Why I Won't Come Out on National Coming Out Day [W:259]

[roguenuke]

Nice try my pretty..but total rubbish..

Can you imagine a woman saying in court ''he sodomised me in my mouth??''

Do you think that is what gay men say when they have any type of sex, normally? If so, you have some seriously out there imaginings.

 

[wolfie]

Perhaps you should define "incest" first, because of your support for it by way of championing the exploits of the Lot family.

My support for incest??? Whaaaat??

 

[roguenuke]

Sorry..nice try..but sodomy relates to the anus..not the mouth..that is called oral..

And "anal sex" is anal because it relates to the anus. All are still called sodomy because of a failure in comprehension in what actually caused the fall of Sodom.

 

[Gardener]

My support for incest??? Whaaaat??

Yes, you think a father having sex with his underage daughters is the way to go after he has offered them to a crowd to be gang raped.

 

[wolfie]

Do you think that is what gay men say when they have any type of sex, normally? If so, you have some seriously out there imaginings.

I know what I know...Ok..let's start slowly..
Sodomy..

English dictionary..with me so far?

Any of various forms of sexual intercourse held to be unnatural or abnormal, especially anal intercourse or bestiality.

 

[wolfie]

Yes, you think a father having sex with his underage daughters is the way to go after he has offered them to a crowd to be gang raped.

Are you trippin?

 

[roguenuke]

I know what I know...Ok..let's start slowly..
Sodomy..

English dictionary..with me so far?

Any of various forms of sexual intercourse held to be unnatural or abnormal, especially anal intercourse or bestiality.

And yet most of the time, bestiality is separated from sodomy nowdays. In fact, your very definition would include oral intercourse, since at the time of the coining of sodomy it was considered "unnatural" because the only sex that was supposed to be going on was that done for making babies and oral sex does not make babies.

Plus if Sodom was about anal sex, then how come bestiality was included in the meaning of sodomy? It was never mentioned at all in the Bible as any part of why Sodom was destroyed.

Maybe, just maybe, it is because "sodomy" as a word, really has very little whatsoever to do with what actually happened in Sodom and why it was destroyed.

 

[Gardener]

Are you trippin?

Hey -- if it's the sort of lifestyle you support, then it's the sort of lifestyle you support.

 

[wolfie]

Hey -- if it's the sort of lifestyle you support, then it's the sort of lifestyle you support.

I'm going to leave you to have a rest..you and roguenuke bore me...with your silly pointless posts..

Good luck with coming out..or not!!

I don't frigging care...

 

[Gardener]

I'm going to leave you to have a rest..you and roguenuke bore me...with your silly pointless posts..

Good luck with coming out..or not!!

I don't frigging care...

Hey, thanks for the encouragement and well wishes!!

and a good luck to you in your relations.

 

[wolfie]

Hey, thanks for the encouragement and well wishes!!

and a good luck to you in your relations.

I don't remember telling you I was your best friend...

Get on with your life...

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

That's lame. I base my beliefs on the preponderance of the historical accounts of Jesus Christ, and on the supernatural fellowship of the Holy Spirit, of whom you know very little about.

You base your belief on FAITH. And as soon as you mention supernatural, your evidence disappears into faith-based beliefs, not any empirical proof. You can't prove your position because your position is based on faith, something personal and not empirical.

Are you getting it yet?

That would be evidence of sorts, not necessarily scientific proof. For example, would you consider the Alamo scientific proof of the battle that occurred there, or would a lot of that belief be based on written and/or oral traditions (hearsay)?

We have lots of evidence of the battle of the Alamo. Not necessarily why things happened, as that is subjective, but what happened. We have the fort, bullet holes, we have other artifact that show that the battle took place. We also have eyewitness accounts that are supported by the evidence. We know that eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable because our perceptions are affected by our feelings and past experiences... sometimes our desires, too.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

So you say, but in Daniel's case at least several of the most revered rabbis in history dispute your denial.

And many do not.

And, if you say Isaiah 53 speaks of a future Messiah, then it also says the Jews will reject him just like you did Jesus. That's what's been happening ever since the Jews rebelled against God and Moses, and killed their own prophets.

Jesus did not fulfill the requirements of being the Messiah, so rejecting a false profit is appropriate. There are plenty of people who have claimed to be the Messiah who were not, some of whom fulfilled the requirements FAR better than Jesus did. Many of the prophesies that Daniel spoke of were fulfilled by Judas Maccabeus. Simon Bar Kohkba was considered the Messiah for a time, but like all others, including Jesus, was discovered to be false. You are attempting to fit the evidence into your belief system. That's not how the examination of information works.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I've already demonstrated it is a sin, so please get yours straight.

Since you haven't, I have my facts straight.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Hey - nobody believed Noah either, so you guys have the right mindset to label something as snake oil.

Plenty of people have followed false prophets. You are just one in a long line.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Nope. Denial isn't a river in Egypt.

When you can bust the resurrection of Christ they you will have more credibility on NT issues.

When you can prove the resurrection, the NT will have some credibility.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

You bet I'll stand by my beliefs, which are based on scripture and the historical evidence for Jesus Christ. No bias there, just based on the evidence.

No, they are based on your belief system. Face it... no matter how much you try to PROVE your faith, you will always fail. It doesn't matter whether you accept this failure or not, it's still a failure. Is your faith so weak that you have to have others accept it for it to be valid? Because that's what you are trying to do, and failing miserably at it.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Hello..

The Sin of Sodom


Sodom...Sodomy??

Worked it out yet??

This has been explained ad nauseum. Further do you know how sodomy is defined?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

So what would you call anal sex?

What would you call anal sex performed by HETEROSEXUALS?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Hey don't blame me..The Old Testament was out of my hands!

I find gay people a tad aggressive...

Interesting. I find ANTI-gay people a tad aggressive.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Sorry..nice try..but sodomy relates to the anus..not the mouth..that is called oral..

Wrong. Here is the definition of sodomy... it really annoys me that I have to repost such SIMPLE concepts, over and over:

anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex

Sodomy - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Now that you have been educated on the definition of sodomy, I don't expect you will make this error again.

 

[Logicman]

Jesus did not fulfill the requirements of being the Messiah, so rejecting a false profit is appropriate. There are plenty of people who have claimed to be the Messiah who were not, some of whom fulfilled the requirements FAR better than Jesus did. Many of the prophesies that Daniel spoke of were fulfilled by Judas Maccabeus. Simon Bar Kohkba was considered the Messiah for a time, but like all others, including Jesus, was discovered to be false. You are attempting to fit the evidence into your belief system. That's not how the examination of information works.

Once again, you totally ignore the prophecies that are expected to be fulfilled at the second coming.

 

[Logicman]

No, they are based on your belief system. Face it... no matter how much you try to PROVE your faith, you will always fail. It doesn't matter whether you accept this failure or not, it's still a failure. Is your faith so weak that you have to have others accept it for it to be valid? Because that's what you are trying to do, and failing miserably at it.

Ha. You're the one who's going to be whistling Dixie at the Judgment.

It's the Jews who gave us Jesus and Christianity. Your own people, and you throw them under the bus.

And Isaiah 53 says you're going to reject the Messiah, just like you did with Jesus, the Messiah.

 

[chromium]

Ha. You're the one who's going to be whistling Dixie at the Judgment.

It's the Jews who gave us Jesus and Christianity. Your own people, and you throw them under the bus.

And Isaiah 53 says you're going to reject the Messiah, just like you did with Jesus, the Messiah.

Jews by definition do not believe in the biblical jesus. Are you attacking him for being Jewish?

 

[Logicman]

Jews by definition do not believe in the biblical jesus. Are you attacking him for being Jewish?

Like I said, Jews started Christianity. Isaiah wrote in Isaiah 53 that they would reject their Messiah. Just like a great many of them did. They also constantly rebelled against God and killed their own prophets. What do you think of that?