Christian friends of gays and lesbians

[CurveLight]

God's Word says that homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, an abomination, fornication, vile affections, and a great sin against Him. Is God promoting hate?

God's Word is defined in John 1:1-3 and it is not the bible. Just more proof bigots like you are easily the most ignorant group who claims to "follow" the bible.

I never made that distinction.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being."
(John 1:1-3)

We know from John 1:14, that 'the Word', 'Logos' in the original manuscripts, in John 1:1 is Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ.

- - "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father."

Verse 1, tell us that Jesus Christ is eternal, that He was with God, and that He is God. There can be no doubt that this verse means that Jesus, the Christ, is Jehovah God. The word-for-word translation from the original Greek manuscripts read, "-and God was the Word.". The Apostle John knew this to be true for in writing this verse he used 'ho theos', from which 'God' is translated in the original manuscripts. The Greek TITLE 'ho theos' was used exclusively, by ALL the writers of New Testament, to indicate only the God of Israel, Yaweh - Jehovah. For a more in-depth explanation see ho theos. Verse 3 also bears testimony to the fact that Jesus is GOD.

John 1:1-3

You're such a dishonest fuck. You were clearly referencing the bible when you stated "God's Word...." and when you get busted you try to wiggle out of it. Let's expose your arrogance and dishonesty even further. You are trying to claim you were referencing Jesus and not the bible. Well dumbfuck, Jesus never once spoke about homosexuality. Your next dance step is to say "Oh yes he did! Since he is God that means he spoke of it....."

I truly fucking despise shitbags like you who piss all over Jesus as a lifestyle then claim you are simply the "messenger."

 

[bodecea]

So you believe you can just keep on sinning and God will simply forgive you in the end? And you also think it's ok to lump all Christians in the same catagory as those idiots at Westboro?

The only noticeable diff between you and the Westboro wingers is your mailing address.

Prove it.

OK, there IS no difference in your mailing address.

 

[bodecea]

Your friend is a moron. But I suppose birds of a feather.....

God's Word says that homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, an abomination, fornication, vile affections, and a great sin against Him. As many scriptures as there are that address sin, there are more that speak of forgiveness and redemption. Jesus Christ died on the cross for all of our sins and rose again the third day. He desires that we repent and be forgiven of our sins by coming into a personal relationship with Him.

We are all sinners but those who wish to be a good Christian will do their best to avoid committing sinful acts. "For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live" (Rom 8:13)

...but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. Don’t be deceived, my dear brothers. (James 1:14-16)

The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Gal 5:19-21)

Thanks for being a SHINING example of why this person's friend has an adverse feeling towards so-called Christians. Now....go back to telling us how smart you are.

I could care less how anyone views Christians. The text above came from the Bible and a Christian acknowledges and accepts the word of God.

You're kidding, right? You pick and choose which parts you want to follow all the time.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

God's Word is defined in John 1:1-3 and it is not the bible. Just more proof bigots like you are easily the most ignorant group who claims to "follow" the bible.

I never made that distinction.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being."
(John 1:1-3)

We know from John 1:14, that 'the Word', 'Logos' in the original manuscripts, in John 1:1 is Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ.

- - "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father."

Verse 1, tell us that Jesus Christ is eternal, that He was with God, and that He is God. There can be no doubt that this verse means that Jesus, the Christ, is Jehovah God. The word-for-word translation from the original Greek manuscripts read, "-and God was the Word.". The Apostle John knew this to be true for in writing this verse he used 'ho theos', from which 'God' is translated in the original manuscripts. The Greek TITLE 'ho theos' was used exclusively, by ALL the writers of New Testament, to indicate only the God of Israel, Yaweh - Jehovah. For a more in-depth explanation see ho theos. Verse 3 also bears testimony to the fact that Jesus is GOD.

John 1:1-3

You're such a dishonest fuck. You were clearly referencing the bible when you stated "God's Word...." and when you get busted you try to wiggle out of it. Let's expose your arrogance and dishonesty even further. You are trying to claim you were referencing Jesus and not the bible. Well dumbfuck, Jesus never once spoke about homosexuality. Your next dance step is to say "Oh yes he did! Since he is God that means he spoke of it....."

I truly fucking despise shitbags like you who piss all over Jesus as a lifestyle then claim you are simply the "messenger."

No and if I had been I would have said the word of God, not God's Word. Please do not attempt to know what I am thinking, you will always be wrong. You are correct however in that Jesus and God are one and the same. The Bible is the word of God, if you disagree then so be it. Whether Jesus uttered those words explicitly or not does not make the sentiments any less valid.

1st John 5:7. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

8. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Thanks for being a SHINING example of why this person's friend has an adverse feeling towards so-called Christians. Now....go back to telling us how smart you are.

I could care less how anyone views Christians. The text above came from the Bible and a Christian acknowledges and accepts the word of God.

You're kidding, right? You pick and choose which parts you want to follow all the time.

No I pick and choose scripture that addresses the issues we're discussing.

 

[bodecea]

I could care less how anyone views Christians. The text above came from the Bible and a Christian acknowledges and accepts the word of God.

You're kidding, right? You pick and choose which parts you want to follow all the time.

No I pick and choose scripture that addresses the issues we're discussing.

Thanks for admitting that you belong to the Church of St. Luby's

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You're kidding, right? You pick and choose which parts you want to follow all the time.

No I pick and choose scripture that addresses the issues we're discussing.

Thanks for admitting that you belong to the Church of St. Luby's

Never heard of that church. But I see you're getting better at taking comments out of context. So tell me, what is your religious affiliation?

 

[CurveLight]

I never made that distinction.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being."
(John 1:1-3)

We know from John 1:14, that 'the Word', 'Logos' in the original manuscripts, in John 1:1 is Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ.

- - "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father."

Verse 1, tell us that Jesus Christ is eternal, that He was with God, and that He is God. There can be no doubt that this verse means that Jesus, the Christ, is Jehovah God. The word-for-word translation from the original Greek manuscripts read, "-and God was the Word.". The Apostle John knew this to be true for in writing this verse he used 'ho theos', from which 'God' is translated in the original manuscripts. The Greek TITLE 'ho theos' was used exclusively, by ALL the writers of New Testament, to indicate only the God of Israel, Yaweh - Jehovah. For a more in-depth explanation see ho theos. Verse 3 also bears testimony to the fact that Jesus is GOD.

John 1:1-3

You're such a dishonest fuck. You were clearly referencing the bible when you stated "God's Word...." and when you get busted you try to wiggle out of it. Let's expose your arrogance and dishonesty even further. You are trying to claim you were referencing Jesus and not the bible. Well dumbfuck, Jesus never once spoke about homosexuality. Your next dance step is to say "Oh yes he did! Since he is God that means he spoke of it....."

I truly fucking despise shitbags like you who piss all over Jesus as a lifestyle then claim you are simply the "messenger."

No and if I had been I would have said the word of God, not God's Word. Please do not attempt to know what I am thinking, you will always be wrong. You are correct however in that Jesus and God are one and the same. The Bible is the word of God, if you disagree then so be it. Whether Jesus uttered those words explicitly or not does not make the sentiments any less valid.

1st John 5:7. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

8. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

Keep dancing. Is God omniscient?

 

[Christopher]

So you believe you can just keep on sinning and God will simply forgive you in the end?

No, I never said that.

And you also think it's ok to lump all Christians in the same catagory as those idiots at Westboro?

No, I did not lump all Christians into the same category as Westboro. I didn’t even lump all the members of the Westboro Church together. Please read my post again.

 

[Oscar Wao]

God's Word says that homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, an abomination, fornication, vile affections, and a great sin against Him. Is God promoting hate?

God said no such thing, that was from a book written by humans.

The Bible was also written by humans so I'm guessing you wouldn't believe what the bible says either.

•Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."1
•Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
•1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
•Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

They are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:18ff).

You do realize the verses are talking about shrine prostitutes, right?

 

[bodecea]

No I pick and choose scripture that addresses the issues we're discussing.

Thanks for admitting that you belong to the Church of St. Luby's

Never heard of that church. But I see you're getting better at taking comments out of context. So tell me, what is your religious affiliation?

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[logical4u]

God's Word says that homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, an abomination, fornication, vile affections, and a great sin against Him. Is God promoting hate?

God said no such thing, that was from a book written by humans.

So when you want to control Christians, you quote the Bible and use 'select' statements to influence their behavior. When you disagree with it, you declare 'those portions' were written by humans. All of the Bible was written by men [the only physical writing of the Lord ever mentioned was the ten Commandments (three of which are broken by homosexual acts) in the OT and Yeshua writing in the sand in the NT].

By what authority do you use to 'judge' which portions are to be followed and which portions are 'wrong'?

 

[logical4u]

And Lot...the "good" guy was perfectly willing to hand his daughters over to get the city folk to leave him alone.

I don't know if you missed it: that was to demonstrate how important those visitors were.
When the crowd rejected the daughters in their lust for the guests, the guests gave them a demonstation of the power at their command: they burned the crowds eyes out before killing most of them. Sometimes, those we think can be easily subdued turn out to be our worst nightmare.

No, it demonstrates how UNimportant his daughters were.

Then, why were they STILL virgins???????

 

[logical4u]

And Lot...the "good" guy was perfectly willing to hand his daughters over to get the city folk to leave him alone.

I don't know if you missed it: that was to demonstrate how important those visitors were.
When the crowd rejected the daughters in their lust for the guests, the guests gave them a demonstation of the power at their command: they burned the crowds eyes out before killing most of them. Sometimes, those we think can be easily subdued turn out to be our worst nightmare.

Why do you inject sex when sex is no where in the narrative? Have you ever actually studied Genesis 19 or are you so in love with hating gays you'll repeat anything to help with that agenda?

"No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."
3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.

4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight?





Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."


{If you are going to tell us what is in the Bible, don't bear false witness.}


8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."
9 "Get out of our way," they replied. And they said, "This fellow came here as an alien, and now he wants to play the judge! We'll treat you worse than them." They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door.

10 But the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house and shut the door. 11 Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, young and old, with blindness so that they could not find the door.
sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it."

14 So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were pledged to marry [a] his daughters. He said, "Hurry and get out of this place, because the LORD is about to destroy the city!" But his sons-in-law thought he was joking.

15 With the coming of dawn, the angels urged Lot, saying, "Hurry! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away when the city is punished."


Where have I ever stated that I hated gays????????????????????????

I disagree with their behavior; it is sinful. It does corrupt. I disagree with addicts' sinful behavior, too. I disagree with cleptomaniacs' sinful behavior, too. Are the LGBT activists' so pathetic in the weakness of their arguements they want to re-define disagreement as "hate"?

 

[logical4u]

I don't know if you missed it: that was to demonstrate how important those visitors were.
When the crowd rejected the daughters in their lust for the guests, the guests gave them a demonstation of the power at their command: they burned the crowds eyes out before killing most of them. Sometimes, those we think can be easily subdued turn out to be our worst nightmare.

No, it demonstrates how UNimportant his daughters were.

The offer of his virgin daughters was a demonstration of being willing to sacrifice his most valuable commodities to protect his guests. Virgin daughters were one of the highest forms of currency for fathers in that culture so the offer of his daughters only helps show how the narrative is about social economics and had nothing to do with sex at all.

Why would anyone want a virgin if it wasn't about sex?

 

[logical4u]

There are a lot of hetero married couples that can't have children einstein.

The are the exception, not the rule. Many of them would like to have children, but can't do to health or physical problems. Much different than two people of the same sex pretending they are the same as two people of the opposite sex. Again, those relationships are 'usually' honest if they know, or if they don't, find out after they are married. The majority of marriages (one man, one woman), have children the green way (no scientist, doctors or extra electricity needed). A homosexual couple can not have children as mates. They must take (legally adopt) someone else's child or one of them must CHOOSE to copulate with the opposite sex to have a child (not being faithful to their 'lifestyle'), or use artificial means (test tubes, implantation, etc). To say they are the same is deceptive.

Basing the value of a monogamous relationship primarily on the ability to pro-create is simply a homophobic method of trying to justify their bigotry in the absence of substance. A family is not defined by who can make babies but by people who stop acting like babies and take care of each other.

AGAIN, saying someone is bigoted implies that you know of a better way for society. I have asked you to give examples of these 'great communities' were people live according to your beliefs. You have not demonstrated anything, just made statements of your beliefs. I have asked you to give examples of anywhere in history that demonstrates marriage was not between men and women, but between just men or just women. You have not. Basically, there is a small population of LGBTs that want to change society based on there selfish needs with no proof, no examples, nothing to imply that society embracing that 'lifestyle' will benefit society in any way.

When someone uses 'LGBT communities' as a demonstration on how that 'lifestyle' does not help society, you are quick to say: that isn't how it really is. We are waiting, were are these great example of LGBT communities that are moral, law-abiding, upstanding communities?

 

[CurveLight]

No, it demonstrates how UNimportant his daughters were.

The offer of his virgin daughters was a demonstration of being willing to sacrifice his most valuable commodities to protect his guests. Virgin daughters were one of the highest forms of currency for fathers in that culture so the offer of his daughters only helps show how the narrative is about social economics and had nothing to do with sex at all.

Why would anyone want a virgin if it wasn't about sex?

The offer of his virgin daughters was a demonstration of being willing to sacrifice his most valuable commodities to protect his guests. Virgin daughters were one of the highest forms of currency for fathers in that culture so the offer of his daughters only helps show how the narrative is about social economics and had nothing to do with sex at all.

 

[logical4u]

Yes, I do have gay friends. Of course, with my job I work in San Francisco a lot.

I also have a gay brother whom I am close to; actually, I am probably closer to him than my two other brothers. Any Christian who promotes hatred towards anyone is not really following Christ's teachings.

God's Word says that homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, an abomination, fornication, vile affections, and a great sin against Him. Is God promoting hate?

God's Word is defined in John 1:1-3 and it is not the bible. Just more proof bigots like you are easily the most ignorant group who claims to "follow" the bible.

So according to your belief, people don't need to have sex at all, to have children, therefore all sex is immoral? The whole be fruitful and multiply thing should read: try anything?

 

[logical4u]

God said no such thing, that was from a book written by humans.

The Bible was also written by humans so I'm guessing you wouldn't believe what the bible says either.

•Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."1
•Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
•1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
•Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

They are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:18ff).

Why would I? It's just a bunch of guys telling tales and making up rules and shit, no biggie, it's on auto-ignore, like Harry Potter books. And "God's word", where'd you hear that? he give a lecture?

Funny, I don't remember any great works of 'wisdom' coming from Harry Potter teaching society to apply laws equitably (the Commandments), or having historical events docummented.

 

[logical4u]

I'm a Mormon, and agree with you that homosexuality is a sin against God, however, I believe God will be the final judge for each individual and not us. We do not have the ability as God does to see into the heart of every gay and lesbian person and I have tried my best to see into the heart of my brother to understand him. I still accept him completely as my brother, and will continue to do so, even though we don't completely agree on this matter.

No, God does not promote hate and that was my point. I was referring to Christians who promote hatred against gays are not really following God/Christ. Like some members within the Westboro Baptist Church.

So you believe you can just keep on sinning and God will simply forgive you in the end? And you also think it's ok to lump all Christians in the same catagory as those idiots at Westboro?

The only noticeable diff between you and the Westboro wingers is your mailing address.

AGAIN: you have no substance so you resort to FALSE WITNESS.