Gay theology (i.e. Mel White, Soulforce) why even try?

[WhatThe]

Geez, I don't know. How about honesty and integrity? Oh, and truth.

So now you're saying that anyone non-Christian is devoid of honesty, integrity, and truth?
Way to love thy neighbour. Good job.

I could also agree with your Christian references... as they apply to CHRISTIANS. Not non Christians. However, not even all Christians are agreed on the subject of the bible & homosexuality. There are many different opinions; all i want to know if what makes your more valid then everyone elses.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Well see, here's the thing.
I can tell you to go have a look at the topics on www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.com , but you will only respond with "no, that's wrong, it's pathetic" so what's the point?

Excuse me, but I am responsible for the Original Post.

The examples given to "affirm" gay sex and gay unions, that the site uses, makes sex-slave pedophilia/pederasty completly OK "for Christians." Um, supposedly "even GLBT's" reject pedophilia.

It makes incest between a mother in law and a duaghter in law a beautiful thing.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of the "haughtiness" and uncaring actions of its people. I agree it was not only homosexuality. I have come to the conclusion, that GLBT's have far more hubris on their stance than anyone I have ever seen on any issue, other than atheists and Humanists, including myself. The very word "gay" ( a neologism) could easily be defined as "haughty."

The website equates another multilated slave as something wonderful in the Eunuch of Acts.

Also, the way gay theologians handle David and Jonathan does away with the word "phobia" when ANY decent parent gets a dose of how the see the friendship of men. Many, many men have literally given their loves for their friends and submit to the authority of one over them, without any sexual slant on their love.

Gay theology is not a good place to promote GLBT perspective of right and wrong behaviors.

 

[WhatThe]

Excuse me, but I am responsible for the Original Post.

The examples given to "affirm" gay sex and gay unions, that the site uses, makes sex-slave pedophilia/pederasty completly OK "for Christians." Um, supposedly "even GLBT's" reject pedophilia.

It makes incest between a mother in law and a duaghter in law a beautiful thing.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of the "haughtiness" and uncaring actions of its people. I agree it was not only homosexuality. I have come to the conclusion, that GLBT's have far more hubris on their stance than anyone I have ever seen on any issue, other than atheists and Humanists, including myself. The very word "gay" ( a neologism) could easily be defined as "haughty."

The website equates another multilated slave as something wonderful in the Eunuch of Acts.

Also, the way gay theologians handle David and Jonathan does away with the word "phobia" when ANY decent parent gets a dose of how the see the friendship of men. Many, many men have literally given their loves for their friends and submit to the authority of one over them, without any sexual slant on their love.

Gay theology is not a good place to promote GLBT perspective of right and wrong behaviors.

As i have stated to you before, passages need to be examined in relation to the time that they were written.
What we now consider to be paedophilia was in those times considered to be the norm. People married at a very young age in comparison to today.
So if you are going to call that paedophilia, then you must also assume that Joseph was a paedophile, as scholars theorise the age of Mary to be about 12.

As for a mother and daughter in law, they share no blood/genetics, therefore it is not incest. Mother and daughter, yes; mother and daughter in law, no.

And again, who is to say that your interpretation is any more valid than anoyone else's?

 

[ReverendDG]

Turning out just as the prophets described I see.

of course because they considered anything they didn't follow wrong, its nothing new.

Nothing up to the nuptials. Then reason takes over to the unreasonableness of same-gender "couplings." According to anatomy, it is quite abnormal. (Don't even need my Bible for that one.)

tell that to the prostate (at least in the case of male homosexuals) and tell that to heterosexuals who preform oral.

I'll eat fifty twinkies a day and find out. I LOVE twinkies. AND I AM NOT TALKING GAY SLANG. I mean the Hostess cake.

thats just sad, you think thats the first thing that pops into peoples minds when they hear the word "twinkies"?
that tells more about you than about anyone else

Is that what you were taught in College by your liberal/progressive marxist atheist professors.

no i'd say by the dictionary and political science. are you just out to take potshots at people you don't know?

How come abortion and gay sex is far more like ancient pagan worship practices? Hardly progreesive going back to Molech worship.

really? i've never heard of anyone requesting any orgies or burning children to bronze effigies
i think thats all in your overly obsessed mind

"Conservatives" push for a decent and responsible and honest society. Free of perversions and immorality becoming civil rights. Conservatives it's been shown, give more of their money to charities than liberals, who take tax dollars and give little else back.

thats not what the current batch of conservatives say, or else they wouldn't wiretap us citizens or hold people of arab decent without right

of course when it comes to "immorality" or "perversions" its all the ones you don't like, not the ones you practice, am i right?
what do taxes and charities have to do with anything? i would figure the reason libs don't do charity is because they believe that our society should as a necessity should take care of people.

Liberals think rights means porn as free speech and sexual perversions and promiscuity should be taught by kids.

lies all lies,

Owing to the role models held up by liberals and progressives I can see why their minds are tainted like that. Elton John and Madonna are hardly anyone that a good person should follow.

good god man, no one considers those two roll models, my roll models are jefferson, FDR, lincoln,newton, and other scientists
who cares what celebrities think?

Is the fleshlight usage also sought by a congenital sexual orientation? Are we expecting masturbation-marriage next? Sure would be an easy ring ceremony.

wow man now you are scraping the bottom of the barrel,FAIL
at least come up with something with some merit, this isn't even worth the time

MY POINT?

you have none, just a bunch of nonsense

That the Bible has no gay promoting scripture anywhere. And it does not.

so the best you have is an argument from silence and the typical close minded belief that the bible says homosexuality is wrong. though surprisingly the issue is never brought up by jesus and seems to be pushed aside for more important things

Yet, I am the one the GLBT adherants scream is a liar.

who's screaming, most people calmly say you're a liar

 

[cantata]

Turning out just as the prophets described I see.

Ah yes, clever prophets - predicting nondescript social change that the conservatives of the future will inevitably dislike. What a remarkable talent.

Nothing up to the nuptials. Then reason takes over to the unreasonableness of same-gender "couplings." According to anatomy, it is quite abnormal. (Don't even need my Bible for that one.)

Oh, but it feels so good.

Do tell me - is kissing dirtydirtyabnormal? What about heterosexual oral sex? What about pegging? Does it matter to you what heterosexual couples do sexually, or just same-sex couples?

I'll eat fifty twinkies a day and find out. I LOVE twinkies. AND I AM NOT TALKING GAY SLANG. I mean the Hostess cake.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

An overweight person can be very reasonable and rational and ordinary with regard to the rest of their life, anyway, so I don't see what point you think you've made here.

Is that what you were taught in College by your liberal/progressive marxist atheist professors.

Er, how about no?

conservative, adj. Disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

How come abortion and gay sex is far more like ancient pagan worship practices? Hardly progreesive going back to Molech worship.

How dishonest. Liberalism is about permitting consenting adults to do their thing. Conservatism is about preventing them from doing so. People have been prevented from doing these things for centuries. Now they are permitted to do so. Progress.

"Conservatives" push for a decent and responsible and honest society. Free of perversions and immorality becoming civil rights. Conservatives it's been shown, give more of their money to charities than liberals, who take tax dollars and give little else back.

And this is relevant how?

Liberals think rights means porn as free speech and sexual perversions and promiscuity should be taught by kids. Owing to the role models held up by liberals and progressives I can see why their minds are tainted like that. Elton John and Madonna are hardly anyone that a good person should follow.

Thank you for telling me how you view liberals. Is that what your conservative professors told you at college?

Is the fleshlight usage also sought by a congenital sexual orientation? Are we expecting masturbation-marriage next? Sure would be an easy ring ceremony.

Objectùm-sexuals might wish to marry their masturbatory devices. I really don't know. Does it matter if they do?

MY POINT?

That the Bible has no gay promoting scripture anywhere. And it does not.

Yet, I am the one the GLBT adherants scream is a liar.

I couldn't give a flying jam sandwich about the Bible, Polycarp_fan. I do love how you try to change the subject when it's been made obvious that you're just ranting into the wind and no one is quite sure what you're trying to say.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

As i have stated to you before, passages need to be examined in relation to the time that they were written.
What we now consider to be paedophilia was in those times considered to be the norm. People married at a very young age in comparison to today.
So if you are going to call that paedophilia, then you must also assume that Joseph was a paedophile, as scholars theorise the age of Mary to be about 12.

And yet her cousin Elizabeth was old?

Try the OP please.

As for a mother and daughter in law, they share no blood/genetics, therefore it is not incest. Mother and daughter, yes; mother and daughter in law, no.

Your interpretation is still myth or perversion. It is not theologically sound for the context of that day or anyday. It is still sexual. The basis for all things GBLT and you have shown that reality once again. Forget about the reality of reality. Especially in the Ruth story.

And again, who is to say that your interpretation is any more valid than anoyone else's?

Ethics and morality. And reality.

Your scripture twisting has turned erotic for no other reason than to licenese immorality for whatever reason you want to do so. All I want to do is show how sound and unbigoted and unhateful it is just to present the truth about scripture. I don't have to mangle it or alter it.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

of course because they considered anything they didn't follow wrong, its nothing new.

Stoning was a good reason to preach the truth. A prophet that was in error wasn't as lucky as modern-day gay theologians.

tell that to the prostate (at least in the case of male homosexuals) and tell that to heterosexuals who preform oral.

It could feel pleasureable to screw a steak. Is that what the steak was designed for? Heroin is pleasureable as well. Many vices feel great. I'll categorize your personals pleasures where they fit.

thats just sad, you think thats the first thing that pops into peoples minds when they hear the word "twinkies"?
that tells more about you than about anyone else

Eating twinkies (Hostess cakes) feels good. When you get in the sewer you have to expect what could be slung at you and try to avoid it. Are you going with the "He's a closeted self-loathing gay guy" anytime soon? As you can see, I have experience with gay debaters.

no i'd say by the dictionary and political science. are you just out to take potshots at people you don't know?

I am here to contend for the faith. The one that scriptures says "Was delivered only once to the saints." I couldn't care less what pagans act on until they do it in the Church, and blame Christians that want their perversions out, as bigots and haters.

[/quote]really? i've never heard of anyone requesting any orgies or burning children to bronze effigies
i think thats all in your overly obsessed mind[/quote]

Gay debate tactic number five is it? How many of the anti-Christian non-Christian crowd are supporters of gay goals? I just report what I see. It's a Christian thing to do.

thats not what the current batch of conservatives say, or else they wouldn't wiretap us citizens or hold people of arab decent without right

Not too many Swedes bombing people every day. BUT, please gay debate tactic number one, is to spin away from the truth of the OP. Please focus.

of course when it comes to "immorality" or "perversions" its all the ones you don't like, not the ones you practice, am i right?

I'm sorry, I left the "two wrongs make a right" thing back in kindergarten. I don't need the Bible for universal truth.

what do taxes and charities have to do with anything? i would figure the reason libs don't do charity is because they believe that our society should as a necessity should take care of people.

Look at what Ezekiel (a prophet) says were the sins of Sodom. Hubris absolutely defines gay comebacks.

lies all lies,

Yet reality proves that I am not lying about the scriptures. Neologism is.

good god man, no one considers those two roll models, my roll models are jefferson, FDR, lincoln,newton, and other scientists
who cares what celebrities think?

Read Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address and see why we finally agree on something. And note now, that it is the northerners (so to speak) that are twisting scripture and pushing gay unions over the Christian populace. But please, offer up another thread. Here, please stick to the OP.




wow man now you are scraping the bottom of the barrel,FAIL
at least come up with something with some merit, this isn't even worth the time




you have none, just a bunch of nonsense

so the best you have is an argument from silence and the typical close minded belief that the bible says homosexuality is wrong. though surprisingly the issue is never brought up by jesus and seems to be pushed aside for more important things

The way Jesus literally goes out of His way to show what a "marriage" consists "of" (a man and a woman and that that is the way God made it) is one of the loudest statements in the New testament against same-gender "unions."

You pagans are allowed to reject that also. Read the text.



[/quote]who's screaming, most people calmly say you're a liar[/quote]

That would be where the GLBT community succeeds the most. Screaming at their detractors.

 

[Aten's Apostle]

thats just sad, you think thats the first thing that pops into peoples minds when they hear the word "twinkies"?
that tells more about you than about anyone else

It's probably not the first thing that went through his mind either, as given the dual context of the original quote (homophobia and twinkies causing mental instability) I would surmise that he was actually referencing an episode in American jurispudence that was equally bizarre and depressing known as the twinkie defense and the murder of a man named Harvey Milk. My post count is not high enough to post directly, so I apologise for the fact that people reading this must meet me halfway and go to wikipedia and type those in if you're looking to be bemused.

Referencing a homophobic assassination in a set of posts so homophobic that it suggests that the users keyboard will still be non-functional from the sheer amount of spittle spewed from his foaming mouth? Whatever next? Condoning racial profile of dirty terrorist brown people by invoking the passivity of Swedes*? No, not even Polycarp_Fan a man whose posts I have been reading while lurking, could sink to such depths of charmlessness.

*Who it must be noted, are subjected to a far greater domestic spying program than citizens or subjects of many dictatorships despite being good upstanding white people who have never murdered their political leaders or anything untoward.

 

[morningstar2651]

You make it sound as if you must marry a homosexual if it becomes legal. It's legal for me to drink alcohol and smoke tobacco, but I choose not to.

Guess I have to post pictures of more evil gays that show how reality affirms your stance.

Ted and Ray met in Fresno, CA 25 years ago. Ted stopped by a party at Ray's house to say hello to friends. Ted, dressed in a suit, was on his way to an employee's retirement party when he was accidentally pushed into the swimming pool. Ray fished him out, and Ted knew in a flash that Ray was a keeper.

Ted and Ray raised a daughter from the age of five years old until they walked her down the aisle in 2000. On June 17, their daughter returned the gesture by giving them away in marriage while their grandson was the ring bearer.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]

 

[Polycarp_fan]

You make it sound as if you must marry a homosexual if it becomes legal. It's legal for me to drink alcohol and smoke tobacco, but I choose not to.

Guess I have to post pictures of more evil gays that show how reality affirms your stance.

But none from gay bars or public bathrooms? I wonder why.

Ted and Ray met in Fresno, CA 25 years ago. Ted stopped by a party at Ray's house to say hello to friends. Ted, dressed in a suit, was on his way to an employee's retirement party when he was accidentally pushed into the swimming pool. Ray fished him out, and Ted knew in a flash that Ray was a keeper.

Ted and Ray raised a daughter from the age of five years old until they walked her down the aisle in 2000. On June 17, their daughter returned the gesture by giving them away in marriage while their grandson was the ring bearer.

And so, it begins. Propaganda.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

It's probably not the first thing that went through his mind either, as given the dual context of the original quote (homophobia and twinkies causing mental instability) I would surmise that he was actually referencing an episode in American jurispudence that was equally bizarre and depressing known as the twinkie defense and the murder of a man named Harvey Milk. My post count is not high enough to post directly, so I apologise for the fact that people reading this must meet me halfway and go to wikipedia and type those in if you're looking to be bemused.

Referencing a homophobic assassination in a set of posts so homophobic that it suggests that the users keyboard will still be non-functional from the sheer amount of spittle spewed from his foaming mouth? Whatever next? Condoning racial profile of dirty terrorist brown people by invoking the passivity of Swedes*? No, not even Polycarp_Fan a man whose posts I have been reading while lurking, could sink to such depths of charmlessness.

Straight from Gay Debate Tactics 101. When all else fails to force change, charge someone with a hate crime. My reference to twinkies has absolutely nothing to do with Milken and nothing to do with gay slang.

If you want to come into the light of day and get into this debate, then please post your gay promoting and supporting scriptures. You can use any Bible translation or interpretation you want to. Otherwise your slings and arrows won't reach. Pitiful.

 

[WhatThe]

Your interpretation is still myth or perversion. It is not theologically sound for the context of that day or anyday. It is still sexual. The basis for all things GBLT and you have shown that reality once again. Forget about the reality of reality. Especially in the Ruth story.

According to you, EVERYTHING is sexual. I do not see how anything i wrote was sexual. If you read a story about two people loving each other and somehow find that to be erotic and/or sexual, then that's your problem, not mine.

The reality is this, Polycarp_fan: There are gay people in this world. There are people of your faith who accept, support, and affirm homosexual lifestyles due to their beliefs and ethics. Their beliefs and ethics that are based on the simple concept of Love Thy Brother.

 

[morningstar2651]

But none from gay bars or public bathrooms? I wonder why.

I have a digital camera. I'll see if I can fulfill your request.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

According to you, EVERYTHING is sexual. I do not see how anything i wrote was sexual. If you read a story about two people loving each other and somehow find that to be erotic and/or sexual, then that's your problem, not mine.

The reality is this, Polycarp_fan: There are gay people in this world. There are people of your faith who accept, support, and affirm homosexual lifestyles due to their beliefs and ethics. Their beliefs and ethics that are based on the simple concept of Love Thy Brother.

Except Jonathon and David... they are the exception, the only two men in the history of the world that were able to hang out, kiss each other and cuddle naked without being an abomination

 

[Polycarp_fan]

According to you, EVERYTHING is sexual. I do not see how anything i wrote was sexual.

GLBT. That would be "Gay" meaning male homosexual. "Lesbian" meaning female homosexual. "Bi" meaning sex with both/either a man or a woman. "Transexual," meaning the person thinks they are the opposite sex.

Now, other than the "T" in the GLBT, you have people labeling themselves for the sex they desire and/or engage in. The "T" people, at least they know how things are supposed to work, they just have the wong body parts "according to" their minds.

Did I miss anything?

If you read a story about two people loving each other and somehow find that to be erotic and/or sexual, then that's your problem, not mine.

It is gay theology to see a homosexual relationship where none is. That is there problem not mine. And according to the scriptures gay theology uses, they have a problem.

The reality is this, Polycarp_fan: There are gay people in this world. There are people of your faith who accept, support, and affirm homosexual lifestyles due to their beliefs and ethics. Their beliefs and ethics that are based on the simple concept of Love Thy Brother.

"Gay," is a neologism that has no bearing on the Biblical process of what is right and what is wrong behavior for a believer. You are wrong about the acceptance of homosexuals in Christian Churches being based on the concept of brotherly love. It is based on the concept that gays and lesbians are pushing their way into and onto the Church and Christians are tolerating that. Their beliefs are based on liberal/progressive ideology and have no basis in the Biblical. What you describe is the parable of the wheat and the weeds being followed in its peaceful form. Things will get worse before they get better.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Except Jonathon and David... they are the exception, the only two men in the history of the world that were able to hang out, kiss each other and cuddle naked without being an abomination

Both David and Jonathan married women. David, in fact, was attracted to women quite lustfully, lasciviously, licentiously and murderously. He didn't live his life trying to affirm that behavior. Read Psalm 51.

The fact that two young men can love it each other seems to be too much for the gay theologian to contemplate, without corrupting the text for the gay agenda. And you still have the fact that the religion of both Jonathan and David considered same-gender sex an abomination, a detestable act. They could break the law of Moses, but they could never have altered it to approve of same-gender sex, and of course, same-gender marriage does not exist to the Hebrew/Israelites. When broken down to reality, all you have with david and Jonathan, is two "best friends for life." BFF is what the kids of today would call it.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Both David and Jonathan married women. David, in fact, was attracted to women quite lustfully, lasciviously, licentiously and murderously. He didn't live his life trying to affirm that behavior. Read Psalm 51.

There are many homosexuals and bisexual people who have heterosexual marriages, either due to confusion or conformity. The fact Jonaqthon and David married women does not alter the fact that the description of their relationship is blatantly homosexual.

The fact that two young men can love it each other seems to be too much for the gay theologian to contemplate,

I have no problem with two men loving each other non-sexually. My problem is with the idea that two men can love each other "greater than they love any woman" and spend all that time sneaking around each other's tents, cuddling naked, kissing, and attracting such parental condemnation without being gay. There's a difference

 

[Eve_Sundancer]

Ted and Ray met in Fresno, CA 25 years ago. Ted stopped by a party at Ray's house to say hello to friends. Ted, dressed in a suit, was on his way to an employee's retirement party when he was accidentally pushed into the swimming pool. Ray fished him out, and Ted knew in a flash that Ray was a keeper.

Ted and Ray raised a daughter from the age of five years old until they walked her down the aisle in 2000. On June 17, their daughter returned the gesture by giving them away in marriage while their grandson was the ring bearer.

And so, it begins. Propaganda.

So now propaganda=anything that makes non-heterosexuals look like real normal people, who don't deserve to be demonized?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

So now propaganda=anything that makes non-heterosexuals look like real normal people, who don't deserve to be demonized?

Just a bit of balance would be honest. Like a couple of drag queens or leather boys, maybe a couple of crew cut you-know-who's. We seem to always get the stock photos of the old uncle looking couple.

In keeping with the OP, tell me something, "if" this couple were to hold a Biblical view of things (hypothetical I know), how does the "child" of a same-gender couple honor their father and mother?

 

[Maren]

Just a bit of balance would be honest. Like a couple of drag queens or leather boys, maybe a couple of crew cut you-know-who's. We seem to always get the stock photos of the old uncle looking couple.

In keeping with the OP, tell me something, "if" this couple were to hold a Biblical view of things (hypothetical I know), how does the "child" of a same-gender couple honor their father and mother?

I hope you realize that the vast majority of transvestites are heterosexual? So perhaps we need to show transvestites and dominatrixes with their male "slaves" to give people a rounded view of heterosexuals?