"They": Addendum to Jesus on Same Sex Marriage.

[John D. Brey]

Jesus is providing a meaningful sign of his return by speaking of a particular category of persons doing all the things he’s just mentioned. And even that requires that at least one of the things he mentions is remarkable concerning the category of persons he’s speaking about. Which is to say, there’s only one category of people for whom any of the things he mentions could be ironic enough to create a meaningful sign. Jesus is pointing out that the two times God rained down death and destruction (as he will rain it down at the second coming of Jesus Christ) homosexuals were eating and drinking . . . which is not remarkable . . . marrying . . . and living as though they were married: same-sex relationships sanctified by the state, or the city-state.

As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be also in the days of the Son of Man. They eat, drank, and married, and were given authority to marry [ἐκγαμίζω], until the day that Noah entered into the ark and the flood came and destroyed them all.

Luke 17:26-27.​

In the original thread, edited into an essay [link], exegesis showed that Jesus clued his listeners in to whom he was referring to as signifying the arrival of the end-times by noting the people just prior to the flood (the antediluvian), and the people just before Sodom and Gomorrah was flooded with fire and brimstone. Jesus is drawing an undeniable parallel between the two times same-sex marriage was authorized as holy matrimony ἐκγαμίζω, and the way things will be just prior to his return. The "they," in Luke 17:26-27, is pretty undeniably homosexuals, such that that's old hat all of which is well-worn in the original thread-become-essay.

What's new in this thread is revelation of the very scripture from the Tanakh that Jesus was almost surely referring to when he referenced the "they" who are in the crosshairs of his preeminent sign signifying the arrival of the end times.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

In the original thread, edited into an essay [link], exegesis showed that Jesus clued his listeners in to whom he was referring to as signifying the arrival of the end-times by noting the people just prior to the flood (the antediluvian), and the people just before Sodom and Gomorrah was flooded with fire and brimstone. Jesus is drawing an undeniable parallel between the two times same-sex marriage was authorized as holy matrimony ἐκγαμίζω, and the way things will be just prior to his return. The "they," in Luke 17:26-27, is pretty undeniably homosexuals, such that that's old hat all of which is well-worn in the original thread-become-essay.

What's new in this thread is revelation of the very scripture from the Tanakh that Jesus was almost surely referring to when he referenced the "they" who are in the crosshairs of his preeminent sign signifying the arrival of the end times.

43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. 44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Daniel 2:43–44.​

The statement by the prophet concerns the impending battle between the final two kingdoms prior to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. One kingdom is what eschatology refers to as the "revived Roman Empire" (the last reigning earthly kingdom prior to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth), and the other is spiritual Israel, which the same theology speaks of as having been "raptured" or resurrected from the earth just prior to the heyday of the revived Roman Empire.

The quotation from Daniel 2:43-44 contains an important hapax legomenon that Keil and Delitzsch politely understate as "peculiar." It's the Hebrew phrase זרע אנשא "seed of men." The phrase is used nowhere else than here in the entire Tanakh. The verse (Daniel 2:43) claims that the revived Roman Empire will come into its own (in the last days) when "they" (the pronoun associated with Jesus' prophesy), get this: shall mingle themselves with the seed of men מתערבין להון בזרע אנשא?

What on earth does that mean? Who, or what, is mingling itself, themselves, with the "seed of men"? And before we can even start to research that question, we're hit with the statement that these [and they're masculine according to the Hebrew text] who mingle themselves with the seed of men don't "cleave" דבק one to another since they don't properly speaking mix, any more than iron mixes with clay to produce an allow.

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave דבק unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Genesis 2:24.​

Copper and tin are made to cleave to one another so that they shall be one metal: bronze. But try as you might, iron and clay just simply don't fuse. If you try to get them to mix, you can go through the motions, but at the end of the day "they" simply don't, properly speaking, cleave דבק.




John

 

[MikeF]

The "they," in Luke 17:26-27, is pretty undeniably homosexuals,

I think you are way off base here John. "They" refers to every other man and woman who did not get on the ark and therefore perished in the flood. "They" refers to everyone, not simply homosexuals.

26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.

27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; 29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.

 

[John D. Brey]

I think you are way off base here John. "They" refers to every other man and woman who did not get on the ark and therefore perished in the flood. "They" refers to everyone, not simply homosexuals.

26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.

27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; 29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.

As pointed out in the original thread (linked to in the opening message), Jesus is speaking explicitly concerning events in the last days. He's giving the Pharisees and his followers a sign that will preceded the wholesale destruction of the final generation of this current, post-diluvian, civilization. This being the case, the personal pronoun "they" directly references those who were the antediluvian, and the Sodomites, but who will not be know again until the end of the age. In other words, the "they" in Jesus' narrative existed prior to the flood, and in Sodom and Gomorrah, but will not again be known from Jesus' day until the end of the age. Furthermore, these "they" who exist prior to the flood, and in Sodom and Gomorrah, were wiped clean off the earth in the flood of water and then fire, as they're going to again be wiped clean off the earth (by fire) in the last days.

The Greek word ἐκγαμίζω (Luke 17:27), translated "given in marriage," exegeted properly, means "given the right, or authority, to marry." Jesus is saying that the particular "they" who were the antediluvian, and the Sodomites, were given the right and authority to marry, cohabitate, mingle, in the full sight of their peers. Which segues into the "they" Jesus is surely referencing as almost a direct quotation from Daniel 2:43, who, Daniel, is speaking of the same last days that Jesus is discussing: "they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay."

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave דבק unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Genesis 2:24.
​

John

 

[Fool]

In the original thread, edited into an essay [link], exegesis showed that Jesus clued his listeners in to whom he was referring to as signifying the arrival of the end-times by noting the people just prior to the flood (the antediluvian), and the people just before Sodom and Gomorrah was flooded with fire and brimstone. Jesus is drawing an undeniable parallel between the two times same-sex marriage was authorized as holy matrimony ἐκγαμίζω, and the way things will be just prior to his return. The "they," in Luke 17:26-27, is pretty undeniably homosexuals, such that that's old hat all of which is well-worn in the original thread-become-essay.

What's new in this thread is revelation of the very scripture from the Tanakh that Jesus was almost surely referring to when he referenced the "they" who are in the crosshairs of his preeminent sign signifying the arrival of the end times.



John

there were women and children living in sodom and gomorrah. furthermore, raping men is usually an act of war, or basically doing something to another against their will. this same thing happened in another village with a concubine and the israelites came out against it. basically it goes to the idea of aggression and lack of empathy for a fellow sojourner, or wayfaring stranger. basically an inhospitable people like haters of all kinds

Judges 19

it isn't an act of same sex love.

furthermore once the individual realizes this is not a beginning/ending, the everlasting is the viewpoint.

also, you're ignoring explicitly what ezekiel said that sodom's problem was.

חַי־אָ֗נִי נְאֻם֙ אֲדֹנָ֣י יֱהֹוִ֔ה אִם־עָֽשְׂתָה֙ סְדֹ֣ם אֲחוֹתֵ֔ךְ הִ֖יא וּבְנוֹתֶ֑יהָ כַּאֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשִׂ֔ית אַ֖תְּ וּבְנוֹתָֽיִךְ׃ As I live—declares the Lord GOD—your sister Sodom and her daughters did not do what you and your daughters did.

הִנֵּה־זֶ֣ה הָיָ֔ה עֲוֺ֖ן סְדֹ֣ם אֲחוֹתֵ֑ךְ גָּא֨וֹן שִׂבְעַת־לֶ֜חֶם וְשַׁלְוַ֣ת הַשְׁקֵ֗ט הָ֤יָה לָהּ֙ וְלִבְנוֹתֶ֔יהָ וְיַד־עָנִ֥י וְאֶבְי֖וֹן לֹ֥א הֶחֱזִֽיקָה׃ Only this was the sin of your sister Sodom: arrogance! She and her daughters had plenty of bread and untroubled tranquillity; yet she did not support the poor and the needy.

וַֽתִּגְבְּהֶ֔ינָה וַתַּֽעֲשֶׂ֥ינָה תוֹעֵבָ֖ה לְפָנָ֑י וָאָסִ֥יר אֶתְהֶ֖ן כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר רָאִֽיתִי׃ {ס} In their haughtiness, they committed abomination before Me; and so I removed them as you saw.

 

[John D. Brey]

I think you are way off base here John. "They" refers to every other man and woman who did not get on the ark and therefore perished in the flood. "They" refers to everyone, not simply homosexuals.

R. Huna said in R. Joseph's name: The generation of the Flood were not blotted out from the world until they composed nuptial songs1 in honour of pederasty and bestiality. R. Simlia said: Whenever you find [this kind of] lust, an epidemic visits the world which slays both good and bad. R. Azariah and R. Judah b. R. Simon in R. Joshua's name said: The Holy One, blessed be He, is long-suffering for everything save immorality [of this kind].

Midrash Rabbah Bere****h, XXVI.​

Hundreds of years ago, long before the first case of homosexuals being allowed to mingle and cohabitate by the law of the land, the sages of Midrash Rabbah forewarned that God is long-suffering except for immorality of this kind. In the poster children noted by Jesus, the antediluvan, and Sodom and Gomorrah, the good and the bad were slain wholesale, as will be the case now; or should I say, in the last days in order to be less dogmatic concerning those innocent and unaware we're there, and that "they," are here?

As I've pointed out every time this topic comes up, the grave sin that causes wholesale destruction to literally rain down from heaven, isn't homosexuality. Homosexuality is as old as man. It exists in every age. The grave sin that brings the destruction of civilizations is a particular kind of thought, and action, toward God and his laws, that manifests itself not by means of the righteous tolerance of homosexuals (and that tolerance is indeed righteous), but in believing that the state, the community, has the power to sacralize a sin, eliminate the sinful aspect of an act, as though they were possessors of the salvific, redemptive, authority, that resides in heaven alone, with God alone (Romans chapter one).

The homosexual act is something like a garden variety sin covered as is any other sin by God's redemptive activity. The homosexual is a sinner like every other sinner; technically no better or no worse. The sin that comes under the reign of terror from heaven above merely uses homosexuality as the medium for its manifestation. It's not the homosexual who is to be feared for bringing wholesale destruction on humanity since homosexuality is a garden variety sin; it's in fact the non-homosexuals who think they've become like the most high God such that they will blot out sexual sins with the stroke of what the pen-is in the human act of lawmaking; it's those who pass laws sacralizing sin, any sin, who, quite literally, unleash hell.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

there were women and children living in sodom and gomorrah. furthermore, raping men is usually an act of war, or basically doing something to another against their will. this same thing happened in another village with a concubine and the israelites came out against it. basically it goes to the idea of aggression and lack of empathy for a fellow sojourner, or wayfaring stranger. basically an inhospitable people like haters of all kinds

Judges 19

it isn't an act of same sex love.

furthermore once the individual realizes this is not a beginning/ending, the everlasting is the viewpoint.

also, you're ignoring explicitly what ezekiel said that sodom's problem was.

חַי־אָ֗נִי נְאֻם֙ אֲדֹנָ֣י יֱהֹוִ֔ה אִם־עָֽשְׂתָה֙ סְדֹ֣ם אֲחוֹתֵ֔ךְ הִ֖יא וּבְנוֹתֶ֑יהָ כַּאֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשִׂ֔ית אַ֖תְּ וּבְנוֹתָֽיִךְ׃ As I live—declares the Lord GOD—your sister Sodom and her daughters did not do what you and your daughters did.

הִנֵּה־זֶ֣ה הָיָ֔ה עֲוֺ֖ן סְדֹ֣ם אֲחוֹתֵ֑ךְ גָּא֨וֹן שִׂבְעַת־לֶ֜חֶם וְשַׁלְוַ֣ת הַשְׁקֵ֗ט הָ֤יָה לָהּ֙ וְלִבְנוֹתֶ֔יהָ וְיַד־עָנִ֥י וְאֶבְי֖וֹן לֹ֥א הֶחֱזִֽיקָה׃ Only this was the sin of your sister Sodom: arrogance! She and her daughters had plenty of bread and untroubled tranquillity; yet she did not support the poor and the needy.

וַֽתִּגְבְּהֶ֔ינָה וַתַּֽעֲשֶׂ֥ינָה תוֹעֵבָ֖ה לְפָנָ֑י וָאָסִ֥יר אֶתְהֶ֖ן כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר רָאִֽיתִי׃ {ס} In their haughtiness, they committed abomination before Me; and so I removed them as you saw.

Very important. I addressed this to some extent in message #6. The "abomination" that causes desolation isn't technically homosexuality, but the arrogance that uses homosexuality as its medium of exchange. The men who legalized homosexuality, sacralized it, redeemed it with their pen, were mostly not homosexuals. They are sinners who's haughtiness, and humanistic good-intentions, rises to the level of evil and abomination for reasons they don't likely intuit in their ungodly-ignorance. They use homosexuals as the medium for their otherworldly haughtiness, arrogance, and obamanation. Homosexuals are victimized by this clan as surely as are the rest of us.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

The Greek word ἐκγαμίζω (Luke 17:27), translated "given in marriage," exegeted properly, means "given the right, or authority, to marry." Jesus is saying that the particular "they" who were the antediluvian, and the Sodomites, were given the right and authority to marry, cohabitate, mingle, in the full sight of their peers. Which segues into the "they" Jesus is surely referencing as almost a direct quotation from Daniel 2:43, who, Daniel, is speaking of the same last days that Jesus is discussing: "they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay."

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave דבק unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Genesis 2:24.
​

The exegesis above appears, and does to some degree (at least on the surface) refute the idea that homosexuals aren't the target of the abomination that leads to the wholesale destruction of an entire people/civilization (both the good and bad). It's the deeper exegesis of scripture that can free the homosexual from the apparent contradiction (returning them to their natural place as garden variety sinners) that's the true topic of this thread. A truly great mystery lies, so to say, at the heart of the scriptures involved.



John

 

[Fool]

Very important. I addressed this to some extent in message #6. The "abomination" that causes desolation isn't technically homosexuality, but the arrogance that uses homosexuality as its medium of exchange. The men who legalized homosexuality, sacralized it, redeemed it with their pen, were mostly not homosexuals. They are sinners who's haughtiness, and humanistic good-intentions, rises to the level of evil and abomination for reasons they don't likely intuit in their ungodly-ignorance. They use homosexuals as the medium for their otherworldly haughtiness, arrogance, and obamanation. Homosexuals are victimized by this clan as surely as are the rest of us.



John

still wrong

 

[MikeF]

As pointed out in the original thread (linked to in the opening message), Jesus is speaking explicitly concerning events in the last days. He's giving the Pharisees and his followers a sign that will preceded the wholesale destruction of the final generation of this current, post-diluvian, civilization. This being the case, the personal pronoun "they" directly references those who were the antediluvian, and the Sodomites, but who will not be know again until the end of the age. In other words, the "they" in Jesus' narrative existed prior to the flood, and in Sodom and Gomorrah, but will not again be known from Jesus' day until the end of the age. Furthermore, these "they" who exist prior to the flood, and in Sodom and Gomorrah, were wiped clean off the earth in the flood of water and then fire, as they're going to again be wiped clean off the earth (by fire) in the last days.

The Greek word ἐκγαμίζω (Luke 17:27), translated "given in marriage," exegeted properly, means "given the right, or authority, to marry." Jesus is saying that the particular "they" who were the antediluvian, and the Sodomites, were given the right and authority to marry, cohabitate, mingle, in the full sight of their peers. Which segues into the "they" Jesus is surely referencing as almost a direct quotation from Daniel 2:43, who, Daniel, is speaking of the same last days that Jesus is discussing: "they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay."

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave דבק unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Genesis 2:24.
​

John

IMO

Sorry John, I do not agree. In Luke 17:27, "they married wives" is referring to men, and "they were given in marriage" simply refers to women. This passage is in no way referring to homosexuality.

Are you concerned that current cultural acceptance of homosexuality is going to result in a wrathful act from god of the OT?

 

[John D. Brey]

still wrong

I suspect my interlocutor supports same-sex marriage. In which case, naturally, my interpretation must be wrong.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

IMO

Sorry John, I do not agree. In Luke 17:27, "they married wives" is referring to men, and "they were given in marriage" simply refers to women. This passage is in no way referring to homosexuality.

In the same chapter, just a couple verses further, Jesus says two men are in the same bed. So it's pretty peculiar that in a context seeming to imply same-sex marriage we find the hapax legomenon (one time occurrence in a text) two men in the same bed. Of course it doesn't say they're spooning. Perhaps they're laying back-to-back both reading Playboy magazines?

Btw, the reason I keep noting where a hapax is found is that according to the general concepts of scriptural exegesis, contrary to a one time occurrence lessening the significance of a word or idea, it actually magnifies it. The fact that only one time in the NT is there reference to two men in one bed means the exegete is suppose to take careful note of the nuance in the context of the text. The fact that the context of a text speaking of two men sharing a bed is seemingly implying homosexuality makes the narrative appear to stand up so straightforward as to be disturbing to those who prefer to keep such truths veiled from sight.



John

 

[Fool]

I suspect my interlocutor supports same-sex marriage. In which case, naturally, my interpretation must be wrong.



John

One's ego can become a blinder to seeing what is true and what is just self aggrandizing.

The reference is to the holy place, the temple, and what Daniel saw. The 2nd temple was already destroyed in the 1st century. There is no reference to a 3rd temple

 

[John D. Brey]

One's ego can become a blinder to seeing what is true and what is just self aggrandizing.

Cool video compilation. And yes. Ego can create a blinder. And so can lack of knowledge gallivanting as truth. . . I'm both young enough, and old enough, to have seen Billy Squier with Motley Crue at McNicoles Sports Arena Denver Colorado long ago.



John

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What's new in this thread is revelation of the very scripture from the Tanakh that Jesus was almost surely referring to when he referenced the "they" who are in the crosshairs of his preeminent sign signifying the arrival of the end times.

While you blame the gays and fear what they bring I will celebrate the continued decline of Christianity and improvement and betterment of all humanity. Your claims aren't even Biblically supported, Jesus said it is a perverse generation that looks for signs, and here you claim the gays are a sign of the end times. How do you know these are the end times when Jesus himself said only the Father knows when it will be? Are you saying you know better than Jesus?

 

[John D. Brey]

While you blame the gays and fear what they bring I will celebrate the continued decline of Christianity and improvement and betterment of all humanity. Your claims aren't even Biblically supported, Jesus said it is a perverse generation that looks for signs, and here you claim the gays are a sign of the end times. How do you know these are the end times when Jesus himself said only the Father knows when it will be? Are you saying you know better than Jesus?

Not sure how much of the thread you read, but I've pretty clearly stated that I don't blame the gays nor fear them in any way. And your support of the decline of Christianity is likely to be rewarded since it's declining fast.

I think you might be taking Jesus' statement out of context. He spoke of signs, and gave signs (like the decline of Christianity). I think the comment you note is when the Jews wanted him to prove who he was by giving them a sign. I think in his mind he was the sign of who he was such that their request was perverse. For instance, Nicodemus said that he and his crowd knew Jesus was of God because of his words and actions. Nicodemus didn't come to Jesus secretly in the night, with a flask of water, and ask Jesus to turn it into wine for a gathering he (Nicodemus) was having that night.

Again, you might be taking Jesus out of context when he said the "day and the hour" no man knows. He specifically gave signs so that when the generation about to get wiped out comes, they will know to be prepared. We are that generation. Don't ask me to give the day or hour. I haven't a clue. Just know it ain't gonna be pretty. The Bible says it will be the worst time since man has existed on the planet.

Pop up some popcorn. We got front row seats.




John

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Not sure how much of the thread you read, but I've pretty clearly stated that I don't blame the gays nor fear them in any way. And your support of the decline of Christianity is likely to be rewarded since it's declining fast.

I think you might be taking Jesus' statement out of context. He spoke of signs, and gave signs. I think the comment you note is when the Jews wanted him to prove who he was by giving them a sign. I think in his mind he was the sign of who he was such that their request was perverse. For instance, Nicodemus said that he and his crowd knew Jesus was of God because of his words and actions. Nicodemus didn't come to Jesus secretly in the night, with a flask of water, and ask Jesus to turn it into wine for a gathering he (Nicodemus) was having that night.

Again, you might be taking Jesus out of context when he said the "day and the hour" no man knew. But he specifically gave signs so that when the generation about to get wiped out comes, they will know to be prepared. We are that generation. Don't ask me about the day or hour. I haven't a clue.




John

Is that why he said it will come unexpected, like a thief in the night?
And are you sure you aren't blaming and fearing gays? Your opening post strongly suggest otherwise.

Jesus is drawing an undeniable parallel between the two times same-sex marriage was authorized as holy matrimony ἐκγαμίζω, and the way things will be just prior to his return. The "they," in Luke 17:26-27, is pretty undeniably homosexuals, such that that's old hat all of which is well-worn in the original thread-become-essay.
...Jesus was almost surely referring to when he referenced the "they" who are in the crosshairs of his preeminent sign signifying the arrival of the end times.

All of that you read into those passages. You inserted homosexuality where it isn't. You said they are in the crosshairs and signifying the arrival of the end times. How is that not blaming and fearing them?

 

[John D. Brey]

Is that why he said it will come unexpected, like a thief in the night?

I think his idea was that you be prepared by assuming it could come any time. And yet to his close disciples he gave clues concerning the general time of its arrival.

And are you sure you aren't blaming and fearing gays? Your opening post strongly suggest otherwise.

As I've pointed out every time this topic comes up, the grave sin that causes wholesale destruction to literally rain down from heaven, isn't homosexuality. Homosexuality is as old as man. It exists in every age. The grave sin that brings the destruction of civilizations is a particular kind of thought, and action, toward God and his laws, that manifests itself not by means of the righteous tolerance of homosexuals (and that tolerance is indeed righteous), but in believing that the state, the community, has the power to sacralize a sin, eliminate the sinful aspect of an act, as though they were possessors of the salvific, redemptive, authority, that resides in heaven alone, with God alone (Romans chapter one).

The homosexual act is something like a garden variety sin covered as is any other sin by God's redemptive activity. The homosexual is a sinner like every other sinner; technically no better or no worse. The sin that comes under the reign of terror from heaven above merely uses homosexuality as the medium for its manifestation. It's not the homosexual who is to be feared for bringing wholesale destruction on humanity since homosexuality is a garden variety sin; it's in fact the non-homosexuals who think they've become like the most high God such that they will blot out sexual sins with the stroke of what the pen-is in the human act of lawmaking; it's those who pass laws sacralizing sin, any sin, who, quite literally, unleash hell.​

We're all sinners. So it would be hypocritical to judge homosexuals as sinners. Evil is different than sin. An "abomination" is generally something like evil that transcends sin. Homosexuality isn't itself evil. But it manifests a strain of evil it is not.

All of that you read into those passages. You inserted homosexuality where it isn't. You said they are in the crosshairs and signifying the arrival of the end times. How is that not blaming and fearing them?

Fair question. I haven't answered that yet. One of the last message I posted before you jumped in was a threat to answer that question.

The exegesis above appears, and does to some degree (at least on the surface) refute the idea that homosexuals aren't the target of the abomination that leads to the wholesale destruction of an entire people/civilization (both the good and bad). It's the deeper exegesis of scripture that can free the homosexual from the apparent contradiction (returning them to their natural place as garden variety sinners) that's the true topic of this thread. A truly great mystery lies, so to say, at the heart of the scriptures involved.​

John

 

[Fool]

Not sure how much of the thread you read, but I've pretty clearly stated that I don't blame the gays nor fear them in any way. And your support of the decline of Christianity is likely to be rewarded since it's declining fast.

I think you might be taking Jesus' statement out of context. He spoke of signs, and gave signs (like the decline of Christianity). I think the comment you note is when the Jews wanted him to prove who he was by giving them a sign. I think in his mind he was the sign of who he was such that their request was perverse. For instance, Nicodemus said that he and his crowd knew Jesus was of God because of his words and actions. Nicodemus didn't come to Jesus secretly in the night, with a flask of water, and ask Jesus to turn it into wine for a gathering he (Nicodemus) was having that night.

Again, you might be taking Jesus out of context when he said the "day and the hour" no man knows. He specifically gave signs so that when the generation about to get wiped out comes, they will know to be prepared. We are that generation. Don't ask me to give the day or hour. I haven't a clue. Just know it ain't gonna be pretty. The Bible says it will be the worst time since man has existed on the planet.

Pop up some popcorn. We got front row seats.




John

The prophecy already happened because of the destruction of the 2nd temple is obvious. There is no prophecy regarding a third.

Epic fail

Pedastry and homosexuality aren't the same thing.

The love of most will grow cold. People will become lovers of self and not lovers to all as self.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The homosexual act is something like a garden variety sin covered as is any other sin by God's redemptive activity.

Disgusting.
And good riddance. We'll all be better off when hardly anyone else believes such things, such as how we became far better off when people abandoned the idea the proper place of the negro is servitude.

We're all sinners.

I assure you, I've not sinned in over 20 years now. I am not a sinner. The only sinners are those who agree to pick up those shackles and burdens and let their religion ensnare them in. To the rest of us it is entirely non-applicable.

So it would be hypocritical to judge homosexuals as sinners.

It is hypocritical for a Christian to judge anyone. That's something else Jesus told you not to do. But you're doing it.

but in believing that the state, the community, has the power to sacralize a sin, eliminate the sinful aspect of an act, as though they were possessors of the salvific, redemptive, authority, that resides in heaven alone, with God alone (Romans chapter one).

Sin doesn't exist outside of those who believe in it. Why should the state be concerned about it? If you're so worried about this destruction than go form your own commune away from the rest of us invited this destruction from the heavens (that will never come).