On Homosexuality & Religion [Merged]

Started by debbiejo274 pages

Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you.

"But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Sounds a little bias to meeeeeeeee

The author again isssssssssssss...ta ta ta daaaaaaa........Paul

Originally posted by debbiejo
Paul worshiper.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you.

"But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God."

Sounds a little bias to meeeeeeeee

* to you, yes... because everyone here knows you hate Saint Paul... had it looked by someone neutral, it's a very nice verse... a verse that could destroy misinterpretations about homosexuals in the Bible... 😉

Oh I don't hate the sinner .....just the sin... 😉

* same as Christianity in the Bible preaches the sin of homosexual acts, but not the homosexual person itself... 😉

Yeah Paul was a deluded person..........yet I don't hate him.

Can't quite remember at this moment.......but Jesus didn't preach about homosexuality did he?

Only this moment.......Hmm sounds like a song ..........

Originally posted by Alliance
Basically, what I see is two people arguing about whose old text gives better defintion to proper sexual relations.

You dont use a horse to plow your fields, don't use morals from a 2000 year old (Buddhists included) piece of crap.

Try opening your goddamn eyes and think about something.

"piece of crap"

I still use the Math Euklid used. It's pretty good. Still think Democracy is a great System. Oh well, I guess I am old fashioned.

Originally posted by peejayd
* to you, yes... because everyone here knows you hate Saint Paul... had it looked by someone neutral, it's a very nice verse... a verse that could destroy misinterpretations about homosexuals in the Bible... 😉

Yeah its nice that it was put there to make sure that literalists never deviated from doctrine again and that the supposed purities of the Church hierarchy was maintained as a system of ultimateloyalty.

"neutral" 😆

You can run around all day trying to figure out what someone meant in poorly recorded texts thousand os years ago and then spin yourself in circles trying to create a "literal" interpretation of it, but at the end of th day you will only find a biased interpretation of reality trapped in a box.

Its better to live with the inescapeable bias outside of the box.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I still use the Math Euklid used. It's pretty good. Still think Democracy is a great System. Oh well, I guess I am old fashioned.

Citing Euclid, a pillar of logical thinking, as a means to validate outdated biblical moral virtues is kind of silly.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Citing Euclid, a pillar of logical thinking, as a means to validate outdated biblical moral virtues is kind of silly.

But Alliance was throwing everything into the pot.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Citing Euclid, a pillar of logical thinking, as a means to validate outdated biblical moral virtues is kind of silly.

I did not.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But Alliance was throwing everything into the pot.

MORAL STEW!

Originally posted by Alliance
MORAL STEW!

"Everything old is good" and "Everything old is bad" are equally incorrect.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I did not.

You did too. I saw it.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
You did too. I saw it.

Lies.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
"Everything old is good" and "Everything old is bad" are equally incorrect.

I think i know what you meant.

I don't follow that system. However, morals are based on CONTEXT. And people are most often NOT sensitive to context.

Originally posted by Alliance
I think i know what you meant.

I don't follow that system. However, morals are based on CONTEXT. And people are most often NOT sensitive to context.

I think you understand what you mean. When I read the lotus sutra, I always keep context in mind.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
According to Jesus, experiencing the desire is equivocal to exercising the behavior. This means that it is just as sinful for one to experience an attraction to members of the same sex as it is for him to have sex with members of the same sex.

Lust != attraction.
Originally posted by debbiejo
Do not be [B]deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you.

"But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Sounds a little bias to meeeeeeeee

The author again isssssssssssss...ta ta ta daaaaaaa........Paul [/B]


Paul made up the word that was later translated into "homosexual."
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
"piece of crap"

If he didn't say anything about Buddhists, you'd be on that bandwagon.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Lust != attraction.

Paul made up the word that was later translated into "homosexual."

If he didn't say anything about Buddhists, you'd be on that bandwagon.

Of course... 😉 I'm over sensitive, but I'm aware of it.

Le sigh.

Just tell him to die in a fire next time.