Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-13-2015, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Townsville
6,796 posts, read 2,907,672 times
Reputation: 5519

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
I don't follow. How do I know which two whats were connected?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965
I think that he's talking about the plan of G-d to destroy the city connected with the alleged rampant homosexuality...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
You nailed it. It's an issue many on both sides would like to ignore.
I'm still not following. Why would we assume "an issue", i.e. homosexuality connected with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, where no such issue is referenced in the actual biblical story of S and G?

I reaffirm my thinking on this topic based on my ability to read print from a book that NOWHERE is homosexuality given as the reason - or even PART of the reason - as to why God decided to level the twin cities. I just don't see it and no one so far in this thread has been able to offer up any evidence from scripture to change this view. Why is there this insatiable need by many Christians to add popular misconceptions to Bible passages and - indeed - to persist in this even when confronted with the contrary?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-13-2015, 08:19 PM
 
Location: Townsville
6,796 posts, read 2,907,672 times
Reputation: 5519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
Uh, nothing in Jude says anything about homosexual activity.
That's right. Even if the men of Sodom (who clearly sired sons) DID play both sides of the sexual team Jude does not mention this. One has to personally implant "homosexual activity" into that text.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2015, 08:38 PM
 
Location: Townsville
6,796 posts, read 2,907,672 times
Reputation: 5519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vf6cruiser View Post
Your study wasn't very deep on S&G.......
The 'study' that I mentioned was little more than a group of us doing an actual reading of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah directly from the Bible. We couldn't find any reference to homosexuality. And, nor can you or anyone else. How much more study is required to determine - from scripture- that homosexuality WAS NOT the reason for God having destroyed S&G? We also read Ezekiel's explanation for the destruction of S&G (Ezekiel 16:49-50) and found no mention whatever of homosexuality. We also put two and two together from Jesus' mention of S&G, i.e. inhospitality, and, likewise, found no mention of homosexuality (Matthew 10:15).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vf6cruiser View Post
...and YES there is mention of homosexual activity............

Jud 1:7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
Jud 1:8 Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones.
I truly must be a dimwit. I've read that passage of scripture many times (which appears to contradict or embellish the statements by Ezekiel and Jesus) and still cannot see where homosexuality is mentioned. Why are these texts that anti-gay Christians present as 'proof' that God condemns homosexuality always couched in ambiguities?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2015, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Townsville
6,796 posts, read 2,907,672 times
Reputation: 5519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965
You're quoting Jude, which is relatively recent...All the TNK states is that:

Genesis 13:

13And the people of Sodom were very evil and sinful against the Lord.

Where does it state anything regarding homosexuality in there?...This means that they knew who G-d was but chose to be disobedient to Him...IOW, they sinned in everything...Not just one thing...That is why G-d destroyed them...
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
Yes, everything including homosexuality for some.
Even though we can logically assume that "some" of any given population of people would be homosexual, where are we told in scripture that "some" were homosexuals and that 'homosexuality' was at least 'a part' of the 'wickedness' of S&G?

Sorry boys and girls. I'm just not seeing this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2015, 08:59 PM
 
Location: Townsville
6,796 posts, read 2,907,672 times
Reputation: 5519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
...Sodom and Gomorrah were part of a metropolis assumed to have been located on the eastern bank of the Dead Sea consisting of five cities, each with its own king. There was (1) Bera, king of Sodom, (2) Birsha, king of Gomorrah, (3) Shinab, king of Admad, (4) Shember, king of Zeboiim, and (5) the king of Bela, which is also called Zoar (Genesis 14:8). This thriving group of city-states is referred to in the Bible (Genesis 13:12) as the Cities of the Plain. The five kings were under the dominion of a coalition of eastern Mesopotamian overlords. According to the Torah, with the help of the patriarch Abraham, the cities gained their independence, though their independence was only short-lived. A few years later, God destroyed the cities in a hail of fire and brimstone....

...Between 1973 and 1979, four more "cities" to the south of Bab edh-Dhra were found. Their Arabic names are Numeira, Safi, Feifa, and Khanazir. The surrounding area has been thoroughly explored and no other cities have been found, only these five. The five cities, a few miles apart from each other, are almost in a straight line going from north to south....

...
But recent evidence found by Manfred Bietak in Tel el-Daba indicates that Middle Bronze Age Canaanite artifacts lagged about 100 years behind their Egyptian counterparts. When it comes to Sodom and Gomorrah, the lag could be much more substantial because, according to the Talmud (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 109a), intentional isolationism prevailed in the Cities of the Plain.
The (inhabitants of the cities of the Plain) said: "Since there cometh forth bread out of land and it hath the dust of gold, why should we suffer wayfarers, who come to us only to deplete our wealth? Come, let us abolish the practice of traveling into our land."
If, as the Talmud records, traveling into the area of Sodom and Gomorrah was sharply curtailed -- forbidden, or at least discouraged -- the introduction of outside styles of pottery and metal working would seriously fall behind the style and techniques of the more advanced Egyptians. How far the Cities of the Plain would have straggled is unknown. We must be patient and await further evidence to emerge....

- Biblical Archeology: Sodom and Gomorrah
The above is most interesting. It certainly appears to tie in with Jesus remark in Matthew 10:15 pertaining to S&G's lack of hospitality and also the discouraging of visitors to the cities by the threat of violence toward them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2015, 10:10 PM
 
Location: US
32,530 posts, read 22,033,127 times
Reputation: 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV View Post
The above is most interesting. It certainly appears to tie in with Jesus remark in Matthew 10:15 pertaining to S&G's lack of hospitality and also the discouraging of visitors to the cities by the threat of violence toward them.
Yup...And it is obvious from the first mention of them in Genesis 13:13 that they knew who G-d was but chose to rebel against Him...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2015, 10:13 PM
 
Location: US
32,530 posts, read 22,033,127 times
Reputation: 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV View Post
Even though we can logically assume that "some" of any given population of people would be homosexual, where are we told in scripture that "some" were homosexuals and that 'homosexuality' was at least 'a part' of the 'wickedness' of S&G?

Sorry boys and girls. I'm just not seeing this.
Not seeing what?...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2015, 10:20 PM
 
Location: US
32,530 posts, read 22,033,127 times
Reputation: 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV View Post
I'm still not following. Why would we assume "an issue", i.e. homosexuality connected with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, where no such issue is referenced in the actual biblical story of S and G?


This is what your closet homosexual preachers and lay people state emphatically the reason that G-d destroyed S&G...When scripture clearly states that they were "evil and sinful AGAINST G-d" and that is all it says, the attempted rape of the angels was just an isolated incident that in itself was not the reason G-d decided to destroy the 5 cities of the plain...Which was mentioned way back when Lot first settled there...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2015, 01:36 AM
 
Location: Townsville
6,796 posts, read 2,907,672 times
Reputation: 5519
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
Even though we can logically assume that "some" of any given population of people would be homosexual, where are we told in scripture that "some" were homosexuals and that 'homosexuality' was at least 'a part' of the 'wickedness' of S&G?

Sorry boys and girls. I'm just not seeing this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
Not seeing what?...
Well, as I've been saying all along, I'm not seeing any reference to homosexuality in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah whereas others DO somehow appear to be seeing homosexuality referenced in the story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2015, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
17,071 posts, read 10,920,829 times
Reputation: 1874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
Not seeing what?...
What you are too blind to see, the point is that there is NO reference to the act itself as "sin."

Put it this way: what you are essentially saying is the same as saying that heterosexual acts are "sin" because rape is wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top