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.
[SIZE=-1]Maybe because, if you don't speculate and try to take it word for word, it loses meaning. Talk about picking and choosing. Besides, "use of women". Literally interpreting that makes us seem like objects. I'm offended.[/SIZE]
Listen, here is yet ANOTHER gay thread started by the same individuals that want to go to all other gay threads and spew. Nothing new..just the same blah blah blah....
What it boils down to is the way that you CHOSE to practice your faith. 95% of US citizens call themselves "christians"..yet fewer than 35% practice any sort of religious belief. As a christian..you practice your faith either one of two ways.
1 - The God of "rapture". You believe that the second coming will resuce and save SOME people but destroy most of humankind. You have your list of requirements that must be met in order to be a "true" Christian and be "saved". You have a "bad news" way of viewing Christ..there will be a last judgement, either at the end of our lives or at the end of history and you better be ready or you're in deep trouble. This would be Christianity of threat...anxiety...and self preservation.
2 - The God of "love and justice"...THE MOST FREQUENT REFERENCE IN THE BIBLE!!! A nice God of compassion and social justice.
God's acceptance of us is unconditional, and not dependent upon something we believe or must do, or some test of requirements.
Those that have a "good news" view where God has invited us into a new life HERE AND NOW, transforms us personally.
This version is the of all transformed people and a transformed earth with the glory of God.
What sort of Christian are you?
Is Christianity about requirements such as "here is what you must do to be saved"?
or is Christianity about relationship and transformation such as "here is the path to follow"? Both involve imperatives...but one is a threat...the other is an invitation.
Some find they must make God out to a "monarchial model"...meaning you have to express your belief in God through legal language..primarily concerned with personal virtue, or as someone you must measure up to in order to meet his requirements. A God of heaven and a God of Hell.
To do this, you see God as "lawgiver and judge",
meaning the God of works.
Keeping in mind the entire Protestant Reformation was born out of their rejection for "works" but for "grace"..God's acceptance of us, thus, is uncondtional..and NOT dependent on what we do or say.
If you begin to say, God accepts us "IF"....then you have now put conditions on his grace, thus, no longer making it grace.
So, given that...is God's basis for our life with him based on laws or grace? Requirements and rewards? or Relationships and transformations..here and now??? Grace affirms the latter.
Repeat thread would probably be the reason no one is bothering MercyBurst.
Honestly why can't anyone come up with an ORIGINAL thread idea.
You along with any other forum member who debates here has YET to disprove even one myth on the fact sheet. Nowhere in the original Hebrew or Greek is homosexuality as one's innate sexual constitution condemned. I am still looking for one refute of this, and I have yet to get it, and a tired old Talmud link is ridiculous at best.No arguments. Good. The debate can not be challenged.
The bible does not support gay arguments!!!!!
You along with any other forum member who debates here has YET to disprove even one myth on the fact sheet. Nowhere in the original Hebrew or Greek is homosexuality as one's innate sexual constitution condemned.
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly,
The Jerusalem Bible, German 1968, agrees with Scroggs, translating arsenokoitai as "child molesters". Of course, fundamentalists ignore that bible translation [as well as Phillips (1958), Jerusalem Bible (French -1955), The Latin Vulgate, (405), etc., of which reject the homosexual interpretation] while accepting the NIV (which is unclear since it has the translation "homosexual offenders").
Note: The Dutch NBG translation of 1951 uses the word "schandjongens" ("maleprostitutes" in English) for malakoi and "knapenschenders" ("boy-molesters" in English) for arsenokotai.
Rembert Truluck is a Doctor of Theology from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY, 1968. He was a Southern Baptist Pastor from 1953 to 1973, and a Professor of Religion at Baptist College of Charleston, SC, from1973 to 1981. Truluck is well learned in Hebrew and Greek. In his article "The Six Bible Passages Used To Condemn Homosexuals", Dr. Truluck writes, "The Greek word [arsenokoitai] translated "homosexual" does not mean homosexual! The word is obscure and uncertain."
Dr. Truluck personally wrote a letter to me, in responce to mine, in which he writes: ".... [arsenokoitai] was never translated as "homosexual" until 1946, and was a bad mistake then."
http://home.wanadoo.nl/inspiritus/The%20Mystery.htm
http://home.wanadoo.nl/inspiritus/The Mystery.htm
1) Why isn't female-female sex condemned under YOUR same logicFrom reading the bible, I don't see innate constitution, not that it really matters in this debate anyway:
Questions for you to answer:
1) So why isn't male-on-female sex UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES condemned with a death penalty?
2) Why are the verses in Romans 1:27 and in Leviticus 20:13 EXCLUSIVE TO SAME SEX?
3) Why are the worst examples of human depravity found in the bible EXCLUSIVELY SAME SEX?
You can not answer these questions, and they defeat everything you've presented.
1) Why isn't female-female sex condemned under YOUR same logic
Romans 1 is talking about idolaters who worshiped idols and were malicious murderers, read the whole passage.
Romans, Chapter 1. In this passage, the Apostle Paul gives a very specific list of characteristics describing those in question: He describes them as those who once knew God, but who chose not to honor God as God. Instead, they worshiped material images of human beings, birds, animals, and reptiles as objects of worship rather than the One True Living God.
We are told that they were filled with EVERY kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, and malice. They were full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, gossip, slander, insolence, haughtiness, and boastfulness. They were inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, and ruthless. (NRSV) As a result of their total depravity, God turned them over to complete spiritual ruin, so that they left no stone of sexual debauchery unturned, engaging in mass orgies and idolatrous sexual cult worship, which included both homosexual and heterosexual debauchery.
These murderous, malicious people who worshiped idols and hated God after once knowing Him, have NOTHING to do with people who have a sincere desire to love and worship the Lord Jesus Christ and who happen to be homosexual.
Today, there are multitudes of homosexual people who are tirelessly yearning to be a part of the Church so that they can WORSHIP the One True Living God and profess Jesus as their Savior. Anyone who can possibly equate the monstrous, reprobate people of Romans 1 to modern-day gay and lesbian people who reach out to humanity, love and respect their parents, and who have been expelled from the church they love, just for being homosexual, is not using common sense! Like those religious leaders who scorned Jesus, they have chosen to believe lies founded on their traditions.
http://www.opendoorcenter.com/myths_&_facts.htm
If you don't understand the historical context of the verses you bring here, you will not ever get it.When they do these awful things, why are they EXCLUSIVELY SAME SEX?
Giving honour to pornography and the theory of evolution, where man came from animals -- I'd say that pretty well fills the bill, but that isn't really relevant to the argument. The question is, when they do all these terrible things, WHY DO THEY TURN GAY?
There is nothing in there about heterosexuals, it's EXCLUSIVELY HOMOS that are doing ALL THESE TERRIBLE THINGS.
Except that they are ALL GAY.
So why aren't heterosexuals condemned the same way as Romans 1 UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES?
There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between hetero and homo, and you know it!!!!!!!!!
If you don't understand the historical context of the verses you bring here, you will not ever get it.
Quite the post! Excellent! Then again...we know common sense is not used with fundamentalist b/c sense is not something that they embrace. Some may take that as a "slam" but it's only making an observation on literalism.1) Why isn't female-female sex condemned under YOUR same logic
Romans 1 is talking about idolaters who worshiped idols and were malicious murderers, read the whole passage.
Romans, Chapter 1. In this passage, the Apostle Paul gives a very specific list of characteristics describing those in question: He describes them as those who once knew God, but who chose not to honor God as God. Instead, they worshiped material images of human beings, birds, animals, and reptiles as objects of worship rather than the One True Living God. We are told that they were filled with EVERY kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, and malice. They were full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, gossip, slander, insolence, haughtiness, and boastfulness. They were inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, and ruthless. (NRSV) As a result of their total depravity, God turned them over to complete spiritual ruin, so that they left no stone of sexual debauchery unturned, engaging in mass orgies and idolatrous sexual cult worship, which included both homosexual and heterosexual debauchery.
These murderous, malicious people who worshiped idols and hated God after once knowing Him, have NOTHING to do with people who have a sincere desire to love and worship the Lord Jesus Christ and who happen to be homosexual. Today, there are multitudes of homosexual people who are tirelessly yearning to be a part of the Church so that they can WORSHIP the One True Living God and profess Jesus as their Savior. Anyone who can possibly equate the monstrous, reprobate people of Romans 1 to modern-day gay and lesbian people who reach out to humanity, love and respect their parents, and who have been expelled from the church they love, just for being homosexual, is not using common sense! Like those religious leaders who scorned Jesus, they have chosen to believe lies founded on their traditions.
http://www.opendoorcenter.com/myths_&_facts.htm
Mercy....don't even tell me that you equate the belief in evolution as "man coming from animals".... if so...you really are a case study. People that believe in evolution believe man evolved from primative man to modern man...not from ape to man..yet ANOTHER misrepresentation that you seem to embrace...Just an fyi, and not to go off topic too much... the theroy based on fossil findings and bone carbons would be,If you don't understand the historical context of the verses you bring here, you will not ever get it.
Mercy....don't even tell me that you equate the belief in evolution as "man coming from animals".... if so...you really are a case study.
People that believe in evolution believe man evolved from primative man to modern man...not from ape to man..yet ANOTHER misrepresentation that you seem to embrace...Just an fyi, and not to go off topic too much... the theroy based on fossil findings and bone carbons would be,
Pliopithecus, Pronconsul, Dryopithecus, Oreopithecus, Ramapithecus, Australopithecus, Paranthropus, Advanced Australopithecus, Homo Erectus, Early Homo Sapiens, Solo Man, & Rhodesian Man, Neanderthal Man, Cro-Magnon Man, Modern Man .
This goes back about 4M+ years..but don't tell me...dinasours and fossils more than 6K years old are all just fake and made up...
Quite the post! Excellent! Then again...we know common sense is not used with fundamentalist b/c sense is not something that they embrace. Some may take that as a "slam" but it's only making an observation on literalism.
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?