Eating catfish is just as sinful as homosexuality

[Liability]

USCitizen.

I hate to break it to you but "sodomy" is all sex except penis/vaginal penetration. Anal Sex is sodomy, oral sex is sodomy.

So, unless homosexuals are completely celibate, they ARE engaging in Sodomy.

That is the modern definition.

I wonder who can demonstrate that such was the understanding back in the days of the Bible?

On the other hand, I have to admit: I don't really care all that much.

That's not a modern definition. The word sodomy, after all comes from SODDOM AND GOMMORAH!

Soddomites in the OT, is about homsexuals.

If Sodomites is about homosexuality, and the modern (quoted) definition includes heterosexual behavior, then you ARE overlaying the modern definition on to the Biblical passages.

(Unless Gommorah covers the whole non-penis/vagina sexual relations stuff.)

But that seems unlikely: Stand to Reason: What was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?

 

[teapartysamurai]

As long as we're in total agreement that Jesus never stated any issue or gave any inkling whatsoever that homosexuality was immoral on any level, than we're good.

Thank you

I ADDRESSED THIS, OH ONE WHO IS READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGED!

I have delt with people like this before. Most are homosexuals who claim to be "Christians."

They claim that Jesus himself never mentioned homosexualty, thus it is not a sin.

Quite erroneous for several reasons.

For one, Jesus didn't HAVE to mention homosexuality.

Jesus preached to JEWS during his lifetime. His sermons, his debates, and the religious questioning from Pharisees, Sadducees, Scribes, Lawyers (etc) were all from and for JEWS (the only exception may be the Herodians, since Herod himself was an Idumean)

Thus, the subject of homosexuality never came up, BECAUSE IT WAS A SETTLED MATTER. No one questioned Jesus on homosexuality, because no one had to. Everyone knew the answer to that issue.

Leviticus 18 made it very clear homosexuality was not only a sin, BUT an abomination. Jesus confirmed the validity of the law to his Jewish audience, which includes Leviticus 18.


Quote:
Matthew 5:18 King James Version


18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.


Can you imagine Jesus up and telling Jews that he was for gay marriage? He would have been stoned to death on the spot!

Get real people! You know what I'm saying is true!

Thus, the question of homosexuality is NEVER broached until the first Chapter of Romans.

Why you may ask! Why is homosexuality never mentioned (in the NT) until the first Chapter of Romans? The answer is to that is very easy to understand.

While Jesus' audience were Jews, who were debating points of the law, Paul (who wrote Romans) was bringing Christianity to PAGANS.

Although, there was NO QUESTION that homosexuality was verboten in Jewish Law, homosexuality was quite common in many pagan socities like Greece and Rome. (Indeed, people engaged in these pagan practices in the OT were called the "sodomites.")

Thus, right off the bat, Paul makes it clear to new Christian converts from the pagan cultures (that comprised the Roman Empire) that these sexual practices were a sin.

Thus, the erroneous notion that, since Jesus didn't mention homosexuality, homosexuality isn't a sin, is just a another way the PC crowd tries to rationalize their way around the Bible.

It's not based on fact, it's based on ignorance and lies.

It's as simple as that.

Jesus spoke about murder, divorce, anger and adultery in Matthew and many other sins of the time.
In the Bible.
By your way of thinking murder was not a "settled" sin.
Paul was speaking to the Jews, not the Romans, in Corinthians.
Since Jesus spoke about many other sins why is it "erroneous" that he never mentioned homosexuality?
That opinion makes no sense. Jesus mentioned MANY sins.
But never homosexuality. Ever.
Jesus preached blessings to those that THE JEWS LOOKED DOWN UPON.
In Matthew 5 Jesus commends, brings blessings and praises those that the Jews look down upon.
And you claim that homosexuals were not looked down upon by the Jews?
Jesus in Mark addresses the weaknesses and fallacies of the Jewish laws in the Judaistic system.
Early on in Jesus' ministry he began to butt heads with the Jewish rabbis over the religous law. One case in point is the Sabbath. The Pharrisses stated that Jesus was soft on the law. Why is it that Jesus worked on the Sabbath and disobeyed that law? How could that be? Pharrisses looked at Jesus as a law breaker.
Jesus gave us the proper interpretaion of moral law. Homosexuality is not in it.
Where is it in the 10 commandments?
Jesus laid out the law and labeled the Jewish law as "law in it's perversions". Imagine that.

All through the Bible Jesus speaks about the law and his interpretation of it and the moral codes he sets down. Best example was Jesus was soft on adultery according to Jewish law. They demanded women be stoned to death. Jesus did not do that and he spoke about that sin and others.
No where did he mention homosexuality. Claims that he had a "done deal" with that are without any fact or foundation anywhere in the Bible as the Bible is full of Jesus speaking of what he believed was sin.

You don't know what the hell you are talking about. Paul made it his personal mission to convert "gentiles" to Christianity. Of course he also preached to Jews, but his main goal was gentiles:

Acts 13:46 King James Version



46Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Why do you guys pretend to know what you are talking about WHEN IT'S SO DAMN OBVIOUS, YOU DON'T!

Besides which the Gentiles comprised most of the membership of the Church at Rome in Paul's time.

This is really starting to get me mad. You either are being lied to by someone, or you are just making BS up and hoping no one else realizes it's BS. Which is it, because I'm getting tired of having to refute lie after STUPID LIE!

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Bible speaks against sodomy, oral sex is sodomy.

The question posed to you was whether you could show the bible speaking of or condemning oral sex between married couples.

Instead of admitting that you can't and conceding that you're wrong, you answer "ground beef.

You need to take your gripe up with merriam webster, not me.

Webster has nothing to do with this.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The Bible speaks against sodomy, oral sex is sodomy.

The question posed to you was whether you could show the bible speaking of or condemning oral sex between married couples.

Instead of admitting that you can't and conceding that you're wrong, you answer "ground beef.

You need to take your gripe up with merriam webster, not me.

Webster has nothing to do with this.

So do you want me to provide proof that the Bible speaks against sodomy in general? That's all I asked, if you'd like me to I'd be happy to, that's a very easy thing to do.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Damn, this is so easy it is unreal.
The Bible lists 667 sins and does not distinguish between them like you do mal. The penalty for lust is death in the Bible.
Homosexuality is listed as sin the same as the 7 "deadly sins": greed, envy, pride, wrath/anger, lust gluttony and sloth.
I am sure you treat the sin of gluttony the same as you do homosexuality mal.
Of course it is the Old Testament that lists most of these sins. New Testament does not mention homosexuality at all.
And most of these sins are Jewish law. We do not go by religous law in this country.
Something about the United States Constitution.
You need to read Romans 14:4 10, Mark 9:42, Acts 21:28, Numbers 14:2-3, 16:3 mal. Get back to us when you have mastered that.
Matthew said it best: It is a sin to think evil against any of God's children.
Luke got it right: It is a sin to despise your neighbor.

THE NEW TESTAMENT DOES MENTION HOMOSEXUALITY!!!!!!!

Why do you libs keep lying about this!



All of that refers to HOMOSEXUALITY. I already addressed this over and over and YET you lying libs insist on repeating the same lies.

As for the wages of sin:

Romans 6:23 King James Version (KJV)



23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

The PENALTY FOR EVERY SIN IS DEATH. That's why Jesus died for us. Because God doesn't differentiate between sins.

You are confusing how God treats sin, and the laws he set up for a civil Hebrew Society through the Mosaic Law.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

You speak ONLY OF YOUR OWN IGNORANCE and prejudice regarding the Bible, NOT from any knowlege.

I own 3 corporations and have voted Republican for 40 years.
I can always tell when you have ZERO confidence in your argument.
You call everyone a "lib" that disagrees with you.

Oh give me a break!

You know you can tell when someone has COMPLETELY LOST THE ARGUMENT?

They stop discussing it, and make it either about themselves or you, AND YOU DID BOTH!

You just got defensive about yourself and then started attacking me, but you completely DROPPED even discussing the actual subject.

I agree you lost, and lost badly. Maybe now you will stop pretending you even come close to knowing the Bible and will stop making up stupid lies about it.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Sodomy may be a sin to you....then don't do it. But do NOT create CIVIL laws forcing your sin/no sin beliefs on other law-abiding, tax-paying adults. If it does not hurt others or their rights....it's NONE of your business.

Okay that's stupid.

I also think fornication is a sin. I'm not going to create laws against it.

OR adultery, etc.

We are NOT talking about laws. We are talking about what is considered a sin in the Bible.

Next you will claim we are, because of "gay marriage" blah blah blah.

Sorry, but it is not Christians forcing a change to any laws, IT'S THE GAYS.

Gay marriage has never existed the HISTORY of the world. Go back to Ancient cultures. Look at Greece where homosexuality was touted and encouraged. THERE WAS NEVER A THOUGHT OF MARRIAGE.

As a matter of fact the "normal" relationship in ancient Greece was pedophilia. YES, that's true. Look it up. Pedophilia. Guess where the word pederasty comes from. Bingo! Greece! It means quite literally "love of boys."

That's how it worked most of the times in Greece (for example, cultures like Sparta) An older man, preying on a young boy, and we he got tired of him and wanted another young boy, er I mean decided the boy was ready to "move on," he would find a wife for the "youth." THEN the boy would be married. But it was always to a WOMAN, not another guy.

It's gays who are trying to FORCE LAWS on us, changing the concept of marriage to something that HAS NEVER EXISTED.

Marriage is an institution for raising a family (and just because some couples can't have children doesn't change that. There are always exceptions to the rule, that doesn't CHANGE the rule)

I don't care how you cut it, the ONLY institution were you create a child IS A MAN AND A WOMAN. -- PERIOD!

If same sex marriage didn't exist, why did the Christians feel the need to outlaw it and make it punishable by death around the year 300?

That sure sounds like Christians forcing laws to me.

Oh when you have even a shred of evidence for that, let me know.

Five will get you 10 it was NOT about GAY MARRIAGE. But I can't wait for you to produce your bogus "evidence."

My guess is you will tell me to "google" it because you are talking out your butt.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Actually the definition of Sodomy is:

Merriam-Webster
Definition of SODOMY
: anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex;
​

So actually any husband that has ever gotten a hummer from his wife is a sodomite.




>>>>>

Except for one thing!

Hebrews 13:4 King James Version



4Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

In other words, just like Vegas, what happens between a married man and a married woman, stays between them. Their bed is undefiled.

Sodomy applies to those outside marriage.

So then why do you spend so much time denying gays the sacrament of marriage? If gays are married, sodomy laws and God's wrath would not apply to them.

I'm not denying Gays anything. I'm against gays changing the definition of marriage to create something which has never existed, and is simply a political ploy.

If it were NOT simply a political ploy, gay marriage would have have because a political cudgel in the last 15 years.

It didn't even exist before that time, so there is no way to conclude otherwise.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If Sodomites is about homosexuality, and the modern (quoted) definition includes heterosexual behavior, then you ARE overlaying the modern definition on to the Biblical passages.

Sodomite

Originally meaning a citizen of the inhospitable biblical city of Sodom, has been extended over the centuries to mean a homosexual. Such famous Sodomites include Oscar Wilde and Lot.

"I like being a Sodomite ...a Lot!"
"Oh, very witty, Wilde!"


Urban Dictionary: sodomite

Drock ain't known for his honesty.

(Unless Gommorah covers the whole non-penis/vagina sexual relations stuff.)

But that seems unlikely: Stand to Reason: What was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?

 

[Dr.Drock]

If Sodomites is about homosexuality, and the modern (quoted) definition includes heterosexual behavior, then you ARE overlaying the modern definition on to the Biblical passages.

Sodomite

Originally meaning a citizen of the inhospitable biblical city of Sodom, has been extended over the centuries to mean a homosexual. Such famous Sodomites include Oscar Wilde and Lot.

"I like being a Sodomite ...a Lot!"
"Oh, very witty, Wilde!"


Urban Dictionary: sodomite

Drock ain't known for his honesty.

(Unless Gommorah covers the whole non-penis/vagina sexual relations stuff.)

But that seems unlikely: Stand to Reason: What was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?

Actually you're lying again big guy, I'm talking about sodomy, not sodomites. I've never even typed the word sodomite until this post.

If you'd like me to provide merriam webster's defintion of sodomy so you can better understand english, I'd be happy to.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So do you want me to provide proof that the Bible speaks against sodomy in general?

"Ground Beef," huh Drock?

Good answer....

That's all I asked, if you'd like me to I'd be happy to, that's a very easy thing to do.

 

[Liability]

If Sodomites is about homosexuality, and the modern (quoted) definition includes heterosexual behavior, then you ARE overlaying the modern definition on to the Biblical passages.

Sodomite

Originally meaning a citizen of the inhospitable biblical city of Sodom, has been extended over the centuries to mean a homosexual. Such famous Sodomites include Oscar Wilde and Lot.

"I like being a Sodomite ...a Lot!"
"Oh, very witty, Wilde!"


Urban Dictionary: sodomite

Drock ain't known for his honesty.

(Unless Gommorah covers the whole non-penis/vagina sexual relations stuff.)

But that seems unlikely: Stand to Reason: What was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?

Actually you're lying again big guy, I'm talking about sodomy, not sodomites. I've never even typed the word sodomite until this post.

If you'd like me to provide merriam webster's defintion of sodomy so you can better understand english, I'd be happy to.

But the POINT remains: the MODERN definition of "sodomy" may or may not encompass the same behavior(s) as the OLD understanding of that term.

So, without resorting to the MODERN dictionary definitions, can you utilize the Bible ITSELF as evidence supporting your contention?

 

[Liability]

So do you want me to provide proof that the Bible speaks against sodomy in general?

"Ground Beef," huh Drock?

Good answer....

That's all I asked, if you'd like me to I'd be happy to, that's a very easy thing to do.

Some people put a raw egg on their tartare!

True story!

 

[hortysir]

There's a lot more straight oral sex happening in america now than gay sex.

And I am thankful





(unsubscribe....this shit's getting old)

 

[Dr.Drock]

Sodomite

Originally meaning a citizen of the inhospitable biblical city of Sodom, has been extended over the centuries to mean a homosexual. Such famous Sodomites include Oscar Wilde and Lot.

"I like being a Sodomite ...a Lot!"
"Oh, very witty, Wilde!"


Urban Dictionary: sodomite

Drock ain't known for his honesty.

Actually you're lying again big guy, I'm talking about sodomy, not sodomites. I've never even typed the word sodomite until this post.

If you'd like me to provide merriam webster's defintion of sodomy so you can better understand english, I'd be happy to.

But the POINT remains: the MODERN definition of "sodomy" may or may not encompass the same behavior(s) as the OLD understanding of that term.

So, without resorting to the MODERN dictionary definitions, can you utilize the Bible ITSELF as evidence supporting your contention?

That's why I brought up 2 options originally. Either those who print out the current version of the Bible are wrong when they put the word sodomy in the texts and need to pick new words to put in place to be more accurate, or you guys have an issue with how merriam webster defines the word.

I can't twist the meaning of the words in the Bible, I go by what the Bible says when talking about the Bible.

 

[mal]

Jesus spoke about murder, divorce, anger and adultery in Matthew and many other sins of the time.
In the Bible.

Quotes and Context, Please.



peace...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Some people put a raw egg on their tartare!

True story!

I've even heard of anchovies in it - though that sounded a little fishy.

 

[mal]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...bodecea-others-did-jesus-define-marriage.html

^Feel free to come on over...



peace...

 

[mal]

Damn, this is so easy it is unreal.
The Bible lists 667 sins and does not distinguish between them like you do mal. The penalty for lust is death in the Bible.
Homosexuality is listed as sin the same as the 7 "deadly sins": greed, envy, pride, wrath/anger, lust gluttony and sloth.
I am sure you treat the sin of gluttony the same as you do homosexuality mal.
Of course it is the Old Testament that lists most of these sins. New Testament does not mention homosexuality at all.
And most of these sins are Jewish law. We do not go by religous law in this country.
Something about the United States Constitution.
You need to read Romans 14:4 10, Mark 9:42, Acts 21:28, Numbers 14:2-3, 16:3 mal. Get back to us when you have mastered that.
Matthew said it best: It is a sin to think evil against any of God's children.
Luke got it right: It is a sin to despise your neighbor.

THE NEW TESTAMENT DOES MENTION HOMOSEXUALITY!!!!!!!

Why do you libs keep lying about this!



All of that refers to HOMOSEXUALITY. I already addressed this over and over and YET you lying libs insist on repeating the same lies.

As for the wages of sin:

Romans 6:23 King James Version (KJV)



23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

The PENALTY FOR EVERY SIN IS DEATH. That's why Jesus died for us. Because God doesn't differentiate between sins.

You are confusing how God treats sin, and the laws he set up for a civil Hebrew Society through the Mosaic Law.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

You speak ONLY OF YOUR OWN IGNORANCE and prejudice regarding the Bible, NOT from any knowlege.

I own 3 corporations and have voted Republican for 40 years.
I can always tell when you have ZERO confidence in your argument.
You call everyone a "lib" that disagrees with you.

Don't use Dishonest Liberal Tactics when Forwarding a Liberal Agenda then...



peace...

 

[uscitizen]

Never said that oral sex is a sin.
Nor does it say that in the bible.

It says sodomy and oral sex is sodomy.

Today's Dictionary Definitions are not Applicable to the Bible...

What does it say in the Bible about a Married Couple Engaging in Oral Sex?...



peace...

So if it is not in the bible it is not a sin?

Does the bible speak of pornography?

 

[Gadawg73]

I ADDRESSED THIS, OH ONE WHO IS READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGED!

I have delt with people like this before. Most are homosexuals who claim to be "Christians."

They claim that Jesus himself never mentioned homosexualty, thus it is not a sin.

Quite erroneous for several reasons.

For one, Jesus didn't HAVE to mention homosexuality.

Jesus preached to JEWS during his lifetime. His sermons, his debates, and the religious questioning from Pharisees, Sadducees, Scribes, Lawyers (etc) were all from and for JEWS (the only exception may be the Herodians, since Herod himself was an Idumean)

Thus, the subject of homosexuality never came up, BECAUSE IT WAS A SETTLED MATTER. No one questioned Jesus on homosexuality, because no one had to. Everyone knew the answer to that issue.

Leviticus 18 made it very clear homosexuality was not only a sin, BUT an abomination. Jesus confirmed the validity of the law to his Jewish audience, which includes Leviticus 18.


Quote:
Matthew 5:18 King James Version


18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.


Can you imagine Jesus up and telling Jews that he was for gay marriage? He would have been stoned to death on the spot!

Get real people! You know what I'm saying is true!

Thus, the question of homosexuality is NEVER broached until the first Chapter of Romans.

Why you may ask! Why is homosexuality never mentioned (in the NT) until the first Chapter of Romans? The answer is to that is very easy to understand.

While Jesus' audience were Jews, who were debating points of the law, Paul (who wrote Romans) was bringing Christianity to PAGANS.

Although, there was NO QUESTION that homosexuality was verboten in Jewish Law, homosexuality was quite common in many pagan socities like Greece and Rome. (Indeed, people engaged in these pagan practices in the OT were called the "sodomites.")

Thus, right off the bat, Paul makes it clear to new Christian converts from the pagan cultures (that comprised the Roman Empire) that these sexual practices were a sin.

Thus, the erroneous notion that, since Jesus didn't mention homosexuality, homosexuality isn't a sin, is just a another way the PC crowd tries to rationalize their way around the Bible.

It's not based on fact, it's based on ignorance and lies.

It's as simple as that.

Jesus spoke about murder, divorce, anger and adultery in Matthew and many other sins of the time.
In the Bible.
By your way of thinking murder was not a "settled" sin.
Paul was speaking to the Jews, not the Romans, in Corinthians.
Since Jesus spoke about many other sins why is it "erroneous" that he never mentioned homosexuality?
That opinion makes no sense. Jesus mentioned MANY sins.
But never homosexuality. Ever.
Jesus preached blessings to those that THE JEWS LOOKED DOWN UPON.
In Matthew 5 Jesus commends, brings blessings and praises those that the Jews look down upon.
And you claim that homosexuals were not looked down upon by the Jews?
Jesus in Mark addresses the weaknesses and fallacies of the Jewish laws in the Judaistic system.
Early on in Jesus' ministry he began to butt heads with the Jewish rabbis over the religous law. One case in point is the Sabbath. The Pharrisses stated that Jesus was soft on the law. Why is it that Jesus worked on the Sabbath and disobeyed that law? How could that be? Pharrisses looked at Jesus as a law breaker.
Jesus gave us the proper interpretaion of moral law. Homosexuality is not in it.
Where is it in the 10 commandments?
Jesus laid out the law and labeled the Jewish law as "law in it's perversions". Imagine that.

All through the Bible Jesus speaks about the law and his interpretation of it and the moral codes he sets down. Best example was Jesus was soft on adultery according to Jewish law. They demanded women be stoned to death. Jesus did not do that and he spoke about that sin and others.
No where did he mention homosexuality. Claims that he had a "done deal" with that are without any fact or foundation anywhere in the Bible as the Bible is full of Jesus speaking of what he believed was sin.

You don't know what the hell you are talking about. Paul made it his personal mission to convert "gentiles" to Christianity. Of course he also preached to Jews, but his main goal was gentiles:

Acts 13:46 King James Version



46Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Why do you guys pretend to know what you are talking about WHEN IT'S SO DAMN OBVIOUS, YOU DON'T!

Besides which the Gentiles comprised most of the membership of the Church at Rome in Paul's time.

This is really starting to get me mad. You either are being lied to by someone, or you are just making BS up and hoping no one else realizes it's BS. Which is it, because I'm getting tired of having to refute lie after STUPID LIE!

I took religion in military school in the 60s.
You are the one that has no clue what you are talking about. You do not even know Bible history.
I quoted The Bible and gave you books where it is.
You quote nothing, zilch, not a damn thing.
All you have is opinion.
You do not even know that The First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians was for the Jews and Gentiles. CHRISTIAN gentiles. You see, Paul enumerated numerous so called immoral tendencies of the Christian Corinthians. They were not pagans. Corinth was a very prosperous trading port and the Jews lead the way as merchants there. Most all of the early Christians were Jewish dude and Paul mandated circumcission for all Christians also. Paul uses as an example in his teaching of the ancient Isrealites who were punished for their sins. Where did Jesus use this and throw out the old Jewish laws? In fact, Jesus never did such a thing and did the opposite with the adulterous women.
Corinthians 1 gives us a clear history of the early church, a church with NO clear single supreme authority. The missionaries and preachers who spread the Gospel in the decades after Jesus were by NO means homogenous in their approaches to Christian doctrine and practice. I suggest you go read Corinthians and tell me where I am wrong. Paul speaks himself of divisions in the church.
Instances of vast disagreements in doctrine and practice amongst early Christian leaders and disciples are in all The New Testament. In Acts we see that.
No wonder you are mad. You have no argument and nothing to back up anything you post.