[HaloHope]

I don't really think there is a difference.

Well, obviously, everyone is aware male-female heterosexual intercourse is obviously different to same-sex intercourse.

But when one becomes one flesh, I would think there would be as much metaphor in there as much as being literal. If two people marry, and share their lives together, their hopes, their dreams - isn't that what marriage is fundamentally about? Two against the world? Unity? A couple-dom that isn't entered by anyone else?

Really, when you look at comitted homosexual couples there really is no difference, metaphorically. Homosexuals have long-term relationships, that if you removed gender, are no different to a heterosexual marriage.

So, I don't think the whole "One man and one woman" thing really holds that much clout. Really, I think its declasse to have wild, promiscuous sex - regardless of orientation. So, providing the homosexual couple in question are united, and are safe and devoted to each other, and aren't really hurting themselves or others around them, I think its a non-issue that the parties just happen to prefer the same gender.

Fantastic post (and reps for you )

Becoming one flesh imho is just a metaphor for when couples are sexually intimate and their bodies, minds, souls etc.. join and become one (assuming the couple in question love each other anyway). Gender is fairly irrelevant as couples tend to fit together pretty well regardless of what their gender is.