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.
There is everything wrong with consenting same-sex arrangements. It is sin and both people are guilty of it before the Lord God Almighty. There is no whitewashing what God has already stated clearly is an abomination to Him.
God does not approve. Be careful of what you approve.
Romans 1:32
who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
Are you putting facts in the story again?You mean like eating shrimp and lobster?
Are you putting facts in the story again?
EnemyParty11 said:Are you putting facts in the story again?
Not sure what you mean?
I'm just responding to the comment by Floatingaxe, "There is no whitewashing what God has already stated clearly is an abomination to Him." So I guess there is no whitewashing shellfish, since that was stated clearly by God as an abomination to Him.
That whole blessed are the meek, blessed are the persecuted, do unto others, love one another as i have loved you bits.
It did? I must have missed it. Why is it that these are the only two men in the history of the planet who can be known to have kissed cuddled, snuck around each other's tents at night, loved one another more than any woman, kissed on the lips, been naked together, and NOT be considered homosexual? Methinks me hears special pleading.
Says you.
The Bible never really defines marriage, and historically its a shifting norm... what we consider marriage today is not the same institution as what was considered marriage a thousand years ago. Indeed, once upon a time, say, for commoners any time greater than 500 years ago, all it took to be considered married was for the couple to consider themselves married and be accepted in the community as a couple. Just like homosexuals and common law/ de facto couples today
Sadly for the side trying to justify irational hatreds and condemnation, nowhere does God make any comment on his thoughts on the matter.
Such descriptions are normative, not proscriptive.
Same way that I could say to you "show me one person in the bible who is Chinese, they aren't they're all Middle Eastern/African". That does NOT mean that the Bible is only applicable to those groups, or that God somehow dislikes Chinese people.
The scriptures were written within the normative framework of the time. Just because they do not explicetly condone something does NOT automatically mean they are condemned. Although I'm sure you will respond shortly to tell me why homosexuality is a special case, its lacking of an accepted example in the Bible demands it be condemned, while the lack of an accepted example of computer use in the Biblke doesn't mean that what you are doing right now is a sin.
special pleading for the win.
You mean like eating shrimp and lobster?
Hey, everyone?
Let's all take a deep breath and step away from the keyboard for a few.
I feel a mod hat coming on...
I believe it is the written down account of an oral story that was toild and retold for generations as an explanation of unexplainable events.Yes, You're probably right.
Back to the OP ...does anyone believe that the article has merit, i.e. could the article interpretation of the story of Lot and the angels be the correct interpretation?
How many believe - as I do - that the story is possibly, even probably, JUST that ...a fable?
Whether fact or fable, how many believe that the story has little or nothing to do with the homosexuality that we're pretty well discussing on this subforum ...that is, committed relationships between same-sex couples?
How many would be willing to concede that the traditional translation of the story just might have holes in it?
How many don't know - or even care - WHAT the story is about?
Citation needed...Of course it is not a fable. Excavations have revealed literal balls of brimstone.
Lot sure knew what the mob of perverts wanted. That is why he offered his daughters...maybe they would settle! It was for sexual gratification only that those hundreds of men besieged Lot's house. They weren't satisfied with the prospect of young female flesh, becasue they were so steeped in perversion. the angels of the Lord struck them blind for their own reasons, one of them probably included was the fact that they did not perceove them as holy angels, but saw them as objects to be violated.
They were lucky to not have been killed on the spot, but they were spared for incineration later.
The context is more than telling. To argue this point simply reveals profound imperception.
Surely Lot was heavily influenced.
So what excuse did the other men used as focal points of Bible stories have when they did "bad things"? King David had an abundance of positive influences in his life. He was considered a man after God's own heart. So what drove him to engage in some rather unsavory behavior?
Thats great... how does it confirm the account of events involving Lot and the angels? All I see is evidence of a city that was destroyed that fits the description of the location of the towns,http://www.arkdiscovery.com/sodom_&_gomorrah.htm
~also~
http://www.wyattmuseum.com/cities-of-the-plain.htm
Then click on "More than Geological Layers"
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?