 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Da Blonde Bombshell
Cobra
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Posts: 461
Location: Brooklyn NY (formerly TX)
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:15 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| RevJP wrote: | I wonder when, or if, this thread will offer anything of use or benefit to anyone here?
Seems like a lot of anger and mudslinging going on by all sides - is it making everyone feel better? |
When people are struggling for basic human rights and being unfairly maligned it does feel better to correct that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Da Blonde Bombshell
Cobra
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Posts: 461
Location: Brooklyn NY (formerly TX)
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Van wrote: | | This is a Bible discussion board, the Bible says homosexual activity is wrong, and therefore to advocate homosexual activity is wrong. |
Many Christians disagree with your conclusions. As I've said before no one "advocates" homosexuality.
| Quote: | | The Bible teaches that sexual activity should be engaged in within marriage between a man and a women. Sexual activity, no matter the flavor outside of marriage is wrong. |
Not exactly. The ancients could not have conceived of same gender marriage given their limited worldview and superstitious misimpressios. You second sentence provedes a cogent argument in favor of LGBT marriages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Van
King Kong
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 2646
Location: San Clemente, California
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was a pretty good hitter, but with a slow bat speed. I got my hits right handed by hitting between, and not over, first and second. Late in the game, when they were on to my lack of power, they moved the second baseman toward first and plugged by hitting spot. So I would bunt (hit a dribbler) toward third and hope to beat it out, due to a bad throw. I was not fast either.
But in the field I was sure handed, if you hit it in my direction, you were out. So I got to play because I could field and throw accurately if not far. Softball I played second, hardball, shortstop (I could not make the throw with a softball from short without throwing in a ark which made the throw too slow.)
Did I mention I love baseball. 
To return to topic, I did not say anyone advocates homosexuality. And you knew that. But you posted it anyway, bending the truth to make your point. I said you advocated homosexual activity. More to the point I said you advocated the acceptance of homosexual activity. This is true and it is wrong. That there is a double play |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fake
Tiger
Joined: 03 May 2003
Posts: 862
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Van wrote: | Fake, so how come you are pointing your finger at me?
This is a Bible discussion board, the Bible says homosexual activity is wrong, and therefore to advocate homosexual activity is wrong. |
I have shown how the bible doesn't say it's wrong
The Bible states you should not lie with a man as you lie with a woman (granted you're a man).
It is simply this way, you should not have anal sex with a woman, because when you have sex with a woman, it is with the intent of creating a new life. Thus, you don't lie with a man, as you lie with a woman. 
The Bible teaches that sexual activity is only for the weak, that the strong, and pure, will not indulge in deviant behaviour. If Jesus and his diciples had a final say, we'd die out within our generation...
Fake |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Van
King Kong
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 2646
Location: San Clemente, California
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fake, you post is utter nonsense. The bible says sex is great, within the bounds of marriage between a man and a woman, and we should engage it more often than we do. The Bible says that the idea that sex is wrong or evil is a lie from Satan.
Fake, you evaded, once more, questions with an attack on truth. The desire for homosexual activity is called a degrading passion, the act an indecent error, a "thing that is not proper."
Fake, it seems you are trying to wear out the pitcher by hitting foul balls. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smilin' Jacks
Pit Bull
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 354
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The Bible teaches that sexual activity is only for the weak, that the strong, and pure, will not indulge in deviant behaviour. If Jesus and his diciples had a final say, we'd die out within our generation...
|
I'm interested in what you might think of an idea postulated by Bishop Spong in his book "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism" where he stated that Paul is likely a homosexual?
8) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Van
King Kong
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 2646
Location: San Clemente, California
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I am not interested in that subject at all. Paul taught about Christ, that is the subject that interests me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fake
Tiger
Joined: 03 May 2003
Posts: 862
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Van, it might surprise you to some extent, but I can not for my life understand how anyone can be bi/homosexual. I find the thought of myself with another man disgusting, and sickening, but, what anyone bi/homosexual do and/or act, is none of my business. Remember, I'm a socialist libertarian. I don't want to prohibit you from exercising your right to follow your religion, even though I consider it the greatest hoax during the last two millenia.
You're welcome to practice what you believe in, let a bi/homosexual do the same, if he/she think it's in accordance with his/her God(s). If they're wrong, they'll find out on judgement day.
Fake |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Da Blonde Bombshell
Cobra
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Posts: 461
Location: Brooklyn NY (formerly TX)
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Smilin' Jacks wrote: | | Quote: |
The Bible teaches that sexual activity is only for the weak, that the strong, and pure, will not indulge in deviant behaviour. If Jesus and his diciples had a final say, we'd die out within our generation...
|
I'm interested in what you might think of an idea postulated by Bishop Spong in his book "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism" where he stated that Paul is likely a homosexual?
8) |
Spong states the case for that well, though of course it's just speculation. Paul IMO was more likely mostly asexual and addicted to power. We see that in quite a few bachelor politicians, some of which are closeted gays but most of which would rather read a policy briefing book and then give a press conference than they would like to boink somebody. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smilin' Jacks
Pit Bull
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 354
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the reply!
| Quote: | me: I'm interested in what you might think of an idea postulated by Bishop Spong in his book "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism" where he stated that Paul is likely a homosexual? 8)
you: Spong states the case for that well, though of course it's just speculation. |
Of course. I had written that he postulated - a position or supposition assumed without proof - the idea...(ain't that good sentence structure?  )
| Quote: | | Paul IMO was more likely mostly asexual and addicted to power. We see that in quite a few bachelor politicians, some of which are closeted gays but most of which would rather read a policy briefing book and then give a press conference than they would like to boink somebody. |
Two, isn't it at last count?
Paul was a lot of things but I have no doubt he was a misogynist. And he seems to have a prediliction toward self-abuse...
8) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Da Blonde Bombshell
Cobra
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Posts: 461
Location: Brooklyn NY (formerly TX)
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Smilin' Jacks wrote: | Thanks for the reply!
| Quote: | me: I'm interested in what you might think of an idea postulated by Bishop Spong in his book "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism" where he stated that Paul is likely a homosexual? 8)
you: Spong states the case for that well, though of course it's just speculation. |
Of course. I had written that he postulated - a position or supposition assumed without proof - the idea...(ain't that good sentence structure? )
| Quote: | | Paul IMO was more likely mostly asexual and addicted to power. We see that in quite a few bachelor politicians, some of which are closeted gays but most of which would rather read a policy briefing book and then give a press conference than they would like to boink somebody. |
Two, isn't it at last count? |
Who? I'd include Ralph Nader, Jerry Brown (Mayor of Oakland, former Governor of California), former Congressman G.V. "Sonny" Montgomery, and Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur and possibly Dennis Kucinich.
| Quote: | Paul was a lot of things but I have no doubt he was a misogynist. And he seems to have a prediliction toward self-abuse...
|
To be a convert so full of zeal was a lot of what made him so obnoxious.
Kind of reminds of when I was younger and I worked in entertainment. There was another dancer at the gentemen's club where I worked that was mean, rolled customers, etc. She once expressed an intent to rape me with a broom and a Glock stuck in her ear saved me. Then she got religion and decided to do "outreach" to save other dancers but she didn't have much success, people remembered what she was and she wasn't a good ambassador for Christ. So she and her friends from the holy roller church she was in took to standing on the corner with picket signs and hollering "*One Who Practices the World's Oldest Profession*!", "*Working Girl*!" etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Van
King Kong
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 2646
Location: San Clemente, California
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is a Bible discussion board, the Bible says homosexual activity is wrong, and therefore to advocate homosexual activity is wrong.
You are advocating homosexual activity by saying any activity between consenting adults is fine. This the the view of the godless left, no doubt about it.
The Bible teaches that sexual activity should be engaged in within marriage between a man and a women. Sexual activity, no matter the flavor outside of marriage is wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
objectivist
German Shepherd
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 335
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the bible doesn't speak out about lesbians does it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Van
King Kong
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 2646
Location: San Clemente, California
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Romans 1:26-27 appears to address ladies doing sexually impure stuff, but the bottom line is that sexual activity outside of marriage between a man and a women is wrong, so that would cover all manner of misbehavior. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Da Blonde Bombshell
Cobra
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Posts: 461
Location: Brooklyn NY (formerly TX)
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| objectivist wrote: | | the bible doesn't speak out about lesbians does it? |
ROMANS 1:26 states "For this cause (see verses above) God gave them up to vile affections; for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature." and fundamentalists use that particular (and only) verse to condemn lesbians. Of course when it's pointed out how ambiguous that is and how it's obvious Paul had no idea what he was talking about, then they refer to the admonition to Eve in Genesis 3:16 as if to say "Well, even though it doesn't say anything about lesbians, what it says about men applies to women as well [except the right to preach, have a job, and be a freeborn individual] and besides you are all suppossed to get married and have babies anyhow" (singsong voice).
BTW, many lesbian Holy Union ceremonies as well as those for gay males and heterosexual weddings use the reading of Ruth 1:16 "Whiter thou goest I will go" etc. which was spoken by Ruth to her Mother-in-Law Naomi after her husband's death of the bond of love between them.
Not also in the Romans verse Paul referred to the "vile affections" being a sort of punishment. It is possible he was speaking of the futility and soullessness of the Roman Orgy. He certainly said zero about committed same gender relationships and would not have conceived of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
