Re: Insulting words or expressions [ was Good Try, Ruth
1st Century Apostolic Tradition Endorcer
"- .. -- Tim .-." <timr...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1vadnWiuWr4V0bTV...@bt.com...
>
> "1st Century Apostolic Tradition Endorcer"
> <1stCentur...@Traditionalist.com> wrote in message
> news:aubWj.5$JE...@newsfe11.ams2...
>>
>> "- .. -- Tim .-." <timr...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>>
>>>Let's be truthful about it: Choosing an insulting word or expression
>>>over a neutral one indicates either hatred or fear, most probably the
>>>former. If so, it's not very Christian.
>>
>> Really, Tim?
>> Jesus who was the founder of Christianity so was he full of hatred when
>> he stated.
>> "Snakes, sons of vipers! How shall you escape the judgment of hell?"
>> Matthew 23:33
>
> Ah yes! He was talking about fundies here, so that was quite
> understandable! ;)
Certainly not Christian fundamentalists, as they agree with what Christ and
the Apostles taught.
>> Or Matthew 23:17 "You blind fools! "
>>
>> Also his usage of "Dogs" [ie*Sodomites]
>
> No, he was referring to non-Jews. You are trying to read something into
> that passage that just is NOT there.
It's is there, is you just cannot face it, as fornicating Sodomities were
specifically refered to as being "Dogs" as shown in Deut 23:18.
>> and "Swine",
>> "Do not give to DOGS what is holy; and do not throw your pearls before
>> SWINE, lest they trample them under foot and turn to attack you." Matt
>> 7:6 (RSV)
>> Boy! and how the Dogs and their friends do attack.
>
> Gentiles? Yes, I suppose there has been a lot of anti-Semitism throughout
> the years.
I am referring to the 'Dogs' and their friends referred to by Inspired
Isaiah.
>> He also branded people as "Hypocrites".
>
> Yes, usually the fundies.
Not Christian fundamentalists, they have full approval.
>> Now, do such far from neutral names meet with your full approval?
>
> Yes, since he was attacking the attackers.
Oh! so it's quite ok to call people harsh and insulting names if they
disagree with the you liberals, but not if they are fornicating Sodomites
pretending they are Chrisitans?
God's law disagrees with you..... * "Thou shalt not bring the hire of a
whore, or the price of a DOG, into
the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are
abomination unto the LORD thy God." Deut 23:18 (KJV)
Or...
"17,18 "No prostitutes are permitted in Israel, either men or women; you
must not bring to the Lord any offering from the earnings of a prostitute
or a homosexual, for both are detestable to the Lord your God." Deut 23:17
(TLB)
Jeff...
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
"Robert Marshall" <sp...@chezmarshall.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:m1k5hia...@chezmarshall.freeserve.co.uk...
> On Sun, 25 May 2008, 1stCentur...@traditionalist.com wrote:
>
>>
>> "- .. -- Tim .-." <timr...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>>
>>> Jeff. That should not be seen as capitulation on my part, since
>>> most readers on these groups already know what our views are.
>>
>> Could you just clarify the following then?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> You do believe homosexual fornication (anal intercourse: buggery) is
>> sinful' don't you?
> Nice to see you so focussed on one act Jeff.
Ahhh! I see that has *again* roused you from your chair.
> Do you also believe that
> heterosexual anal intercourse is inherently sinful?
If I did, Robert, I would show the passage from the Scripture forbidding it.
Maybe you can furnish such a passage....I can only find what God has
personally stated...."13 If a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both
of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their
blood shall be upon them."
>- far more
> heterosexuals practice it
Do they, I wouldn't know, but for a man and his wife, I can find nothing in
NT Scripture forbidding anything they wish to do sexually with each other.
>than (male) homosexuals because there's so
> many more of the first!
Even so.......sinful 'fornicating' Sodomite buggers will be severely dealt
with by Almighty God.
"7 And don't forget the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring
towns, all full of lust of every kind, including lust of men for other men.
Those cities were destroyed by fire and continue to be a warning to us that
there is a hell in which sinners are punished." Jude 1:7 (TLB)
So do be warned.
If you are wise enough to catch the drift.
Jeff...
"3 For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should
abstain from fornication."
1 Thess 4:2-3 (Darby)
- .. -- Tim .-.
"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
<1stCentur...@Traditionalist.com> wrote in message
news:U5m_j.6538$x55....@newsfe17.ams2...
Well, I would have thought that one bum is much like another bum. ['Bum' =
UK equivalent of 'Butt']
Certainly many places that have or had "Anti-sodomy" laws included
heterosexual buggery as well as homosexual buggery, and some include(d) all
forms of penetrative oral sex, as well. To claim that bum-sex is holy and
pure just as long as the receptive bum is female, is a bit strange. In the
UK for a long time anal sex even between man and wife was illegal.
Tim.
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Maybe so, but Christians are governed by NT teaching which has no such
restrictions on the sexual intimacy between a man and his wife.
As for your unscriptural liberal attitude that if homosexual relations
"fornication" are taking place between 'christians' is solely their
business.....what do you say to Paul's warning to such people?
"3 For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, [ Strong's 1)
Consecration, Purification ] that ye should
abstain from fornication."
1 Thess 4:2-3 (Darby)
Should you not be agreeing with him, and encouraging all your homosexual
friends and colleagues to observe such a dire warning?
Jeff...
"17 For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son,
and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways
which be in Christ, as *I teach every where* in every church."
1 Cor 4:17
- .. -- Tim .-.
"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
<1stCentur...@Traditionalist.com> wrote in message
I am not advocating any change from Traditional teaching on this, Jeff. As
I pointed out, anyone who *does* excercise right-of-conscience, does so
taking culpability upon *themselves* before God, so it is a very serious
matter. But I do respect their right to take such a risk, if they so wish,
as long as it is *private* then it remains between themselves and God. The
duty of the Church and of Christian leaders is to pass on teaching 'as
received'. However, dissent from that teaching over some issues, in
conscience, is a right accepted by most, even to a certain extent among the
historical Church groups.
Their right to choose to let God alone be the judge is something I would
defend. Whether they are wise to take that option is another question, but
I accept their freedom to take such a risk.
Tim.
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
"Morph" <crumpet-p...@muffin-butterers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:24vk34122v5grgpje...@4ax.com...
> Yes! We know his views and I suspect most disagree with them.
That's the way it will be...."3 For there is going to come a time when
people won't listen to the truth but will go around looking for teachers who
will tell them just what they want to hear. 4 They won't listen to what the
Bible says but will blithely follow their own misguided ideas." 2 Tim 4:3-4
(TLB)
> But people keep feeding him!!
Error and it's immoral manifestations will be earnestly contended.
> The stuff this guy spews out.....
Lovely Jubbly!
Straight from the Word of God.....{;o;}
Jeff...
>
>
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 08:35:09 +0100, "- .. -- Tim .-."
> <timr...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>>"1st Century Apostolic Tradition Endorcer"
>><1stCentur...@Traditionalist.com> wrote in message
>>news:t2vXj.6935$EH5....@newsfe30.ams2...
>>>
>>> "- .. -- Tim .-." <timr...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>> People should not be called a
>>>>'Sodomite', unless they came from Sodom.
>>>
>>> What silliness is this?
>>> Your overpowering desire to see Sodomites in the kingdom has robbed you
>>> of
>>> right thinking.
>>> You cannot keep living with your head in the sand, Tim.
>>>
>>> [Online Dictionary
>>> Main Entry:
>>>
>>> [Main Entry:
>>> Sod·om·ite
>>> Pronunciation:
>>> \-?mit\
>>> Function:
>>> noun
>>> Date:
>>> 14th century
>>> : one who practices sodomy ]
>>>
>>> -----------
>>>
>>> Sod·omy
>>> Pronunciation:
>>> \'sä-d?-me\
>>> Function:
>>> noun
>>> Etymology:
>>> Middle English, from Anglo-French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom;
>>> from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Genesis
>>> 19:1-11
>>> Date: 13th century
>>> : anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex;
>>> also
>>> :
>>> copulation with an animal
>>> - sod·om·it·ic \?sä-d?-'mi-tik\ or sod·om·it·i·cal \-ti-k?l\
>>> adjective ]
>>> ----------------------
>>>
>>> Example.
>>> *Police nabs man for sodomy*
>>> http://www.nyasatimes.com/national/196.html
>>>
>>>
>>>> Since Sodom was destroyed 1,000's
>>>>of years ago, there are NO Sodomites now,
>>>
>>> What piffle!
>>> The world is fast becoming full of them, just as Christ prophisied.
>>> "When I return the world will be as indifferent to the things of God as
>>> the people were in Noah's day. 27 They ate and drank and
>>> married--everything
>>> just as usual right up to the day when Noah went into the ark and the
>>> Flood
>>> came and destroyed them all.
>>> 28 "And the world will be as it was in the days of Lot: people went
>>> about their daily business--eating and drinking, buying and selling,
>>> farming
>>> and building-- 29 until the morning Lot left Sodom. Then fire and
>>> brimstone
>>> rained down from heaven and destroyed them all." Luke 17:26-29 (TLB)
>>>
>>> So we see such cities in America have become overpopulated with
>>> fornicating
>>> Sodomites and lesbians in
>>> San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, etc.
>>>
>>>>so it can only be seen as a term
>>>>of abuse intended to cause hurt.
>>>
>>> What other nicer 'neutral' kinder words do suggest for a paedophile or a
>>> rapist then?
>>>
>>> For they are meant to shame such wicked people and to show up the
>>> wickedness of their ungodly acts of depravity, or 'Abomination' for
>>> sinful
>>> homosexual acts, as Almighty God calls it.
>>>
>>> You do believe homosexual fornication is sinful' don't you.Tim?
>>>
>>> Calling some-one a murderer is offensive, if they are, so what, it's
>>> deserving and meant to be, just as their wicked murder was also
>>> 'offensive',
>>> and just as Sodomy between men is very offensive to God, as He detests
>>> such
>>> perverted acts between males.
>>>
>>> Jeff...
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I've opted to let you express your views without further comment, Jeff.
>>That should not be seen as capitulation on my part, since most readers on
>>these groups already know what our views are.
>>
>>Tim.
>>
>
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
There was very little trouble with homosexual sin when it was a criminal
offence in the eyes of the Law of the Land as well as in the eyes of God
before 1967, for many centuries. Both the public and the churches knew
exactly where they stood, it was an evil, criminal deed, committed by
perverts who were punished for their "Vile affection" for each other.
Which it is of course today "Vile affection" in the eyes of God, for His
Word remains the only true guidance on homosexual abomination. Today's
liberal minded people have become ~corruptors of the faith~.
Jeff...
"7 And don't forget the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring
towns, all full of lust of every kind, including lust of men for other men.
Those cities were destroyed by fire and continue to be a warning to us that
there is a hell in which sinners are punished."
Jude 1:6-7 (TLB)
- .. -- Tim .-.
"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
<1stCentur...@Traditionalist.com> wrote in message
> offence in the eyes of the Law of the Land as well as in the eyes of God
> before 1967, for many centuries. Both the public and the churches knew
> exactly where they stood, it was an evil, criminal deed, committed by
> perverts who were punished for their "Vile affection" for each other.
> Which it is of course today "Vile affection" in the eyes of God, for His
> Word remains the only true guidance on homosexual abomination. Today's
> liberal minded people have become ~corruptors of the faith~.
>
> Jeff...
> towns, all full of lust of every kind, including lust of men for other
> men. Those cities were destroyed by fire and continue to be a warning to
> us that there is a hell in which sinners are punished."
If putting it up a bum is perversion, Jeff, it hardly matters what gender
the bum happens to be! I find it strange that you do not feel exactly the
same way about a man who buggers his wife, this too was illegal, don't
forget. Indeed, I would have thought that you would have argued that *any*
form of sex apart from penis-vaginal intercourse was a 'perversion'.
Tim.
The Heretic
wrote:
> "1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"<1stCenturyAposto...@Traditionalist.com> wrote in message
>
> news:D2q3k.105538$_c7....@newsfe16.ams2...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "- .. -- Tim .-." <timrea...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:4eidnQ_NyMN...@bt.com...
>
> >> "1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
> >>news:U5m_j.6538$x55....@newsfe17.ams2...
>
> >>> "Robert Marshall" <s...@chezmarshall.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> >>>news:m1k5hia...@chezmarshall.freeserve.co.uk...
> >>>> On Sun, 25 May 2008, 1stCenturyAposto...@traditionalist.com wrote:
>
> >>>>> "- .. -- Tim .-." <timrea...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
are peopversestsle who practice fellatio, Gamorrites?
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
The forms of 'perversion' are what God Himself declares they are.....nothing
more or nothing less.
"13 If a man lie with mankind, as with womankind,
both of them have committed abomination."
Or do you think that homosexual 'fornication' is now acceptable before God
and is no longer a sin?
Jeff...
The Heretic
<1stCenturyAposto...@Traditionalist.com> wrote:
> "- .. -- Tim .-." <timrea...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:lq6dnUbMW-1-7dPV...@bt.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
> > <1stCenturyAposto...@Traditionalist.com> wrote in message
> >news:D2q3k.105538$_c7....@newsfe16.ams2...
>
> >> "- .. -- Tim .-." <timrea...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> >>news:4eidnQ_NyMN...@bt.com...
>
> >>> "1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
> >>>news:U5m_j.6538$x55....@newsfe17.ams2...
>
> >>>> "Robert Marshall" <s...@chezmarshall.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> >>>>news:m1k5hia...@chezmarshall.freeserve.co.uk...
> >>>>> On Sun, 25 May 2008, 1stCenturyAposto...@traditionalist.com wrote:
>
> >>>>>> "- .. -- Tim .-." <timrea...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
No Jeff it never was. It is just people like you who lived a long
time ago, who wrote down their opinion and claimed it was from God. I
don't believe them and I don't believe you. You can quote thiese
ancients who shared your dislike of homosexuals all you like.
It does not make it true. And you are just perpetuating same attitude
of repulsion. And if others concurr with you they are also.
So nice to have ancient quotes to
put into words, feelings that you would have even if such text did
not exist
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
"The Heretic" <michae...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:1c1ab654-856c-48b6...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Well I suppose you would have to say that wouldn't you,
otherwise you would be lying about being 'The Heretic'....{;o;}
The Heretic
<1stCenturyAposto...@Traditionalist.com> wrote:
> "The Heretic" <michaelrja...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
Yes , it was an inspiration >:)=
Episkopos J.J. Jubilee
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA...
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA...
with those kinds of attitudes the kind of heaven YOUR going to go to
would make a "sodomite" scream bloody hell...
I'm gonna relish watching dad eat you up.... fucking morons.
Christo-Satanic Syndicate has spoken... ya'll a bunch a easily duped
fuckwads... naw just kiddin... hehe
++
Someone falsely calling himself a 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist ,
although he is not Orthodox wrote:
>The forms of 'perversion' are what God Himself declares they are.....nothing
>more or nothing less.
>"13 If a man lie with mankind, as with womankind,
>both of them have committed abomination."
>
>
When did "God" say this?
>Or do you think that homosexual 'fornication' is now acceptable before God
>and is no longer a sin?
>
>
No, I think that the quality of mercy is not strained.
>Jeff...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Satan luvs you baby...
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
"++" <fri...@spambot.com> wrote in message
news:AIKdnTLtTP1YidLV...@rcn.net...
>
>
> Someone falsely calling himself a 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist,
> although he is not Orthodox wrote:
One cannot possibly be more 'Orthodox' than being a follower of 1st Century
Apostolic Traditionas, Gail.
>>The forms of 'perversion' are what God Himself declares they
>>are.....nothing more or nothing less.
>>"13 If a man lie with mankind, as with womankind,
>>both of them have committed abomination."
>>
> When did "God" say this?
Ah!
You haven't been participating in the posted Daily Bible Readings then?
Otherwise you would have read on March 10/08
"I am Jehovah your God, 3 so don't act like the heathen--like the
people of Egypt where you lived so long, or the people of Canaan where I am
going to take you. 4,5 You must obey only my laws, and you must carry them
out in detail, for I am the Lord your God. If you obey them, you shall live.
I am the Lord. ............21 "You shall not give any of your children to
Molech, burning them upon his altar; never profane the name of your God, for
I am Jehovah.
22 "Homosexuality is absolutely forbidden, for it is an enormous sin.
23 A man shall have no sexual intercourse with any female animal, thus
defiling himself; and a woman must never give herself to a male animal, to
mate with it; this is a terrible perversion." Lev 18:1-23 (TLB)
>>Or do you think that homosexual 'fornication' is now acceptable before God
>>and is no longer a sin?
> No, I think that the quality of mercy is not strained.
"7 And don't forget the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring
towns, all full of lust of every kind, including lust of men for other men.
Those cities were destroyed by fire and continue to be a warning to us that
there is a hell in which sinners are punished." Jude 1:6-7 (TLB)
Jeff...
Pastor Dave
<michae...@videotron.ca> spake thusly:
>> Or do you think that homosexual 'fornication'
>> is now acceptable before God and is no longer
>> a sin?
>
>No Jeff it never was. It is just people like you
>who lived a long time ago, who wrote down
>their opinion and claimed it was from God.
You mean like you're doing now, when you claim
"it never was"? You are speaking for God and
are therefore no better than they were, when
assuming your claim to be true about them.
>I don't believe them and I don't believe you.
Belief is not proof. Isn't that what you tell Christians?
And yet you make your claims, as if they are true.
Therefore, at best, you are a hypocrite.
>You can quote thiese ancients who shared your
>dislike of homosexuals all you like.
Straw man. You assume a dislike, because one says
that homosexual acts are sin, which they are.
As for me, I'll take God's word over your arrogant
assumption that they were dumb and you're smart.
>It does not make it true.
And yet, you think that you saying what you say,
makes what you say true. That means you're
nothing but a hypocrite pot, calling the kettle black.
>And you are just perpetuating same attitude of repulsion.
Repulsive things should perpetuate repulsion.
And if you can't figure out that it is repulsive,
that's your shortcoming, not ours.
He's an outtie, she's an innie. It ain't rocket science! :)
>And if others concurr with you they are also.
You can't even spell and you wish to criticize others?
The fact is, you're just pointing your finger and claiming
that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. That makes
you guilty of what you accuse others of doing.
>So nice to have ancient quotes to put into words,
>feelings that you would have even if such text did
>not exist
And should have! But isn't it nice, hypocrite, to have
"modern" quotes to put into words, feelings that you
would have, even if such text did not exist, hypocrite!
And by the way:
1) Ancient does not automatically equal wrong.
2) You would not claim that an ancient quote
that agrees with you is wrong, hypocrite.
3) Homosexual acts lead to all kinds of things,
like having sex with little boys. Doubt that?
Look at those "ancient quotes" some more!
4) Why don't you have a problem with those
ancient quotes that make everything okay?
5) Why are you such a hypocrite?
--
The Last Days were in the first century:
Speaking to His disciples that were standing
in front of Him, Jesus said...
Luke 21:20-22
20) And when YE shall see JERUSALEM compassed
with armies, then know that the desolation
THEREOF IS NIGH.
21) Then let them which are IN JUDEA flee to
the mountains; and let them which are in the
midst of it depart out; and let not them that
are in the countries enter thereinto.
22) For THESE be the days of vengeance, that
ALL THINGS WHICH ARE WRITTEN, MAY BE FULFILLED.
Pastor Dave
Jubilee" <juurgeni...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
Thank you for showing us Christians how much more
intelligent and mature unbelievers are. <chuckle>
--
The Last Days were in the first century:
Romans 13:11-2
11) And that, knowing the time, that NOW
it is high time to awake out of sleep:
for NOW is our salvation nearer than when
we believed.
12) The night is far spent, the day is
AT HAND: let us therefore cast off the
works of darkness, and let us put on
the armor of light.
Pastor Dave
spake thusly:
>Someone falsely calling himself a 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist ,
>although he is not Orthodox wrote:
You're not too bright, huh?
>>The forms of 'perversion' are what God Himself declares they are.....nothing
>>more or nothing less.
>>"13 If a man lie with mankind, as with womankind,
>>both of them have committed abomination."
>
>When did "God" say this?
Having problems with the calendar?
>>Or do you think that homosexual 'fornication' is now acceptable before God
>>and is no longer a sin?
>
>No, I think that the quality of mercy is not strained.
So now "mercy = accept perversion as good".
Yea, you're smart! Not! <chuckle>
Bye now! :)
--
"Faith is not an intellectual belief. Faith is a belief
with legs on it." - Adrian Rogers
The Heretic
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:07:18 -0700 (PDT), The Heretic
>
> >> Or do you think that homosexual 'fornication'
> >> is now acceptable before God and is no longer
> >> a sin?
>
> >No Jeff it never was. It is just people like you
> >who lived a long time ago, who wrote down
> >their opinion and claimed it was from God.
>
> You mean like you're doing now, when you claim
> "it never was"? You are speaking for God and
> are therefore no better than they were, when
> assuming your claim to be true about them.
>
> >I don't believe them and I don't believe you.
>
> Belief is not proof. Isn't that what you tell Christians?
> And yet you make your claims, as if they are true.
>
> Therefore, at best, you are a hypocrite.
>
> >You can quote thiese ancients who shared your
> >dislike of homosexuals all you like.
>
> Straw man. You assume a dislike, because one says
> that homosexual acts are sin, which they are.
Just because you they are? Not based on *your*
beliefs..beliefs do not make it so..well in your mind obviously.
>
> As for me, I'll take God's word over your arrogant
> assumption that they were dumb and you're smart.
well if you ever hear God's word let me know, for now all you do is
read a book
of second hand experiences and think you know something.
And as for arrogance look at yourself, where someone has different
views,
you start by all kinds of insults. That's not discussing.
> >It does not make it true.
>
> And yet, you think that you saying what you say,
> makes what you say true. That means you're
> nothing but a hypocrite pot, calling the kettle black.
You describe yourself again...how interesting!
>
> >And you are just perpetuating same attitude of repulsion.
>
> Repulsive things should perpetuate repulsion.
> And if you can't figure out that it is repulsive,
> that's your shortcoming, not ours.
>
> He's an outtie, she's an innie. It ain't rocket science! :)
>
> >And if others concurr with you they are also.
>
> You can't even spell and you wish to criticize others?
>
> The fact is, you're just pointing your finger and claiming
> that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. That makes
> you guilty of what you accuse others of doing.
You are describing yourself again.
>
> >So nice to have ancient quotes to put into words,
> >feelings that you would have even if such text did
> >not exist
>
> And should have! But isn't it nice, hypocrite, to have
> "modern" quotes to put into words, feelings that you
> would have, even if such text did not exist, hypocrite!
>
experience is greater than texts
> And by the way:
>
> 1) Ancient does not automatically equal wrong.
>
> 2) You would not claim that an ancient quote
> that agrees with you is wrong, hypocrite.
>
> 3) Homosexual acts lead to all kinds of things,
> like having sex with little boys. Doubt that?
> Look at those "ancient quotes" some more!
from personal expereince I know that is not true..yopu are spreading
lies and hatred..based n your 'beliefs' and only beliefs, not
facts.
>
> 4) Why don't you have a problem with those
> ancient quotes that make everything okay?
>
> 5) Why are you such a hypocrite?
>
> --
Clue: look in the mirror and ask yourself why.
Episkopos J.J. Jubilee
judgements. That and I've never read the original scriptures in the
original language. It stands to reason that for quite some time people
lived natural lives in harmony with YHWH's commandments in league with
Christ's teachings and his sacrifice without going about lambasting
people in generally the same way that Jewish people do for not
following scriptual commandments.
You do know that angels can sin from being too much like angels right?
The open expression of love, as it differentiates from lust, doesn't
need rules (such as the prohibitions against certain types of food
which just like homosexuality could be punishable by death), when the
architecture of existence itself has been revolutionized. We are all
born innocent and NOT in sin, it is only because our parents sinned
that they pass it on later to us. That is the whole point of the
Christian Epic. I'm not going to belabour this point because yes I
obviously sin, but I obviously Love YHWH and his expression in Christ,
I also refuse to judge other people (though I might pick on them when
I'm feeling frisky) because if I go around judging all the time I'll
just be another evil angel-demon prude who generally makes god even
angrier than the pick-up artist.
I also have sympathies for the dumb devils that only got where they
are because they were duped and are too one-sighted to even notice the
fact.
Seriously stop judging lest you be judged. You believe what you want,
but you do get weighed for how much slack your predjuices eat up.
There are too sides to the sin equation; those who break the law
deeply and those who idolize the law. Generally speaking the right
side is worse.