Egg+egg=baby?

---

Quote:for them that defile themselves with mankind This bolded texted by yourself doesn't imply anything about homosexuality to me. This could mean just about anything... including masturbation. Mankind did not just mean men/males, but all humans.This is the point I made before. People like yourself take a simply piece of text than twist it around to try and fit your cause. Again to me this text means nothing or says nothing about homosexuality.

One last time (for Chance and Eddie)...this has NOTHING to do with being gay. It has EVERYTHING to do with a man sticking his dick up another man's butt. Is the difference between the two concepts really so difficult to understand? It reads a little more coarsely, but similarly in the Old Testament. As far as the Bible is concerned, be gay all you want...I see nothing in there against it. Just don't practice homosexual sex. Clear?Eddie - Do your research. The orginal text refers to a sodomite...one who lives in Sodom. And we know what God did to that town, and why.

AGHHH!!okay done screaming for the moment.. anyways..I know you say you have no issues with gay peopel but instead the act... in that bold text I see nothing that says anything about sticking a dick up a guys ass!! LoL Good lord!! lolWebster definition: anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex.Sounds to me like we have a whole lot of sodomites out there myself... yourself included, Thor. Again, shall I reserve you a seat on the bus to hell?Also I don't remember anything being said about "sodomy" in the scripture your quoted.... (I might have missed something in another post, its possible.. busy at work and also have a freakin headach!)

Well I don't think Webster was around when the Bible was written.In referring to similar passages in the OT, we see that the implication is "for a man to lie with another man as with a woman". So, it would seem to me, same-gender sex between two men is the issue...however it is performed. The keyword here: sex. Man-woman (hetero) sex, in terms of what is and isn't allowed, is never adressed. However, the Bible says that the marriage bed is undefiled...which could imply that "anything goes" if you're married. In this idea, it might be seen why perhaps some homosexuals are so hung up on being allowed to be married. A civil union wouldn't cut it, in this case. If they could be "married", in the eyes of others (who don't know any better) they could do what they wanted, sexually, based on this "marriage bed" concept. God would never recognize such a marriage anyway, but acceptance in the eyes of others is what some gays are really interested in. Sorry Eddie...can of worms.

Thor please listen to "what this world needs" by casting crowns. Spesifically the talking part.

Thor, I have pointed out until I'm blue in the face half the crap you just said in that paragraph but it's like talking to a brick wall. I'm not even sure why you even still hang around these forums if you cannot learn anything because you obviously always think you are right.You are the worst kind of Christian.. a "Know it all" Christian, who really doesn't know a damn thing.

I disagree. He was showing/talking about the marriage bed and concepts of marriage, not that "he's okay with gays, but not the icky sex part." that you said. He was stating different things.And who knows, maybe he's also "busy at work and has a headache."

Originally Posted By: RadIf I should come around, Thor, would you offer me your daughter for the night?The Bible says you should. Food and a bed, yes...so happens I have both to give. But my daughter? Aside from the fact she's only 2, I know of noplace in the Bible where it says as you suggest. Perhaps you could point it out and we could discuss?

Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyselfYou are the worst kind of Christian.. a "Know it all" Christian, who really doesn't know a damn thing. I've been telling you what I know. But here above, you are telling me what I am...never having met me. Now...which one of us is thinking they are a "know it all"?

You don't know squat. It's what you believe and believing and knowing are different. Agian I say listen to the song "what the world needs" by casting crowns.

Fuck.

Quote:For example, Ezekiel says that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah "had pride, surfeit of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and the needy" (16:49-50); and the Wisdom of Solomon says that they "refused to receive strangers when they came to them" (19.14). so, by those biblical definitions, those who deny equal healthcare to the poor are the actual sodomites.now it becomes much more clear

Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: unsupervisedbut that phrase makes no reference to sex in general or sex between men in particular.hence the folly of referring to the bible for rules of life. It contains, as you so astutely observe, euphemisms, open to interpretation. Interpretations depend upon the readers predispositions. That's why christians are in conflict with christians. Why don't you at least go study it in the original language for yourself before you run into conflict with scholars who have done so most of their life, please. "Sodomite" is one of the original terms used in the NT...is that of any help to you? well, if the English version of the book is so inadequate, don't quote it, dumbass

I think I'm going to stop posting stuff like this, because everytime I do this happens.

There's nothing wrong with stuff like this happening. It's how we come to understand each other. That certainly doesn't mean we will agree or persuade but it helps us appreciate the feelings that others have and why they have and sometimes that's enough.

Originally Posted By: Rad Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: RadIf I should come around, Thor, would you offer me your daughter for the night?The Bible says you should. Food and a bed, yes...so happens I have both to give. But my daughter? Aside from the fact she's only 2, I know of noplace in the Bible where it says as you suggest. Perhaps you could point it out and we could discuss? Did Lot not offer his daughter's to the citizens of Sodom to use as they wished?For that matter, did Lot's daughters not sleep with their father in order to bear children? You're taking the whole thing out of context. Let me tell you what happened...since you don't seem all that interested in finding it out for yourself.Some strangers/visiters were staying with Lot at the time. Now, for a Christian, visiters are special...they are to be treated as Christ himself. There are passages to support this...that you can find for yourself if you care to. Some of the men from the town (Sodom) came to Lots house and demanded to have the visitors for purposes of...well, you should know by now if you've been following this thread. If not...sex with Lot's male visiters it what they had in mind. So Lot found himself in a predicament and was being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. And the customs, being what they were at the time, if any of the townsfolk "deflowered" his daughters they would have to marry them. All things considered, Lot offered up his daughters in place of his male visiters. Perhaps now you can understand why, and that your presumption about offering up your daughters to strangers is taken way out of context. BTW, all of the above is found in the Bible.

Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyselfYou are the worst kind of Christian.. a "Know it all" Christian, who really doesn't know a damn thing. I've been telling you what I know. But here above, you are telling me what I am...never having met me. Now...which one of us is thinking they are a "know it all"? I know what you have shown me.. and what you have shown me is intolerance.

Originally Posted By: Rad Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: Rad Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: RadIf I should come around, Thor, would you offer me your daughter for the night?The Bible says you should. Food and a bed, yes...so happens I have both to give. But my daughter? Aside from the fact she's only 2, I know of noplace in the Bible where it says as you suggest. Perhaps you could point it out and we could discuss? Did Lot not offer his daughter's to the citizens of Sodom to use as they wished?For that matter, did Lot's daughters not sleep with their father in order to bear children? You're taking the whole thing out of context. Let me tell you what happened...since you don't seem all that interested in finding it out for yourself.Some strangers/visiters were staying with Lot at the time. Now, for a Christian, visiters are special...they are to be treated as Christ himself. There are passages to support this...that you can find for yourself if you care to. Some of the men from the town (Sodom) came to Lots house and demanded to have the visitors for purposes of...well, you should know by now if you've been following this thread. If not...sex with Lot's male visiters it what they had in mind. So Lot found himself in a predicament and was being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. And the customs, being what they were at the time, if any of the townsfolk "deflowered" his daughters they would have to marry them. All things considered, Lot offered up his daughters in place of his male visiters. Perhaps now you can understand why, and that your presumption about offering up your daughters to strangers is taken way out of context. BTW, all of the above is found in the Bible. Much from the Bible is taken way out of context.Much in the Bible is ignored when convenient and stressed when convenient.The offering of your daughter for the night will be one ignored, I hope, and I hope the sleeping with them, but you don't hesitate to stress the presumed sin of homosexuality that you like to read into that story, which many Biblical scholars state had nothing to do with male/male sex anyway. I took nothing out of context and ignored nothing. It's highly unlikely that a group of men is going to knock on my door and demand to have gay sex with my male guests and threaten me if I refuse...asumming I have any male guests at the time. If it ever did happen, I have an option Lot did not. I'll put a 9mm in their faces...as I believe in protecting my own. I'm quite certain Lot would have done something similar if he had had that option.If you decide to accept Christ and the Bible, you need ignore nothing.

Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyself Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyselfYou are the worst kind of Christian.. a "Know it all" Christian, who really doesn't know a damn thing. I've been telling you what I know. But here above, you are telling me what I am...never having met me. Now...which one of us is thinking they are a "know it all"? I know what you have shown me.. and what you have shown me is intolerance. What I have shown is acceptance of you as a person, and unacceptance of what you profess to practice with another man. That's the truth...but you can't claim to be a victim unless you can sneak in that PC "intolerance" word somewhere. BTW, Christians are NOT about tolerance...they are about acceptance. Remember that.

Quote:In this idea, it might be seen why perhaps some homosexuals are so hung up on being allowed to be married. A civil union wouldn't cut it, in this case. If they could be "married", in the eyes of others (who don't know any better) they could do what they wanted, sexually, based on this "marriage bed" concept. God would never recognize such a marriage anyway, but acceptance in the eyes of others is what some gays are really interested in Again you never listen. We talked about Civil Unions before. If the government would have offered Civil Unions, instead of also denying that at one time, I would bet the majority of the GLBT community would have accepted it. But that’s now moot because Same-Sex marriage is now picking up speed and now, in my opinion, the government lost the opportunity to give us Civil Unions. With Same-Sex Marriage gaining ground and being approved state by state, why would we settle for Civil Unions? You conservatives basically screwed yourself when you fought against Civil Unions; guess you shouldn’t have been so greedy.Thor, again I must have been talking to the wall when I expressed to you that Sex-Sex Marriage has nothing to do with acceptance. I doubt there are many homosexuals that would careless whether you accept us or not. This has nothing to do with acceptance; it has to do with equality under the eyes of the law, not under the eyes of you. Like me, hate me, disapprove or approve of me I don’t care. But I do care about is equality and being treated as every other United States Citizens with full rights.Who are you to say what God will and will not recognize? Last I checked you are not Gods keeper, so I’d watch saying what God will and will not do. I think you’re pretty full of yourself to even considering making such a statement. When the time comes and I go before the Lord HE will let me know what he approves and disapproves of, not you. Honestly that’s pretty much the point, regardless what we do on earth or what we approve of on earth, God will have the ultimate say. So I’ll never understand why people like yourself think they need to make these rules, God will have the Ultimate decision.