Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are aware that 1 Corinthians 6:9 didn't add homosexual until 1958 right?
That is why I also included a link to the 25 major interpretations of the verse. This same point is made ad nauseum creating a circlular debate that never ends.
As I said before, I am not trying to tell anyone how to live. I AM tired of having it shoved in my face daily. The common modus operandi of todays homosexual is to hear someone say "please stop shoving it in my face", they'll proceed to shove even harder. If people can't be convinced to accept it willingly then it'll be repeated over and over until they acquiesce. We are witnessing a form of mass colusion called progressivism.
As for Hilgis' remarks about Sassy bearing false witness. You better watch how you hand that accusation out. It doesn't apply to forum posting and opinions, but to falsely accusing someone of a crime under the law. Your application of such an accusation is, if not entirely wrong, completely out of place.
This is turning into a biblical scrambled egg. I'm done with it.
You are aware that 1 Corinthians 6:9 didn't add homosexual until 1958 right? And that from the start of the Reformation until 1958, it was universally believed to condemn masturbation?
Around 35 A.D., the Jewish philosopher Philo (a contemporary of Paul’s) held that arsenokoites referred to shrine prostitution (Philo, The Special Laws, III, VII, 40-42).
Early versions of the Bible in English translated malakos as a general weakness of character or degeneracy (weaklings, wantons); however, with the translation that was named for King James, the dominant translation shifted to effeminate, where it stayed until the mid-20th century. Thereafter, purely out of sexual ideology, the translation has shifted to particular sexual acts/orientation. There is no more evidence to support this shift than there was the earlier one to effeminate.
Good info.
It is sad how man has taken such a wonderful message of love and grace and dragged us back into the law of death. It is so obvious how man wanted to be able to control others and keep them from the fullness of life in Jesus so they created rules that have nothing to do with love.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SassySpice
Just what's with you & this government marriage thing huh? I know I know, you want it to be legal (that by definition alone implies "law) that 2 males/females can marry. Well thank God in most states it's illegal & I pray it always stays that way. I don't want children growing up thinking it's acceptable or normal to live in such a ungodly way.
Not sure what you are talking about, my wife and I are happily married (8 years this week!) Actually I wish I did not need permission from the state in order to marry, for me it was a union between me my wife and God, the state should have nothing to do with it. The history of marriage licenses in the US is something I don't want to be a part of. The whole idea of a license was created in order to keep blacks from marrying whites, I could not imagine promoting something so vile, yet the "Sanctity of marriage" crowd does it everyday.
God forbid your children grow up knowing that salvation is of Christ and not a bunch of laws forced on them by the majority, ya you don't want that. I love knowing my kids know it is all about Jesus and not works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SassySpice
[/b][/color]
Well when your butt goes to hell I'll bet you'll pay some credence then that's for damn (pun intended) sure.
Being that you are preaching the law unto salvation and not the grace of Jesus, you may want to be a little worried also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SassySpice
Just what do you call yourself, the spinmaster? You can do all the wormning & squirming, twisting & turning you want, either you believe the bible or you don't. You can't twist God's word to condone your hellish lifestyle no matter how hard you try. Christ said either you're with Him or against Him, there's no middle ground. So what side of the fence are you on?
Spinning? no, it is called learning the word of God, not man. What hellish lifestyle are you talking about? You mean Commandment 9? I am not the one doing that????
I am on the side of Jesus, he is the one who saves, not my works or choices.
No, God refers to men forcing other men to have sex in a woman's bed to be a to'evah, not an abomination.
Ancient Israel was a patriarchal society. For a man to be made submissive like women were (as they were inferior pieces of property and nothing more) was an insult to the man, and deemed taboo and ritually impure.
Abomination is a mistranslation. Take your own advice and read the Bible.
how come when a thoroughly disprove your so called facts (lies) you never respond but you only do when I comment on your ignorance and use a sarcastic tone in which case you only respond to the sarcasm and not the point that was made?
for what feels like the millionth time (post 103 is the most thorough)
1. to'evah mean abomination learn hebrew then talk (I quoted you from a dictionary with a very good reputation and gave you a verse where your translation makes no sense so stop the propaganda now. 2. there is no word "in a woman's bed" mentioned in the verse. 3. show me 1 bit of evidence that the word shacab (lie down) means that it's forced just because it means it once doesn't mean it means it everywhere, many times it doesn't mean anything sexual, and of the times it does mean it many of those clearly have no forced meaning. The fact a Christan only reading the Kings James Bibe despite all it's mistakes translations knows the bible 10000000000000 times better then you do someone who claims to be jewish and know the text in it's original to truly be a embarrassment to the "people of the book" (Jews).
to put it simply according to the bible if two men both agree engage in a certain sexual act in their own bed the bible calls this a abomination and they get the death penalty for it (under the right judicial circumstances) and rightfully so.
for all those who don't know anything about Reform-Judaism (which is what Fiyero claims to be)
most reform "rabbis" have a weaker understanding of the bible both in content and literal meaning (considering most can't really read hebrew) than the average kid in 4th grader in a Orthodox school.
Can't be the God of the Bible....you know, the one that hates all sexual sin (fornication, homosexuality, beastiality, child molestation, incest etc...)
OK, Saucy, it's clear you don't actually support equality for homosexual persons (apart from your issue with marriage). And you've still not responded to my question regarding civil unions and non-religious civil marriages. My question wasn't rhetorical. In point of fact I bet you believe sexual relations between same-gender persons should be illegal. By the way, we live in a secular republic; this is not a theocracy, irrespective of how much you may wish it were otherwise.
I already stated I believe in equal rights for gay's but not marriage. Civil unions are not marriage so do as you damn well please. Sexual relations between same sex makes no sense to make it illegal since who will witness it, so why bother. IMHO you cannot take a unholy union before God, that's sacrilegious & a damnable offense by God. Did I answer your question this time?
Before I leave this thread I'd like to ask one thing of the pro-homosexual biblical scholars in here.
Show me where Jesus referred to marriage as being other than between a man and woman. Show me anywhere in the bible that points out a relation between a man and a man as being acceptable. Some things just shoudln't need such clarification. So you go ahead and say there's nothing against homosexuality, I say there's nothing supporting it.
Before I leave this thread I'd like to ask one thing of the pro-homosexual biblical scholars in here.
Show me where Jesus referred to marriage as being other than between a man and woman. Show me anywhere in the bible that points out a relation between a man and a man as being acceptable. Some things just shoudln't need such clarification. So you go ahead and say there's nothing against homosexuality, I say there's nothing supporting it.
Show me where Jesus called on Caesar for anything?
Take this discussion to the religion forum, this thread is closed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
