Why the Same-Sex Marriage Experiment Will Not Work

[Guest TeenTitan19]

since you were not alive during the time of david, i find it hard to believe that you can state the nature of their relationship FOR SURE. second of all for "getting my hands dirty", i refuse to merely bump out bible passages for you to construe them the way you would like and completely disregard context. I have pointed you in a direction if you truly want enlightenment, and if you choose not to take that direction, it is no fault of mine. There is no point in arguing because this debate is going no where and neither side is gaining anything. have a great life. I pray that one day you truly become enlightened and refrain from discriminating against LGBT people.

[Guest TeenTitan19]

im pretty sure the word "homosexual" did not occur until the 19th century. just saying. and most theological study points to corinthians meaning the temple prostitution that was prevalent at the time.

Temple prostitution in Corinth was heaveiy homosexual. Mlale prostitutes would dress as women and take on effiminate roles in order to attract sailors who had been on the ocean for months and were not particularlly selective as to their mode of sexual outlet.

as a last note, the fact that you're comparing prostitutes to everyday monogamous homosexual relationships simply shows your flawed train of thought. l8r man. GBU

[Guest shiloh357]

But as an example to show you that I can argue from a nonsecular POV: Leviticus 18:22 or whatever the verse is. leviticus states a myriad of things as being "unclean." such as eating shellfish, touching pigskin (football anyone), wearing polyester. religious institutions disregard these passages in the same book but choose to pick out verse 22. I think it's ridiculous and if one is to be ignored, than the rest should be as well.

I speak and read Hebrew. What you don't understand is that the word used for "unclean" or "abomination" when applied to homoseuxality is different than the word used for ritual uncleanness (shellfish, touching a dead body, or female mensturation). Hebrew is very precise. It is also very nuanced and for that reason you cannot go off of what you read in English. English has no way to express the precision that exists in Hebrew. It simply doesn't translate. So going off of a face-value approach to the text will render erroneous interpretations.

Sorry titan, but your position does not hold up biblicaly or otherwise.

[Guest shiloh357]

im pretty sure the word "homosexual" did not occur until the 19th century. just saying. and most theological study points to corinthians meaning the temple prostitution that was prevalent at the time.

Temple prostitution in Corinth was heaveiy homosexual. Mlale prostitutes would dress as women and take on effiminate roles in order to attract sailors who had been on the ocean for months and were not particularlly selective as to their mode of sexual outlet.

as a last note, the fact that you're comparing prostitutes to everyday monogamous homosexual relationships simply shows your flawed train of thought. l8r man. GBU

It doesn't matter if we are talking about homosexual prostitution or monogamous homosexual relationships. That is irrelevant. God considers both equally sinful. The Bible makes no distinction. You are the one operating from a flawed train of thought.

[Guest shiloh357]

im pretty sure the word "homosexual" did not occur until the 19th century. just saying. and most theological study points to corinthians meaning the temple prostitution that was prevalent at the time.

Temple prostitution in Corinth was heaveiy homosexual. Mlale prostitutes would dress as women and take on effiminate roles in order to attract sailors who had been on the ocean for months and were not particularlly selective as to their mode of sexual outlet.

as a last note, the fact that you're comparing prostitutes to everyday monogamous homosexual relationships simply shows your flawed train of thought. l8r man. GBU

It doesn't matter if we are talking about homosexual prostitution or monogamous homosexual relationships. That is irrelevant. God considers both equally sinful. The Bible makes no distinction. You are the one operating from a flawed train of thought.

[Guest shiloh357]

since you were not alive during the time of david, i find it hard to believe that you can state the nature of their relationship

Well, there is something to be said for undertanding anciet Hebrew covenant traditions. IN Hebrew, the word "love" has an entirely different connoatation than it does in English. In Hebrew thought, love is not an emotional . It a concept that is operative in nature as well as covenantal.

David and Jonathan "loved" each other, but the word in Hebrew, ahava is not a romantic word. It is a covenant word.

The story of David and Jonathan's covenant is in I Sam. 18. Verse 4 says that Jonathan took off his robe, sword, bow and "girdle" and gave them to David. The radical homosexual movement ignoranlty presumes that David and Jonathan stripped down to bare nudity, based on this passage. What Jonathan did was simply take off his outer garment that bore the family "coat of arms" and he gave to David his sword and bow. In ancient Hebrew culture, Jonathan was essentially making David part of Saul's household by way of a covenant. What the passage doesn't tell you, because it assumes you understand ancient Hebrew convenant tradition is that they made a blood covenant before Jonathan gave David those items. They slit their palms and mingled the blood. The text only tells you the last part about the garments because the author assumes you would know what happened first.

So David and Jonathan were not gay. The assertion that they were is simply absurd.

[~candice~]

There were temple prostitutes, but Mel White's "temple prostitute" argument for the NT is utter bollocks. He is just flat out wrong and his argument is so weak it is laughable. The bible is soaked with God's design for sexual expression so much that to deny His design (a man and a woman in marriage) is a fruitless exercise. From Adam and Eve all the way to Revelation we read that His design is heterosexual marriage and nothing else.

You get another bowl of ice cream for knowing where that bogus theory comes from. Poor Mel won't answer my emails on the subject. Neither will Rick Brentlinger. Could it be because they themselves realize that their biblical arguments are patently weak and non-objective, as I have kindly but firmly pointed out? One wonders.

Choc mint I hope

2Ti 3:1 Know this also, that in the last days grievous times will be at hand.

2Ti 3:2 For men will be self-lovers, money-lovers, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

2Ti 3:3 without natural affection, unyielding, false accusers, without self-control, savage, despisers of good,

2Ti 3:4 traitors, reckless, puffed up, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God,

2Ti 3:5 having a form of godliness, but denying the power of it; even turn away from these.

2Ti 3:6 For of these are those who creep into houses and lead captive silly women loaded with sins, led away with different kinds of lusts,

2Ti 3:7 ever learning and never able to come to the full knowledge of the truth.

[Guest TeenTitan19]

I'm not indulging you anymore. Case and point: "homosexual" http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_year_did_homosexual_become_a_word have a good life.

Edited June 24, 2011 by refugepsa91
no name calling,debate the subject not the person

[~candice~]

I'm not indulging you anymore. Case and point: "homosexual" http://wiki.answers....l_become_a_word have a good life.

Citing wiki answers does nothing to refute the many claims we have made with the Word. It doesn't matter when homosexual became a Word - the action is well clear in the bible in the Hebrew and the Greek.

Prostitute as a word in English only came about in the 16 th century so I guess that's okay too now?

http://www.word-origins.com/definition/prostitute.html

Temple was from the 14th century.

http://www.word-origins.com/definition/temple.html

Does that mean there were no temple prostitutes before the 14th century? Of course not, it means that the concept was explained by different English words, or Hebrew / Greek words.

I'm sorry but I think you are throwing a tantrum because your position has been destroyed and you are failing to see the difference between attacking a position (which we have done) and attacking a person (which you just did to Cobalt). The spirit of a born again Christian should, at this point, repent and apologise, and spend some time seeking out what His Word really does say without the liberal tolerate-everything garb that has been mentioned here.

Believe it or not, I've been in your shoes, shocked to the core at the strength of the opposition that the body of Christians have in this forum against homosexuality. It's a bit of a rude shock. When so many people powerfully object to your stance it's easy to think they are rejecting you. Such is not the case here, we really do speak from the Word and there is no wriggle room on this topic.

God bless, praying for you.

Candice

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

look up a website called religioustolerance. that can more succinctly explain my thoughts on those bible passages. as far as you are concerned, I am happy that you are living the life you desire. however, research indicates more and more the fluidity of SOME peoples' sexuality, indicating that we are all partly homosexual and party heterosexual. As you matured you may have discovered that you were more heterosexual than homosexual. i dont know. but that doesn't give you the right to tell others who homosexual that they are perverts, etc. and say theyre lives are not complete (just as i do not say your life is not complete). and as for the "shoving down the throat portion": religious entities are becoming more and more involved in politics, etc. and trying to impose upon the world "christian standards". If i am a buddhist (which many are) then our GOD has no bearing on their lives whatsoever and therefore our teachings should no be imposed upon them as the "be all end all". that is where i am coming from.

Hello TeenTitan19,

I have to challenge the assertion that you can be a homosexual and still be saved, for the following reasons:

Homosexuality, as in, the practice of homosexual contact, itself is a sin,