"Gays" - tell them the Truth

Chasey_Lane said:
Your husband must be a scholar, too, since he knows so much about the Bible as well. :rolleyes:

You want a link, find it yourself - it's out there!


I don't want to get in the middle of a forum spat, but it appears that Sharon was joking and she even used the :lmao: smilie... why did you roll your eyes, then shoot a "thinly veiled barb" at her husband and end it by telling her to find it herself - that seemed a little harsh for someone that was only joking. :patriot: Are we a little touchy today? :patriot:
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
Chasey_Lane said:
More on my research:

The Bible says absolutely nothing about homosexuality being sinful when you examine the actual Hebrew/Greek texts. The word "homosexuality" didn't even exist until 1869. The word first appeared in Germany to describe the theory that from birth some people are predisposed toward persons of the same sex. Since the biblical languages had no words for heterosexual or homosexual, it is anachronistic and misleading when homosexual is used to translate a biblical text. It is wrong to proclaim the biblical view of homosexuality since there is none. This violates the integrity of the individual texts and the biblical witness as a whole. Each reference to what is today homosexuality must be read in the light of the particular literary, cultural, and historic contexts of any particular passage.
:patriot:
The early manuscripts express it as "man laying with man" or "woman laying with woman" or "giving up their natural function" or "unatural desire". The meaning is clear.
 
Verisimilitude said:
How do you explain the text in the Bible that describes a woman laying down with a woman or a man with a man in the bible. Isn't the concept of woman laying down (in the Biblical sense) with another woman and men having sex with men, considered homosexuality?


2A- Is there I would ":bump:"?"



:patriot:
 

Chasey_Lane

Salt Life
Verisimilitude said:
I don't want to get in the middle of a forum spat, but it appears that Sharon was joking and she even used the :lmao: smilie... why did you roll your eyes, then shoot a "thinly veiled barb" at her husband and end it by telling her to find it herself - that seemed a little harsh for someone that was only joking. :patriot: Are we a little touchy today? :patriot:
Who said anything about a forum spat?
 
Chasey_Lane said:
Who said anything about a forum spat?


Seemed like person A was trying to help and joked about something facetiously and you took it personal. I thought that would be considered a forum spat.
I apologize in advance if that was not the case or your post was supposed to have been as lighthearted and as funny as Person A's post. :patriot:
 

mAlice

professional daydreamer
Verisimilitude said:
Seemed like person A was trying to help and joked about something facetiously and you took it personal. I thought that would be considered a forum spat.
I apologize in advance if that was not the case or your post was supposed to have been as lighthearted and as funny as Person A's post. :busybody:

:fixed:
 

ceo_pte

New Member
2ndAmendment said:
The early manuscripts express it as "man laying with man" or "woman laying with woman" or "giving up their natural function" or "unatural desire". The meaning is clear.

Sounds clear to me...
 
D

dems4me

Guest
Verisimilitude said:
In hindsight, I guess that is how things came across. Thank you for pointing out the err of my ways. :patriot: I will try to do the same for you one day. :patriot:


:howdy: Hi!!! CarrieBlue!!!!! :howdy:

:huggy:
 
D

dems4me

Guest
2ndAmendment said:
Are you saying that Verisimilitude is an elaine MPD and she is conversing with herself?


:shrug: I've seen others do that and say hi to CarrieBlue here and there -- I was just trying to be funny :frown: :banghead: :banghead: Never again, I promise.. :banghead: :banghead:
 
Top