Homosexuality= 999,999,999,999,999,999 God= 0

Originally posted by meggiddo2012
reply to post by OptimusSubprime

 

Pick any version and show me where the central message of the cross is different as far as salvation and redemption goes sir.

If salvation through Jesus Christ is required, then it is important to apply Scripture to our lives. If you don't believe then nothing or no evidence I bring to you will matter. Spiritual discernment and insight is required to fully understand the Scriptures. They are misunderstood, misinterpreted and utilized for power, abuse and control because of the lack of the above. Anyways, forgive if I seem argumentative it is not what I desire. I choose to believe in faith what I believe and others do the same. That is the beauty of free will. Again, my intention is not to argue or offend but to share what I believe to be true based on Scripture.

I believe rapist should marry the woman they rape, and pay her father 50 silvers. If she is rapped in a city but doesn't cry loud enough, she should be killed in front of the entire city. people who work on the sabbath should be killed, and don't forget those evil shell fish eaters. people who wear clothing of multiple fabrics? KILL THEM!, people who don't listen to priests, DEAD! adulterers? RIP! a priests daughter who has sex, I say burn her to death! followers of other religions? kill them too. women who are not virgins on their wedding surely deserve death.

When I pillage towns that have sinners in them, I'm free to rape women and dash babies into pieces too, cause the bible tells me so.

How about this gem Deuteronomy 21:10-14 THANK YOU GOD!

When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."

Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by jimmyx

 

Homosexualtiy is wrong.
It is not a natural function of
either the vagina or the penis.

Be thankful then that you were not
born attracted to juvenile male ostriches.

edit on 6-2-2013 by slugger9787 because: (no reason given)

have you ever tried to put a penis into a butt? it fits perfectly fine. You'd be surprised how many things a penis can fit into.

These are the kinds of posts and stories that remind me that despite the technology foisted upon us we are still living in the dark ages. Nothing ever seems to be quite as important as people's private sexuality. What you can do or not do based on your genital configuration, how you can express yourself, who you can sleep with... Everyone is obsessed.

All the wasted energy thinking about it on all sides of the fence. It doesn't matter. None of it matters. It's not worth anyone's attention.

Stopping corruption, restoring liberty, developing energy systems that are in balance with nature instead of destructive to it, conquering disease, making sure nobody is hungry or homeless, and exploring the galaxy. Those are things worth thinking about; not who people want to love or rub up against.

reply to post by mahatche

if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamoured of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife.

So basically kill her parents, kidnap her, and rape her.

At least the Biblical God allowed a month of mourning. A cruel god would have probably only given a week...

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


unless the OT god was frequently pharaoh of that particular era and the translators didn't realize this, cause if you read that stuff, it often contradicts itself such as the saying that no man has seen god, yet abraham supposedly saw him at his tent when "god" shows up; with a couple men in tow, on his way to determine the fates of sodom and gomorrah that he had heard bad things about so was gonna travel to to witness it first hand. correct me if i'm wrong but can't god just witness stuff supernaturally? why'd he have to travel on the ground, to get there? or ezekiel witnessing what is said to be god in a "vision" on a floating platform, but when you look closer it just says one who looks like god. well, what's god look like if you have never seen god?

reply to post by 0001391


all fine points , however how are people supposed to focus on these fine ideals when their basic rights are being denied !

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
reply to post by lupodigubbio

 

Such a stupid topic title. This doesn't prove anything except that we as humans are all inherently sinful and weak. Even Christian's can fall into sin you know, although its not an excuse. We are not perfect just forgiven.

Homosexuality is a sin and a unnatural desire of the flesh. God takes it very seriously and views it as an abomination.

edit on 8-2-2013 by RevelationGeneration because: (no reason given)

Stupid enough to catch your attention. What would that make you then?

Oh God takes all abominations very seriously. I'm more concerned about the mixed fabric shirt I'm wearing and the shrimp paella I ate yesterday. Speaking of abominations, allow me to cherry pick:

Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished.

So my dear friend. We're both #ed, apparently

reply to post by lupodigubbio


Subjectively, I think it's right that everyone be who they want to be.

Objectively, I don't agree with this new society that they're planning for by which they're encouraging all men to act like women (using beauty products, perfume, shaving their bodies, etc) and encouraging all women to be "Feminists" emasculating men, dressing, working, drinking, smoking like men and turning against motherhood, as well as the big promotion now of Lesbianism in music ("I kissed a girl and I liked it" songs) and on television serial dramas, etc. All of this is being done so that ultimately the generations of the future will all look EXACTLY the same and won't be able to tell if someone is a man or a woman.

Is this the future we want? Where men are obsolete and women reject motherhood so much so that we need test-tube babies and special "breeders" to grow them? Where babies are brought up by the State? Where do human rights come into all this?

Also note that these people planning this new society are the Marxist International who despise Christianity which supports Individualism where everyone has the right to live, whereas the Marxists are planning Collectivism where everyone works for the "Good of Society" i.e. if you can't work, don't be a burden to society, offer yourself up for voluntary euthanasia because you don't have the right to live. Can't you see that they're using Homosexuality to help destroy Christianity? To destroy Individualism?

So remember who and what you're supporting when you post videos like this. Not enough people are realising that their actions today are only serving the Marxists to quickly bring on their hideous controlled society.

Originally posted by rottensociety
reply to post by lupodigubbio

 

Subjectively, I think it's right that everyone be who they want to be.

Can't you see that they're using Homosexuality to help destroy Christianity? To destroy Individualism?

I understand your point, even though I don't see enough evidence for this Marxist conspiracy you wrote about. However, this little bit disturbs me.

Your above quote basically suggests Christiany = Individualism

Can you see what is wrong with this concept? Please elaborate, I'm honestly at a loss for words.

Seems god couldn't cure 'the gay'. Guess it's another one for the too hard basket. ...together with war, famine, pestilence, rape, murder, child abuse...*

Originally posted by meggiddo2012
reply to post by OptimusSubprime

 

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
New Living Translation (NLT)
9 Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, 10 or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. 11 Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

So male prostitution is sin but ok for women? Whatever!!! Just by that 1 paragraph, No one on the planet today will ever go to heaven! Not even the POPE. Again: ...or are thieves...or greedy people...or cheat people

Oh but call on his name and you'll be fine. Right?!?

Originally posted by lupodigubbio
"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?" (l Corinthians 11:14)

Another one that make a lot of sense... Didn't most men have long hair back then....INCLUDING Jesus...

I know many many people (very dear friends and family members) that are gay and you know what, they are believers, respectfull of others and NEVER judged heterosexuals for their preferences........THEY have far more respect for others than the people discriminating against them.

Who decided that it is right or wrong to love another human being for who he/she is and not what "label" he/she has received by society. My closest friend ever has been married twice and has had kids in both marriages. After being cheated on by both, taken to the cleaners twice, he just got fed up with women. Was single for nearly a decade and then met "him"...they were just very good friends at first and things "just happenned".

They have been happily together for almost 20 years now (longest relationship in his life). And they are happy...isn't THAT what matters? And NOT what some couple thousand year old book, translated who knows how many times(and misinterpreted) says should be so.....or some guy wearing a "ROBE" talking to a crown in Church thinks is right.

So I say this: It is not immoral to be happy and in love, no matter the sexuality of the persons inplicated. Love is a beautifull thing, actually the most beautifull thing this world can offer.

And love has no preferences!

reply to post by Teye22


ever notice the old and new testaments are totally different?

Originally posted by meggiddo2012
reply to post by lupodigubbio

 

Question. If you eliminate the male or female sex from the equation, could humanity or humans continue to exist or will we cease to exist?

Thats what the greys are aint it?? lol

Originally posted by rottensociety
reply to post by lupodigubbio

 

Subjectively, I think it's right that everyone be who they want to be.

Objectively, I don't agree with this new society that they're planning for by which they're encouraging all men to act like women (using beauty products, perfume, shaving their bodies, etc) and encouraging all women to be "Feminists" emasculating men, dressing, working, drinking, smoking like men and turning against motherhood, as well as the big promotion now of Lesbianism in music ("I kissed a girl and I liked it" songs) and on television serial dramas, etc. All of this is being done so that ultimately the generations of the future will all look EXACTLY the same and won't be able to tell if someone is a man or a woman.

Is this the future we want? Where men are obsolete and women reject motherhood so much so that we need test-tube babies and special "breeders" to grow them? Where babies are brought up by the State? Where do human rights come into all this?

Also note that these people planning this new society are the Marxist International who despise Christianity which supports Individualism where everyone has the right to live, whereas the Marxists are planning Collectivism where everyone works for the "Good of Society" i.e. if you can't work, don't be a burden to society, offer yourself up for voluntary euthanasia because you don't have the right to live. Can't you see that they're using Homosexuality to help destroy Christianity? To destroy Individualism?

So remember who and what you're supporting when you post videos like this. Not enough people are realising that their actions today are only serving the Marxists to quickly bring on their hideous controlled society.

Once again, I ask: Isn't that what the greys are?? lol

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
I used to be one of those "pray the gay away" Chritians. Now that I am older and less ignorant I have determined due to scientific evidence that people are born gay. Having said that, why would God allow someone to be born a certain way, and then punish said person for all eternity for something that is not their fault? Yes, ALL people are born into sin, but only a few are born gay. I don't think that God would choose a select amount of people to have more sin than everyone else, therefore I must conclude that being gay is not a sin. Being gay is not biologically natural in regards to procreation, but it is natural to the person born gay.

I am still a Christian, but I take a non-fundalmentalist point of view. I believe that individual liberty is a gift from God, and that all men were endowed by their creator with certain rights... life, liberty, and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. For a gay person, their pursuit of happiness involves being with a member of their own sex, and there is nothing wrong with that.

edit on 6-2-2013 by OptimusSubprime because: (no reason given)

YAY SCIENCE! Destroyer of ignorance, revealer of truth!
Now, if and when science proves there is no god, this whole argument is moot.

OptimusSubprime, if you can accept being gay because you were 'made' that way then who do you believe wrote that crap in the bible, is that the word of god, or the word of man? If it was wrote by man, what part of it was inspired by a god? If one part is false, then the whole thing is suspect.

Man, I would hate to be gay and be a man/woman of god, how would you cope with yourself? All you could do to ease your tortured mind would be to de-gay yourself.
Even hetero's have the occasional gay thoughts. (the ones who can't handle that are your dangerous homophobes, religion makes homophobes justified in their idiocy)
Yes, I believe homophobes are more gay than your average hetero, and they fear that, then they hate what they fear.

So if you are a Christian and accept that you are gay, you are denying the word of god (man), so pick one, being gay or being religious, picking one will set you free.
Why torture yourself because of something you cannot prove to be more than just faith?
Being gay is real.

(Please note, I am heterosexual, I am not gay, (not that there is anything wrong with that) but, I will admit I have had gay thoughts, but I am not going to beat myself up over it.

I have an idea; why don't heterosexual people try converting to homosexuality?
That should be easy enough to do, right?
No more drooling over the opposite sex, love your own kind, have a partner that can understand you.
Changing your sexuality should be a piece of cake and easy on the mind and soul.

And birds can be frogs if they wanted to.

reply to post by rottensociety


Even though that song 'I kissed a girl and I liked it' makes me cringe, like her other songs, your whole post is written from a religious POV.
People will be the sexuality they want to be, and they should not be ashamed of that, but I admit it shouldn't be pushed on society to sell records.

But if men want to express femininity and vice versa, so big freakin WHAT!
So what, who cares, I'd rather live in a society that feels comfortable in their own skin than being what a religion and social 'norms' dictates to society.
Sounds like a better, un-repressed world to me.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Teye22

 

ever notice the old and new testaments are totally different?

Yes I did...

They are different books though, although some passages might be found in both books in different terms.

Here are a few linkies that "might" shed some light on those diferences, and the reasons for them.

Link
Link

Please dont quote me on any of these as I have no position on the accuracy of these books. I dont even know if I believe in them my self. I think that after the many m,any translations and interpretations, they might have lost a lot of their true meaning.

Just my opinion though.

in all honesty - whats the purpose of OP s thread ?

so we have here a male, who is fighting with his biological nature - and obviously lost a battle.
And ?

Some fight their need for alcohol, others fight their need to steal,
again others fight their own haughtyness,
- you name it.

it is not the fighting of those things - included homosexuality - what is 'wrong '.
But it is wrong to STOP fighting, and EMBRACE them.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

 

yet abraham supposedly saw him at his tent when "god" shows up; with a couple men in tow,

Uh, HUH! Abe pitched a tent! And there are no women there. Hmmmm?

on his way to determine the fates of sodom and gomorrah that he had heard bad things about so was gonna travel to to witness it first hand.

I've always wondered why god would need Abe to go check it out for him/her/it, why couldn't an all powerful being do that him/her/itself? What does that say about 'all knowing'?

correct me if i'm wrong but can't god just witness stuff supernaturally? why'd he have to travel on the ground, to get there? or ezekiel witnessing what is said to be god in a "vision" on a floating platform, but when you look closer it just says one who looks like god. well, what's god look like if you have never seen god?

It just don't make any sense, does it?