Sodom & Gomorrah - The sin was sodomy, not inhospitality (Jehovah, resurrection)

[pcamps]

Originally Posted by Rbbi1

Compassion is also sharing the Word to the darkest of darkened hearts, knowing the outcome will not at least initially, be pleasant. Respect of persons, tailors to what they perceive their audience wants to hear, thereby bypassing the friction to follow.

I love the Spirit of G-d and His Word, and Paul was used to deliver some of that Word. I don't worship him.

As for your labels, I ignore them in Christendom and so why would I pay any attention to non-Christian ones? Peace

The good news was never you are a sinner deserving of hell, it's even while you thought that about yourself that way because you were condition to think that way, God never stopped loving you, and I Jesus Christ am proof of your heavenly Father's love . There is no such theme in the scripture that comes anywhere close to saying repent from your sin or you'll end up in hell. The message of the bible fundamentalist is geared to tickle their own ears, it is you lot that will not tolerate anything other outside your belief system(I know this to be true, I once was part of the fundamentalist system, and all I know who were part of it admit to the same thing) . In respect to the Spirit of God and the word, Jesus said His words (not the bible) are spirit and life, in other what I speak is accomplished because spirit and life never fail.

And that's mem hollering from the choir loft......

[Richard1965]

Originally Posted by RomulusXXV

[color="Navy"]a process that starts from an initial state of small significance and builds upon itself, becoming larger, graver, more serious, and also perhaps potentially dangerous or disastrous. . .

Sounds like the testimonies of many Christians I know that try to "out-bad" each other when they give their individual wittnesses of what a miraculous change from how bad they once were to how good they are now...

[jeffbase40]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

No it doesn't. Rape, even men against men has been used as a weapon of humiliation since the dawn of time. It has nothing to do with homosexual desires. And the story says the entire town called out the angels to be attacked. The entire city of Sodom, both young and old, was not all gay men. The sin of Sodom was inhospitality. The Bible flat out tells you this. Hospitality was a divine commandment to the people in those days. Breaking it was very extreme. You guys are so obsessed with the gays and using the story to justify your hatred, you completely ignore the entire point of the whole story and what it was really intended to call out.

Again you ignore my main point. If the sin is ONLY inhospitality then it makes no sense why God would only be angry with this one city and ignore other pagan cities that were doing far worse things. The passage says all the men wanted to get to know the angels in a sexual sense. You have zero proof that that this only meant rape. Also even more disturbing, the crowd rejected Lot's offer of his daughters. That certainly doesn't sound very heterosexual to me. It doesn't make sense why Lot would make the offer in the first place knowing that the crowd's intent was male rape, not sexual desire.

[scgraham]

Originally Posted by Jrhockney

Do you even know the meaning of the word "research"?...How about "unbiased?"... I have the bible along with several Greek and Hebrew concordances and I like to think I have the guidance of the Holy Spirit as well but I'm not about to pretend like I have a perfect understanding of everything in the bible just by asking the Holy Spirit! Newsflash: He doesn't make it that easy and if he did, we wouldn't have 30,000+ Christian denominations! So, O perfect Holy Spirit listener/translator...quit being a lazy know it all and get Studying! You might just find out these people are in fact evangelicals and know a heck of a lot more than you.

What, research through the lense of liberal theologians? Hardly. Satan seduced Eve through liberal theology. Hath God said thou shall not eat of every tree?

[Rbbi1]

Originally Posted by RomulusXXV

Several times I've had reason to wonder about the 'conversion' stories of some folks. I mean, some of the more 'extremist' folks seem not only to have 'seen the light' but also appear to have been blinded by it in the process . . .

Well, I'm not surprised. You can't fully appreciate something you yourself have not experienced. Nevertheless, He's no respecter of persons and if you turn to Him with your WHOLE HEART, He will do the same with you. Peace

[Rbbi1]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

No it doesn't. Rape, even men against men has been used as a weapon of humiliation since the dawn of time. It has nothing to do with homosexual desires. And the story says the entire town called out the angels to be attacked. The entire city of Sodom, both young and old, was not all gay men. The sin of Sodom was inhospitality. The Bible flat out tells you this. Hospitality was a divine commandment to the people in those days. Breaking it was very extreme. You guys are so obsessed with the gays and using the story to justify your hatred, you completely ignore the entire point of the whole story and what it was really intended to call out.

This stance just shows the sheer insanity of the beastly darkened carnal minds of men, that would equate homosexual rape as a lesser offense than offering someone their shady tent for a few hours.

It's repulsive in the extreme to begin with, and in type spiritually, it's the same as putting Christ, the righteous (means UPRIGHT) member of the body capable of producing new life, to the lowest form of degradation possible, to be covered in caca. So go ahead, keep on promoting it and fighting for it. Then look forward to explaining to Him why you agreed to His degradation on judgment day. Peace

[RomulusXXV]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

No it doesn't. Rape, even men against men has been used as a weapon of humiliation since the dawn of time. It has nothing to do with homosexual desires. And the story says the entire town called out the angels to be attacked. The entire city of Sodom, both young and old, was not all gay men. The sin of Sodom was inhospitality. The Bible flat out tells you this. Hospitality was a divine commandment to the people in those days. Breaking it was very extreme. You guys are so obsessed with the gays and using the story to justify your hatred, you completely ignore the entire point of the whole story and what it was really intended to call out.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Again you ignore my main point. If the sin is ONLY inhospitality then it makes no sense why God would only be angry with this one city and ignore other pagan cities that were doing far worse things.

Shhhhh, Jeff. Settle down. It's okay.

Between you and me, Jeff ...does anything about the story of Sodom and Gomorrah make sense? I mean, really . . .?

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

The passage says all the men wanted to get to know the angels in a sexual sense.

Yes, it apparently does imply this. However, Fiyero already gave a pretty good explanation as to why men rape other men. As he says, it's an act of intimidation and humiliation. It also serves to 'demasculinize' the male enemy, i.e. degrade them by having 'feminized' them.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

You have zero proof that that this only meant rape.

Well, they would hardly have been beating down Lot's door for an intimate candle-light dinner with the angels followed by a night of serious love-making, now would they? You clearly don't know what rape means. Besides, it never happened so we can all breath a sigh of relief.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Also even more disturbing, the crowd rejected Lot's offer of his daughters. That certainly doesn't sound very heterosexual to me.

What's even more disturbing yet is that 'the hero' (Lot) would offer his daughters in the first place! But then, the daughters were required later on in the story to rape Lot in the cave! Talk about a dysfunctional family!

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

It doesn't make sense why Lot would make the offer in the first place knowing that the crowd's intent was male rape, not sexual desire.

Jeff, Jeff, Jeff ...it's just a story. Settle down. Don't get yourself so worked up. I don't think you or your neighbors need be too worried that the gay folks in your town will come pounding on your door attempting to call you out for sex. Gay people really don't do that kind of thing, Jeff! And again ...don't go too far out of your way to try and make any sense out of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Just relax, sit back, close your eyes and put on your logic cap . . .!

[Rbbi1]

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

That is NOT compassion, that is proselytizing, and is used by fundamentalists to MEAN compassion so they can think better of themselves.

Jesus respected everybody but religious leaders. He respected Samaritans, Gentiles, women (when it was unseemly to do so), lepers, cripples and others who are rejected by the Hebrew holiness code.

But in these latter days new Pharisees arrive with a new holiness code of their own making. They try to control sex lives of individuals when God downright loved to see people having all sorts of sex--with multiple wives, with harlots, with concubines--all that stuff that makes you shiver in disgust. That's the real God of the OT. You have simply invented other stories to keep from reading the REAL story.

You've ignored Romulus who provides superb bible commentary on Sodom and Gomorrah. But that doesn't fit your prejudice that you cling to in order to feel more important than some people.

No one needs to EVER share the WORD the way you say. If all of you fundamentalists were LIVING the "WORD" it would be apparent to all. Want to see real christians? Go visit a Quaker friendship meeting, or get involved with the forgiveness provided by the Amish regardless of what dastardly deed has been committed against them by "outsiders."

I agree that Paul, a flawed man who tried to do his best, sometimes gives a wonderful testimony like I Corinthians 13. If you made up your mind to only quote that, you'd be far ahead of where you are.
You may love the Spirit of God (and like to show you are following Jewish LAW by not putting the vowels in His Name), but Jesus was disgusted by the LAW. Virtually every action He took was to turn everything Jews knew about the LAW upside down. He didn't respect the purity code that was crafted to leave the poor and marginalized out the Kingdom of Heaven.

But I give you credit---YOU respect the purity code, because you love the LAW--and love it so much that you wish to impose it on all of us--just like the Pharisees did. The atheists on this thread show more respect for the teaching of Jesus than you do. He may be your "savior," but He certainly is not your Lord.

And you apparently cannot open your mouth without lies falling out of it, because that is all you post, with a few exceptions. He was NOT disgusted by the law, He was disgusted by it being used unlawfully for personal gain. Since He fulfilled it and told us to follow Him, then it follows that we too will be lead in ways to fulfill it also, since that is part of the cross experience. Common sense.


You insist on making it personal for me, when in fact, it's not personal at all, I have absolutely no ax to grind. It's not my Word, I have no horses in this race but myself, but it is my duty to share what I have been given, for many reasons. And you are way below your pay grade to determine whether He is my Lord or not, as you have no idea what my walk has been like. Peace

[Jrhockney]

Originally Posted by scgraham

What, research through the lense of liberal theologians? Hardly. Satan seduced Eve through liberal theology. Hath God said thou shall not eat of every tree?

.....THEY'RE NOT LIBERAL THEOLOGIANS! Warden wouldn't have posted them otherwise because he knows how people like you think! Take 3 minutes of your extremely presumptuous and apparently unintellectual spiritual life and read something! Saying Robert Gagnon is a liberal theologian is like calling Bernie Sanders a Dittohead!

[scgraham]

Originally Posted by Jrhockney

.....THEY'RE NOT LIBERAL THEOLOGIANS! Warden wouldn't have posted them otherwise because he knows how you people think! Take 3 minutes of your extremely presumptuous and unintellectual life and read something! Saying Robert Gagnon is a liberal theologian is like calling Bernie Sanders a Dittohead!

I already addressed this in another post, so do your own research.