ABC's 'Nightline' Accused of Snubbing Truth About Homosexuality
tim
By Jim Brown
June 4, 2002
(AgapePress) - A pro-family activist who appeared in a Nightline town
hall meeting on homosexuality says the ABC News program failed to
address the health risks associated with the dangerous and sinful way
of life.
The Nightline town hall meeting from Roanoke, Virginia, capped a
weeklong series titled "A Matter of Choice." Phil Whitaker, director
of outreach for the Family Foundation of Virginia, was invited to
participate in the program. Whitaker says the show was framed to look
like the responses from the audience were spontaneous, but in fact
they were not.
He says show producers knew the perspective each respondent was
taking, and the timing of those responses was pre-selected by the
Nightline staff.
"In my initial comments to [Nightline host Ted Koppel], I really tried
to raise some of the pressing health issues and family stability
issues that I think are relevant to the homosexual agenda issue -- and
although he said [they] would come back to that, they never did,"
Whitaker says. "So those issues got glossed over entirely, and that
really disappointed me."
Whitaker says ABC wanted to focus only on the controversy between the
Church and the homosexual community. He says the tone of the
broadcast, and the message from the speakers, left the viewing
audience with the false impression that most Roanoke churches are open
to and accepting of the sin of homosexuality.
"They continually played up how normal, how mainstream [homosexuals
supposedly are]," Whitaker says. "The individuals they interviewed
from the homosexual community were certainly educated, well spoken,
well behaved, intelligent people. You did not see any of the more
radical element from the gay-rights agenda present on the program at
all."
According to Whitaker, the broadcast was nothing more than another
effort by the Disney-owned network to promote and legitimize
homosexuality.
Sparkup
"tim" <why...@soon.com> wrote in message
news:52f185ff.02092...@posting.google.com...
Did they have any bible-thumping crazies on?
Ninure Saunders
why...@soon.com (tim) wrote:
-
-"They continually played up how normal, how mainstream [homosexuals
-supposedly are]," Whitaker says. "The individuals they interviewed
-from the homosexual community were certainly educated, well spoken,
-well behaved, intelligent people. You did not see any of the more
-radical element from the gay-rights agenda present on the program at
-all."
So the next time Nightline does a program on Christianity, to be fair they
should include representatives from the Cgristian Idenity movement, and
the KKK so that Americans can have a true picture of "Christians".
-
-According to Whitaker, the broadcast was nothing more than another
-effort by the Disney-owned network to promote and legitimize
-homosexuality.
<sarcasm>
I'm sure after the program was over, MILLIONS of Americans went out to
learn how they too, could become homosexuals.
Gay soscial clubss were overwhelmed ith requests on how to "join"...and
sores ran out of toaster ovens as "gay recruiters" were signing up gormer
heteroexuals.....
<end sarcasm>
"If you gave me $1 million tomorrow and told me to promote homosexuality,
I haven't the faintest idea what I would do.
What do you do? Have a contest? Make up posters? Put ads on television?
The notion of promoting homosexuality is preposterous.Our agenda is very
simple: Please leave us alone. Please let us be what we want to be and
live our lives with others."
U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://www.geocities.com/ninure
The world's second most subversive document
http://www.geocities.com/ninure/declaration.html
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.ufmcc.com
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
Pope Dilbert
>
> By Jim Brown
> June 4, 2002
>
> (AgapePress) -
The Reich Wing Mouthpiece
A pro-family activist who appeared in a Nightline town
> hall meeting on homosexuality says the ABC News program failed to
> address the health risks associated with the dangerous and sinful way
> of life.
IOW they didn't spread YOUR propaganda and lies!
Barnabas,
tim wrote:
> ABC's 'Nightline' Accused of Snubbing Truth About Homosexuality
>
> By Jim Brown
> June 4, 2002
>
> (AgapePress) - A pro-family activist who appeared in a Nightline town
> hall meeting on homosexuality says the ABC News program failed to
> address the health risks associated with the dangerous and sinful way
> of life.
There is nothing sinful about homosexuality, there is no sin of
homosexuality in the bible.
M. Clark
???????????????????????????????????????
> simple: Please leave us alone. Please let us be what we want to be and
> live our lives with others."
> U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass
Thank you for posting.
The notion of promoting homosexuality is not preposterous. In fact,
promoting things like homosexuality is exactly what Romans 1:32 warns
that unrepentant sinners will do.
Homosexuals should keep in mind that the good news of the gospel is not
about how God despises same-sex sexual relationships. 1 Corinthians
6:9-11, in fact, shows that certain members of that early Church had
been involved in same-sex sexual relationships but had been cleansed in
the name of Jesus.
Indeed, return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and have
eternal life.
M. Clark
Pope Dilbert
"M. Clark" <idont...@toemail.com> wrote in message
news:1fj2ls7.1fdxmag1q551vpN%idont...@toemail.com...
(hint .... the rest of the world does NOT go by the rules you cull, and
distort, from your bible)
>
> Homosexuals should keep in mind that the good news of the gospel is not
> about how God despises same-sex sexual relationships. 1 Corinthians
> 6:9-11, in fact, shows that certain members of that early Church had
> been involved in same-sex sexual relationships but had been cleansed in
> the name of Jesus.
You should keep in mind that the bible is to tell you how to be .. NOT for
you to command others!
>
> Indeed, return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and have
> eternal life.
Immediately after you offer valid evidence to support any of your claims!
JTEM
"M. Clark" <idont...@toemail.com> wrote
> In fact, promoting things like homosexuality is
> exactly what Romans 1:32 warns that
> unrepentant sinners will do.
Would it be sad if you actually succeeded in dragging
everybody -- kicking & screaming -- into Heaven?
You'd have no body to keep you company in Hell.
L. Michael Roberts
> Ninure Saunders <RainbowChri...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <52f185ff.02092...@posting.google.com>,
>>why...@soon.com (tim) wrote:
>>
<snip>
>>So the next time Nightline does a program on Christianity, to be fair they
>>should include representatives from the Christian Identity movement, and
>>the KKK so that Americans can have a true picture of "Christians".
>>-
>>-According to Whitaker, the broadcast was nothing more than another
>>-effort by the Disney-owned network to promote and legitimize
>>-homosexuality.
>>
>><sarcasm>
>>
>>I'm sure after the program was over, MILLIONS of Americans went out to
>>learn how they too, could become homosexuals.
>>
>>Gay social clubs were overwhelmed ith requests on how to "join"...and
>>sores ran out of toaster ovens as "gay recruiters" were signing up gormer
>>heterosexuals.....
>>
>><end sarcasm>
>>
>>"If you gave me $1 million tomorrow and told me to promote homosexuality,
>>I haven't the faintest idea what I would do.
>>
>> What do you do? Have a contest? Make up posters? Put ads on television?
>>
>> The notion of promoting homosexuality is preposterous.Our agenda is very
>
> ???????????????????????????????????????
>
>
>>simple: Please leave us alone. Please let us be what we want to be and
>>live our lives with others."
>> U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass
>
>
> Thank you for posting.
>
> The notion of promoting homosexuality is not preposterous.
It is totally and completely preposterous. Please list a number of
ways in which homosexuality can be "promoted" and contrast that with
how heterosexuality is "promoted"
> In fact,
> promoting things like homosexuality is exactly what Romans 1:32 warns
> that unrepentant sinners will do.
Your religious beliefs and dogma are totally IRRELEVANT to civil
rights - for further information, look up "separation of church and
state".
<snip balance of cult propaganda>
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts =======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Hamilton, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+=================================================================+
M. Clark
M. Clark
> Homosexuality attracts the death penalty in the Bible, as does any form
> of sex outside of marriage. Stop pretending otherwise.
Thank you for posting.
If your assertion about the death penalty punishment for unlawful sex
was still true then Paul should have had the sexual offender of 1
Corinthians 5 put to death. However, Paul just had this man kicked out
of the Church. So did Paul screw up?
Centainly not. Paul, under the guidance of Jesus' Holy Spirit, actually
satisfied the intent of the Law by simply having this man kicked out of
the Church. Indeed, God commanded the Israelites several times in
Deuteromony, verse 13:5 for example, to "purge the evil from among you".
And 1 Corinthians 5:13 shows that this is exactly how Paul justified his
judgement on this offender.
Note that since both incest and same-sex sexual relationships are
forbidden by Leviticus 18:7,8 and 22 respectively, Paul could just as
well have used an unrepentant homosexual for the example of 1
Corinthians 5 which really addresses sexual immorality in general.
Homosexuals should keep in mind, however, that the good news of the
gospel is not about how God despises homosexuality. 1 Corinthains
6:9-11, in fact, shows that certain members of that early Church had
formerly been involved in same-sex sexual relationships but had been
cleansed in the name of Jesus.
Indeed, return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and have
eternal life.
M. Clark
>
>
> -Barry
> ========
> Web page: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~barry.og
> Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information.
> Voicemail/fax number +14136227640
>
> "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it,
> doesn't go away".
> Philip K. Dick
grantco
This thread reminds me of this email I was sent awhile ago. Maybe you've
seen it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a US radio personality who dispenses advice to
people who call in to her radio show.
Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an
abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any
circumstance.
The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a US resident, Jim,
which was posted on the Internet.
It's funny, as well as informative:
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law.
I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge
with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual
lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly
states it to be an abomination.
End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
specific laws and how to follow them.
1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odour for the Lord-Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They
claim the odour is not pleasing to them.
Should I smite them?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus
21:7.
In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her
period of menstrual cleanliness-Lev.15:19-24. The problem is, how do I
tell?
I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female,
provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine
claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify?
Why can't I own Canadians?
5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2
clearly states he should be put to death.
Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination-Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.
I don't agree.
Can you settle this?
7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a
defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses.
Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27.
How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me
unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different
crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two
different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse
and blaspheme a lot.
Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole
town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16)
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do
with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can
help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Your devoted fan,
Jim
Barnabas,
JTEM wrote:
You are part of the Dan Quayle's family right?
Votes are like trees, if you are trying to build a forest. If you have
more trees than you have forests, then at that point the pollsters
will probably say you will win.
-- Senator Dan Quayle, during the '88 campaign
(reported in Newsweek in 1988)
My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we
will never, never surrender to what is right.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle speaking to the Christian Coalition
about the need for abstinence to avoid AIDS, 11/15/91
(reported in Esquire, 8/92)
If you give a person a fish, they'll fish for a day. But if you train a
person to fish, they'll fish for a lifetime.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle while at a job training center in Atlanta
(reported in the NY Times, 10/14/92).
Damn he sounds just like you.
Barnabas,
Barry OGrady wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:04:35 -0500, "Barnabas," <"barnabas,"@iname.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> Homosexuality attracts the death penalty in the Bible, as does any form
> of sex outside of marriage. Stop pretending otherwise.
You got to be JTEM using another name.
Fornication (zanah) harlot, go a whoring, whoredom.
Fornication (ekporneuo) to go a whoring.
Sodomite (qadesh) which means a male temple prostitute.
Abusers of themselves with mankind (arsenokoite) one who lies
with a male as with a female, sodomite, (qadesh) male temple
prostitute.
Effeminate (malakos) of a male who submits his body to unnatural
lewdness, of a male prostitute.
A high place (ramah) a place of illicit worship.
You are trying to say that fornication is an act of having
sex while unmarried, but that make no sense when it is a act of going
whoring, when you are married. This can be clearly pointed out in
the usage of the word fornication by Jesus himself:
Matthew 5:32 "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away
his "wife", saving for the cause of "fornication", causeth her to commit
adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth
adultery."
Now if fornication was having sex outside of marriage, instead of
the idolatrous act of having sex for the purpose of worshiping
other gods, then Jesus would not be talking about putting
away a "wife" for the cause of "fornication". If it were a "wife"
having sex in the modern sense of the words, it would be adultery,
not fornication, yet both words are used in the same context,
clearly a "wife" can commit fornication and the modern usage of
the word is mistranslated.
Barnabas,
M. Clark wrote:
> Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:04:35 -0500, "Barnabas," <"barnabas,"@iname.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >tim wrote:
> > >
> > >> ABC's 'Nightline' Accused of Snubbing Truth About Homosexuality
> > >>
> > >> By Jim Brown
> > >> June 4, 2002
> > >>
> > >> (AgapePress) - A pro-family activist who appeared in a Nightline town
> > >> hall meeting on homosexuality says the ABC News program failed to
> > >> address the health risks associated with the dangerous and sinful way
> > >> of life.
> > >
> > >There is nothing sinful about homosexuality, there is no sin of
> > >homosexuality in the bible.
> >
> > Homosexuality attracts the death penalty in the Bible, as does any form
> > of sex outside of marriage. Stop pretending otherwise.
>
> Thank you for posting.
>
> If your assertion about the death penalty punishment for unlawful sex
> was still true then Paul should have had the sexual offender of 1
> Corinthians 5 put to death. However, Paul just had this man kicked out
> of the Church. So did Paul screw up?
It was idolatry not sexual offender.
> Paul could just as
> well have used an unrepentant homosexual for the example of 1
> Corinthians 5 which really addresses sexual immorality in general.
Has nothing to do with sex, only idolatry.
>
>
> Homosexuals should keep in mind, however, that the good news of the
> gospel is not about how God despises homosexuality. 1 Corinthains
> 6:9-11, in fact, shows that certain members of that early Church had
> formerly been involved in same-sex sexual relationships but had been
> cleansed in the name of Jesus.
You can copy and paste this all you like, it will only add to the count
of blasphemy against you The context is 1 Cor 6:8-20 worshiping
other gods by prostitution.
You could not even tell us where Romans was written at could you?
M. Clark
>
>
> M. Clark wrote:
>
> > Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:04:35 -0500, "Barnabas,"
> > ><"barnabas,"@iname.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >tim wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> ABC's 'Nightline' Accused of Snubbing Truth About Homosexuality
> > > >>
> > > >> By Jim Brown
> > > >> June 4, 2002
> > > >>
> > > >> (AgapePress) - A pro-family activist who appeared in a Nightline town
> > > >> hall meeting on homosexuality says the ABC News program failed to
> > > >> address the health risks associated with the dangerous and sinful way
> > > >> of life.
> > > >
> > > >There is nothing sinful about homosexuality, there is no sin of
> > > >homosexuality in the bible.
> > >
> > > Homosexuality attracts the death penalty in the Bible, as does any form
> > > of sex outside of marriage. Stop pretending otherwise.
> >
> > Thank you for posting.
> >
> > If your assertion about the death penalty punishment for unlawful sex
> > was still true then Paul should have had the sexual offender of 1
> > Corinthians 5 put to death. However, Paul just had this man kicked out
> > of the Church. So did Paul screw up?
>
> It was idolatry not sexual offender.
Thank you for replying.
With respect to how idolatry is related to sexual immorality, Romans
1:25-27 shows that sexual immorality is a consequence of idolatry.
Return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and have eternal
life.
M. Clark
>
M. Clark
Thank you for replying.
Yes, the rituals of the Law concerning animal sacrifices, slavery, and
other things are a typical smokescreen rebutal for those who are
themselves slaves to homosexuality.
But those who let Jesus' Holy Spirit reveal the true meaning of the
Scriptures to them can tell you that Hebrews 10:1-18 Jesus' death on the
cross was the ultimate sacrifice. The bottom line is that Jesus wiped
out the need for further sacrifices.
>
> 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus
> 21:7.
>
> In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
1 Corinthians 7:21 and 23 says for slaves to acquire their freedom if
they can do so and to not become a slave to men.
>
> 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her
> period of menstrual cleanliness-Lev.15:19-24. The problem is, how do I
> tell?
>
> I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
Consider that Jesus was almost made unclean by an unclean woman as Luke
8:43-38 shows. But between Jesus' power to heal and the woman's faith
the woman was healed and Jesus remained clean. Indeed, it was as if the
unclean woman had never touched Jesus. So consider that if Jesus is in
your heart then a little faith can also prevent you from becomming
unclean. Otherwise, Galatians 2:6 indicates that no one can be
justified by the Law anyway.
>
> 4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female,
> provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine
> claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify?
I wouldn't regard any of the Lord's freedmen (1 Corinthians 7:22) as
slaves. You may get the Lord's attention for doing so but probably not
the kind of attention you want.
>
> Why can't I own Canadians?
>
> 5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2
> clearly states he should be put to death.
Who are you to question another of the Lord's servants (Romans 14:4)?
Indeed, Romans 14:5-6 shows that one man might regard certain days as
holy while another man considers every day the same.
>
> Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
But Jesus clarified such things with respect to the Law and the Prophets
in Matthew 7:12. Jesus said do to others as you would have them do to
you.
>
> 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
> abomination-Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.
> I don't agree.
The Lord said in Acts 11:9 not call anything unclean that He has
purified. 1 Corinthians 10:27 later says to eat anything put in front of
you. The Lord also inspired to Paul to write to eat anythings sold in
the meat market in 1 Corinthians 10:25.
>
> Can you settle this?
>
> 7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a
> defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses.
Again, Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice so there is now no need for
true, repentant Christians with impairments to make any kind of
sacrifice now anyway.
>
> Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
>
> 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
> around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27.
At least you're in good company. Acts 18:18 shows that Paul also got
his hair cut.
>
> How should they die?
>
> 9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me
> unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
Having learned a lesson from the bleeding woman above, you know that you
just have to have Jesus in your heart and, using a little faith, you can
play football. But don't think you're going to win all the time.
>
> 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different
> crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two
> different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse
> and blaspheme a lot.
Again, plan A, being justified by the Law obviously won't work for him.
He should pick plan JC, being justified by faith in Jesus Christ.
(Galatians 2:26)
>
> Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole
> town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16)
Just let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
>
> Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do
> with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
Why not follow the example of Paul who upheld the real intent of the Law
by simply having a sexual offender kicked out of the church as 1
Corinthians 5 shows. Otherwise, Leviticus 20:11 shows that this sexual
offender should have been put to death. Messy.
>
> I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can
> help.
I study the Word out of necessity. Otherwise, you hear so many Bible
corruptions that you'd end up not really knowing what the Bible says
about anything anyway.
>
> Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Malachi 3:6 shows that the Lord does indeed not change. However, Jesus
indicated in Matthew 5:17-18 that the Law and the Prophets may indeed
disappear one day.
>
> Your devoted fan,
Don't worry about me. You need to put your faith in Jesus.
M. Clark
>
> Jim
Barnabas,
M. Clark wrote:
> Barnabas, <"barnabas,"@iname.com> wrote:
>
> > > Thank you for posting.
> > >
> > > If your assertion about the death penalty punishment for unlawful sex
> > > was still true then Paul should have had the sexual offender of 1
> > > Corinthians 5 put to death. However, Paul just had this man kicked out
> > > of the Church. So did Paul screw up?
> >
> > It was idolatry not sexual offender.
>
> Thank you for replying.
>
> With respect to how idolatry is related to sexual immorality, Romans
> 1:25-27 shows that sexual immorality is a consequence of idolatry.
And once again you lie and blaspheme the bible. Bet you cannot
even quote who first said that, blasphemer.
Adam Clarke's Commentary:
Romans, 1
Verse 23. They changed the glory, &c.] The finest representation of
their deities was in the human figure; and on such representative
figures the sculptors spent all their skill; hence the HERCULES of
Farnese, the VENUS of Medicis, and the APOLLO of Belvidere.
And when they had formed their gods according to the human shape,
they endowed them with human passions; and as they clothed them
with attributes of extraordinary strength, beauty, wisdom, &c., not
having the true principles of morality, they represented them as
slaves to the most disorderly and disgraceful passions; excelling in
irregularities the most profligate of men, as possessing unlimited
powers of sensual gratification.
Verse 26. For this cause God gave them up. Their system
of idolatry necessarily produced all kinds of impurity.
How could it be otherwise, when the highest objects of
their worship were adulterers, fornicators, and prostitutes
of the most infamous kind, such as Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, Venus.
Verse 27. Receiving in themselves that recompense, &c.] Both
the women and men, by their unnatural prostitutions, enervated
their bodies, so that barrenness prevailed, and those disorders
which are necessarily attendant on prostitution and sodomitical
practices.
So much for your homosexual thingy.
Barnabas,
M. Clark wrote:
> grantco <gra...@greenbaynet.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
> > specific laws and how to follow them.
> >
> > 1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
> > pleasing odour for the Lord-Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They
> > claim the odour is not pleasing to them.
> >
> > Should I smite them?
>
> Thank you for replying.
>
> Yes, the rituals of the Law concerning animal sacrifices, slavery, and
> other things are a typical smokescreen rebutal for those who are
> themselves slaves to homosexuality.
And the lying blasphemer speaks again, there is no sin of homosexuality
in the bible only of idolatry, using your body which is the temple of
God against God to worship other fertility gods as Baal-Molech and
Venus.
> > Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do
> > with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
>
> Why not follow the example of Paul who upheld the real intent of the Law
> by simply having a sexual offender kicked out of the church as 1
> Corinthians 5 shows.
1 Cor 5 shows nothing, but in your child's bible.
> Otherwise, Leviticus 20:11 shows that this sexual
> offender should have been put to death. Messy.
No, in context, something you know nothing about, it shows having
sexual rituals to Molech (Baal) is a idolatrous sin, it is treason.
The way you pray to fertility gods is to have sex to them, to give
your seed to them, that is why the verse about Molech is right before
Lev 1:22 and the context, something a lying blasphemer like you knows
nothing about, is Lev 18:21-24, Lev 20:2-5, 13, 15-16. But then
you would actually have to read the bible wouldn't you. God forbid.
M. Clark
Thank you for replying.
I agree with what this author is saying. Indeed, he and I are saying
the same thing but in different ways, this author providing some more
specific examples pertaining to idolatry practices of ancient times for
the most part. But we are tempted by different idols now. Can't you
see this?
Return to God, believing in his son Jesus in faith, and have eternal
life.
M. Clark
M. Clark
>
>
> M. Clark wrote:
>
> > grantco <gra...@greenbaynet.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
> > > specific laws and how to follow them.
> > >
> > > 1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
> > > pleasing odour for the Lord-Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They
> > > claim the odour is not pleasing to them.
> > >
> > > Should I smite them?
> >
> > Thank you for replying.
> >
> > Yes, the rituals of the Law concerning animal sacrifices, slavery, and
> > other things are a typical smokescreen rebutal for those who are
> > themselves slaves to homosexuality.
>
> And the lying blasphemer speaks again, there is no sin of homosexuality
> in the bible only of idolatry, using your body which is the temple of
> God against God to worship other fertility gods as Baal-Molech and
> Venus.
Thank you for replying.
But consider that God put the ball into our court by commanding us to
_obey_ the Laws as Leviticus 18:4 shows. Indeed, we have the choice to
either obey laws like Leviticus 18:22 or to disobey it, sinning against
God and our own bodies if we choose to disobey it.
>
> > > Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do
> > > with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
> >
> > Why not follow the example of Paul who upheld the real intent of the Law
> > by simply having a sexual offender kicked out of the church as 1
> > Corinthians 5 shows.
>
> 1 Cor 5 shows nothing, but in your child's bible.
Thank you for your opinion.
>
> > Otherwise, Leviticus 20:11 shows that this sexual
> > offender should have been put to death. Messy.
>
> No, in context, something you know nothing about, it shows having
> sexual rituals to Molech (Baal) is a idolatrous sin, it is treason.
> The way you pray to fertility gods is to have sex to them, to give
> your seed to them, that is why the verse about Molech is right before
> Lev 1:22 and the context, something a lying blasphemer like you knows
> nothing about, is Lev 18:21-24, Lev 20:2-5, 13, 15-16. But then
> you would actually have to read the bible wouldn't you. God forbid.
I stand by my assertions.
Return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and have eternal
life.
M. Clark
Barnabas,
M. Clark wrote:
> Barnabas, <"barnabas,"@iname.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > M. Clark wrote:
> >
> > > grantco <gra...@greenbaynet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
> > > > specific laws and how to follow them.
> > > >
> > > > 1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
> > > > pleasing odour for the Lord-Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They
> > > > claim the odour is not pleasing to them.
> > > >
> > > > Should I smite them?
> > >
> > > Thank you for replying.
> > >
> > > Yes, the rituals of the Law concerning animal sacrifices, slavery, and
> > > other things are a typical smokescreen rebutal for those who are
> > > themselves slaves to homosexuality.
> >
> > And the lying blasphemer speaks again, there is no sin of homosexuality
> > in the bible only of idolatry, using your body which is the temple of
> > God against God to worship other fertility gods as Baal-Molech and
> > Venus.
>
> Thank you for replying.
>
> But consider that God put the ball into our court by commanding us to
> _obey_ the Laws as Leviticus 18:4 shows. Indeed, we have the choice to
> either obey laws like Leviticus 18:22 or to disobey it, sinning against
> God and our own bodies if we choose to disobey it.
Since the context is Lev 18:21-24 and Baal-Molech has not been
worshiped for around 1600 years the verse no longer has any meaning.
Only to those with a perverted agenda of using the bible as a shield
and a weapon of mass destruction against intersexual children and
homosexuals. Why do you insist in harming children? Hermaphrodites
cannot help being born with both sexes and that anyone they have as a
mate will be a same sex relationship.
>
>
> >
> > > > Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do
> > > > with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
> > >
> > > Why not follow the example of Paul who upheld the real intent of the Law
> > > by simply having a sexual offender kicked out of the church as 1
> > > Corinthians 5 shows.
> >
> > 1 Cor 5 shows nothing, but in your child's bible.
>
> Thank you for your opinion.
It you little bible thingy that child's bible has the word homosexual in
it, it is a child's bible made for public consumption, the word
homosexual was not coined until 1892 so why is it in your little
bible thingy? They had no need to coin the word homosexual until
now, because no one saw same sex relationships any different than
opposite sex. There was same sex marriages in the church until
the 19th century, there is same sex love and same sex marriage in
the bible. Your little theory of a sin of homosexuality in the bible
is modern urban myth.
>
>
> >
> > > Otherwise, Leviticus 20:11 shows that this sexual
> > > offender should have been put to death. Messy.
> >
> > No, in context, something you know nothing about, it shows having
> > sexual rituals to Molech (Baal) is a idolatrous sin, it is treason.
> > The way you pray to fertility gods is to have sex to them, to give
> > your seed to them, that is why the verse about Molech is right before
> > Lev 1:22 and the context, something a lying blasphemer like you knows
> > nothing about, is Lev 18:21-24, Lev 20:2-5, 13, 15-16. But then
> > you would actually have to read the bible wouldn't you. God forbid.
>
> I stand by my assertions.
Reason, you have a perverted agenda, and it does not include truth.
Barnabas,
M. Clark wrote:
The difference is you assign these acts to homosexuals not to those
that worship the fertility gods as Baal-Molech and Venus, they were
no more homosexuals for doing their religious duty to a fertility god,
than are today's christians cannibals for drinking the blood and eating
the body of Christ. Both are doing a religious duty not an act
of cannibalism or homosexuality.
M. Clark
Thank you for replying.
You're not being honest with yourself with respect to these Leviticus
verses. Baal was a supreme male divinity in some ancient cultures so do
you see why homosexuality becomes an issue here? And Romans 1:25-27
doesn't single out Ball-Molech but refers to idols in general.
> worshiped for around 1600 years the verse no longer has any meaning.
> Only to those with a perverted agenda of using the bible as a shield
> and a weapon of mass destruction against intersexual children and
> homosexuals. Why do you insist in harming children? Hermaphrodites
> cannot help being born with both sexes and that anyone they have as a
> mate will be a same sex relationship.
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > > Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair
> > > > > like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
> > > >
> > > > Why not follow the example of Paul who upheld the real intent of the
> > > > Law by simply having a sexual offender kicked out of the church as 1
> > > > Corinthians 5 shows.
> > >
> > > 1 Cor 5 shows nothing, but in your child's bible.
> >
> > Thank you for your opinion.
>
> It you little bible thingy that child's bible has the word homosexual in
> it, it is a child's bible made for public consumption, the word
> homosexual was not coined until 1892 so why is it in your little
> bible thingy? They had no need to coin the word homosexual until
> now, because no one saw same sex relationships any different than
> opposite sex. There was same sex marriages in the church until
> the 19th century, there is same sex love and same sex marriage in
> the bible. Your little theory of a sin of homosexuality in the bible
> is modern urban myth.
You're risking your salvation on a word that doesn't even belong to the
language that the original text was written in. And this is perhaps why
the original texts give a simple, working definition of homosexuality in
the first place.
Return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and have eternal
life.
M. Clark
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > >
Barnabas,
M. Clark wrote:
No, because it has nothing what so ever to do with homosexuality,
no more than Christians are cannibals. It was a religious duty.
> And Romans 1:25-27
> doesn't single out Ball-Molech but refers to idols in general.
And what is the difference? There were lots of fertility gods, it singles
out many in Rom 1:23 you just refuse to accept it.
>
>
> > worshiped for around 1600 years the verse no longer has any meaning.
> > Only to those with a perverted agenda of using the bible as a shield
> > and a weapon of mass destruction against intersexual children and
> > homosexuals. Why do you insist in harming children? Hermaphrodites
> > cannot help being born with both sexes and that anyone they have as a
> > mate will be a same sex relationship.
>
> > It you little bible thingy that child's bible has the word homosexual in
> > it, it is a child's bible made for public consumption, the word
> > homosexual was not coined until 1892 so why is it in your little
> > bible thingy? They had no need to coin the word homosexual until
> > now, because no one saw same sex relationships any different than
> > opposite sex. There was same sex marriages in the church until
> > the 19th century, there is same sex love and same sex marriage in
> > the bible. Your little theory of a sin of homosexuality in the bible
> > is modern urban myth.
>
> You're risking your salvation on a word that doesn't even belong to the
> language that the original text was written in. And this is perhaps why
> the original texts give a simple, working definition of homosexuality in
> the first place.
You are delusional, it is you who is risking your salvation on that word
by assuming that in the last 300 years where homosexuality became a
sin to them in the bible, that they are right, and the 3100 years prior to
that, that they were wrong. There was same sex marriage in the church
until the 19th century.
Return to reality
Bernard Hubbard
news:3D9EA61F.6C47D2AE@.li0bcpl.net:
> You did say our court, not your court?
> If as you say, god has given these things to us, to do with
> as we will, then what we do is none of your business. I
> didn't see anything about god giving you the right to sit
> in judgment.
>
> So blow off.
>
> --
> Fritz
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Taking back my freedom of conscience.
>
>
>
Hey Fritz, he hasn't the balls to blow off with nor a suitable
mouth.
Bernard Hubbard
Australian, liberal, Gay and Proud