# Homosexuality is not a sin



## Simon Peter (Aug 31, 2007)

People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA.  I know, I know, the Bible says it is a sin, but culturally at that time, people did not understand what we know now, and the Bible was divinely inspired, but written by fallible humans.  

We will look back one day on this sad chapter in society, and realize we are doing to gays and lesbian what we did to blacks before God woke everybody up through the actions of Dr. King.  As one of the message boards' black members, believe me, i know.


----------



## PWalls (Aug 31, 2007)

Simon Peter said:


> People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA.  I know, I know, the Bible says it is a sin, but culturally at that time, people did not understand what we know now, and the Bible was divinely inspired, but written by fallible humans.
> 
> We will look back one day on this sad chapter in society, and realize we are doing to gays and lesbian what we did to blacks before God woke everybody up through the actions of Dr. King.  As one of the message boards' black members, believe me, i know.



Move this to the spiritual discussion forum where we can properly refute and dismiss this erroneous opinion please.


----------



## fulldraw74 (Aug 31, 2007)

Simon Peter said:


> People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA.  I know, I know, the Bible says it is a sin, but culturally at that time, people did not understand what we know now, and the Bible was divinely inspired, but written by fallible humans.
> 
> We will look back one day on this sad chapter in society, and realize we are doing to gays and lesbian what we did to blacks before God woke everybody up through the actions of Dr. King.  As one of the message boards' black members, believe me, i know.




So the bible knew not what it was saying..........

It is a sin.........


----------



## SnowHunter (Aug 31, 2007)

op2:op2:op2:op2:


----------



## DYI hunting (Aug 31, 2007)

I think you might be in the wrong forum. 

I assume from your other posts, your here to give Linwood a run for his money?


----------



## Jim Thompson (Aug 31, 2007)

I moved it to the correct forum. yall have fun but keep it a debate and not a bashing fest.


----------



## Buck (Aug 31, 2007)

As if this subject hasn't already been beat to death on here...


----------



## biggtruxx (Aug 31, 2007)

sure the bible was written mostly by man... but the red words are by the man himself......

definately a sin


----------



## 60Grit (Aug 31, 2007)

Simon Peter said:


> People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA. I know, I know, the Bible says it is a sin, but culturally at that time, people did not understand what we know now, and the Bible was divinely inspired, but written by fallible humans.
> 
> We will look back one day on this sad chapter in society, and realize we are doing to gays and lesbian what we did to blacks before God woke everybody up through the actions of Dr. King. As one of the message boards' black members, believe me, i know.


 

The same case can be made of some serial killers........

Your point??


----------



## DYI hunting (Aug 31, 2007)

There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is genetic.  SP, care to post any evidence to support your claim?  

If your rejecting the bible's stance on homosexuality, then your opening the door to reject any part of the bible that you feel doesn't fit your lifestyle or interfers with your enjoyment.  I don't think that is the way it works.


----------



## Jody Hawk (Aug 31, 2007)

I can't believe this thread is still on here. Come on, the man has made five total posts and all are on controversial subjects. He's trolling mods.


----------



## Lead Poison (Aug 31, 2007)

*I see Satan is working over time...the Bible isn't wrong.*

Sorry, it was sin when the Bible was written, it is sin today, and it will always be sin.  

It's an abomination to God and the saved members here on the forum know this to be true.

*Simon Peter?????????*


----------



## 60Grit (Aug 31, 2007)

Jody Hawk said:


> I can't believe this thread is still on here. Come on, the man has made five total posts and all are on controversial subjects. He's trolling mods.


 
Hang tight Jody.

Troll season opens soon....


----------



## biggtruxx (Aug 31, 2007)

whats the bag limit????  

im new to here also whats considered trolling???


----------



## Lead Poison (Aug 31, 2007)

Trolling is when a new member signs on with the intent and purpose to agrue and cause trouble. 

Being a Troll is being a troublemaker.

Is it by accident someone uses the name "Simon Peter" and then post their support of the sin of homosexuality? You be the judge.


----------



## biggtruxx (Aug 31, 2007)

thanks for the fyi 

where do i get a license???


----------



## CAL (Aug 31, 2007)

Simon Peter said:


> People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA.  I know, I know, the Bible says it is a sin, but culturally at that time, people did not understand what we know now, and the Bible was divinely inspired, but written by fallible humans.
> 
> 
> If you believe this,you probably believe that cows jump over the moon too.


----------



## DaGris (Aug 31, 2007)

..............not this again...................Its a sin according to the "bible" .............but so is alot of thing we all do.....How many of you out there say homosexuality is a sin but had sex before you were married ...............Like I have said before on here, its not a choice. Talk to some gay folks, see how they really feel, you'll find out its not a choice. If they could change and not have to put up with society looking down on them, they would............................


----------



## Spotlite (Aug 31, 2007)

Simon Peter said:


> People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA.  I know, I know, the Bible says it is a sin, but culturally at that time, people did not understand what we know now, and the Bible was divinely inspired, but written by fallible humans.
> 
> We will look back one day on this sad chapter in society, and realize we are doing to gays and lesbian what we did to blacks before God woke everybody up through the actions of Dr. King.  As one of the message boards' black members, believe me, i know.




oh yeah


----------



## leroy (Aug 31, 2007)

Jody Hawk said:


> I can't believe this thread is still on here. Come on, the man has made five total posts and all are on controversial subjects. He's trolling mods.



And we help them out by arguing with them for 150-200 posts and I have been guilty of it myself. Trying to do better though.


----------



## Jim Thompson (Aug 31, 2007)

if yall would quit responding and getting all tied in knots the trolls would find new playgrounds


----------



## Spotlite (Aug 31, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> if yall would quit responding and getting all tied in knots the trolls would find new playgrounds



Somehow I knew it was our faultbad us


----------



## dixie (Aug 31, 2007)

one of the silliest things I've ever read anywhere, talk all you want about DNA and man's knowledge, God gave man a mind to chose and man does, he can obey Gods laws or he can chose to go his own path to death and destruction. its really very simple


----------



## Jim Thompson (Aug 31, 2007)

Spotlite said:


> Somehow I knew it was our faultbad us



thought you knew that by now


----------



## Spotlite (Aug 31, 2007)

Jody Hawk said:


> I can't believe this thread is still on here. Come on, the man has made five total posts and all are on controversial subjects. He's trolling mods.



Leave it on, that way the rest of us dont look to stupid.


----------



## Robk (Aug 31, 2007)

Funny, I've always been able to decide whom I get naked with.  Seems to be a choice to me.  




R


----------



## Spotlite (Aug 31, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> thought you knew that by now



Please stay on topic with this thread


----------



## pnome (Aug 31, 2007)

Simon Peter said:


> People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA.
> 
> 
> > Let me start by saying, I don't really care if it's considered a sin or not.
> ...


----------



## Spotlite (Aug 31, 2007)

Robk said:


> Funny, I've always been able to decide whom I get naked with.  Seems to be a choice to me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Even with too many drinks


----------



## Robk (Aug 31, 2007)

Spotlite said:


> Even with too many drinks



Yep, I never have more than two drinks at a time outside of my own home.


----------



## Darcy (Aug 31, 2007)

pretty neat we now have a "prophet" among us


----------



## StriperAddict (Aug 31, 2007)

*A troll by any other name...*


Good grief Charlie Brown,

another one along to take out a pair of scissors and hack up God's word !!  Go and do so, "Simon Peter", at your own peril...


----------



## Spotlite (Aug 31, 2007)

Darcy said:


> pretty neat we now have a "prophet" among us



Reckon we could get the lottery numbers from him


----------



## Lead Poison (Aug 31, 2007)

Robk said:


> Funny, I've always been able to decide whom I get naked with.  Seems to be a choice to me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're absolutely right...it's a choice.


----------



## Randy (Aug 31, 2007)

At least we know where his handle comes from?


----------



## fulldraw74 (Aug 31, 2007)

Lead Poison said:


> You're absolutely right...it's a choice.



The devil made him do it........


----------



## PWalls (Aug 31, 2007)

It's only fair that if the political forum has a "Linwood", then I guess the Spiritual forum needs a "Simon Peter".


----------



## knifemaker (Aug 31, 2007)

I thought the second coming was going to be something earth shattering. He's arrived and only he is aware. Go figure.


----------



## HuntinTom (Aug 31, 2007)

Ya'll were so mean to that poor pitiful little troll


----------



## 60Grit (Aug 31, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> if yall would quit responding and getting all tied in knots the trolls would find new playgrounds


 
It's more fun to hunt them over baited fields.....


SO, when does the season open...


----------



## HuntinTom (Aug 31, 2007)

60Grit said:


> It's more fun to hunt them over baited fields.....
> 
> 
> SO, when does the season open...



Looks like Jim already opened it on this one...


----------



## dutchman (Aug 31, 2007)

biggtruxx said:


> whats the bag limit????
> 
> im new to here also whats considered trolling???



It's all you can get!


----------



## Thunderbeard (Aug 31, 2007)

Randy said:


> At least we know where his handle comes from?



 Your funny Randy.


----------



## hunter_58 (Aug 31, 2007)

60Grit said:


> It's more fun to hunt them over baited fields.....
> 
> 
> SO, when does the season open...



Should i use #4 or #8 shot, I've never been troll hunting?
Something tells me, this guy has gone camping/fishing, with some friends, for the weekend


----------



## Dub (Aug 31, 2007)

60Grit said:


> The same case can be made of some serial killers........
> 
> Your point??



Yup.


----------



## crackerdave (Sep 1, 2007)

What a waste of time !


----------



## polaris30144 (Sep 1, 2007)

Maybe he has spent time in prison playin drop the soap with BUBBA in the shower.


----------



## RackNBeardOutdoors (Sep 1, 2007)

I'm assuming the "Banned" under his name means he is no longer here? Thank you moderators


----------



## K80 (Sep 1, 2007)

Robk said:


> Yep, I never have more than two drinks at a time outside of my own home.



Is that because you only have two hands?


----------



## Robk (Sep 1, 2007)

LOL, nope...  seen too many folks overindulge on liquid stupidity and decided I didn't want to join the club... 


R


----------



## Georgia Clay (Sep 1, 2007)

Simon Peter, has a sinister motive. He may be looking for quotes to portay this site in a bad light. Sounds like an ARA trick to me.

In case he is on the up I'll bite and tell you that homosexuality is 100% environmental and 0% DNA inherited.

It can come from many sources including abuse, neglect, mental defect, drug use or other environmental sources. 
Much of it comes from envy base and is a curable mental illness.


----------



## Buck Only (Sep 2, 2007)

Some of you that are so quick to judge, do you know any homosexuals?  Perhaps your brother, sister, uncle, aunt, etc is a homosexual. 

I would be willing to bet if your loved one was a homosexual you just might see things in a different light and not be so quick to judge.


----------



## 60Grit (Sep 2, 2007)

Get a clue folks, Simon Peter was a troll.

He has now fallen victim to the Troll Patrol and is no longer with us, thus the banned, or more properly phrase, banded, under his name.


----------



## fulldraw74 (Sep 2, 2007)

Buck Only said:


> Some of you that are so quick to judge, do you know any homosexuals?  Perhaps your brother, sister, uncle, aunt, etc is a homosexual.
> 
> I would be willing to bet if your loved one was a homosexual you just might see things in a different light and not be so quick to judge.



I dont think so........


----------



## Buck Only (Sep 2, 2007)

fulldraw74 said:


> I dont think so........



Do you have a child or relative who is a homosexual?


----------



## 7Mag Hunter (Sep 2, 2007)

Sooo, what your saying is that cows DON'T jump over
the moon ?????


----------



## jneil (Sep 2, 2007)

My cousin is homosexual. His parents could tell he was "different" when he was 4 or 5. He was kind of messed up has a teenager, but today he is a well ajusted homosexual man. He's always pleasent to be around and is there if any one in the family is in need.


----------



## fulldraw74 (Sep 2, 2007)

Buck Only said:


> Do you have a child or relative who is a homosexual?



Nope....I assume you do though.  I  have not noticed a verse in the bible where it tells me there is an "exception" if its a family member though........


----------



## DS7418 (Sep 2, 2007)

I think the Lord is ok with Lesbo's,, and he don't like idiotidiotidiotidiot's... LOL... my wife told me I was 1/2 lesbian on our honeymoon, and all is well !!!


----------



## Georgia Clay (Sep 3, 2007)

Buck Only, Homosexuality is a mental defect or a sin either way it doesn't mean the person is to be hated. They are to be counseled and helped. If you give your stamp of approval to any kind of deviant behavior all you're doing is enabling that person to live a damaged existence devoid of societal acceptance or God's blessings..


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 3, 2007)

Georgia Clay said:


> Buck Only, Homosexuality is a mental defect or a sin either way it doesn't mean the person is to be hated. They are to be counseled and helped. If you give your stamp of approval to any kind of deviant behavior all you're doing is enabling that person to live a damaged existence devoid of societal acceptance or God's blessings..



I agree.


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 3, 2007)

Buck Only said:


> Some of you that are so quick to judge, do you know any homosexuals?  Perhaps your brother, sister, uncle, aunt, etc is a homosexual.
> 
> I would be willing to bet if your loved one was a homosexual you just might see things in a different light and not be so quick to judge.



You'd bet wrong Buck! 

A parent, though they love their child, should NEVER condone sin (homosexuality). ESPECIALLY if it's their child who is sinning. 

Calling sin what it truly is (sin) is NOT judging! In case you didn't know, God is the judge and he calls homosexuality an abomination! It is a sin of commission (someone chooses to commit). And it is a choice. A very bad choice.


----------



## Jim Thompson (Sep 3, 2007)

60Grit said:


> Get a clue folks, Simon Peter was a troll.
> 
> He has now fallen victim to the Troll Patrol and is no longer with us, thus the banned, or more properly phrase, banded, under his name.



yeah but now folks have something to argue about


----------



## crackerdave (Sep 3, 2007)

DO not !


----------



## hunter_58 (Sep 3, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> yeah but now folks have something to argue about



yep, and it's entertaining.
If a person ain't careful, they might learn something on this forum


----------



## MR. SCOOTINN (Sep 3, 2007)

i know 2 boys ..my wifes sisters son & a friend of wifes son..that are both gay...i could tell when they were about 9-12 years old they had a fement side...& at about 18 they both admitted they were gay...but i seen it long before that...

what i find interesting is everyone says it is a sin because the bible says so,,,,the bible also says killing is a sin,,,but yet if someone broke in my house i would protect my home & family...or at a time of war as we are now,,,if you belive the bible & killing is a sin how can any christian serve in the military...would they not be commiting a sin ? also..


----------



## leroy (Sep 3, 2007)

68 and still going


----------



## DEER SLAYER 69 (Sep 3, 2007)

to mr scootin a few replys above me - the bible talks about times of war it dosent talk about times of homosexuality -


----------



## MR. SCOOTINN (Sep 4, 2007)

DEER SLAYER 69 said:


> to mr scootin a few replys above me - the bible talks about times of war it dosent talk about times of homosexuality -



For one i am not for homosexuality....the bible talks about alot of things...more than one wife,,concubines,,slavery,,,& so on...my point is if the bible says it is a sin to kill ,,,as it does for homosexuality....does it make a digffrence wether it is at a time of war...it would still be a sin correct?...


----------



## 60Grit (Sep 4, 2007)

I believe the Bible says it is a sin to Murder.

Big difference.


----------



## MR. SCOOTINN (Sep 4, 2007)

60Grit said:


> I believe the Bible says it is a sin to Murder.
> 
> Big difference.



The Holy Bible: King James Version. 2000. 

The Second Book of Moses, Called 
Exodus 
20 

The Ten Commandments 
Deut. 5.1-21  
1  And God spake all these words, saying,

2  ¶ I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

3  ¶ Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

4  ¶ Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

5  thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: Ex. 34.17 · Lev. 19.4 ; 26.1 · Deut. 4.15-18 ; 27.15 for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

6  and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. Ex. 34.6, 7 · Num. 14.18 · Deut. 7.9, 10 

7  ¶ Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: Lev. 19.12 for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

8  ¶ Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Ex. 16.23-30 ; 31.12-14 

9  Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work:

10  but the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, Ex. 23.12 ; 31.15 ; 34.21 ; 35.2 · Lev. 23.3 thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

11  for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Gen. 2.1-3 · Ex. 31.17 

12  ¶ Honor thy father and thy mother: Deut. 27.16 · Mt. 15.4 ; 19.19 · Mk. 7.10 ; 10.19 · Lk. 18.20 · Eph. 6.2 that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. Eph. 6.3 

13  ¶ Thou shalt not kill. Gen. 9.6 · Lev. 24.17 · Mt. 5.21 ; 19.18 · Mk. 10.19 · Lk. 18.20 · Rom. 13.9 · Jas. 2.11 

14  ¶ Thou shalt not commit adultery. Lev. 20.10 · Mt. 5.27 ; 19.18 · Mk. 10.19 · Lk. 18.20 · Rom. 13.9 · Jas. 2.11 

15  ¶ Thou shalt not steal. Lev. 19.11 · Mt. 19.18 · Mk. 10.19 · Lk. 18.20 · Rom. 13.9 

16  ¶ Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Ex. 23.1 · Mt. 19.18 · Mk. 10.19 · Lk. 18.20 

17  ¶ Thou shalt not covet Rom. 7.7 ; 13.9 thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his idiotidiotidiot, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

LOOK AT # 13......


----------



## 60Grit (Sep 4, 2007)

Do you honestly believe, given the entire context of the bible, that this commandment does not believe Murder???


----------



## MR. SCOOTINN (Sep 4, 2007)

60Grit said:


> Do you honestly believe, given the entire context of the bible, that this commandment does not believe Murder???



i really do not know 100% do you....all i am saying is it seems people quote the bible on some things & take it of contense on others to suit thier wishes...i am new to bible study & am trying to learn more every day....what i can tell you is it says tho shall not kill....now we as humans can take it for what it says...or we can alter it to fit our wishes...

can you tell 100% it is meant for murder only?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 4, 2007)

Buck Only said:


> Some of you that are so quick to judge, do you know any homosexuals?  Perhaps your brother, sister, uncle, aunt, etc is a homosexual.
> 
> I would be willing to bet if your loved one was a homosexual you just might see things in a different light and not be so quick to judge.



And my granddaddy was a drunk, still was my granddaddy. but still drunk. I never overlooked him for that.............

You cant change how they are related to you, but you dont have to accept their habits either.


----------



## PWalls (Sep 4, 2007)

Spotlite said:


> You cant change how they are related to you, but you dont have to accept their habits either.



Exactly. Nor do you have to "rationalize" it away either. It is what it is and that is a sin of choice.


----------



## 60Grit (Sep 4, 2007)

MR. SCOOTINN said:


> i really do not know 100% do you....all i am saying is it seems people quote the bible on some things & take it of contense on others to suit thier wishes...i am new to bible study & am trying to learn more every day....what i can tell you is it says tho shall not kill....now we as humans can take it for what it says...or we can alter it to fit our wishes...
> 
> can you tell 100% it is meant for murder only?


 
I am not willing to through out the baby with the bath water over mere interpretive differences.

Homosexuality is a sin, period.

Here's a clue, they are called "Reproductive Organs" for a reason, even science agrees with that one. They serve no other function as designed by God.


----------



## DEER SLAYER 69 (Sep 4, 2007)

Eccl. 3:3 (A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up) 

there is no time to be gay in the bible


----------



## MR. SCOOTINN (Sep 4, 2007)

60Grit said:


> I am not willing to through out the baby with the bath water over mere interpretive differences.
> 
> Homosexuality is a sin, period.
> 
> Here's a clue, they are called "Reproductive Organs" for a reason, even science agrees with that one. They serve no other function as designed by God.



Once again i an not for homosexuality...all i was saying or trying to point out,,,is thier are alot of things that are sins which alot of us do...so maybe we need to look at ourselves a little,,so we can grow...
 & as for interpritation...i do not know how you could interpert tho shall not kill...any other way...

even tho..if someone broke in my house...i would protect it & my family...but as i do that i may be committing a sin also...& knowing it is against god commandments...( what will he have in store for me knowing it is against his will) & me still doing it..


----------



## FX Jenkins (Sep 4, 2007)

Mr. Scootinn

I personally think this is a situation where we can go back and look at the original Greek or Hebrew. In this case the word Ratsach, as found in Exodus 20:13, is better translated as Murder, which of course is the unlawful taking of human life ...  There are many instances where taking of life is lawful, justified and even commanded by God..

But I do agree with you that we should spend more time examining the beam in our own eye...

As to the original topic of this thread, if I felt a member was legitimately seeking direction..I might formulate a response, ...he got was he was looking for...


----------



## MR. SCOOTINN (Sep 4, 2007)

FX Jenkins said:


> Mr. Scootinn
> 
> I personally think this is a situation where we can go back and look at the original Greek or Hebrew. In this case the word Ratsach, as found in Exodus 20:13, is better translated as Murder, which of course is the unlawful taking of human life ...  There are many instances where taking of life is lawful, justified and even commanded by God..
> 
> ...



fx..it would seem you have better knowledge of the bible than me...i have a question you ...you state  (I personally think this is a situation where we can go back and look at the original Greek or Hebrew. In this case the word Ratsach, as found in Exodus 20:13, is better translated as Murder)....if you have to go back  & look at the greek or hebrew..to find what a word or  means in the bible..would it not be better to read & learn from one the has been translated to english....so people get the correct meaning......& why in the bible was it printed in the ten commandmants...tho shall not kill instead of tho shall not Ratsach...or in the grrek or hebrew,,,does it state tho shall not ratsach,,,in the ten commandmants....thanks for the help,,,


----------



## Buck Only (Sep 4, 2007)

Lead Poison said:


> You'd bet wrong Buck!
> 
> A parent, though they love their child, should NEVER condone sin (homosexuality). ESPECIALLY if it's their child who is sinning.
> 
> Calling sin what it truly is (sin) is NOT judging! In case you didn't know, God is the judge and he calls homosexuality an abomination! It is a sin of commission (someone chooses to commit). And it is a choice. A very bad choice.



I would be wrong, wrong about what?  I never once said it was NOT a sin!  I simply stated folks would think differently about it, nothing more nothing less.  Don't break your neck jumping to conclusions.

Oh, I think it is a SIN, but I am not here to judge them, just as I would not judge anybody else.

Why don't folks post other threads about obesity being a sin??  Is homosexuality a greater sin?  Not in the eyes of my Lord.


----------



## DEER SLAYER 69 (Sep 4, 2007)

mr scootin i understand you dont agree with it im  just stating my points on it but fx jenkins better explains what i was trying to get across


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 4, 2007)

Buck Only said:


> I would be wrong, wrong about what?  I never once said it was NOT a sin!  I simply stated folks would think differently about it, nothing more nothing less.  Don't break your neck jumping to conclusions.
> 
> *Oh, I think it is a SIN, but I am not here to judge them, just as I would not judge anybody else.*
> 
> Why don't folks post other threads about obesity being a sin??  Is homosexuality a greater sin?  Not in the eyes of my Lord.



In one of your post's you commented that you would bet a lot of people would change their view's if their family member was a homosexual. So, my comment stands. I would NOT accept a sinful lifestyle even if it was a family member involved. 

And _the Lord_ will tell you calling homosexuality what it truly is (sin) is _NOT_ judging. You are the one who is so quick to come to the defense of homosexuals. 

Who's breaking their "neck jumping to conclusions"???


----------



## FX Jenkins (Sep 5, 2007)

MR. SCOOTINN said:


> fx..it would seem you have better knowledge of the bible than me...i have a question you ...you state  (I personally think this is a situation where we can go back and look at the original Greek or Hebrew. In this case the word Ratsach, as found in Exodus 20:13, is better translated as Murder)....if you have to go back  & look at the greek or hebrew..to find what a word or  means in the bible..would it not be better to read & learn from one the has been translated to english....so people get the correct meaning......& why in the bible was it printed in the ten commandmants...tho shall not kill instead of tho shall not Ratsach...or in the grrek or hebrew,,,does it state tho shall not ratsach,,,in the ten commandmants....thanks for the help,,,



Mr Scootinn,
  Thanks for the kind words but I'll be the first to state, I'm no bible authority..
  You ask a very valid question about translations, and this has been debated in the past on this forum.  My belief is this.  The entire bible is the divinely inspired word of God, and this inspiration, and the power of Gods word, transcends language and translation.  In other words, as we read the Bible, in any language, God will make known to us His truths (John 8:31-32, John 14:26, Prov 1:23) through the Holy Spirit, and in Gods time.  We don't, however, read the bible and immediatly understand everything cover to cover.  And John 8:32 talks about continueing in the Scriptures, that is a learning process called discipleship, which also builds our faith, and when we consider a scripture in context and in accordance with all of the other teachings, parables, and commands in Gods word, truths become apparent to us as God wills it an in accordance with His plan for our life.  With that said, I believe God gave us the Bible, incl. the 10 Commandments, in the Hebrew and Greek languages for a reason, that is, these languages allow for a more defined and specific conveyance.  For example.  There are three different kinds of Love found in the original transcripts, with English translations, approx 22  now, just using the one word "Love" in each of these instances...but if you'd like to know the specific nature of "Love" in a given scripture, you can go back and see if it was Agape, Eros, or Philia...

To your Question, Moses recorded this command on stone as 
*לאתרצח*
with 
*רצח*
Meaning Ratsach or in specific English, murder, or slay. This word does not connote the acts of a soldier in wartime, or a hunter in the woods, or a law enforcement officer in the line of duty, or acts of legal self defense. It means specifically the deliberate, premeditated murder of an innocent person without legal or moral justification. Some more literal English translations, such as the ESV English Standard Version, actually say murder instead of kill.  Kill, is of course a general translation of the act of murder, and thus it is a correct translation, generally speaking, but without taking the rest of Gods word into account, and all of the instances where God has actually instructed and condoned otherwise, just look at King David's life in 1st and 2nd Samuel, the translation of "though shalt not kill" could be applied out of context to describe all forms of killing.  This is a technique used by many to actually discredit the bible and suggest that it is inherent  because it contradicts itself..Not so, when literal interpretations are considered in context.   

I believe God gives us the ability and knowledge to reference the original scriptures when matters of interpretation arise such as this..And of course he also calls Pastors and Elders to minister Gods word to us..and then lastly, were all called according to the great commission, to testify one to another what God has shown us in His love and mercy....and your of course free to accept or reject this application of the sixth commandment ..I'm not trying to force it on you or anyone else..but just share what I have learned up to this point.. 
Blissings,
FX


----------



## LLove (Sep 5, 2007)

the amounts of drama, arrogance and judgement some people need in their lives amazes me.. 

if you don't believe its a sin, great
if you do believe its a sin and that they're going "down to the warm place" for it, then leave them alone to enjoy whatever rest of a life they have.
Its no ones business, and the opinions just dont change anything.


----------



## PWalls (Sep 5, 2007)

LLove said:


> the amounts of drama, arrogance and judgement some people need in their lives amazes me..
> 
> if you don't believe its a sin, great
> if you do believe its a sin and that they're going "down to the warm place" for it, then leave them alone to enjoy whatever rest of a life they have.
> Its no ones business, and the opinions just dont change anything.



tolerance is not always a good thing. very liberal of you.


----------



## MR. SCOOTINN (Sep 5, 2007)

FX Jenkins said:


> Mr Scootinn,
> Thanks for the kind words but I'll be the first to state, I'm no bible authority..
> You ask a very valid question about translations, and this has been debated in the past on this forum.  My belief is this.  The entire bible is the divinely inspired word of God, and this inspiration, and the power of Gods word, transcends language and translation.  In other words, as we read the Bible, in any language, God will make known to us His truths (John 8:31-32, John 14:26, Prov 1:23) through the Holy Spirit, and in Gods time.  We don't, however, read the bible and immediatly understand everything cover to cover.  And John 8:32 talks about continueing in the Scriptures, that is a learning process called discipleship, which also builds our faith, and when we consider a scripture in context and in accordance with all of the other teachings, parables, and commands in Gods word, truths become apparent to us as God wills it an in accordance with His plan for our life.  With that said, I believe God gave us the Bible, incl. the 10 Commandments, in the Hebrew and Greek languages for a reason, that is, these languages allow for a more defined and specific conveyance.  For example.  There are three different kinds of Love found in the original transcripts, with English translations, approx 22  now, just using the one word "Love" in each of these instances...but if you'd like to know the specific nature of "Love" in a given scripture, you can go back and see if it was Agape, Eros, or Philia...
> 
> ...



apprecite the help fx....i have a better understanding know...that has always been one of my problems ...i get ver confused with the bible at times & some of the meanings...& you ask someone..& you get 100 answers with all of them makeing a little sense...hard to know what the true story is...thanks..


----------



## FX Jenkins (Sep 5, 2007)

MR. SCOOTINN said:


> apprecite the help fx....i have a better understanding know...that has always been one of my problems ...i get ver confused with the bible at times & some of the meanings...& you ask someone..& you get 100 answers with all of them makeing a little sense...hard to know what the true story is...thanks..



Thank you Sir for your constructive participation in this forum...Many parts of the Bible still leave me baffled with questions but I just have to trust I don't need to understand everything but rather have faith that God is always in control...


----------



## LLove (Sep 5, 2007)

PWalls said:


> tolerance is not always a good thing. very liberal of you.



not so much tolerance as knowing to pick battles.


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 6, 2007)

*That's just what liberals want.........*

Not taking a stand against something we *know* is sin, is exactly what those promoting the homosexual agenda wants us to do...no thank you!


----------



## LLove (Sep 6, 2007)

theres not a liberal bone in my body, i've never agreed with the homosexual agenda, i've never condoned it, I dont like to see it, hear about it or be around it.. however.. taking a stand against something that will NEVER change seems pointless when the time could've been spent raising food and clothes for the homeless, teaching more frequent and more in depth gun control classes and thru classes community work helped in America's ever on going war on drugs. (which happens to be a lot worse than the terrorism that everyone is in such an uproar about right now.)
So I never said the gay lifestyle was ok.. But if i'm going to get heated about something and try to change it in the world i'm going after something that could save a life.. not change one.


----------



## Oldstick (Sep 6, 2007)

Now just so's I understand exactly what many of you are stating as Biblical truth, let me ask something.  Are you actualy saying that the homosexual sex act is the sin?

If I tell you my leg hurts or I have a headache how can you possibly prove that I don't?  If someone says they were born with desires towards the same sex or desires to act effeminite or pursue stereotypical feminine careers, how can any other human prove they are lying.

You are not saying that acting sissy or dressing gaudy is a sin are you?  Just the sexual act between members of the same sex is the sin right?


----------



## whchunter (Sep 6, 2007)

*symbols*



FX Jenkins said:


> Mr Scootinn,
> Thanks for the kind words but I'll be the first to state, I'm no bible authority..
> You ask a very valid question about translations, and this has been debated in the past on this forum.  My belief is this.  The entire bible is the divinely inspired word of God, and this inspiration, and the power of Gods word, transcends language and translation.  In other words, as we read the Bible, in any language, God will make known to us His truths (John 8:31-32, John 14:26, Prov 1:23) through the Holy Spirit, and in Gods time.  We don't, however, read the bible and immediatly understand everything cover to cover.  And John 8:32 talks about continueing in the Scriptures, that is a learning process called discipleship, which also builds our faith, and when we consider a scripture in context and in accordance with all of the other teachings, parables, and commands in Gods word, truths become apparent to us as God wills it an in accordance with His plan for our life.  With that said, I believe God gave us the Bible, incl. the 10 Commandments, in the Hebrew and Greek languages for a reason, that is, these languages allow for a more defined and specific conveyance.  For example.  There are three different kinds of Love found in the original transcripts, with English translations, approx 22  now, just using the one word "Love" in each of these instances...but if you'd like to know the specific nature of "Love" in a given scripture, you can go back and see if it was Agape, Eros, or Philia...
> 
> ...




How'd you type them neat little symbols?  I'm glad SLIMON PETER is gone.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 6, 2007)

greers57 said:


> Now just so's I understand exactly what many of you are stating as Biblical truth, let me ask something.  Are you actualy saying that the homosexual sex act is the sin?
> 
> If I tell you my leg hurts or I have a headache how can you possibly prove that I don't?  If someone says they were born with desires towards the same sex or desires to act effeminite or pursue stereotypical feminine careers, how can any other human prove they are lying.
> 
> You are not saying that acting sissy or dressing gaudy is a sin are you?  Just the sexual act between members of the same sex is the sin right?



I think Romans chapter 1 would be a good place to get the answers to your questions.


----------



## fulldraw74 (Sep 6, 2007)

LLove said:


> theres not a liberal bone in my body, i've never agreed with the homosexual agenda, i've never condoned it, I dont like to see it, hear about it or be around it.. however.. taking a stand against something that will NEVER change seems pointless when the time could've been spent raising food and clothes for the homeless, teaching more frequent and more in depth gun control classes and thru classes community work helped in America's ever on going war on drugs. (which happens to be a lot worse than the terrorism that everyone is in such an uproar about right now.)
> So I never said the gay lifestyle was ok.. But if i'm going to get heated about something and try to change it in the world i'm going after something that could save a life.. not change one.




Someone had to start somewhere with the homeless, gun control, etc........
One could argue that you will never prevent some from being homeless but your trying.......


----------



## Jim Thompson (Sep 6, 2007)

fulldraw74 said:


> One could argue that you will never prevent some from being homeless but your trying.......



not if they dont want to change and are completely happy with their choices and lifestyle.  unless of course you are wanting to change them for your own benifit


----------



## FX Jenkins (Sep 6, 2007)

greers57 said:


> Now just so's I understand exactly what many of you are stating as Biblical truth, let me ask something.  Are you actualy saying that the homosexual sex act is the sin?
> 
> If I tell you my leg hurts or I have a headache how can you possibly prove that I don't?  If someone says they were born with desires towards the same sex or desires to act effeminite or pursue stereotypical feminine careers, how can any other human prove they are lying.
> 
> You are not saying that acting sissy or dressing gaudy is a sin are you?  Just the sexual act between members of the same sex is the sin right?



Greers57
Its my belief that the act itself is sin as described in Romans 1:18-32.  And while I can speak out against the sin itself, I am not condemning the individual. In fact, it remains my responsibility to continue to love (agape) a person in any sin, and not to judge them, but not to accept sinful behavior either..

Furthermore, I believe it when a person says the have "feelings" one way or another...
Romans 1:26 says   
_For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.​_Like anything else in the flesh, the more you give in to it, the more it consumes you and deeper you have to go to get your kicks..
Whether homosexuals are born with these feelings I can't argue, but there is also a facet of sin that transcends generations and afflicts generations as a result of"sins of the father", which is a whole other issue that I'm not knowledgable enough to explain, but I trust that God, in his infinite wisdom, knows who will accept him and who will not, and just as God actually hardened Pharaoh's heart, for the purpose of a His divine good, ..I still trust that God knows what He's doing with this whole homosexuality thing, and I've heard testimony of folks who have actually turned away from this sin, so I cannot simply give up on them either...But before I go out on an Anti-Homosexual*ity *(noun not homosexual pro-noun) campaign...I better be looking out for the beam in my own eye...


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 6, 2007)

What about just thinking about the sin? Not necessarily participating in the actual sin act... weather it be stealing, coveting, adultry, lusting, etc...

I can't think of the verse but I know that it says it in the Bible somewhere in the New Testament(I think), and I am paraphrasing...lusting after a woman is just as bad as having an affair with her...

I would think that if you can't control your thoughts than you are still sinning... atleast that is what it sounds like to me....

DB BB


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 6, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> not if they dont want to change and are completely happy with their choices and lifestyle.  unless of course you are wanting to change them for your own benifit



I guess some homeless might be happy the way they are and dont want to change, but they aint marching for any rights or acceptance either


----------



## LLove (Sep 6, 2007)

fulldraw74 said:


> Someone had to start somewhere with the homeless, gun control, etc........
> One could argue that you will never prevent some from being homeless but your trying.......



but i'm happy helping someone that wants to be helped. You almost cant help someone change that doesnt want to.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 6, 2007)

Double Barrel BB said:


> What about just thinking about the sin? Not necessarily participating in the actual sin act... weather it be stealing, coveting, adultry, lusting, etc...
> 
> I can't think of the verse but I know that it says it in the Bible somewhere in the New Testament(I think), and I am paraphrasing...lusting after a woman is just as bad as having an affair with her...
> 
> ...



Yes, Matt 5:28, one of the greatest challenges to any Spirit filled, Spirit led person on the face of the earth!  



FX, excellent post!


----------



## Jim Thompson (Sep 6, 2007)

Spotlite said:


> I guess some homeless might be happy the way they are and dont want to change, but they aint marching for any rights or acceptance either



the minute the city outlaws them they take a stand and march together


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 6, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> the minute the city outlaws them they take a stand and march together



Bad thing about it is, we will not even be able to scream "go home"


----------



## toddboucher (Sep 6, 2007)

The question was asked a way back, we would act different if it was a family member. I hope not because it doesn't mater what man says about this SIN, but it does matter what God says'

Ezekiel 3:18-21
When I say to a wicked man, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for [a] his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 19 But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself. 

 20 "Again, when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and does evil, and I put a stumbling block before him, he will die. Since you did not warn him, he will die for his sin. The righteous things he did will not be remembered, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 21 But if you do warn the righteous man not to sin and he does not sin, he will surely live because he took warning, and you will have saved yourself."

I would hope in fear of God I would speak the truth, tell them I Love you but this is what God says so in this house we will honor God views and no man's. I beileve by just saying I love you, but will not condone this will deal with the persons heart.

But your right I never faced this so I can't tell what would come out of my heart. I only hope Gods word would.


----------



## FX Jenkins (Sep 6, 2007)

whchunter said:


> How'd you type them neat little symbols?  I'm glad SLIMON PETER is gone.



   just change the language setting on your computer 

I can't write Aramaic...but I can copy/paste

I'm glad SLImon Peter is gone also...He was an author of confusion...


----------



## 60Grit (Sep 6, 2007)

This has to be the longest thread by the shortest lived member on here......


----------



## fulldraw74 (Sep 6, 2007)

LLove said:


> but i'm happy helping someone that wants to be helped. You almost cant help someone change that doesnt want to.



I agree.......but thats what being a christian is all about. Trying to show someone the path to salvation.......


----------



## LLove (Sep 6, 2007)

fulldraw74 said:


> I agree.......but thats what being a christian is all about. Trying to show someone the path to salvation.......



I agree.
 And I see it as leading a horse to water.. i just dont agree with the people that want to hold the horse's head under.


----------



## TTom (Sep 17, 2007)

The sin is placing sexual desire before your duty to God and your fellow man.
When a Heterosexual runs around sleeping with anyone who'll have them for the night it's sinful. When a Homosexual runs around doing the same thing that too is sinful. Niether because of who they slept with, but rather because they squandered the gift of sex on someone without the spirit of love instead of lust in their hearts.

Jesus said not a single published word on the subject of homosexuality. There are no red letter passages that mention it. I see the matter as a hold over from Levitican Law that we were supposedly freed from by his fulfilling it.

Abomination level Levitican laws seem to have all been removed from the expectation of Christians, except this one.


----------



## PWalls (Sep 17, 2007)

TTom said:


> The sin is placing sexual desire before your duty to God and your fellow man.
> When a Heterosexual runs around sleeping with anyone who'll have them for the night it's sinful. When a Homosexual runs around doing the same thing that too is sinful. Niether because of who they slept with, but rather because they squandered the gift of sex on someone without the spirit of love instead of lust in their hearts.
> 
> Jesus said not a single published word on the subject of homosexuality. There are no red letter passages that mention it. I see the matter as a hold over from Levitican Law that we were supposedly freed from by his fulfilling it.
> ...




How bout that. Jesus came along and did away with all the Laws so homosexuality magically went from a no-no to OK now? It's OK to have a homosexual relationship if you "love" that person? Is that how you justify your Uncle and his partner to yourself? Homosexuality was a sin back then and is still a sin right now. Period. End of story.


----------



## TTom (Sep 18, 2007)

How's your pork diet?
How about your clothing mix cotton and polyester?
How about planting more than one crop in a field?
Still stoning adulterers?

No I justify the belief  simply the Law was fulfilled and thus we no longer live under the law but under grace.

There is no period end of story about it, there is only opinion, about what the bible means. I am lead by my own faith, my own study of the texts and historical context.
If I am wrong through an honest mistake having given my best effort to understand and live by my faith I have no fear.


----------



## PWalls (Sep 18, 2007)

TTom said:


> No I justify the belief  simply the Law was fulfilled and thus we no longer live under the law but under grace.



Amazing how so many people get this wrong. Yes, the Law was fulfilled. Jesus came and took away the penalty for not following the Law. Israelites had Mosaic Law to follow. That was their path to Salvation. Jesus came and gave us a better path to Salvation. He did not and I repeat did not do away with the Law. He just did away with the consequences of not being able to follow it completely (loss of salvation). What was a sin under the old Mosaic Law was still a sin afterwards, only the consequences changed.

So, answer my question. Do you believe that it was a sin under the Mosaic Law to live a homosexual lifestyle but when Jesus came along, that sin just magically disappeared?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2007)

TTom said:


> How's your pork diet?
> How about your clothing mix cotton and polyester?
> How about planting more than one crop in a field?
> Still stoning adulterers?
> ...



Homosexuality has nothing to do with a law, its an abomination.


----------



## TTom (Sep 18, 2007)

Funny that others have seen it as part of The Law (Levidican Law) 
Where it says it is an abomination is in the Levidican Law. Right there with the laws of kosher kitchens, not eating pork etc.

PWall the quote you selected from my post says specificly what I believe being pretty paralell to what you beleive no longer under the law but under grace. (New Pathway vs Old Pathway)
If as you contend only the penalty was removed then it falls back to my earlier Pork in your diet challange both were part of the old law and if as you contend we are required  to continue to follow the old law against homosexuality then we are also required to follow it as to clothing of mixed fibers, eating of pork, and all 300+ of the levidican laws.

It is hipocracy to say that the l;aw against homosexuality remains but the others do not.

As to the nature of sin romans 14 :14 tells us that sin comes not from any action but from the motivation behind those actions.
If it is a sin in your heart then for you it is a sin, while for others that same act may not be a sin. Just a couple vrs away from the stumbling block mentioned earlier.
 Nothing is of itself unclean of itself, but to him that esteamith it to be unclean for him it is unclean.


----------



## redwards (Sep 18, 2007)

TTom said:


> .......
> Jesus said not a single published word on the subject of homosexuality. .........


but He did say this....


> Matt 5:17-20 (HCSB)
> Christ Fulfills the Law
> 
> 17 “_Don’t assume that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets._ I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.
> ...


----------



## rapid fire (Sep 18, 2007)

I bet that there are a lot of stones being cast from people who covet their neighbor's wife daily.


----------



## farmasis (Sep 18, 2007)

LLove said:


> I agree.
> And I see it as leading a horse to water.. i just dont agree with the people that want to hold the horse's head under.



What if a person's sexual perversion of choice is child molestation and not homosexuality.

Are we to not comment on that as being right or wrong?


----------



## farmasis (Sep 18, 2007)

TTom said:


> Funny that others have seen it as part of The Law (Levidican Law)
> Where it says it is an abomination is in the Levidican Law. Right there with the laws of kosher kitchens, not eating pork etc.



The New testament has provided information of which laws we (Christians) are to continue to keep that was given to the ancient Jews. The food laws are not part of them.
God is unchanging, and if he thought of homosexulaity as an abomination 4000 years ago, he still does.


----------



## TTom (Sep 18, 2007)

And you don't see a conflict between those two last statements you just made???

He changed the food laws, there are several dozen of non food laws that we have decided no longer apply as well. Clothing, wearing two different fibers, Contact with women during mensus, etc 

My studies have no such list of requirements of retaining the old laws of Purification, Atonement, or Sacrifice, the three branches of Levidican law. Feel free to provide me with a new list of which ones we get to toss and which ones we have to keep along with their scriptural backing.


Redwards

or one stroke of a letter will pass from the law until all things are accomplished. 

By my estimation they were all accomplished when the law was fullfilled. (accomplished)


As a new aspect to the debate here.
When was the first time the bible ever contained the precice word "Homosexual" and what word did it replace?

BTW earliest version I have heard of that uses it was 1946. Seeing that the term Homosexual was not even coined until about 1864. What was the word used before that and how are the definitions different both connotations and denotations.

BTW this has remained so far a wonderfully civil discussion, bravo it's not easy to have long held beliefs of a religious nature challanged. So far it has been well done overall.


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 18, 2007)

Call it whatever you like.

However, I'd be utterly disgusted if a son, or daughter, _chose_ to be a homosexual. 

It's just plain wrong!. 

Let's move on...


----------



## farmasis (Sep 18, 2007)

TTom said:


> And you don't see a conflict between those two last statements you just made???
> 
> He changed the food laws, there are several dozen of non food laws that we have decided no longer apply as well. Clothing, wearing two different fibers, Contact with women during mensus, etc



God never changed, those laws were given to a certain group of Jews to preserve Judiasm until the lineage of David. The Bible must be taken in context to understand it.



> My studies have no such list of requirements of retaining the old laws of Purification, Atonement, or Sacrifice, the three branches of Levidican law. Feel free to provide me with a new list of which ones we get to toss and which ones we have to keep along with their scriptural backing.



It is all in the NT.



> Redwards
> 
> or one stroke of a letter will pass from the law until all things are accomplished.
> 
> By my estimation they were all accomplished when the law was fullfilled. (accomplished)



Jesus never removed law, he fullfilled them by paying the penalty.



> As a new aspect to the debate here.
> When was the first time the bible ever contained the precice word "Homosexual" and what word did it replace?
> 
> BTW earliest version I have heard of that uses it was 1946. Seeing that the term Homosexual was not even coined until about 1864. What was the word used before that and how are the definitions different both connotations and denotations.
> ...



The NT uses the greek word arsenokoites which means one who lies with a male as a female. Sodomite.


----------



## jmharris23 (Sep 18, 2007)

TTom said:


> As a new aspect to the debate here.
> When was the first time the bible ever contained the precice word "Homosexual" and what word did it replace?
> 
> BTW earliest version I have heard of that uses it was 1946. Seeing that the term Homosexual was not even coined until about 1864. What was the word used before that and how are the definitions different both connotations and denotations.
> ...




Well TTom I'm sure you have a comeback for this but the original greek language used several terms that are able to be conveyed as homosexual- while I will admit that there is quite a bit of discussion as to whether the word used actually meant homosexual or not in 1 Cor 6:9 the context seems to support it

A better argument is Romans 1:26 which also speaks to the perversion of same sex relationships while not calling it homosexuality the context again speaks to the sin of same sex relationships. 

While the term homosexual may not have been used - the context and the original language are there to support the conservative viewpoint of the sin of homosexuality

But this really comes down to a liberal versus conservative interpretation of the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Word of God


----------



## TTom (Sep 19, 2007)

farmasis,

OK so the word Sodomite is used, you do realize the definition of Sodomy includes and has always included many sexual acts performed between opposite genders as well.
Right up until today, Sodomy laws have been interpreted to include some acts most people believe are pretty normal today and within the confines of marriage entirely acceptable.
The sin Sodom was famous for was in their excesses, falling victim to putting their own desires ahead of God in their minds. Even opposite gender people can fall victim to the same exact thing.

jmharris,

I don't have a comeback for every argument what I do have I have because I have studied, with an open mind and heart, refusing to take the conventional wisdom of man's interpretation as infallible.
It's not in my view the bible that is ever in error, but rather man's (including possibly my own) interpretation of it.

My argument grows a bit weaker when addressing Pauline doctrines.
However I have to question how many if any stable momogamous homosexual couple Paul ever met. In the world of Paul the most obvious homosexuals would have been the pagan homosexual prostitutes. Those who historicly sold their bodies for their pagan churches. (very often teen boys) Not hard to see where the prohibition against such a practice would be obvious. Beyond those Paul would have known of some of the Roman homosexual practices, having been in Rome pre his own miraclous conversion. But even those were most often relationships outside a heterosexual marriage. (ie one man or both men were cheating on their respective wives) So the question, and it is admittedly a weaker argument, is how much beyond the obviously sinful for other reasons than gender examples, did Paul know about the nature of homosexuality?


----------



## jmharris23 (Sep 19, 2007)

Well TTom I'm not sure how many he met, but I believe God was inspiring the words that Paul wrote and if this is true and God told him that the homosexual relationship is a sin- then I gotta believe its a sin. 

That doesn't mean I don't love them, it doesn't even mean that I think they may not be predisposed to have an attraction to the same sex, regardless of their predispostion i still believe the bible calls it sin. 

Someone here or maybe another thread used the example of those who are attracted to children. For them its a natural feeling, maybe something they have dealt with since their early life- its still wrong, its still a sin, and its still illegal- no matter how much they may feel that it is natural

Sometimes you just gotta control your impulses. I do not believe their is an easy answer to this


----------



## farmasis (Sep 19, 2007)

TTom said:


> farmasis,
> 
> OK so the word Sodomite is used, you do realize the definition of Sodomy includes and has always included many sexual acts performed between opposite genders as well.
> Right up until today, Sodomy laws have been interpreted to include some acts most people believe are pretty normal today and within the confines of marriage entirely acceptable.
> The sin Sodom was famous for was in their excesses, falling victim to putting their own desires ahead of God in their minds. Even opposite gender people can fall victim to the same exact thing.



Like JM said, homosexuality is condemned without using the word. The act is described and called an abomination. We either choose to believe God or look for an excuse that the words were added later, etc. However, I call that making a god in our image, which is idol worship.



> jmharris,
> 
> I don't have a comeback for every argument what I do have I have because I have studied, with an open mind and heart, refusing to take the conventional wisdom of man's interpretation as infallible.
> It's not in my view the bible that is ever in error, but rather man's (including possibly my own) interpretation of it.
> ...



It is not Paul's ideas expressed in Romans or Moses's expressed in Lev., it is God's and God has met them all. Homosexuality is a sexual perversion of choice just as beastiality, incest and child molestation is. The same argument could be made for the other groups as being "born that way", etc.


----------



## Jim Thompson (Sep 19, 2007)

farmasis said:


> What if a person's sexual perversion of choice is child molestation and not homosexuality.
> 
> Are we to not comment on that as being right or wrong?



feel free to comment on the right and wrong of that since that would not be 2 willing partners


----------



## farmasis (Sep 19, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> feel free to comment on the right and wrong of that since that would not be 2 willing partners



Well, one could make the case that a child was not capable of making the decision and I will not argue, but minor children can make willing decisions. I.E. a 16 year old and a 50 year old mutual relationship.


----------



## Jim Thompson (Sep 19, 2007)

btw, I do agree with ttom on one thing...this has been a civil debate, yall keep up the good posting


----------



## Jim Thompson (Sep 19, 2007)

farmasis said:


> Well, one could make the case that a child was not capable of making the decision and I will not argue, but minor children can make willing decisions. I.E. a 16 year old and a 50 year old mutual relationship.



not in the eyes of mans law.

of course if we look not too far back in time it was ok for a 16 yr old and a 50 yr old to be together...even back in biblical days


----------



## jmharris23 (Sep 19, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> feel free to comment on the right and wrong of that since that would not be 2 willing partners



My daddy always said two wrongs dont make a right

im just funnin with ya btw

Seriously I think the example was being used with the idea that the child molestor "feels" like his natural sexual orientation is being drawn to young people

Feeling this way doesn't make it right- even if he never acts on its still not right


----------



## farmasis (Sep 19, 2007)

Jim Thompson said:


> not in the eyes of mans law.
> 
> of course if we look not too far back in time it was ok for a 16 yr old and a 50 yr old to be together...even back in biblical days



true.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

I am hetereosexual who accepts all - As long as you are a good person.

One statement I would like to make is - Being a Homosexual does not make you a Child Molester.  Actually in research most Child Molesters are Hetero.

Also Before everyone is throwing stones please

Don't forget Masturbation is a sin as well.

Supposedly 85% of people admit to do it at some point.   5% don't do it and the other 10% lies about it.


----------



## farmasis (Sep 19, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> I am hetereosexual who accepts all - As long as you are a good person.
> 
> One statement I would like to make is - Being a Homosexual does not make you a Child Molester.  Actually in research most Child Molesters are Hetero.



Well, since only about 2% of the population is gay, I would think that would be the case.



> Also Before everyone is throwing stones please
> 
> Don't forget Masturbation is a sin as well.
> 
> Supposedly 85% of people admit to do it at some point.   5% don't do it and the other 10% lies about it.



That is true. But, if someone is living as a homosexual, have they repented and turned away from sin? I see most trying to justify it, and not working on turning away from it.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

So your observing the Gay population and studying on their habits Or are you watching on TV the 2 % you speak of - Or seeing Senators in Bathroom Stalls.

By no means am I attacking I am just wondering where your info is from.

your 2% theory is incorrect because a child molester is a child molester.  Just because you are gay does not make you one nor does it mean you are closer to being one than a Hetereosexual.


----------



## farmasis (Sep 19, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> So your observing the Gay population and studying on their habits Or are you watching on TV the 2 % you speak of - Or seeing Senators in Bathroom Stalls.
> 
> By no means am I attacking I am just wondering where your info is from.
> 
> your 2% theory is incorrect because a child molester is a child molester.  Just because you are gay does not make you one nor does it mean you are closer to being one than a Hetereosexual.



No, I am just saying that since gays only make up 2-5% of the population, there would be much more of a chance that a child molester would be heterosexual (95-98% chance).
I wouldn't think homosexuality would make someone prone to child molestation any more than heterosexuality would.


----------



## jmharris23 (Sep 19, 2007)

BTW - Who said anything about homosexuals being child molestors? Before you get upset it might pay to read a little more carefully


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 19, 2007)

I don't understand how one can accept homosexuality.

Look at God's design of man and woman. They were designed to be together, to reproduce, to live as a husband and wife, to have a family. It is soooo obvious that people were NOT designed by God to have relations with the same sex!

It's gross to see two men, or two women, even kissing, let alone anything else. 

Those of you who support civil unions, why stop at joining only two people together? When will the liberal wackos start joining 3 or 4 people together. The homosexual agenda is attacking family moral values at an alarming rate.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

Even if its two really attractive woman kissing?

JK

I agree to disagree.  I just don't see Homosexuals coming to our houses and churches and making us feel unsafe nor do I see them pushing it on us.

So I am not going to judge them.  To me if your a nice person your accepted into my heart.

If that means I will go South when my time is done so be it.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 19, 2007)

I don't worry about "THEM" pushing it on me, I am grown, I know what is right and wrong.

What I worry about is "THEM" pushing there propaganda on my children! Trying to convince them that it is normal...

Bottom line, if it was normal, God would have not condemned it.

It is an abomination plain and simple, and it is more of an abomination that "THEY" are subjecting our kids to it today, trying to brainwash them at a young age...

DB BB


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

How would they push it on your children and my children?


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 19, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> How would they push it on your children and my children?


 
Have you not heard of the books they now hand out to 1-4 graders? Talking about homosexuality and how it is accepted...

Most of it is probably in California...Just a matter of time until they bring it to GA, if it isn't already here....


DB BB


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 19, 2007)

*If you don't oppose it, you're supporting it.*



Clark10 said:


> How would they push it on your children and my children?



If one has to even ask this question, then I'm afraid they will not understand the answer. 

Do children have "Don't ask me out.", or "I'm not a homosexual", labels that they wear in public? 

Our children are sadly being exposed, and desensitized, to the homosexual agenda that IS being pushed, promoted and supported by misguided and informed people.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

So your telling me that you know the Homosexuals are going into our schools and giving books on Homosexuality to our children.

Please send me a link on that.  I need to pull my kids out of school today.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

Again I must live in a whole different world because i have never had a homosexual ask either of my kids out.

Plus a childs education comes from the Church, Home and than School.

Why don't people fight this much against smoking - Which causes cancer and is pushed on our children.

or Dipping which causes cancer and is pushed on our children

or Drinking which causes many problems for our children.

I wish there were more forums on the three above - Which I do two of by the way.

I truly believe that our children have a better chance of having issues with Drinking, Smoking and Dipping than they do of becoming a Homosexual because they read Literature on it.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

JMHarris - if you read between the lines you will see that people believe Homosexual and Child Molester are close to being the same.

Which is why if you look at Lead Poisons fears - The homosexuals will ask our kids on a date.

Just because one is gay does not mean they are going to ask our children out.  They will find someone else that is gay and it should not affect any of us.

Except society wants someone to pick on and be fearful of.

I would like one example from someone on this thread where they were cornered by a Homosexual and having them hit on you.  They stay with each other.


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 19, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> So your telling me that you know the Homosexuals are going into our schools and giving books on Homosexuality to our children.
> 
> Please send me a link on that.  I need to pull my kids out of school today.



In Collier County, Fla. one of our high schools (Gulfcoast  High School) has/had a student gay/straight alliance group that met after school. The group was sponsored by two teachers, one a homosexual, the other a heterosexual. The purpose of the group was to promote dialog and tolerance of the homosexual lifestyle. 

Our children ARE being negatively influenced and we had better do something to stop it. 

I'm sure there are other examples in other states.


----------



## farmasis (Sep 19, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> JMHarris - if you read between the lines you will see that people believe Homosexual and Child Molester are close to being the same.
> 
> Which is why if you look at Lead Poisons fears - The homosexuals will ask our kids on a date.
> 
> ...



Homosexuals and child molesters are in a similar category because they are both acts of sexual perversions. That is not to say that a homosexual is a child molester. If I said something to draw that conclusion, I did not mean to.

Ok, it appears that you have been successfully converted by the normalization of the homosexuality lifestyle agenda. How do you feel about beastiality, incest, or polygamy? Do they get the same rights?


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

So they are promoting to be tolerant of other people even though there beliefs differ.  

Sounds like that could end a lot of deaths from War if you ask me.

Groups don't make you gay.  Your preference does.


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 19, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> Which is why if you look at Lead Poisons fears - The homosexuals will ask our kids on a date.
> 
> Just because one is gay does not mean they are going to ask our children out.  They will find someone else that is gay and it should not affect any of us.
> 
> ...



Oh please! 

You simply cannot convince me a homosexual will only seek other homosexuals. If a homosexual is physically attracted to a heterosexual enough (insert your daughter, or son) they will do whatever it takes to establish a relationship.  There are numerous homosexuals that have numerous sexual relationships with numerous people.

Those that promote the homosexual agenda spread the the misconception (lie) that homosexuals are more committed and loving than heterosexuals. They even go so far as to say homosexuals are better parents. These are all lies straight from Satan. 

I love my kids and don't want them exposed to things I know are wrong.


----------



## Branchminnow (Sep 19, 2007)

farmasis said:


> but minor children can make willing decisions. I.E. a 16 year old


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

Okay  in reference to first question but Sorry but I work with gay men in women in the film industry and never once have I feared them nor feared them around my children.

Beastiality - Dont agree with - Animals dont have a choice

Incest - Don't agree with - It is illegal where Homosexuality is not

Polygamy - I dont agree but also dont understand so can't pass judgement.  Find it funny how a religion promoted the Polygamist Values. - If you ever get a chance to read Under the banner of Heaven - Very interesting.

in response to the following:
"You simply cannot convince me a homosexual will only seek other homosexuals. If a homosexual is physically attracted to a heterosexual enough (insert your daughter, or son) they will do whatever it takes to establish a relationship. There are numerous homosexuals that have numerous sexual relationships with numerous people"

My response - This happens with Hetereosexuals as well - Actually more.  I read a lot more about hetereosexual assaults than Homosexual assaults - actually look at the news every night - I would like to see a reference to homosexual Rape.

Only assaults i see on people regarding Homosexuals are Close minded Judgemental people who attack them for being different,.


----------



## Branchminnow (Sep 19, 2007)

Lead Poison said:


> If one has to even ask this question, then I'm afraid they will not understand the answer.
> 
> Do children have "Don't ask me out.", or "I'm not a homosexual", labels that they wear in public?
> 
> Our children are sadly being exposed, and desensitized, to the homosexual agenda that IS being pushed, promoted and supported by misguided and informed people.


THat was the first thought Ihad


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 19, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> Okay  in reference to first question but Sorry but I work with gay men in women in the film industry and never once have I feared them nor feared them around my children.
> 
> Beastiality - Dont agree with - Animals dont have a choice
> 
> ...



No one was talking about assaults, but refuting your statement that homosexuals only seek out other homosexuals. I don't want any homosexual making a pass, and/or trying to convince, my daughter or son there is nothing wrong with being a homosexual. 

Being open minded to homosexuality is being closed minded to God, his design and his will. No thanks.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

So has a homosexual made a pass on any of your children.  If so than I sympathize with the situation and will let this drop.


----------



## HighCotton (Sep 19, 2007)

*The "Sin" Issue is Completely Irrelevant!*

My $0.02 worth.............

We can argue all day long whether homosexuality is a sin or not and argue all day about the reasons why some people are as they are (born that way, etc.).  That debate is irrelevant to the larger issue.

That fact remains that sin or not, homosexuality is for sure UNNATURAL.  The male produces sperm and the female produces eggs.  Aside from the physical pleasures of sex, the biological reasons for the process are to reproduce.  The man is as he is and the woman as she is and the 2 are attracted to each other and we have these sexual urges only for the ultimate purpose of having babies-- to recreate.

A man having sex with anyone other than a woman and a womoan having sex with anyone other than a man, is completely unnatural and using sex for a purpose against that for which it was intended.

Argue the sin question all day long.  Don't matter.  Whether homosexuality is a sin or not, it's nonetheless unnatural and against the way the human body is functioned to work.

Folks can choose to behave and act the way they wish.  But that doesn't make it right and it doesn't mean something that is clearly unnatural should be treated with rights given as if it were normal, becuase it's clearly not!

HC


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 19, 2007)

Good Post.


----------



## jmharris23 (Sep 19, 2007)

HighCotton said:


> My $0.02 worth.............
> 
> We can argue all day long whether homosexuality is a sin or not and argue all day about the reasons why some people are as they are (born that way, etc.).  That debate is irrelevant to the larger issue.
> 
> ...



Yes great post


----------



## BKA (Sep 19, 2007)

HighCotton said:


> My $0.02 worth.............
> 
> We can argue all day long whether homosexuality is a sin or not and argue all day about the reasons why some people are as they are (born that way, etc.).  That debate is irrelevant to the larger issue.
> 
> ...



What if it's two good looking women; it's OK then isn't it????


----------



## Lostoutlaw (Sep 19, 2007)

BKA said:


> What if it's two good looking women; it's OK then isn't it????



Of course it is Silly fellow!!!!!

Then we have a party to sit and watch them "RIGHT"


----------



## SnowHunter (Sep 19, 2007)

High Cotton said:
			
		

> is completely unnatural and using sex for a purpose against that for which it was intended.



So using that analogy, sex between a woman and a man (married of course) with no intention of procreation is a sin? (just curious how its viewed)


----------



## BKA (Sep 19, 2007)

Lostoutlaw said:


> Of course it is Silly fellow!!!!!
> 
> Then we have a party to sit and watch them "RIGHT"



Amen, brother....


----------



## farmasis (Sep 19, 2007)

Her1911 said:


> So using that analogy, sex between a woman and a man (married of course) with no intention of procreation is a sin? (just curious how its viewed)



I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## HuntinTom (Sep 19, 2007)

HighCotton said:


> My $0.02 worth.............
> 
> We can argue all day long whether homosexuality is a sin or not and argue all day about the reasons why some people are as they are (born that way, etc.).  That debate is irrelevant to the larger issue.
> 
> ...



Not wanting to hijack the thread - But - Just a question about this logic -- If homosexuality is wrong simply because it's "unnatural" since two people of the same gender can't "procreate" - What do we then do with the questions of a man and woman who have sexual intercourse but do not have babies (perhaps through birth control methods, or, physiological reasons, or, what about later in life after a female goes through menopause and is not able to have babies -- Or, what if a young man who's married to the love of his life realizes he is not able to father a child?) So-on-and-so-forth -- If "unnatural" in the way I'm hearing the argument (i.e., not leading to procreation) is just cause to oppose homosexuality, then, I'm concerned there are a lot of heterosexual unions that would be in jeopardy as well...

(Looks like a couple of others were asking the same things as I was typing my reply)


----------



## jmharris23 (Sep 19, 2007)

That's why I like this forum- it always opens my eyes- I wasn't even thinking about it that way Tom- my thought was that High Cotton meant our bodies were created so that a union between a man and woman was a natural thing- with reproduction(typically) being the outcome

whereas a union between same sex doesn't SEEM natural 

but I get your point- it does make sense


----------



## HighCotton (Sep 19, 2007)

*You Miss My Points*

The purpose of being heterosexual (being attracted to and having sex with the opposite sex) is ultimately to procreate.  Yes, this can be prevented with birth control and, yes, some couples are unable to give birth due to problems.  But that doesn't dismiss my point and that being male or female serves only one purpose and that being to have babies... that's the natural design but there are ways to avoid it and problems that make it not always work.  Being homosexual is not NATURAL based on the simple design and functions of male and female.  Questions:  The male produces sperm.... for what purpose?  It's totally useless unless joined with the female egg.  The female produces eggs..... for what purpose?  Totally useless unless joined with the male sperm.  Having male and female results in sex and (baring birth control or problems) results in having babies only because natural urges attract one to the other.  What good are the womans eggs if she is attracted to another woman?  What good is a man's sperm if he is attracted to another man?  No, the natural order of things is heterosexual.  Homosexuality is unnatural.  The NATURAL DESIGN is heterosexual even though there are the issues that Huntin' Tom raised.  That doesn't change my argument.  HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT NATURAL DESIGN.


----------



## TTom (Sep 19, 2007)

And the harm that comes to a person who a gay person asks out is exactly what?????

You simply decline and that's the end of it ,exactly the same as if someone of the opposite gender you do not care to date asks you out. I've been asked out by numerous men over the years, politely declined them all and have never been re-approached by them.
If you are secure in who you find attractive the harm you receive from being asked out is none.

While the idea that it is normal is kinda far fetched with anything that occures in 2-10% of the population depending on the study cited, the idea that a person has to share this world with folks who have different beliefs and ways of living is pretty sane.

Considering the numbers of gay teens physicly beaten by their classmates for their orientation, the need for such groups in many schools is self evident.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 20, 2007)

*Off topic but kind of related...*

Anyone know what A.I.D.S. was called befor it was A.I.D.S.?

G.R.I.D.S. =  Gay-Related Immune Deficiency

Don't believe me... Here is a link

DB BB


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 20, 2007)

D.B - That is fine.  There are also a lot of Disease that killed Heterosexuals as well.  Syphillis and Ghonerea.  It is an STD that anyone can get.  It is not just because you are gay you get AIDS.

Again do I think it is natural - NO - My philosophy has always been if you put people on and Island who can survive and regenerate.  Obviously only Heterosexuals.

My question is - Why do we condemn these people for a different lifestyle.  There are many more things to focus on.  I have asked for one person on this thread to show me where a Gay Man or Woman has forced themselves on them and made them feel endagered and have not gotte an answer yet.

Our society loves to Judge people rather than try to get along.  I would rather have all this energy focused on things that matter to us.


----------



## The AmBASSaDEER (Sep 20, 2007)

TTom said:


> I've been asked out by numerous men over the years, politely declined them all and have never been re-approached by them.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 20, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> D.B - That is fine. There are also a lot of Disease that killed Heterosexuals as well. Syphillis and Ghonerea. It is an STD that anyone can get. It is not just because you are gay you get AIDS.
> 
> Again do I think it is natural - NO - My philosophy has always been if you put people on and Island who can survive and regenerate. Obviously only Heterosexuals.
> 
> ...


 

I have been hit on before by a gay man... It wasn't a pleasent experience, and I had been "friends" with this guy since we were taking the same classes in college... we were in study groups together... then all of a sudden he felt the need to let everyone know what his lifestyle was like and started flaunting it in-front of everyone, I paid it no mind, until he decided to try and make our "friendship" more that just "friendship". The thing is he knew I was heterosexual, but he did not care, I finally had to put him in his place to make him aware that I was not at all interested in his choice of lifestyle.

So go ahead and believe that "They" don't force their lifestyle on anyone, I know differently, by first hand. Thank goodness God found me before the incident!!!!!

DB BB


----------



## farmasis (Sep 20, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> My question is - Why do we condemn these people for a different lifestyle.



It is my opinion that these people are attacking my lifestyle by demanding equal benefits and treatment with their deviant lifestyle. They are forcing themselves on my government, that I must support, for equal entitlement.


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 20, 2007)

It's there government as well.  They pay just as much taxes as we do - FYI.  They should have equal rights.  That is why it is call America and not Russia.

Double B - I got hit on by a Fat Chick a couple of times as well adn I did  not feel comfortable.  So I put her in her place as well.

 I just wish people could be more understanding of others that have different views.  Especially Religious people who are supposed to show people the right path rather than Stone them. 

Talk to people that are different than you - Become educated on why they feel the way they do.  Understanding is a powerful tool we have and might make us all better people.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 20, 2007)

Tolerance is nothing more than Acceptance in disguise....

DB BB


----------



## Clark10 (Sep 20, 2007)

Your Right - I'm Wrong.  Do you feel better now.

Have a nice day.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 20, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> Your Right - I'm Wrong. Do you feel better now.
> 
> Have a nice day.


 
It is not about who is right and who is wrong, it is about what God says on the matter... Sorry if I offended you...

DB BB


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 20, 2007)

Simon Peter said:


> People are born with sexual orientations already programmed into their DNA.  I know, I know, the Bible says it is a sin, but culturally at that time, people did not understand what we know now, and the Bible was divinely inspired, but written by fallible humans.
> 
> We will look back one day on this sad chapter in society, and realize we are doing to gays and lesbian what we did to blacks before God woke everybody up through the actions of Dr. King.  As one of the message boards' black members, believe me, i know.






Sorry, I was just scrolling by when I saw this quote....

It truely made me stupid reading this... What we did to blacks, lesbians, and gays?? I think you hit your head on something really hard! God made 1 man and 1 woman! He did not make 1 man and 1 man... The exit chute on someone is just for exiting.. If God intended for us to just have an overall orgy and sleep with everyone and everything than 2 men would be able to reproduce together... 
I guess we know which team you play on... The losing team..


----------



## 60Grit (Sep 20, 2007)

I'm a bit suspicious of those that keep dredging this thread up??!!!


----------



## farmasis (Sep 20, 2007)

Clark10 said:


> It's there government as well.  They pay just as much taxes as we do - FYI.  They should have equal rights.  That is why it is call America and not Russia.
> 
> Double B - I got hit on by a Fat Chick a couple of times as well adn I did  not feel comfortable.  So I put her in her place as well.
> 
> ...



They may contribute to the government, but in a Republic like ours, that is based on the principles of democracy, the overwhellming majority does not accept the homosexual lifestyle into our culture- despite the repetitive shoving of it down our throats and the attempt to normalize the behavior. They are choosing a deviant lifestyle that does not afford them equal rights because the rules of the game have been set. They are changing the rules, and forcing their values on us, not the other way around. We also do not give incestual or polygamy relationships the same value.
How are religious people to show others the right path, accept them as normal?
I guess we are just ignorant because we do not accept other's behavior.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2007)

I would much prefer getting hit on by some ugly woman than a gay man Thats enough to make you slap somebody

Never been hit on by one and if I ever do, I would imagine it would just make me sick to my stomach to think I even turned the idiot on


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Sep 26, 2007)

Been a while since I've been by here, had some extra time today so I thought I'd see what's been happening over here in the forum    Not too much really to add to this, everything I would have said has pretty much been said too, and TTom I think you nearly quoted anything I would have posted myself! 

Except I did want to say to FX Jenkins, Moses didn't write in Aramaic, he wrote in Hebrew... might want to brush up on that 

And this pretty much made me   ....



Double Barrel BB said:


> I have been hit on before by a gay man...
> 
> Thank goodness God found me before the incident!!!!!
> 
> DB BB



DB, are you saying that if God hadn't 'found you' first, you would have been tempted by his advances? That you yourself may have some underlying homosexual tendencies? That there was a possibility that he may have succeeded at 'turning you gay'??   Interesting....


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 26, 2007)

Dixie Dawg said:


> Been a while since I've been by here, had some extra time today so I thought I'd see what's been happening over here in the forum    Not too much really to add to this, everything I would have said has pretty much been said too, and TTom I think you nearly quoted anything I would have posted myself!
> 
> Except I did want to say to FX Jenkins, Moses didn't write in Aramaic, he wrote in Hebrew... might want to brush up on that
> 
> ...



I'm sure what he means is he would have punched them in the mouth, in reply to their advances. But, I'm sure you knew that as well.


----------



## FX Jenkins (Sep 26, 2007)

Dixie Dawg said:


> Except I did want to say to FX Jenkins, Moses didn't write in Aramaic, he wrote in Hebrew... might want to brush up on that



Ah yes...thanks for that clarification...keep and eye on me, I'm bound to slip up again


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Sep 26, 2007)

Lead Poison said:


> I'm sure what he means is he would have punched them in the mouth, in reply to their advances. But, I'm sure you knew that as well.



Hmmm, really? You think so? Gee, I'm not sure.... maybe I read that the way I wanted it to read... kind of like the Christians read certain parts of the "Old Testament" in order to fit their own agenda? 

Still, I don't know... that statement could be interpreted either way, if you ask me...


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Sep 27, 2007)

Dixie Dawg said:


> DB, are you saying that if God hadn't 'found you' first, you would have been tempted by his advances? That you yourself may have some underlying homosexual tendencies? That there was a possibility that he may have succeeded at 'turning you gay'?? Interesting....


 
Not that I care what you think, or care what you post because you are generally are here just to stir up trouble. Just like you are now inferring that I would have been gay, if God had not found me.

The meaning behind that was I would have beat the guy into oblivion if I had not had the strength of God holding me back.

That is what was meant. Nobody could turn me Gay. Just for clarification for you Dixie. I know that sometimes you find it hard to understand my posts...

DB BB


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 27, 2007)

Not sure if this has been posted before, but click here for words on this subject by Max Lucado.


----------



## pfharris1965 (Sep 27, 2007)

*...*



Dixie Dawg said:


> DB, are you saying that if God hadn't 'found you' first, you would have been tempted by his advances? That you yourself may have some underlying homosexual tendencies? That there was a possibility that he may have succeeded at 'turning you gay'?? Interesting....


 
...too funny Dixie Dawg...

Imagine if God had not found him first...the homosexual insignia might be some variation of the confederate flag with the rainbow built in...  

Boy now wouldn't that be something...and it would potentially cause a lot of confusion...


----------



## pfharris1965 (Sep 27, 2007)

*...*



Spotlite said:


> I would much prefer getting hit on by some ugly woman than a gay man Thats enough to make you slap somebody
> 
> Never been hit on by one and if I ever do, I would imagine it would just make me sick to my stomach to think I even turned the idiot on


 
Awe come on you ole stud muffin you......you know full well it would most likely be those very revealing overalls you were sporting in avatars past that sent him over the top...


----------



## farmasis (Sep 27, 2007)

StriperAddict said:


> Not sure if this has been posted before, but click here for words on this subject by Max Lucado.




very good, I have not seen that yet.


----------



## TTom (Oct 1, 2007)

A few points to ponder here on Max's points.

1. One Man and one woman?????
So many old testament men had multiple wives that to infer from any old testament scripture that man was limited to one seems silly. Abraham had two, is then figured that Abraham was not right in God's eyes for breaking the idea of one man one woman?

2. Sexual contact outside of marriage.
I could swear God was accepting of concubines in fact we see many times where the sons and daughters of concubines (Unmarried female consorts) are mentioned.

3. Inffering that Sodom was destroyed because they sought to have sex with the angel is flawed and shows a cherry picking of scripture. In the previous chapter you find God has already determined that unless he can find ten rightious men in the city it shall be destroyed. The angels were in Sodom to warn Lot and remove him from the impending doom.

Dangers of cherry picking scripture to fit a previously formed agenda. Although I have to give credit that the guy does flat out make a statement against gay bashing.


----------



## GWHRYKER (Oct 1, 2007)

*idiotidiotidiotidiot  sexuals     a cancer in our country!!!!!!!*



Lead Poison said:


> Sorry, it was sin when the Bible was written, it is sin today, and it will always be sin.
> 
> It's an abomination to God and the saved members here on the forum know this to be true.
> 
> *Simon Peter?????????*



DITTO!!!!!!!


----------



## jkdodge (Oct 1, 2007)

I do not hate someone that is gay....I speak these words...In the name of Jesus spirt of homosexuality  flee in the name of Jesus Satin you have no power over this indivigual We pleed the blood that was given to have power over satin and his lies....We cast this out in the name of Jesus. AMEN   Now I will agree the blacks as well as the Indians were treated bad...Gay folks? how in the world can you compare the two....


----------



## SuperSport (Oct 2, 2007)

Stupid to even ? the BIBLE!!! Wrote by man, but the words were By GOD!!!
It is A SIN PLAIN AND SIMPLE!!!


----------



## SuperSport (Oct 2, 2007)

Agree with ya Dodge, Be Gone in the name of JESUS, Name above all other names!!!
Has they guy that started this been back, or did he just post and run and hide???


----------



## Spotlite (Oct 2, 2007)

SuperSport said:


> Agree with ya Dodge, Be Gone in the name of JESUS, Name above all other names!!!
> Has they guy that started this been back, or did he just post and run and hide???



I think he run, but not by choice (banned)


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Oct 8, 2007)

jkdodge said:


> In the name of Jesus spirt of homosexuality  flee in the name of Jesus Satin you have no power over this indivigual We pleed the blood that was given to have power over satin and his lies....



Wow.... I admit that wouldn't have been nearly as amusing if someone had used spell-check before posting...


----------



## Twenty five ought six (Oct 8, 2007)

Actually Dixie, there is a very good joke there ---------



> to have power over satin



When they get the power, are they sinners now?


----------



## crackerdave (Oct 8, 2007)

And do they also have power over velvet? Or just satin?


----------



## Twenty five ought six (Oct 8, 2007)

I guess.  as long as they don't get all perverted and start using sateen:


----------



## Jessehall (Oct 8, 2007)

either way either or its not right it never will be i'm not gonna call someone out for it and i'm not gonna be mean to them or ignore them like they are a plague but i'm not going to accept it either


----------



## The AmBASSaDEER (Oct 11, 2007)

Homosexuals are gay.


----------



## dawg2 (Oct 11, 2007)

SO where did Simons Peter go?  Are we to embrace child molesters and rapists as well?


----------



## BKA (Oct 11, 2007)

The AmBASSaDEER said:


> Homosexuals are gay.



True dat


----------



## dawg2 (Oct 11, 2007)

rangerdave said:


> And do they also have power over velvet? Or just satin?



And what is Jesus satin?


----------



## T/C 300 MAG (Oct 11, 2007)

All my Bibles say God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve!


----------



## contender* (Oct 11, 2007)

T/C 300 MAG said:


> All my Bibles say God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve!


----------

