ClimateSanity
New member
Which renders their accusation powerless.
Cities Across America Creating Rainbow Crosswalks to Celebrate ‘LGBTQ Pride’
- Thread starter Angel4Truth
- Start date
glassjester
Well-known member
Yep.
marhig
Well-known member
It says in your profile that your a priest and you believe in God. Is that true? Because if it is, you certainty don't believe his word!
It's clear in the Bible that homosexual acts are wrong before God.
God says that it's unnatural, and you say it's natural, well so do many others who wish that please their flesh and put the lusts of it before God!
You refer to different animal species that do such acts to justify it as being the norm and moral, but we have a higher intelligence than animals, and by the power of the Spirit, we are to rid ourselves of the lower beast nature, not fulfill the lusts of it to please our flesh.
If it were right to do, then gays would be able to have children naturally, but this doesn't happen. God made male and female to become one flesh, not male and male or female and female.
I don't know what church you are a priest of, but you are teaching a false doctrine if you teach that gay sex is ok before God. No it isn't!
Go read Leviticus 18, 20 and Romans 1 for starters! If you believe in God then you will believe in his word through his people and his Spirit should be convicting your heart, I know that gay sex is wrong before God. And I believe God has everything in the Bible that he wants to be there. It's not just some concocted book of made up stories. It's the word of God!
marhig
Well-known member
Well I personally don't believe in harming anyone, and I certainly wouldn't want anyone executed!
Post of the month. Thanks
...or aversion. You collosal dunce. Google it.
You're saying you don't have an aversion to homosexuality then? If the shoe fits...
Selaphiel
Well-known member
That is true. Your problem is that you equate faith with turning off your brain
It is also clear that you should stone disobedient children and that it is OK to take slaves and forcefully take women as your wife in conquered cities. You need to realize that pointing to the Bible as some unambigious timeless moral commandment of God is irresponsible. There is no excuse for advocating such abhorrent ethics today. We know the history of the Bible, we know a great deal about the biblical texts and how they evolved over time. They are ultimately written by man, imperfect men who were situated historically just like anyone else. Those books are holy only insofar as they are a testament of faith of a group of people who struggled with God, or do you think Jacob wrestling with the angel is a tale of ancient supernatural MMA?
Nope, the author of Leviticus and Paul thinks that, they were wrong. There are good theories about why Paul believed that homosexuality was a unnatural. It is based on his contemporary physiology and biology. It has more to do with a greek understanding of the male as active and the female as passive. His concern is men assuming the feminine role (as they mistakenly and misogynistically understood females) of the being the passive, which is why the word translated as homosexual first and foremost means 'effeminate'. He doesn't even mention women being with women, that is not a concern of his. As for Leviticus, it is not so clear what their motivations were. Of course, that author does not call it unnatural, it is an abomination, which has to do with impurity. In that case, eating anything that isn't kosher is unnatural as well.
I see you are a liar as well, either that or you are incapable of reading. Here is what I said:
"Nope, it is not unnatural (not that natural/unnatural is even a useful guide to what is moral/immoral). It occurs in a multitude of different animal species. That in itself does not make it moral, but it invalidates the nonsensical claim that homosexuality is unnatural."
You said it was unnatural. That nonsenseis invalidated by the simple observation of nature. Homosexuality occurs among animals. As far as the morality of homosexuality, I've seen no convincing argument that it is actually immoral. Pointing to an old book is not an argument.
How does 'it being right' follow from 'ability to have children'? You have not justified this argument. Paul seems to have no concern for the production of children at all. In his epistle to the Corinthians (which is genuine, as opposed to the later pastoral epistles), he even advises against marriage in favor of celibacy. For him, marriage is simply a more legitimate way for men to channel their lust, so they will not burn with desire.
Biology is a bit more complicated than that. And why isn't female homosexuality condemned explicitly in the Bible then?
I'm part of a church that hasn't abandoned reason for madness in the name of 'faith'. Your notion of faith is a mockery of all things religious.
I have read them and I have studied them and their origin.
Saying that over and over does not make it so.
Chair said:
It is easy to appear holy when they equate sin and immorality with something that doesn't concern their lives. Heterosexuals with homosexuality and men with abortion. If they were to adress real problems like war, poverty and oppression, they would have to do something, recognize their own sin.
I don't think it actually makes a difference to the discussion at hand. Even if I granted you the cosmological construct, you'd be no closer to proving the importance of who you go to bed with. Cosmological arguments can be fun, but it's not a very fruitful way to get into a lot of these details.
It's not that I have no interest. It's just, it doesn't seem like a great way to approach the question at hand.
Now that is a question I don't have a lot of interest in. I find questions about theology and philosophy interesting. But not when abused.
Fear of The Other.
I guess so . A dangerous fear.
Personally, I find homosexuality weird. I don't feel comfortable with it. But I don't make a big deal out of it. I don't care enough to bother. I don't fear it.
One of my son's friends realized he was gay a few years ago. At about 30 years old. I've known him for years. I think it's weird, but he is just the same fellow I knew before. So I still have the same relationship I had with him before.
I do care about protecting people's rights, even people who I think have weird lifestyles. I know all too well what happens when you don't protect everybody's basic rights.
marhig
Well-known member
Thought you were a priest? The men may have been imperfect but the Spirit in their heart wasn't!
Paul is an apostle of God, and he was full of the Holy Spirit, and Moses was a prophet of God also full of his Spirit. These men didn't just "make up" what they wrote, they are witness of God inspired by him and spoke what was taught to them by the Spirit of God.
You are a false teacher to teach that homosexuality is ok before God. No it isn't, it's an abomination before him. You can come out with your own understanding and twists and turns to make it all ok and nice and holy to commit such acts but it isn't, it's sinful and wrong!
As for stoning, what did Jesus do when the Jews went to stone the woman caught in adultery? He came and said those without sin cast the first stone. So no-one could stone her because they all had sin. But did Jesus give her a hug and say don't worry you carry on? No! He told her to go sin no more, so what she had been doing it was sinful, and she was told to stop, Jesus didn't go against God's commandments but rather he stood by them.
We don't hurt people who do wrong as we are sinners ourselves, but we don't agree with a person who is sinning before God, and committing such acts as homosexuality is a sin, regardless of what you say. And trying to compare a human being to an animal is ridiculous. We are of a far higher intelligence than an animal, although many who are full of the lusts of the flesh act like animals. That's why we are to die to self, to put away the fleshly lusts and live by the will of God.
By the way, female homosexuality is mentioned in Romans 1
Romans 1
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 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, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Like these people of times past, you are changing the truth of God into a lie! And your church is not teaching the truth! You can try licking yourself clean, making yourself look holy and priest like on the outside, but those who profess to be men of God and go against God's word are just like the pharasees. Whitewashed sepulchres full of dead men's bones!
ClimateSanity
New member
ClimateSanity
New member
Every heteroswxual has an aversion to homosexuality, therefore the accusation is pointless.
ClimateSanity
New member
All of those other troubles can be traced back to moral decay......hence the outcry over sidewalk color.....it's celebrating moral decay.
Ah, no war, poverty, terror, people starving if we just get rid of those rainbow cross walks.
dodge
New member
Your problem is you believe you can change what God has decreed.
It is ! Have you ever read a bible ?
Rom 1:26
¶
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
You are part of a church that follows men NOT God.
dodge
New member
Nah, I never said don't have an aversion to same sex most normal people do have an aversion to same sex.
Homophobic is a created word to make homosexuals look normal, which they are not, and everyone against homosexuality look abnormal. It is Simpy word games.