Why are they gay?

[127Rockledge]

God also says he will Crush all the enemies who oppose the Isrealites, I suppose you will criticize him for that as well.

Nope, it's my job.

Though I think it's funny.

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

no, I walk around in rags, disshevled...and I DO hate pearls..so don't wear them at all....I am a basic slob.

 

[127Rockledge]

I'm glad to see such consistancy.

What kind of ring did your husband give you for your wedding - as I see the indication you are in fact married.

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

sorry, that is a personal question, and I don't have to answer it for your nonsense. I am glad to see you are toning down your condesention!

 

[Randombitsofstring]

The bible supported an economic structure in which people sold themselves to be fed. I wish people would do the reasearch before they commented on an issue they know little about.

That sounds a lot like prostitution. Slavery is slavery no matter how nice you want to make it sound.

 

[HeavenzAngel]

prays for peace christians, that we will all stop fighting and love eachother.

 

[relspace]

That sounds a lot like prostitution. Slavery is slavery no matter how nice you want to make it sound.

Some people say the same thing about religion. You should pay more attention to the kind of distinctions that NewGuy is pointing out. They do make a difference and understanding the difference will develop your discernment in other matters.

prays for peace christians, that we will all stop fighting and love eachother.

You have to be a little more realistic than this. Fighting has a cause and until you remove the cause, statements like yours just put you on the side of the complacent status quo. Peace requires a treaty and a treaty means compromise.

 

[GenemZ]

That sounds a lot like prostitution. Slavery is slavery no matter how nice you want to make it sound.

At one time slavery was a means for food and shelter. The wealthy had slaves. Not the poor. In the economy of the day people sold themselves into slavery at times as to keep alive. If you keep looking at the ancient world through the filter of your present cultural conditioning you will not be able to see what was going on.

Steal someone's horse today? You get fined and some jail time possibly. Steal a person's horse during the western frontier days? And you'd be lynched. Rightfully, so. You are doing the same thing with the slavery issue. You are not seeing it in its context of economy and culture.

Thinkin about it .... You would have liked the ancient world with slavery.

Homosexual expression was a norm and not questioned back then. Anyone who wanted to be gay was free to be... And, come to think of it, many slaves were used for such sexual expression.

Maybe we should do away with slavery? And, homosexuality? Since the ancient world is so wrong to your way of thinking?

GeneZ​

​

 

[127Rockledge]

sorry, that is a personal question, and I don't have to answer it for your nonsense. I am glad to see you are toning down your condesention!

I respect your right to privacy.

However I do not believe the question to be any more personal than, "what kind of car do you drive?" Though the symbolism may be much more significant to you. A ring is not something that will pass onto the next point of existance with us - this is why I did not suppose it to be as personal as it obviously is.

I also do not see the question as nonsense, I see it as very revealing as it is very much related to the consistancy of your beliefs and your efforts to follow it.

I do not adjust my inflection (which is not meant to be patronizing or condescending), but I am glad that you are also glad.

 

[thenewageriseth]

Isn't it weird that slavery in the Bible was ok?
It IS weird isn't it? *wink wink* *nudge nudge*

 

[WalksWithChrist]

YES, I DO! why is that so hard to believe. Ya know, the more I think about it, maybe we SHOULD put into effect everything the Bible says...hm...what a thought.

You mean like stoning disobediant children? If he held to that law, I'd have been taken out loooong ago!

 

[HeavenzAngel]

If we went back to bibical times, husbands would have many wifes, women hardly any rights and no CF to post on.

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

You mean like stoning disobediant children? If he held to that law, I'd have been taken out loooong ago!

I think most of us would..and then think of where the world would be. It was being said a bit sarcastically. I am getting a tad tired of the 'poor' little gay people complaining how hard done by they are..and how tolerant of them we should be....and *gasp* I dared to stand on the Word of God...how could I do that being Christian and all??? GEE...should get it together!

 

[127Rockledge]

But for the sake of consistancy under God's word we must have the same attitude toward all sins, including idolaters - therefore we must not tolerate them, and stand on the word of God, as you would say.

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

But for the sake of consistancy under God's word we must have the same attitude toward all sins, including idolaters - therefore we must not tolerate them, and stand on the word of God, as you would say.

I am NOT tolerant of ALOT of things lately! TRUST me. People keep throwing other 'things' into the pot..THIS thread is about GAY...NOT idolotry or anything else. YES< I AM militant about the 'gay' thread. START one on the other issues..and see how I am about that too! SHEESH!

 

[127Rockledge]

I do believe the attitude towards other sins are relevant - it forms our level of consistancy. In essence our core of believing. We cannot believe one sin is more sinful than another, as God outlined this in the NT. A sin is a sin, and we are to hate the sin but love the sinner.

If homosexuality is a sin, and the homosexuals are being led astray, is it not our moral obligation to counsel and lead the homosexuals back to God? We should be taking the sinner INTO our homes, clothing and feeding them, not locking them OUT to envelope themselves in the unrighteousnous.

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

I do believe the attitude towards other sins are relevant - it forms our level of consistancy. In essence our core of believing. We cannot believe one sin is more sinful than another, as God outlined this in the NT. A sin is a sin, and we are to hate the sin but love the sinner.

If homosexuality is a sin, and the homosexuals are being led astray, is it not our moral obligation to counsel and lead the homosexuals back to God? We should be taking the sinner INTO our homes, clothing and feeding them, not locking them OUT to envelope themselves in the unrighteousnous.

OH! Am I doing this? Locking them out? ARE YOU doing what you suggest??

I STILL challenge the gays to show me in the Bible where GOD says it is ok for 2 women/2 men to have a 'loving' relationship...on the same level as hetrosexual couples. IF They can give me chapter and verse that SAYS that..NOT what THEY think it says, or twist it..I will concede...UNTIL then...GOD says it IS a sin (this IS a gay thread not other 'sin" threads)...and therefore..IT IS!

 

[vossler]

But for the sake of consistancy under God's word we must have the same attitude toward all sins, including idolaters - therefore we must not tolerate them, and stand on the word of God, as you would say.

I don't think anyone who argues against homosexuality would disagree with this.

 

[127Rockledge]

OH! Am I doing this? Locking them out? ARE YOU doing what you suggest??

Your words imply such things. Your admittance to a militant attitude towards homosexuals definitely says it. You have said over and over how you are being forced to tolerate it and will stand for it no longer.

I STILL challenge the gays to show me in the Bible where GOD says it is ok for 2 women/2 men to have a 'loving' relationship...on the same level as hetrosexual couples. IF They can give me chapter and verse that SAYS that..NOT what THEY think it says, or twist it..I will concede...UNTIL then...GOD says it IS a sin (this IS a gay thread not other 'sin" threads)...and therefore..IT IS!

I believe there are only two homosexual people on this board, both female, and one (unknown gender) who admits to having bisexual problems in the past. However there are many more who do not agree that homosexuality is a sin, or atleast like myself, believe it to be debatable at best.

And interpretation is always evident - your view of a scripture IS what you think it means or says, as is theirs. Unless God comes down here himself in physical form and instructs us personally that he meant this rather than that - interpretation will always be a problem.

 

[vossler]

I do believe the attitude towards other sins are relevant - it forms our level of consistancy. In essence our core of believing. We cannot believe one sin is more sinful than another, as God outlined this in the NT. A sin is a sin, and we are to hate the sin but love the sinner.

Yes, you've gotten it.

If homosexuality is a sin, and the homosexuals are being led astray, is it not our moral obligation to counsel and lead the homosexuals back to God? We should be taking the sinner INTO our homes, clothing and feeding them, not locking them OUT to envelope themselves in the unrighteousnous.

Exactly!