Comments on: Gay Christian Dating Service

By: LRA

LRA — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 05:41:34 +0000

You mean kinda like this…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPjEjXyZ2vE

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:33:58 +0000

@ przxqgl: Would have been even funnier if it was lesbian black jewish klanswomyn for tolerance and understanding.

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:30:47 +0000

Would have been even funnier if it was lesbian black jewish klanswomyn for tolerance and understanding.

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:28:18 +0000

Cite your reference, thanks.

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:27:37 +0000

The word “homosexual” does not appear in the Bible except in some modern translations. This is a mistranslation of a greek term “arsenokoitai” that means an adult man who has sex with male children. Therein lies the confusion which incorrectly associates gays with pedophiles.

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:21:40 +0000

Can you ask him when he chose to be heterosexual and why?

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:18:57 +0000

What good are polls, though? I would agree with your log jam in your eye so you pick at the sliver in someone else’s eye statement.

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:15:02 +0000

@ przxggl: Wow! You are right. Why didn’t they have the Baptist Peace Fellowship or the Alliance of Baptists on there because they affirm gay and lesbian relationships and full participation of gays and lesbians in church life? Fred Phelps is an embarrassment to the name “Baptist”.

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:09:05 +0000

Paul doesn’t actually say anything about homosexuality. He does say that men and women should not do what is unnatural. To a heterosexual, acting like you’re gay is not natural. Romans 1:26-27

By: SayBlade

SayBlade — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:05:27 +0000

In the Genesis 19 account of the story of Sodom — really a story about Lot and his family — there is no mention of the specific “sin” of Sodom and so it does NOT mention “homosexuality”. It says “all the people to the last man” came out to where the visitors were staying so they could “know” them. Now, if these visitors were human, and IF the accusation is “homosexuality”, then the women of the city (remember it says all the *people*) were merely guilty of lust. If the visitors were angels, what kind of sex perversion do you call that? We know from Ezekiel 16:49 what the sin of Sodom was and it was “pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.”

Actually, if you read the King James version of the Bible you will NOT find “homosexuality” mentioned anywhere in the Old or New Testament. Mentions of the word in modern translations come from the dented modern lens through which some translators view the texts in ancient Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew.

Besides, there is a very sizable group of mainline Christians who do not take the Bible literally whose faith is based on trust, loyalty and positive values rather than belief without question. Included in that group are many gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered, intersexed, two-spirited, questioning and queer people.

By: UkrainianGirls

UkrainianGirls — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:02:27 +0000

I think that it is a very interesting and amusing article. Practically all its main points are true.

By: Niva Tuvia

Niva Tuvia — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:15:11 +0000

Nope. It’s defineltely not a coincidence. I’d forgotten about the description of acceptable meats. Mostly, just Jewish followers do this. Aka, it’s kosher. I guess all those farmers who grow corn next to their tomatoes are in trouble, because it also says you shall not sow your field with mingled seed. Hmm… Something tells me I should read Leviticus again. I’m thinking that maybe if I read it in its complete context, I’d understand why I don’t feel convicted when I eat crab salad.

By: Teleprompter

Teleprompter — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:02:36 +0000

Well, Leviticus 11:10-12 clearly specify that they are an abomination.

Leviticus 18:22 says that homosexuality is also an abomination.

Yet people today ignore the prohibition against shellfish and not the one against homosexuality?

Why are these treated differently?

Leviticus 19:19 implies that if you wear a shirt that is cotton and polyester, it is an abomination.

Again, why do we not take this seriously, but we do take the prohibitions against homosexuality seriously?

Why the selective reading?

Is it a coincidence that what is emphasized matches up with most peoples’ preferences and aversions?

By: Niva Tuvia

Niva Tuvia — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 15:54:37 +0000

Explain the shellfish comparison. Lol.

By: Teleprompter

Teleprompter — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 15:51:22 +0000

But why is homosexuality a sin? There are lots of animals in nature that can be homosexual.

I’m not arguing (for now) with the concept of “sin”.

I’m arguing as to why that should apply to homosexuality, especially when Christians don’t apply the same prohibitions to eating shellfish or wearing clothes made out of two fabrics.