Gay Rights And The Bible

[gopher]

Rev Robert Arthur gave a different biblical interpretation of homosexuality and the proper view towards it:

Article 1

What was the sin of Sodom in Genesis 19:1-28?
This Old Testament passage is often wrongly used as "biblical proof" that God is displeased with homosexuals. According to many people these cities were destroyed because residents committed the "sin of homosexuality." To suggest that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of homosexuality is to misinterpret Scripture.
The prophet Ezekiel, in an equally inspired book of the Bible, tells that God was displeased with Sodom for very different reasons: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed, and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty, and did detestable things before me (literally, 'committed idolatry'). Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. (Ezekiel 16:49-50, New International version".







.... more .......

 

[petros]

All those statues of Mary..... It is really just Jesus in drag.

 

[petros]

All those statues of Mary..... It is really just Jesus in drag.

Go ahead...give it a try...pencil in a moustache and beard.

 

[petros]

 

[petros]

Sacred Bleeding Heart of Quetzalcoatl?

 

[petros]

What's with deities and leaky hands?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

That kind of image has always baffled me. Jesus, assuming he existed at all, was almost certainly a skinny little dark-skinned Levantine Jew. Why do the usual images of him look like a European Renaissance prince?

 

[mt_pockets1000]

The Earth is even said to be aware if life on her is flourishing or being exhausted.

That sounds reasonable. We don't need a flood of words to tell us that. Anybody with a reasonable mind can see that the earth ebbs and flows like an oscillating, undulating entity in the universe. The earth will react when forces act upon it. Why insult our intelligence by flowering it with outrageous poetic mumbo jumbo? Can you not talk in laymans terms? Everything you say sounds like it's spoken straight from the pulpit. Your message might be better received if you throw off the rhetoric and talk to us as human beings, not aliens.

 

[AnnaG]

Think whatever you like. The reality is ...............

..........something that escapes you.
Whatever. It's still only your measly opinion. You virtually call me a liar and then snivel about personal attack when I retort. You are pathetic.
As I pointed out before, it doesn't matter what others post because it means nothing to you except something with which to nitpick about and see if you can get a rise out of people.

 

[MHz]

Rev Robert Arthur gave a different biblical interpretation of homosexuality and the proper view towards it:

Article 1

What was the sin of Sodom in Genesis 19:1-28?
This Old Testament passage is often wrongly used as "biblical proof" that God is displeased with homosexuals. According to many people these cities were destroyed because residents committed the "sin of homosexuality." To suggest that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of homosexuality is to misinterpret Scripture.
The prophet Ezekiel, in an equally inspired book of the Bible, tells that God was displeased with Sodom for very different reasons: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed, and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty, and did detestable things before me (literally, 'committed idolatry'). Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. (Ezekiel 16:49-50, New International version".

Homosexuality was only one of their sins and it was part of the reason they were destroyed.
The men of that city tried to take the 'strangers', had they accomplished that Lot would not have given his virgin daughters to them.

This is referencing homosexuality, fallen angels took human wives and they will go to the lake.
Jude:1:7:
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha,
and the cities about them in like manner,
giving themselves over to fornication,
and going after strange flesh,
are set forth for an example,
suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

 

[MHz]

Now, how omnipotent can a god be if it gets jealous? That's just inane.

So if your children were taken you would sit back and have a few beers and what-nots and never give them a second thought. God would (and did) kill His one and only Son as part of the process to get us back. Of the two options listed is the 'caring path', the other is your path, which isn't caring.

 

[MHz]

Werll, one thing is for sure, your diction is a little above average even if you can't spell properly.

LOL said the pot to the kettle. Werll,

 

[MHz]

OOOO!!! I am shaking in my boots! You are a twit if you think I am afraid of your god. In fact, I have been challenging that psychopath to come down here and tell me face to face what he is going to do to me for not bowing down and kissing his ass for the past 45 years and the coward has not showed up yet.

Why would you be, there was nothing in that post about saved and unsaved. You imagined a senario, Scripture says things are quite different in what the 'waiting period' is like. Ah Cliffy, when He comes down it will be for everybody, why would He make a special trip just for you, if He was doing interventions He would be doing something for a believer not a disbeliever like you.

 

[MHz]

That's exactly my point, you've just given me the same answer everybody else does, which is not an answer at all. Epicurus posed the key questions over 2200 years ago, and there's still no answer:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

Dex, the only valid answer you will accept is the one you come up with yourself. It isn't up to me or anybody else to supply you with answers to all your questions. The words you need to look at are somewhere in Scripture, if they remain hidden maybe it is meant to be that way. It is probably more that the task is too great or it would require too much energy on your part.

By giving Adam and Eve a free choice and a determination of what would happen if they did not listen He put control in their hands as to if evil would be committed or not. Satan tipped the scales, that in part allows for grace and mercy to be shown to mankind. Fallen angels do not have access to that. That God has a way to nullify the effects of the sin of others does mean He plans for all contingencies. That it doesn't happen fast enough for you means nothing to anybody but you.

 

[MHz]

Does this elevate your to the status of being a great and important person? Slander all others so you (and other non-believers) appear as the 'sane class'.
It would seem to be more in line with an exaggeration of self-worth on your part rather than some defect in people who believe in God.

 

[captain morgan]

Quoting AnnaG Now, how omnipotent can a god be if it gets jealous? That's just inane.

So if your children were taken you would sit back and have a few beers and what-nots and never give them a second thought. God would (and did) kill His one and only Son as part of the process to get us back. Of the two options listed is the 'caring path', the other is your path, which isn't caring.

C'mon Mhz, cut Anna some slack, afterall the comment is based on an educated guess - oops, that's educated guesswork. There must be some fabric supporting it. You ought to view her references, they're quite impressive.

 

[Cliffy]

Why would you be, there was nothing in that post about saved and unsaved. You imagined a senario, Scripture says things are quite different in what the 'waiting period' is like. Ah Cliffy, when He comes down it will be for everybody, why would He make a special trip just for you, if He was doing interventions He would be doing something for a believer not a disbeliever like you.

As usual you ignore the fact that I have repeatedly stated that i am not an atheist but I do not believe in or have any use for your god. I have made the challenge to your god more in jest because he doesn't exist. The deity I would be more concerned with, if I were you, is not some insecure, jealous patriarch, psychopath, but a loving, caring mother who demands nothing of us in the way of worship, just a little respect. Sorry, but I cannot bring myself to take that asshole you call a god seriously.

 

[captain morgan]

Why do you even care Cliffy?... Ultimately, if your beliefs are true, this topic is entirely pointless for you.

 

[JLM]

Why do you even care Cliffy?... Ultimately, if your beliefs are true, this topic is entirely pointless for you.

The ironic part of discussing religion is it is doubtful if anyone of us knows what we are talking about...................:lol::lol::lol: It's good for entertainment though.

 

[Cliffy]

Why do you even care Cliffy?... Ultimately, if your beliefs are true, this topic is entirely pointless for you.

Discussing just about anything is pointless. It is just expressing opinion. It is communicating for the purpose of entertainment. We are here, we have this tool (computer & internet) and we exchange ideas. I express mine , you yours. What else can this be about? Is there some higher purpose, are we just killing time, or something in between? Whatever, I wonder if people think they are doing anything other than mentally masturbating. If so, it would be rather delusional.