<table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> Originally Posted by elohiym
Correction. You posted to me to give you a holler, i.e. you wanted to debate this subject with me. I responded to your post and then you failed to respond, hence Wiz' comment.
</td></tr></tbody></table>
My apologies, I didn't see it. I'm here now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Can someone defend sin as elo does and still call themselves a Christian? In your small world they can.
Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> I'm not defending sin, but rebuking sin. </td></tr></tbody></table>
Correct me if I'm misinterpreting your post to rainee:
"Did you want him to be able to have lawful, lifelong and happy, disease-free monogamous union with another male, or cease being a homosexual because you believe it is sin? Couldn't your attitude as a friend or the attitude of society towards his sexual orientation have contributed to his ruin in some way?"
Forgive me for not interpreting that as a stern disapproval of homosexuality, but let me ask you this: If two males (or females for that matter) are able to have a lawful, lifelong and happy, disease-free monogamous (i.e. sexual) union" then it's NOT a sin?
What if one of the factors in this "union" is absent? Let's say that it wasn't "lifelong", would it be a sin then? How about it they weren't "happy"? What if one were to catch anal cancer (from an unnatural sexual act), yet they had been the one in 10 thousand homosexual couples that were actually monogamous (don't quote my statistic, but it's close), would it be a sin then?
It's interesting how the physical act of homosexuality doesn't appear to be a sin in your eyes, but for some reason the time frame of the relationship, the emotional state of the relationship, and the fact that it's "disease free" are big factors.
Is there someplace in Scripture that backs the above?
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
What part of the following is not "addressing" the point that the Greek word "arsenokoitai" means men having sex with men?
"arsenokoitai Greek “homosexual”
...So, the Greek word in combination literally means “a male who has sex with another male”.
Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> The reason you did not address the point with your cut and paste theology is because if what you posted were accurate and true it would prove that arsenokoitai cannot mean homosexuals per se, as it cannot possibly include female homosexuals based on the analysis you offered. </td></tr></tbody></table>
Much of my argument with Granite involved talking about the current culture, specifically that of the Roman Emperors, most who were homosexual or bisexual. How many of them were women?
Of course Paul would link all unnatural same- sex acts together. Why would he give lesbianism a pass?
Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> Finally, you haven't refuted my argument regarding Leviticus 18:22. </td></tr></tbody></table>
To be perfectly honest with you elo, liberals like you bore me to tears. I glanced at your posts, but didn't follow them closely, as I had better things to do (like watch the grass grow, and believe me, it grows slow this time of year in the Pacific NW).
Post your Leviticus argument and I will respond. Here's mine:
Nowhere in the NT did Paul refute God's intention for man and woman, as seen in Genesis. Man is not only made in God's image, but He tells man and woman to be fruitful and multiple (or as us rednecks that cling to our guns and Bible put it: "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.")
Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> In 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Paul also lists those who covet with the alleged "homosexuals." Do you still willfully covet from time-to-time? Yes or no. </td></tr></tbody></table>
Yes, and I acknowledge that coveting is a sin, plus I don't spend hours trying to convince others that it's not. But wait, what if my coveting were "disease free" or had certain stipulations attached, would it not be a sin then?
I'll be watching for your response. The grass can wait.
Nice! Tongue and cheek humor and well written. Truth smacking at its best. It was written yesterday but it was too good to pass up.
