Pride Month?

[PUB78 1,371]

[auburnatl1 5,555]

25 minutes ago, PUB78 said:

Very true.

No idea what the point is.

[aubiefifty 17,478]

On 6/3/2024 at 12:46 PM, AU9377 said:

We spent a few hundred years trying to shun and kill off homosexuals.  The fact that there have been homosexuals in the world from the beginning of recorded history should be a clue that their existence is not some unnatural affliction, but instead is a manifestation of a constant state of being within the human race.  Making men and women who happen to be gay feel shamed and live in the shadows has accomplished nothing, other than for families to become estranged from their children, siblings and others and experience the grief of losing them to suicide and a life filled with unwarranted depression. 

A nation that claims to be the home of the free should, at the very least, acknowledge that being free must mean more than to be free to live like you and me.  It should mean freedom from persecution and judgment  based solely on who someone loves or chooses to have sex with in their personal lives.    I will be he first to admit that some of the Pride parades seem over the top and at times going to the extent of being vulgar.  Others, I am certain, are more about statements of inclusion. Nonetheless, there are large portions of the gay community that have been forced to find others that they can relate to in order to have a sense of family. That is the fault of a society that spent so many decades not providing the support from their own families and communities that they deserved as much as any other human being. 

If someone believes this is a sign or moral decay in America, they aren't looking for the real moral decay, but instead are choosing to practice selective moral outrage.  Every family has that uncle or aunt that never married, the cousin that they don't hear from any more or the child that moved from their small hometown and hasn't been home in years.  Love them and stop making them carry the guilt they don't deserve.

sometimes your opinions make me breathless with your take. we are ALL gods children and some would not have that so where is the love. you are the man of mystery on here that never gives a bad take on things. long may you run. i get too worked up and realize that. i have so much on me right now but you lift me up with your posts.

[homersapien 11,672]

On 6/3/2024 at 9:38 PM, jj3jordan said:

Oh yeah fiddy. God allowed King James to have gay lovers.  You are one sick dude.

Well, he certainly didn't prevent it.

[aubiefifty 17,478]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, he certainly didn't prevent it.

jj needs to learn how to google some............and as much hate as he spews towards gays and calling me a ped.........i feel the hate jj and you are doing it wrong. one day you will actually say something true on here.

[aubiefifty 17,478]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, he certainly didn't prevent it.

i am betting jj thinks i am the anti christ............

[homersapien 11,672]

1 hour ago, PUB78 said:

Actually - if you are referring to homosexuality - that's debatable, at least among biblical historians and/or psychologists. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/apr/20/was-jesus-gay-probably 

https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Was-Gay-Alexander-Kissi/dp/1499076061

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Was-Jesus-Homosexual-Dole/ca8c57889446e248aa6babb934f9999ecfaeac41

(But then, homosexuality is not a sin.)

Edited June 11 by homersapien

[SaltyTiger 8,101]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

that's debatable, at least among biblical historians.  (But then, homosexuality is not a sin.)

First of all it is not debatable. Doesn’t matter how many full of sh*t articles and books you Google. You are trying to stir a fight and have no clue what you are yapping about. I have explained to your hard head previously. 

[aubiefifty 17,478]

1 minute ago, SaltyTiger said:

First of all it is not debatable. Doesn’t matter how many full of sh*t articles and books you Google. You are trying to stir a fight and have no clue what you are yapping about. I have explained to your hard head previously. 

you big meanie............fry me some fish.

[homersapien 11,672]

3 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

First of all it is not debatable. Doesn’t matter how many full of sh*t articles and books you Google. You are trying to stir a fight and have no clue what you are yapping about. I have explained to your hard head previously. 

Tell that to all the people who actually debate it.

You sir, are trying to imply you are the final authority - you know everything, which means you think you are either God - or Trump. 

 

[ArgoEagle 1,894]

21 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Actually - if you are referring to homosexuality - that's debatable, at least among biblical historians.  (But then, homosexuality is not a sin.)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/apr/20/was-jesus-gay-probably 

https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Was-Gay-Alexander-Kissi/dp/1499076061

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Was-Jesus-Homosexual-Dole/ca8c57889446e248aa6babb934f9999ecfaeac41

This is blatant sacrilege!  It is offensive to God, Jesus, The Holy Spirit, and all Christians.

And homosexuality is not only a sin, but an Abomination to God!   

I had your posts blocked for a long while, and now I remember why.    May God have mercy on your soul.

[aubiefifty 17,478]

2 minutes ago, ArgoEagle said:

This is blatant sacrilege!  It is offensive to God, Jesus, The Holy Spirit, and all Christians.

And homosexuality is not only a sin, but an Abomination to God!   

I had your posts blocked for a long while, and now I remember why.    May God have mercy on your soul.

dude you jumped me for something the other day when i was not even talking to you and you got nasty you big meanie. and you never even said a my bad...............

[ArgoEagle 1,894]

1 minute ago, aubiefifty said:

dude you jumped me for something the other day when i was not even talking to you and you got nasty you big meanie. and you never even said a my bad...............

Nothing to do with you man.

[aubiefifty 17,478]

Just now, ArgoEagle said:

Nothing to do with you man.

i am just pointing out you are not always right on here. not trying to be mean. and you still cannot say sorry............ok mr love. god made gays so i have been told by a priest he thinks there is a plan for them.all i know is we have killed homosexuals for centuries when they are just being who they are. but keep spitting on them. god is love and not hate.

[ArgoEagle 1,894]

2 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

i am just pointing out you are not always right on here. not trying to be mean. and you still cannot say sorry............ok mr love. god made gays so i have been told by a priest he thinks there is a plan for them.all i know is we have killed homosexuals for centuries when they are just being who they are. but keep spitting on them. god is love and not hate.

Man, please read your Bible.  Leviticus 18:22 "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination

Leviticus 20:13  "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination;  they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Deuteronomy 22:5  "A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.  (Crossdressers & Transexuals)

God, not man, destroyed Sodom & Gamorrah with fire & brimstone (every living man, woman, child & animal) because of sexual immorality, in which the main sin mentioned that caused this was homosexuality)

If you or anyone else on this forum are going to make the statement that homosexuality is not sin, then you are contradicting these Bible verses (which were handed down by God for man to write).

I DON'T HATE ANY HUMAN BEING ON THIS EARTH.  MY HOPE IS THAT EVERY LIVING PERSON ACCEPTS JESUS AS THEIR SAVIOR THROUGH HIS DEATH, BURIAL, AND RESURRECTION.

That's not up to me.   But saying homosexuality is not a sin is incorrect (unless you don't believe God's Word; again that's up to you).  I provided you just a few verses to back what I said up. There are several more.

I did not write them nor inspire them, but I accept them bc they come from My Lord God Jehovah and nobody is going to change that with secular logic.

I don't know what you mean by I attacked you, but I have not said anything with the purpose of offending you, but if I did then I do apologize.

[auburnatl1 5,555]

21 minutes ago, ArgoEagle said:

Man, please read your Bible.  Leviticus 18:22 "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination

Leviticus 20:13  "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination;  they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Deuteronomy 22:5  "A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.  (Crossdressers & Transexuals)

God, not man, destroyed Sodom & Gamorrah with fire & brimstone (every living man, woman, child & animal) because of sexual immorality, in which the main sin mentioned that caused this was homosexuality)

If you or anyone else on this forum are going to make the statement that homosexuality is not sin, then you are contradicting these Bible verses (which were handed down by God for man to write).

I DON'T HATE ANY HUMAN BEING ON THIS EARTH.  MY HOPE IS THAT EVERY LIVING PERSON ACCEPTS JESUS AS THEIR SAVIOR THROUGH HIS DEATH, BURIAL, AND RESURRECTION.

That's not up to me.   But saying homosexuality is not a sin is incorrect (unless you don't believe God's Word; again that's up to you).  I provided you just a few verses to back what I said up. There are several more.

I did not write them nor inspire them, but I accept them bc they come from My Lord God Jehovah and nobody is going to change that with secular logic.

I don't know what you mean by I attacked you, but I have not said anything with the purpose of offending you, but if I did then I do apologize.

Old Testament picking and choosing. Christ said he was creating a new covenant. There’s a reason many denominations reject your position.

You have any pork lately? Kosher diet? Follow (or know) the 613 mitzvot Old Testament commandments?

Edited June 11 by auburnatl1

[CoffeeTiger 5,378]

47 minutes ago, ArgoEagle said:

 

God, not man, destroyed Sodom & Gamorrah with fire & brimstone (every living man, woman, child & animal) because of sexual immorality, in which the main sin mentioned that caused this was homosexuality)

 

Like most stories of the old testament, Sodom and Gomorrah is just weird. 

So Lot, the supposed good guy of this story, offers up his 2 virgin daughters to a gang of rapists telling them to do whatever they want to his daughters as long as they don't harm him or the angels he was hiding in his house.(Lot was a real stand up family man, eh?) Apparently the angels wanted to wait to see if the gang would take the daughters, but but when they didn't, only then did the angels decided to intervene and blind the gang of men. In old testament land, you can rape the girls, but men touching men is just a little too far. 

So the family runs away. The evil city is destroyed. Lots wife looks back and gets turned into salt for being a nosy bitch....

 

So they decide eventually to just go hide in a cave...cause why not? And well these virgin daughters were apparently fed up with being virgins and I guess all the other men in Bible land were homosexuals so they decided just to give their dad a lot of alcohol and then have sex with him...cause why not? They just saw a powerful God destroy their home for sexual immorality and kill their own mother for twisting her neck back a little too far, so it makes sense they'd follow that up with sexual immorality of their own. 

Probably the biggest miracle of the story was old man Lot being able to perform sexually while so black out drunk that he couldn't even recognize he was having sex with his own daughters. Geez...no little blue pill needed in those days I guess. 

 

Looking back I guess God realizes he should have just his angels carry Lot out and kill everyone else in the cities. Wouldn't have made nearly as compelling of a narrative though. and the story was more about being an origin story for Moab and Ammon than anything...so eh

Edited June 11 by CoffeeTiger

[Leftfield 2,838]

 

We're all thinking it.....

[ArgoEagle 1,894]

10 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Like most stories of the old testament, Sodom and Gomorrah is just weird. 

So Lot, the supposed good guy of this story, offers up his 2 virgin daughters to a gang of rapists telling them to do whatever they want to his daughters as long as they don't harm him or the angels he was hiding in his house.(Lot was a real stand up family man, eh?) Apparently the angels wanted to wait to see if the gang would take the daughters, but but when they didn't, only then did the angels decided to intervene and blind the gang of men. In old testament land, you can rape the girls, but men touching men is just a little too far. 

So the family runs away. The evil city is destroyed. Lots wife looks back and gets turned into salt for being a nosy bitch....

 

So they decide eventually to just go hide in a cave...cause why not? And well these virgin daughters were apparently fed up with being virgins and I guess all the other men in Bible land were homosexuals so they decided just to give their dad a lot of alcohol and then have sex with him...cause why not? They just saw a powerful God destroy their home for sexual immorality and kill their own mother for twisting her neck back a little too far, so it makes sense they'd follow that up with sexual immorality of their own. 

Probably the biggest miracle of the story was old man Lot being able to perform sexually while so black out drunk that he couldn't even recognize he was having sex with his own daughters. Geez...no little blue pill needed in those days I guess. 

 

Looking back I guess God realizes he should have just his angels carry Lot out and kill everyone else in the cities. Wouldn't have made nearly as compelling of a narrative though. and the story was more about being an origin story for Moab and Ammon than anything...so eh

Yeah. Go ahead & mock & Leftfield go ahead & laugh.

God will judge & God is not mocked.

[ArgoEagle 1,894]

42 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Old Testament picking and choosing. Christ said he was creating a new covenant. There’s a reason many denominations reject your position.

You have any pork lately? Kosher diet? Follow (or know) the 613 mitzvot Old Testament commandments?

Here you go. New Testament.

Romans 1:24  Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves;

25   Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.  Amen.

26   For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections; for their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27   And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working that which is unseemly (not proper, or appropriate) and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28   And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate (wicked, unGodly) mind, to do those things which are not convenient

[CoffeeTiger 5,378]

13 minutes ago, ArgoEagle said:

Yeah. Go ahead & mock & Leftfield go ahead & laugh.

God will judge & God is not mocked.

 

Please, Argo. It's called biblical commentary, not mocking. 

 

It burdens my heart to know you automatically assume the worst of me. 

[aubiefifty 17,478]

1 hour ago, ArgoEagle said:

Man, please read your Bible.  Leviticus 18:22 "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination

Leviticus 20:13  "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination;  they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Deuteronomy 22:5  "A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.  (Crossdressers & Transexuals)

God, not man, destroyed Sodom & Gamorrah with fire & brimstone (every living man, woman, child & animal) because of sexual immorality, in which the main sin mentioned that caused this was homosexuality)

If you or anyone else on this forum are going to make the statement that homosexuality is not sin, then you are contradicting these Bible verses (which were handed down by God for man to write).

I DON'T HATE ANY HUMAN BEING ON THIS EARTH.  MY HOPE IS THAT EVERY LIVING PERSON ACCEPTS JESUS AS THEIR SAVIOR THROUGH HIS DEATH, BURIAL, AND RESURRECTION.

That's not up to me.   But saying homosexuality is not a sin is incorrect (unless you don't believe God's Word; again that's up to you).  I provided you just a few verses to back what I said up. There are several more.

I did not write them nor inspire them, but I accept them bc they come from My Lord God Jehovah and nobody is going to change that with secular logic.

I don't know what you mean by I attacked you, but I have not said anything with the purpose of offending you, but if I did then I do apologize.

you thought i insulted you  but i was aiming at someone else.but i like a man that can apologize argo.i have eaten crow here many times and had to apologize as well.thank you and i also apologize for any hurt i have caused you.

[ArgoEagle 1,894]

10 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

you thought i insulted you  but i was aiming at someone else.but i like a man that can apologize argo.i have eaten crow here many times and had to apologize as well.thank you and i also apologize for any hurt i have caused you.

You & me all right brother

[auburnatl1 5,555]

38 minutes ago, ArgoEagle said:

Here you go. New Testament.

Romans 1:24  Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves;

25   Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.  Amen.

26   For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections; for their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27   And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working that which is unseemly (not proper, or appropriate) and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28   And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate (wicked, unGodly) mind, to do those things which are not convenient

Ah, Roman 1:26-28, the evangelicals go to against gays. Again, Christian scholars  have studied this at length. Romans (like the entire New Testament) was written in Ancient Greek which had no concept or term for homosexual. So it’s up to the translation/ interpretation/context (much it centers around the word Arsenokoitai).

I understand your pov but I promise it’s not as cut and dried as you state - you’re judging (interesting word) a lot of people on imperfect translations. At best. . Btw interesting no where in the gospels (Jesus’s words, not Paul’s - who never met him) does he even mention the subject. I always suggest to some to reread the sermon on the mount and maybe consider it a bit.

Edited June 11 by auburnatl1

[ArgoEagle 1,894]

19 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

Please, Argo. It's called biblical commentary, not mocking. 

 

It burdens my heart to know you automatically assume the worst of me. 

I honestly don't know how sincere you are, but I went back & looked at your post & you made several sarcastic (looking) remarks to me about the Biblical event.

You sure did not sound like you agreed with what I was trying to point out.

God knows your heart, I don't.  So peace be with you.