God And Homosexuality

[Tazarah]

Actually no, @PureX didn't say any of that.

Basically, yes. This is what they said about the bible in post #160:

"Jesus did not write Corinthians, and the MAN who did was expressing the same tired prejudice and ignorance that we see expressed every day even in our own time. Also, that MAN that wrote to the Corinthians never met Jesus nor ever heard him speak. So he had no idea what Jesus would have actually said. Even the gospels were written between 75 and 200 years after the events they supposedly portray. Plenty of time for the stories to become mythologized."

And this is what they said about the bible in post #182:

"In fact, the people who wrote and used the OT scripture did so with the specific intention of providing inspiration for group contemplation, discussion, and debate. They intended the texts to be used precisely for the purpose of confronting the inexplicability of their "living God". A God so beyond their comprehension that they refused to even assign it a name. These were clearly not people who presumed themselves to know the mind of God to the degree that they could write spiritual treatises in God's name. And they would be shocked to discover that there are humans now days that idolize their texts in that way."

^ in addition to the fact that he/she feels they have more wisdom than the prophets, the emboldened portion of what they wrote in post # 182 is completely false, as well as many other parts that I will not take the time to mention.

 

[Tazarah]

You didn't bother addressing a thing I said. You have to go deeper than just reading modern translations. I know what the Bible says, you don't need to spam me with verses like I'm ignorant. I apparently know far more about it than the vapid display you've put on here. Anyone can spam Bible verses but that doesn't mean you understand the context, key terms in the original language, let alone the meaning.

It says that women lusted after women and men lusted after men, that it was unnatural, and that they received punishment for those errors. Not much to take out of context.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

I would address all of the points you've made concerning the idea that non-Israelites can somehow take part in the covenants of Israel (which completely contradicts the bible when you examine it in it's entirety), but there's no need to. All I have to do is ask you to take a look at future Kingdom prophecies, like Isaiah 60:11-12 for example -- which says that in the Kingdom, the gentiles will be forced to serve Israel or be completely destroyed.

Then, we come to a point where we realize that there is only one out of two possible explanations:

a) the bible is contradicting itself.

or

b) the "gentiles" in the NT are not actual heathen, non-Israelite gentiles -- but they are Israelite foreigners who have lost their way and have been separated from their Israelite heritage as I have already explained.

If actual non-Israelite gentiles are able to partake in the covenants of Israel then why do prophecies like Isaiah 60:11-12 (there are many more which say this) say that the gentiles will either serve Israel in the Kingdom or be destroyed?

I don't understand why everyone on this site believes they can ignore my questions and move on to their own.

Do you concede on the fact that God is the literal father of the spirits of Mankind?

Besides - I have already answered your question.

As I already quoted from Hebrews 12, Romans 8 and Galatians 3 - those who have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ - unto baptism - are recognized as legitimate children of God and are then numbered among the seed of Abraham through adoption - and they therefore become heirs of the promise and joint-heirs with the Lord Jesus Christ.

As I said before - you ignore the answers contained in the scriptures.

 

[Tazarah]

I don't understand why everyone on this site believes they can ignore my questions and move on to their own.

Do you concede on the fact that God is the literal father of the spirits of Mankind?

Besides - I have already answered your question.

As I already quoted from Hebrews 12, Romans 8 and Galatians 3 - those who have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ - unto baptism - are recognized as legitimate children of God and are then numbered among the seed of Abraham through adoption - and they therefore become heirs of the promise and joint-heirs with the Lord Jesus Christ.

As I said before - you ignore the answers contained in the scriptures.

Because scriptures like Isaiah 60:11-12 (among many others) are a literal checkmate to your entire doctrine.

Doesn't Isaiah 60:11-12 say that the gentiles will serve the Israelites in the kingdom or be destroyed?

 

[PureX]

You're essentially saying that the God ordained prophets who God himself choice had no idea what they were talking about, and that you somehow have more knowledge and wisdom than they did concerning the true will of God. This is hilarious.

God has not ordained anyone to be a prophet, you have. (And you are not God.) And I'm sure they had an idea what they were writing about. But I'm also sure their ideas were not inerrant. (Because they were not God, either.)

 

[Tazarah]

God has not ordained anyone to be a prophet, you have. (And you are not God.) And I'm sure they had an idea what they were writing about. But I'm also sure their ideas were not inerrant. (Because they were not God, either.)

Where in the world are you getting all of this from? At this point I can't even take you seriously anymore and will disregard all that you have previously said.

AMOS 2:10-11

"10 Also I brought you up from the land of Egypt, and led you forty years through the wilderness, to possess the land of the Amorite.
11 And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for Nazarites. Is it not even thus, O ye children of Israel? saith the LORD."

 

[PureX]

Where in the world are you getting all of this from? At this point I can't even take you seriously anymore and will disregard all that you have previously said.

Then I won't bother responding, further.

 

[Fool]

Ah, so the bible is wrong, and you're right. The God ordained prophets are all wrong and ignorant, and you're right.

2 TIMOTHY 3:16

"16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

jesus corrected the pharisees. goes to show, just because you believe something doesn't make it right.


case in point, the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath.

 

[Left Coast]

Basically, yes. This is what they said about the bible in post #160:

"Jesus did not write Corinthians, and the MAN who did was expressing the same tired prejudice and ignorance that we see expressed every day even in our own time. Also, that MAN that wrote to the Corinthians never met Jesus nor ever heard him speak. So he had no idea what Jesus would have actually said. Even the gospels were written between 75 and 200 years after the events they supposedly portray. Plenty of time for the stories to become mythologized."

And this is what they said about the bible in post #182:

"In fact, the people who wrote and used the OT scripture did so with the specific intention of providing inspiration for group contemplation, discussion, and debate. They intended the texts to be used precisely for the purpose of confronting the inexplicability of their "living God". A God so beyond their comprehension that they refused to even assign it a name. These were clearly not people who presumed themselves to know the mind of God to the degree that they could write spiritual treatises in God's name. And they would be shocked to discover that there are humans now days that idolize their texts in that way."

^ in addition to the fact that he/she feels they have more wisdom than the prophets, the emboldened portion of what they wrote in post # 182 is completely false, as well as many other parts that I will not take the time to mention.

I read what he said, thank you. Your summary is an obvious strawman of what he actually wrote. His position isn't that he has "more wisdom than the prophets," simply because he disagrees with a few of them on some point. His point is that the authors of the Bible didn't think how you do (viewing themselves as completely infallible), and we can still find value in a text even if we don't completely agree with it.

 

[BilliardsBall]

How about if one says, "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."? Think god loves it when man lies with a male as with a woman? But call it whatever you like. In my opinion god hates it.

.

Okay, does this help?

It's awful or (an abomination to a holy God) to do drugs, murder, be homosexual. Murder is bad for both victim and killer, et al.

 

[metis]

If God is supposedly against homosexuality, then why did He make them that way genetically?

Geneticists tell us that they believe around 80% of all professed homosexuals are as such mainly due to genetics. And we even also see this being within other primates as well, btw.

 

[columbus]

Okay, does this help?

It's awful or (an abomination to a holy God) to do drugs, murder, be homosexual. Murder is bad for both victim and killer, et al.

And having sex with my partner of 25 years is like murder.

Yes, that helps. It well explains Holy God, according to BilliardsBall.

I see no reason to believe in such an abominable God image, but you do. Yes, it helps a great deal.
Tom

 

[Tazarah]

jesus corrected the pharisees. goes to show, just because you believe something doesn't make it right.


case in point, the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath.

The pharisees were not prophets, were not God in inspired and were not the men who wrote the biblical scriptures.

 

[Tazarah]

I read what he said, thank you. Your summary is an obvious strawman of what he actually wrote. His position isn't that he has "more wisdom than the prophets," simply because he disagrees with a few of them on some point. His point is that the authors of the Bible didn't think how you do (viewing themselves as completely infallible), and we can still find value in a text even if we don't completely agree with it.

It's not a strawman. He is basically saying that he understands what the prophets were thinking and how the mindsets they were in when they wrote the texts. He is implying that the men who wrote these scriptures did not know what they were talking about simply because he does not agree with what they wrote.

 

[Left Coast]

It's not a strawman. He is basically saying that he understands what the prophets were thinking and how the mindsets they were in when they wrote the texts. He is implying that the men who wrote these scriptures did not know what they were talking about simply because he does not agree with what they wrote.

Again, no, that's not "basically" what he said. It's a strawman you're setting up to knock down. But @PureX can defend himself quite readily if he so chooses, so I have no need to do so any further.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Okay, does this help?

It's awful or (an abomination to a holy God) to do drugs, murder, be homosexual. Murder is bad for both victim and killer, et al.

Smoking a joint and being gay is on par with murder? What!

 

[Tazarah]

Again, no, that's not "basically" what he said. It's a strawman you're setting up to knock down. But @PureX can defend himself quite readily if he so chooses, so I have no need to do so any further.

He has literally said that the people who wrote the bible were "ignorant", he has blatantly implied that they did not know what they were talking about, and he has made it clear that he believes his opinions are more accurate than that of the prophets. This isn't a straw man, I've quoted his exact words.

 

[Left Coast]

He has literally said that the people who wrote the bible were "ignorant", he has blatantly implied that they did not know what they were talking about, and he has made it clear that he believes his opinions are more accurate than that of the prophets. This isn't a straw man, I've quoted his exact words.

I have no need to rehash his argument without him here.

You believe the Bible is infallible. I don't. I see no where to go from here, unless you want to try demonstrating that every word of the Bible is true. Good luck.

 

[Tazarah]

I have no need to rehash his argument without him here.

You believe the Bible is infallible. I don't. I see no where to go from here, unless you want to try demonstrating that every word of the Bible is true. Good luck.

If you do not subscribe to the bible or it's teachings then that's one thing and I have no problem with that.

However, Purex claims to be a christian or a follower Christ and his teachings -- but for some reason feels that he can pick and choose which scriptures are valid and which aren't.

Any scriptures that he doesn't agree with he considers to be invalid or "ignorant".

That's called hypocrisy.

 

[Left Coast]

If you do not subscribe to the bible or it's teachings then that's one thing and I have no problem with that.

However, Purex claims to be a christian or a follower Christ and his teachings -- but for some reason feels that he can pick and choose which scriptures are valid and which aren't.

But all Christians do that. The Bible didn't fall ready-made from heaven. Humans canonized it - they picked and chose which of many competing documents in the early church they would consider authoritative. And they didn't all agree. And y'all have never agreed on how to interpret the Scriptures, even when some of you could agree on what even counts in that category.