News For Anti-Gay Christians.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Lazarus Short

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
God gave us marriage to bond two people, 1 male, 1 female, for the purpose of happiness, but most essentially to reproduce.

What? That is the biggest crock of ridiculousness ever.

Ever read the history of marriage?

Happiness was definitely not a part of marriage during times where women were property and had no say.

TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Marriage License is a government contract protecting the rights and property of those joining together as one household/family. No where is god mentioned in the government license entitled Marriage License.

It really annoys me when ancient social needs aren't applied to the times. Procreation was very important in ancient times due to high death rate of babies/children/mothers.

It does not apply today.

It's not a crock of ridiculousness at all, biggest or otherwise. God gave us something good. If we perverted it due to our sinful natures, do NOT blame God. I think you have suffered disappointment with God. Look up, not around. The restoration of all things will soon be at hand.

God who? Who the hell is God?

Look up? Oh - if you only knew what you just said.

Sinful nature? What exactly does that mean?

It means you're Naughty... by proxy

Originally posted by Akragon


It means you're Naughty... by proxy

Oh - Yes I am.

Green eyed red haired Scorpio - - who got divorced right in the middle of the sexual revolution.

AND - - I am a Vanity Witch. Born the day before Halloween - - - needed that extra day to "prepare" - - totally worth it. I look sinfully devilish on All Hallows' Eve.

reply to post by Annee


Uhm..

Pics or it didn't happen?

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by Annee

 

Uhm..

Pics or it didn't happen?

For the first time ever.

That is funny.

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

There you go, talking about God as true while ascribing the Bible's authorship to a bunch of "men with agendas."

God isn't in the bible man...

I just can not take you seriously, for I KNOW that the Bible was written by a far-more-than-human intelligence. I have posted the proof elsewhere, but I don't think you will believe it, no matter how clearly I present it. I fear your attitude may just get in the way.

You don't have to take me seriously, believe what you will...

But how can anyone take you seriously when you say "i have proof"... but i didn't bring it with me...

As to the examples you point out of what God demands, people like you always like to bring up the evil-for-evil which God demanded, but they never mention His demands that we exercise mercy, look out for our neighbors, strangers, orphans, and widows.

People like me?

What do you know of me? ...

Anyway, this was all under the old covenant, and we are under the new. We are now expected to exercise the spirit of the Law, not the letter. Are you sure that I'm the one who needs the guidance?

Absolutely...

You make answers difficult. However, you are correct - God is not in the Bible, but then He is not contained in His creation either - the Bible contains His Words however, and that is my proof. As I have posted elsewhere on ATS, Ivan Panin, a Russian literary critic, examined the Biblical text and discovered extremely complex mathematical patterns which emerge when you plug in the numerical value of the Hebrew or Greek letters. They lacked a separate set of symbols for numbers, so letters did double duty. It has been pointed out that just the ofen-in-dispute last twelve verses of the Gospel of Mark contain some forty identifiable patterns, which make the chance of the text having come about like that by chance about 1 in 40,000,000. These patterns run from Genesis to Revelation and prove with mathematical certainty that the entire document is unified, made of whole cloth, so to speak. It could not have been produced by mere men. You can research this easily on the www if you really care to know the truth. Here's a link:

www.biblebelievers.org.au...

BTW, I didn't say people like you. Do you personalise everything? Maybe I do know something about you.

reply to post by Lazarus Short


Yes i know of various Codes through out the bible... chuck misler goes on about it in tons of different videos, none of which has been validated by any mathmatician as far as i know.

Though that is beside the point...

Many people have written about encounters with various demons and angels all though out that time period... And since most Chrstians believe in the existance of Satan.... AND considering the current state of Christianity, AND the fact that the OT God is nothing like the Father of Jesus from what he discribes...

I think its more then possible that even though these codes and mathimatical equasions exist... the OT could have been, and most likely was "inspired" by an entity other then the true God.

reply to post by Akragon


Well, I put my proof on the table - how about you? I think you just refuse to be pinned down.

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
reply to post by Akragon

 

Well, I put my proof on the table - how about you? I think you just refuse to be pinned down.

i don't need any proof my friend... i know truth when i see it.

I am in fact "pinned down" so to speak... but again my truth comes from the source. Amazingly enough you call him your saviour...

I do not, though he is my example...

The rest of the book is useless, and no mathimatical Code can show me otherwise

I can not disagree with the actions my my God... perhaps you can live with that, but i can't...

I believe the father of Jesus would disagree with much of what is written within the bible...

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
reply to post by Akragon

 

Well, I put my proof on the table - how about you? I think you just refuse to be pinned down.

Actually, you more like regurgitated the same crap that has no proof at all down on the table. First you said that marrige was for happiness, where you were told that it wasn't and that untill today, it was almost always forced. Also, ALL religons have a form of marrige, and christianity is NOT the first one to have that concept, nor is judaism.

Than you said that you "looked up" if god wrote the bible, and implied that you found out he did, which is the biggest crock I have ever heard. (Thank annee for adding that term to my vocab) Than, after trying to insult me about my term homophobic when it came to the biblical authors, you went on some wild tangent and basicly said that I failed. So here is what I say to you,

A. The people of the time the bible was written where pretty homophobic, at least the hebrews and jews were, the romans where more like raging manwhores.
B. The peopple at the time of the bible's writing had nothing to do with the antihomosexual themes in it, again, that IS sort of what this entire OP is about. *facepalm*
C. If you looked up who wrote the bible, the only place that would say god did it is some extremeist christian group. Even catholics, (The ones who started it all) say that the bible was written by men and manipulated by men.

Than you talked about the codes in the bible, which is NOT proof that a god wrote the book. It IS proof though that the authors communicated. Also, notice how he looked at the ORIGNIAL text? I would bet all my money that you do not even know half the stuff in the original text, nor have read it. The book you read now is like when sombody screws up an omlette, so they chop it up and call it a scrambled egg. God can do math, sure, but so can people.

BTW: You are getting WAY OFF TOPIC. This is about the word homosexual in the bible. You have made it into a "does god exist" debate... much like most christians do.
Also, why did you bring up gay marrige? Nobody mentioned it but you.
PS: Im christian and proud of it.

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
It could not have been produced by mere men. You can research this easily on the www if you really care to know the truth.

But - it could have been produced by off planet beings - - - more evolved/advanced then humans.

The Terra Papers claim off planet beings are the creators of humans. No god involved.

Just because you can find it on the WWW . . . ya know . . .

ATS link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

WWW link: www.scribd.com...

reply to post by darkredfish


All I care to say to your insulting post is that I had to establish the authority of God and His Bible in order to substantiate the verses I quoted. One thing follows after another. As ever, everyone's belief comes down to his or her base attitude, what books he/she has read, and who he/she is willing to believe. I am willing to believe God, have read His Book, and have no chip on my shoulder. I shake off the dust of my sandals at you all...

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
It could not have been produced by mere men. You can research this easily on the www if you really care to know the truth.

But - it could have been produced by off planet beings - - - more evolved/advanced then humans.

The Terra Papers claim off planet beings are the creators of humans. No god involved.

Just because you can find it on the WWW . . . ya know . . .

ATS link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

WWW link: www.scribd.com...

Oh, yeah, proof upon proof here. The Terra Papers? Where did those come from - channeled were they?

Edit: OK, I looked at the site thru the link you gave. Indian lore?? Are you serious???!

My, but we digress.

So, how did this thread become an argument about the existence of God?

The concept of a Prime Mover is still a reasonable philosophical argument with scientific implications (and of course, theological ones).

But I'm bored and really just wanted to ask if "Lazarus Short" is the play on Lazarus Long that I take it to be? Another Heinlein fan? Kind of funny-- speaking of provocative sexuality issues-- pick up a Heinlein novel. Goodness, but incest was a big theme with him.

Finally, as I think I'll bow out of this, now; a few observation should anyone wish to redirect, refine or articulate their thoughts:

* Marriage, as our modern culture takes it to be, may have little in common with Biblical references-- a social-economic contract indicative of security rather than a physical-spiritual union indicative of transcendent potential-- perhaps? Community played a much larger role in the past, as well.
* For a non-Christian, the loudest voice in the West (fundamentalist-evangelical) may be the only form of Christianity known; but it is hardly the oldest or even typical voice of the Church.
* The vast majority of Christians and the bulk of Christian teaching throughout time seeks to establish... NOTHING. Not law, not government, not a kingdom, not morality and not even security are found to be aims of the believers, individually or collectively.
* Persons, individually and collectively, do seek to establish such things as just mentioned-- but tyrants exists without regard to religion or even politics-- tyrants just are-- and no group has claim to them all, and no group is free from any.

Originally posted by Lazarus Short

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
It could not have been produced by mere men. You can research this easily on the www if you really care to know the truth.

But - it could have been produced by off planet beings - - - more evolved/advanced then humans.

The Terra Papers claim off planet beings are the creators of humans. No god involved.

Just because you can find it on the WWW . . . ya know . . .

ATS link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

WWW link: www.scribd.com...

Oh, yeah, proof upon proof here. The Terra Papers? Where did those come from - channeled were they?

Edit: OK, I looked at the site thru the link you gave. Indian lore?? Are you serious???!

Ah - - have you actually read the Jesus story? Talk about "Are you serious???! It is about as "far out" and unbelievable as you can get. Or do you not see that?

Of all the stories I've read in my 65+ years - - - the Terra Papers make the most logical sense to me (in its general concept). The Jesus story with the addition of ETs (off planet beings) - - makes more sense then the Official story.

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

Back on topic. I am old enough to remember George Wallace - the Great White Hope. Today he is - by most - looked upon as a pathetic white supremest of an era gone by - - that no longer belongs in this society.

Exactly the way Anti-gay fundamental Christians will be looked upon in the years to come.

reply to post by Annee


Do you mind if i ask...

What is far out about the "Jesus story"

Are you talking about the virgin birth, and the walking on water thing?

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by Annee

 

Do you mind if i ask...

What is far out about the "Jesus story"

Are you talking about the virgin birth, and the walking on water thing?

There are lots of things. BTW - I grew up Christian and have read the entire bible twice. But I've read so many other things through out my life - - I can't say 100% if all the stories come from the bible. So I just refer to them as "Jesus Stories". If I am speaking specifically of Jesus of the Bible - - I use the term "Biblical Jesus or Mythical Biblical Jesus".

The Manna being dropped from the sky. Healings. Moses coming down from the mount with what looked like radiation burns on his face. Jesus being seen transparent after the resurrection. Turning water to wine. There are lots of "Jesus Stories". I also realize there are many Allegories/Metaphors etc used during times where independent ideas could mean death.

This thread is not about my personal beliefs. However - I do believe there was a real political dissident by the name of Jesus who was executed. I also believe in the Watchers - - and there has been an off-planet being intervention through out the history of man. It seems to me there was some kind of ET intervention during this time.

The word "homosexual" was not added into any biblical text until the 1946 editions were printed.

Correct, popular translations such as the King James Version did not have the word "homosexual" in it. That actual term is a mesh of Greek and Latin. It wasn't commonly used until the late 1800s. Still the depiction of two men having sexual acts with each other is clearly labeled in the Bible as something that is against God's will. The word itself isn't necessary to define the act. Why is it against God's will? It violates the first commandment that Adam received. It's true that sexual experiences have more than one function but that doesn't change the fact that there is still one primary function for sex.

For further clarity the Bible never condemned two men loving each other. It was even common for two men to kiss each other as a greeting of affection. Remember Judas' famous greeting of Jesus? So what is the distinction? The condemnation was strictly related to sexual acts performed by two men. This is not and has never been about love or affection or choosing to live with another man.

Putting on my tin-foil hat I'm starting to believe that the prevalence of the push for homosexual acceptance is in fact a means of population control. Of course they're not going to sell it as such. The cigarette companies don't sell you on lung cancer and asthma. They tell you how glamorous and sexy smoking makes you. So TPTB will push the phrases like "free love" and "acceptance" while glossing over the fact that it means a lower birth rate and it reduces the population in the more educated class of society. More workers, less thinkers.

I doubt that any of the people in this discussion who disagree with the Bible's stance on homosexuality even believe that the Bible is what it claims to be. Let's all pick a topic from a book we think is a fairy-tale and argue about it as if it were actual facts. Someone is either in denial or pointlessly involved in meaningless chatter. More arguments about issues that don't put bread and butter on the table means less focus on meaningful issues and in the long run more dependence on government and greater government control. Divide and conquer. That's how it's done.

Originally posted by dbates
I'm starting to believe that the prevalence of the push for homosexual acceptance is in fact a means of population control.

I think that is one of the most ridiculous arguments currently being put forth.

The "mixed soup" that makes a human being is incredibly complex. It is not always the exact same ingredients - stirred and "baked" the exact same way. If it was we'd all be clones.

Just like being Left Handed (which science can not explain) - - - attraction to same gender is just another variation of the "mixed soup".

Nature does not have a problem with the "mixed soup" of creating living matter. Only society does. It is a man made manufactured phobia.

Originally posted by Annee
Just like being Left Handed (which science can not explain) - - - attraction to same gender is just another variation of the "mixed soup".

Gene for Left-Handed Trait Discovered - National Geographic, 2007

Originally posted by dbates

Originally posted by Annee
Just like being Left Handed (which science can not explain) - - - attraction to same gender is just another variation of the "mixed soup".

Gene for Left-Handed Trait Discovered - National Geographic, 2007

Thanks. About 10% - - - same as homosexuality. (yes I know the 10% is being debated)

I just read an article recently that science doesn't know why some people are born left handed. I'll have to save this link.

So - they found a gene. Interestingly believed to be inherited from father - - - while homosexuality is believed to come through the mother.

But - - its still how the soup gets "mixed".