Right Divider
Body part
I can only laugh in your face ever time that you call me a "far right fundamentalist". I know that it means that you have no argument at all.
Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 7
- Thread starter Idolater
- Start date
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Then hey, laugh all you want dude. You've hardly had any substantive argument yourself have ya?
It's only far right fundamentalists who have such a hang up with homosexuality, not just in Christianity obviously either. It's only far right fundamentalists who advocate for it being a capital crime as you have done etc. Most Christians balk at it. Most Muslims do as well etc.
Right Divider
Body part
Of course I have, but I'm talking to a deaf and blind man.
God condemns sexual perversion of all kinds. That you oppose God is your problem (and it's going to bite you in the end).
There you go with your appeals to popularity again... and again... and again.
It's no wonder why I call you Mr. Fallacy.
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Rather, you're talking to someone who isn't a religious extremist. What you advocate on here is entirely that, along with others.
Supra.
You can call me what ya want, go for it and knock yourself out with it. Far right fundamentalism and any sort of religious extremism is a bane on society.
Right Divider
Body part
Of course you are. You're just the opposite type of religious extremist. You believe that killing babies is good, you believe that sexual perversion is good, etc. etc.
Back at you.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
That would have been an astounding counter argument if it held up. It doesn't. I don't remotely consider killing babies to be good and consider consenting sexual relations between adults to be nobody else's business. The only one holding extremist views between us is you dude. Do you or do you not advocate the death penalty for homosexuals (practicing at least) and adulterers?
Right Divider
Body part
I support whatever God says. You, on the other hand, oppose Him. And supporting God is definitely an extreme position. As is opposing Him.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
That wasn't an answer to my question. Why be reticent? Do you or do you not advocate the death penalty for practicing homosexuals and adulterers?
Right Divider
Body part
As I've said and will continue to say, I agree with God in all things... unlike yourself.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
What are you, a politician or something? Anyone can parrot the likes of which you're doing and have completely different perspectives on what that is. Do you or do you not advocate the death penalty for practicing homosexuals and adulterers? Yes or no?
Gonna warble on some more or just answer the question?
Right Divider
Body part
What does God say? That is the question. Do you know where to go to find out what God says?
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Really. The relevance is that those with homosexual proclivities are better off celibate. There you go.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Replace "homosexual" with rape, pedophilic or adulterous and your statement is equally true
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
What they do amongst themselves (men with men, women with women) is not sex; rather, it is perverse abuse of their organs. Just like all marriage, all sex is only between a man and a woman. So no, those whom you call "gay folk" in fact do not have sex.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Wow, if you're not a politician then you should consider carving out a career in that very field cos you sure don't like giving direct answers to straight questions, do you? Why is that? Can't speak for yourself?
The Bible rarely even alludes to homosexuality and in Jesus' ministry it isn't mentioned the once although He did tackle a bunch of self righteous legalists where it came to a woman supposedly caught in adultery. Do you know where to go to find out what God says about self righteous religious legalists?
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
They don't see it that way, and who can blame them?
Right Divider
Body part
I don't decide right and wrong. I get it from God. You should too.
The Bible explicitly refers to it sometimes, like this:
Lev 20:13 (AKJV/PCE)
(20:13) If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.
No "allusion" required.
Jesus confirmed the law.
I've explained that passage to your before. Jesus KEPT THE LAW.
Here is the principle that He KEPT:
Deut 17:6 (AKJV/PCE)
(17:6) At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; [but] at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
Here is the account that you abuse:
John 8:7-11 (AKJV/PCE)
(8:7) So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (8:8) And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. (8:9) And they which heard [it], being convicted by [their own] conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, [even] unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. (8:10) When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? (8:11) She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
There were NO WITNESSES to ACCUSE her.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Is that an indirect admission that you believe that we should have laws in the present that would have homosexuals and adulterers put to death? Just a yes or no will suffice.
To reduce the case of the woman caught in adultery as simply His 'keeping the law' is as feeble as it ever was. So much more than that but hey, you reflect the pompous religious legalists of the time anyway in essence.
Right Divider
Body part
I go with God.
Again you cannot make an argument. I showed you CLEARLY from the scripture what the "deal was". There were NO WITNESSES to accuse her of a death penalty accusation. Jesus asked her where her ACCUSERS were and there were NONE! TWO OR THREE is the requirement.
... but hey MAKE AN ARGUMENT is you think so. Instead of another of YOUR pompous and vacuous declarations.
False accusations as always.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
You continue to avoid a direct question is all you do. If you believe you're actually "going with God" on the matter then you've had ample opportunity to declare that you think that modern society in the present should have homosexuality and adultery as capital crimes. You don't even have the courage of your convictions to say so RD.
You can shout in all caps all you want and project your own pomposity and legalism onto me all ya want (funny though it is). Reducing that entire event to Jesus solely avoiding a legal trap set by the then day fundamentalists is beyond feeble really. Why did Jesus write on the ground? Why were the crowd made to shuffle off as they did cos it wasn't through force. Why did Jesus utter the words He did?
You wanna reduce it to 'not enough witnesses' then you crack on RD. Something tells me that you know fine well there was a whole load more to it than that.
Last edited: