why homosexualy and homosexual marriage is so wrong

[Pudding]

It is Jehovah God who disallows homosexual acts. A book is incapable of doing anything other than just sitting there. The words are God's, so therefore it is God who allows/disallows things. One of the reasons why so many have created false translations of the scriptures, is to trick people into thinking what they want them to think. Change the word ecclesia from people or congregation to church, and it means something completely different. Change stauros from stake or pole to cross, and it takes on a pagan symbol, used to attract pagans to the church. Change hell from common grave of mankind to place of fiery torment, and you've changed the thinking of a planet full of people. Knowing PRECISELY what God intended to say when He authored the scriptures is quite critical if one intends to do His will.

Group A: You don't understand the real meaning of God's words.
Group B: No, i understand, it's you who don't understand.
Group A: No, my interpretation is right, your wrong.
Group B: No, i'm right, your wrong.
...

A: My translations of the scriptures is 100% accurate.
B: No, mine better than you.
A: No, mine superior.
B: No, mine best.
...

 

[truthofscripture]

Group A: You don't understand the real meaning of God's words.
Group B: No, i understand, it's you who don't understand.
Group A: No, my interpretation is right, your wrong.
Group B: No, i'm right, your wrong.
...

A: My translations of the scriptures is 100% accurate.
B: No, mine better than you.
A: No, mine superior.
B: No, mine best.
...

GROUP C: Low intelligence people who make up rediculous group a and group b lists.

 

[PennyKay]

sex is between man and women

there cannot be homosexualytiy

its not sex

maybe theres erotic love between 2 men or 2 women

its not sex

it cannot be sex

because sex is between to difrentiated sexual beings, man and women

so their cannot be marriage between 2 men or 2 women#

because marriage is between man and women

there can be bonds which can be according to law

but thats not marriage

Sex is any type of sexual intercourse, regardless of gender

There can be homosexuality

it is sex

it can be sex

current natural procreation is between man and woman, sexual intercourse is between man and women, women and women, man and man

under British law, marriage can be between man and woman, woman and woman, man and man

under British law, marriage is between any consenting adult who wants to get married, regardless of gender

bonds according to British law, are now defined as marriage

therefore, it is marriage

 

[Marisa]

Sex is any type of sexual intercourse, regardless of gender

There can be homosexuality

it is sex

it can be sex

current natural procreation is between man and woman, sexual intercourse is between man and women, women and women, man and man

under British law, marriage can be between man and woman, woman and woman, man and man

under British law, marriage is between any consenting adult who wants to get married, regardless of gender

bonds according to British law, are now defined as marriage

therefore, it is marriage

The US is going the way of Britain on this one, and I couldn't be happier. It seems to be a race right now to see which (undoubtedly southern) state will be last to be dragged across the finish line, kicking and screaming.

 

[Pudding]

GROUP C: Low intelligence people who make up rediculous group a and group b lists.

"Thanks" for your "compliments", you must be very "smart"

So the group A and group B lists doesn't exist?

So all the God's believer from different sect agree that each other's translations of scripture and interpretation is both accurate and right?

 

[Marisa]

"Thanks" for your "compliments", you must be very "smart"

I thought you nailed it.

 

[Shak34]

No. You are not getting the sense of what you're reading. And a book cannot allow or disallow anything. It's an inanimate object incapable of doing anything at all.

It is Jehovah God who disallows homosexual acts. A book is incapable of doing anything other than just sitting there. The words are God's, so therefore it is God who allows/disallows things. One of the reasons why so many have created false translations of the scriptures, is to trick people into thinking what they want them to think. Change the word ecclesia from people or congregation to church, and it means something completely different. Change stauros from stake or pole to cross, and it takes on a pagan symbol, used to attract pagans to the church. Change hell from common grave of mankind to place of fiery torment, and you've changed the thinking of a planet full of people. Knowing PRECISELY what God intended to say when He authored the scriptures is quite critical if one intends to do His will.

If, according to you, a book is incapable of doing anything. Then why follow it? It sounds like you put to much stock into an inanimate object. If the book doesn't do anything but just sit there it really isn't all that important.

 

[Kirran]

But obviously Jehovah God DOES allow homosexual acts, because they happen.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To be fair, they did. The idea of a Devil in Judaism developed during the Second Temple period, but modern Judaism rejects the writings that lay it out. You have to keep in mind that modern Judaism is not the current expression of an unbroken chain of Jewish belief.Christian beliefs are actually very much in line with ancient Jewish thought, it's just that modern Judaism doesn't accept it.

Thus is was not originally a part of Judaism. As it has been explained to me, putting Satan to where he is, up to the point of describing him as "God of this world," is blasphemy.

No. You are not getting the sense of what you're reading. And a book cannot allow or disallow anything. It's an inanimate object incapable of doing anything at all.

All laws are written on inanimate objects, such as paper, and yet they allow or disallow things.

It is Jehovah God who disallows homosexual acts. A book is incapable of doing anything other than just sitting there. The words are God's, so therefore it is God who allows/disallows things.

Ah. Well then. Because it is not the Bible that permits slavery, then it is God himself (who "wrote" the Bible anyways, thus the Bible permits: You're really splitting hairs over this one) who permits slavery and even acknowledges slaves, human beings, as property.

 

[Vishvavajra]

It is Jehovah God who disallows homosexual acts. A book is incapable of doing anything other than just sitting there. The words are God's, so therefore it is God who allows/disallows things.

You're being intentionally obtuse. You know exactly what she meant. But we'll be sure to remind you that the Bible is just a book that can only sit there and is incapable of making pronouncements, the next time you go off on what scriptures allegedly says.

One of the reasons why so many have created false translations of the scriptures, is to trick people into thinking what they want them to think. Change the word ecclesia from people or congregation to church, and it means something completely different. Change stauros from stake or pole to cross, and it takes on a pagan symbol, used to attract pagans to the church. Change hell from common grave of mankind to place of fiery torment, and you've changed the thinking of a planet full of people. Knowing PRECISELY what God intended to say when He authored the scriptures is quite critical if one intends to do His will.

More Watchtower malarkey. Nobody is intentionally trying to mislead anyone, although translation is difficult and people often get things wrong. The word church, by the way, only exists in Germanic languages; in Latin, Romance languages, and Greek it's still some form of ecclesia. But the meaning is identical in actual parlance, as church comes from another Greek word that came to be used for the specifically Christian usage of ecclesia (itself based on scripture, as it happens, specifically the statement that any assembly of Christians is effectively a dwelling place of the Lord). Church in English is used identically to ecclesia in other modern languages, meaning this is a distinction without a difference, as anybody who spoke multiple languages would know.

And by the way, stauros does have cross as one of its attested meanings, including in multiple non-Christian sources, including Diodorus Siculus and Plutarch (i.e. both a good century before and contemporary with the Gospels). And it's not as if we don't have sources in both Latin and Greek talking about crucifixion, to compare terminology. The only reason the original Watchtower folks didn't know that is because they were amateur Biblical analysts with no classical education to speak of, and they were so excited to prove everybody else wrong that they didn't do their homework. And nowadays you're not allowed to challenge their erroneous conclusions, or else you're a tool of Satan. (Incidentally, not the sort of thing real scholars have to pull to defend their scholarship.)

As for hell, it doesn't appear as such anywhere in the Bible, so I'll give you that one. There are Gehinnom, Sh'ol, and Hades, but none of those actually refer to the later Christian idea of hell, which is almost entirely post-scriptural oral tradition that then got read back onto the scriptures, even though the people at the time had no such ideas (a distressingly common thing). But even then it's not so much a matter of intentionally distorting things, as it is the natural drift of ideas over time, compounded with a heavy dose of confirmation bias when people look at ancient scriptures and see what they expect to see in them, instead of studying the original context. But note the difference between that and what you're talking about, which is basically swallowing a ready-made interpretation, then reading that back onto the scriptures.

 

[Ingledsva]

*

Yes it does!Exo 21:4 If his master have given him a woman, and she have born him sons or daughters; the woman and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.

Lev 25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

Lev 25:46 And you shall take them for inheritance to your sons after you, to hold for a possession; you may enslave them forever. But on your brothers, the sons of Israel, one over another, you shall not rule over him with severity.

Lev 22:10 There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing: a sojourner of the priest, or an hired servant, shall not eat of the holy thing.
Lev 22:11 But if the priest buy any person with his money, he shall eat of it, and he that is born in his house: they shall eat of his meat.

Note that in 22:10 they have a hired servant – a sakiyr. -- In 20:11 it is a bought slave.

I might add that Concubines, which they could possess, are bought SEX SLAVES.

No. You are not getting the sense of what you're reading. And a book cannot allow or disallow anything. It's an inanimate object incapable of doing anything at all.

That's a laugh!

Most Christians claim the Bible is from God, and try to use the laws within it to condemn others.

I suggest you look these verses up in the original languages.

They did allow real slavery, and sexual slavery abuse.

Google the subject!

*[/QUOTE]

 

[Ingledsva]

It is Jehovah God who disallows homosexual acts. A book is incapable of doing anything other than just sitting there. The words are God's, so therefore it is God who allows/disallows things. One of the reasons why so many have created false translations of the scriptures, is to trick people into thinking what they want them to think. Change the word ecclesia from people or congregation to church, and it means something completely different. Change stauros from stake or pole to cross, and it takes on a pagan symbol, used to attract pagans to the church. Change hell from common grave of mankind to place of fiery torment, and you've changed the thinking of a planet full of people. Knowing PRECISELY what God intended to say when He authored the scriptures is quite critical if one intends to do His will.

And - YOU - do not know what that is!

*

 

[sojourner]

Southern Baptist evangelist: "Do you believe in homosexual marriage?!"

Atheist: "Believe in it?! Heck, I've seen it!!"

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Lordy, yet another thread on religious homophobia! Some people are gay, get over it!

 

[sojourner]

Lordy, yet another thread on religious homophobia! Some people are gay, get over it!

*They* won't stop until all gayness is firmly back in the closet where *they* won't have to see it ever again. then *they* can continue to pretend it doesn't really exist.