Does the bible condemn homosexuality?

page: 20
2
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I came across this post board to me, by error, however, everything is for a reason. I was befriended by someone from Earth and Ether, who stated that she was a Neo-Christian, in which I wanted to understand further. To my dismay, there is really nothing good on the World Wide Web, in reference to the religion. However, I must add, that the Word of God does state specifically what the Lord feels about homosexuality. The references are below:

"A person who is attracted sexually to ember of his or her own sex. Homosexual behavior is prohibited in Scripture (Lev. 20;13) and was a major cause of the divine judgment against Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19: 4-5 and 12 - 13). The apostle Paul listed homosexuals among "the unrighteous", who would not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9), and declared that God's wrath stands against such behavior, whether practiced by men or women (Romans 1:26-27). ( Youngblood, Ronald. Homosexuality. Nelsons New Illustrated Bible Dictionary.Thomas Nelson Publishers. 1995. 575).




posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenflt
 


Leviticus also Clearly calls shellfish eating an Abomination....So shall we burn down all the Red Lobsters?
This would be equally ignorant.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by nivekronnoco
reply to post by ravenflt
 


Leviticus also Clearly calls shellfish eating an Abomination....So shall we burn down all the Red Lobsters?
This would be equally ignorant.


No and the reason why is whenever anyone invokes Leviticus and all the crziness in there as attributed to a clealry crazy God we are always told that this is the Old Tesament when modern Xtianity is about the New Testament.

I once read the whole of Leviticus once holed up in a hotel. I have sinned because I shave ( I find my grey beard a bit alarming). Logic would dictate that we pay attention to the new testament and ignore Leviticus. I don't know if Romans is old or new.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 06:46 AM
link   
Ive noticed that a number of people here say they are against organized religion. I wonder what these people would think about the new UN One World Religion?

Here's a picture of the meditation room at the UN : contenderministries.org...

A statement by Maurice Strong demonstrates the UN dedication to a One World Religion: “The real goal of the Earth Charter is that it will in fact become like the Ten Commandments.”

— Maurice Strong source: www.conspiracyarchive.com...

World Council of Churches and the UN: www.wcc-coe.org...

Rockefellers behind the Interfaith World Movement: www.wcc-coe.org...

And there's just so much much more on this on the Net.

The Un Agenda 21 is the religion of Gaia, to institute UN control of all the world's resources. green-agenda.com...



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Another interesting thing, the Supreme Court declared Humanism to be a religion:
"The U.S. Supreme Court cited Secular Humanism as a religion in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins (367 U.S. 488). Roy Torcaso, the appellant, a practicing Humanist in Maryland, had refused to declare his belief in Almighty God, as then required by State law in order for him to be commissioned as a notary public. The Court held that the requirement for such an oath "invades appellant's freedom of belief and religion."
"Is "Secular Humanism" a "Religion"?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Dewey described Humanism as our "common faith." Julian Huxley called it "Religion without Revelation." The first Humanist Manifesto spoke openly of Humanism as a religion. Many other Humanists could be cited who have acknowledged that Humanism is a religion. In fact, claiming that Humanism was "the new religion" was trendy for at least 100 years, perhaps beginning in 1875 with the publication of The Religion of Humanity by Octavius Brooks Frothingham (1822-1895
source: vftonline.org...
"



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by The angel of light
 





Now the point is how urgent is the need of Reproduction in a world in which there were only two individuals of a specie, like the one described in Genesis, than the one that exist now when there are 6500 millions of persons in the world? Is it possible that the nature is also creating mechanisms of natal control


That certainly is spoken from an evolutionary standpoint. It does not change the natural order of human reproduction, although mad scientists of today may be looking for ways to manipulate that as well. There are apologists for the depopulation agenda who suggest that the natural order is using gayness as a method of controlling population.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join