THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE LI'BLE TO READ IN THE BIBLE

[KCKID]

Why are SO many Christians hung up on homosexuality? While the average Christian would be hard pressed to locate such a text in their Bibles if asked, they would undoubtedly say “Because it’s a sin according to the Bible.� I personally find such a response difficult to accept and rather strongly suspect that one’s ‘religious belief’ on this issue is NOT the driving force behind their aversion/condemnation of homosexuality. I mean, if Christians REALLY desire to condemn ‘sin’ as they perceive it they could give homosexuals a break and instead have a field day targeting the many other human behaviors going on within society that God appears to hate. But …they don’t . . .well certainly not with the same zeal they do toward homosexuality.

So, what is going on here? Does the Bible really condemn sexual relations between consenting adults of the same gender? Or, does the Bible not address the matter of homosexuality at all …or, at least, not as we today recognize homosexuality? Would the Bible authors have even been aware of one’s innate sexuality as well as the complexities surrounding sexuality in general? Or, in simple terms, would they, as with many males of today, have regarded some males as 'effeminate' (or ‘sissies’) based on both ignorance and their own perceived cultural image of the ‘alpha male’? Or, if these authors were considered to be writing by divine authority, might we then say that God is the instigator of such ignorance and has allowed this ignorance to persist from generation to generation?

My main question in this thread is: of the ‘thimble-full’ of scriptures that are commonly used by Christians to condemn homosexuality (sexual attraction/desire directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex), how many of these texts might be considered to be far too ambiguous (open to several possible meanings or interpretations) to have caused such a furor within Christendom in general and specifically resulted in the division of a number of present-day Christian denominations? Can these few scriptures be analyzed so accurately that they can be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt to condemn homosexuality as we refer to the term today? I say no …they cannot. I’ve given my reasons in the past and will do so again if challenged.

Please discuss the below scriptures, as best you can, exegetically, i.e.
observation: what do the passages say?
interpretation: what do the passages mean?
correlation: how do the passages relate to the topic of homosexuality as we define it today?
application: how should these passages affect your/my life?

Note: I've purposely used the NIV for the following texts.

Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (NIV)

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." (NIV).

Romans 1:26-27 - "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (NIV)

1 Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James, To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for[a] Jesus Christ:
2 Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance.
3 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.
4 For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.
5 Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord[c] at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe.
6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.
7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire . . .etc. (NIV)

Should there be other related Bible texts to the topic feel free to present them based on the above criteria for analysis. I purposely omitted the Sodom and Gomorrah saga since it's been done to death and quite clearly has nothing to do with homosexuality per se. However, likewise feel free to present that strange tale for discussion should you find it to be relevant.

[Joab]

to activists now that want to force pride of same gender sex acts into and onto Christianity,

I'm sick of seeing this claim continually and never seeing any evidence whatsoever.
Can you supply any evidence at all that this fantasy has any basis in reality?

[Wootah]

That sounds strikingly anti-semitic.

Moderator Comment
Hi 99%,

Please cut out all uncivil remarks. The sensitive nature of these topics warrants it. Naturally you can argue that something is anti-semitic but the accusation without an attempt at offering evidence strikes me as just putting mud on the other debater.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[99percentatheism]

to activists now that want to force pride of same gender sex acts into and onto Christianity,

I'm sick of seeing this claim continually and never seeing any evidence whatsoever.
Can you supply any evidence at all that this fantasy has any basis in reality?

What does the rainbow flag represent again? Wellllll gay pride. What does the "Gay Pride Movement" represent again? Pride of sexual behavior. THAT is what the bottom-line IS about. Marriage, cannot be defined as just a business partnership concerned with financial and property rights of those garnering a settlement after the death of a spouse.

What does all of the gay theology represent? Forced acceptance of gay pride and homosexual behavior OTHERWISE, it would be just like Mormonism or Watch Tower theology. But it is not only forced, but attached to SECULAR criminal charges and SECULAR charges of bigotry, hate and whatever else can be hung on those that choose to define marriage as the New Testament immutably does.

There is no such thing as same gender marriage OR the celebration OR the affirming of same gender sex acts ANYWHERE, ANYPLACE in any section, sentence or word in the entire Bible.

Or very simply, please answer this:

The "clobber passages" in the Bible stretch from Genesis to Jude. There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced!!!!!

"LGBT" and "Q" activists are free to invent their own religion OR patronize any religious organization that they find willing to celebrate homosexuality. Like I have written, the overwhelming history of gay pride has come to the forefront through completely secular political power. And any Christian Church that wants to have the rainbow flag planted as far away from their Church property as that can possibly happen is not doing anything wrong.

Not one gay pride activist, liberal theologian or "affirming religious body" has yet to produce any supportive scriptures to base the homosexualization of Christianity as just the next step in the gay agenda. The only justification that has been offered is the two wrongs ploy. That The Church has accepted adulterers, the divorced and the remarried into congregations. Yet, not one adulterer, divorcee or remarried person in any Church anywhere has a movement and well funded organizations that demand to have their sins affirmed and ignored.

The response we hear is reminiscent of the threats from the men of Sodom towards Lot: You want to play the judge over us? We will treat you worse then them.

How incredibly ironic and a bit hypocritical that it was "minority rights" that were all important and all encompassing to validate the concerns of gay pride adherents and proponents, and yet now is the pronouncement from the very same gay pride proponents that there is a minority percentage of Christians that will not submit to gay authority over them and that this ends the debate for good.

My how the shoe is on the other foot.

When ANY scripture can be produced that clearly, unambiguously and directly affirms, celebrates and encourages same gender sexuality, within or without a "marriage" then the issue will be settled for The Church universal. The consistency of scripture supports the Christians that are not in concert with the "LGBT Community." No matter how small that number is or becomes.

With a turning away of the ad hominem attack:

If anyone that calls themselves a Christian, has scriptures that support a doing away with the preaching to repent of sins, or that thoughts in ones own mind can redefine sin and sinning in and for the sinner. . . produce them.

[Princess Luna On The Moon]

[Replying to post 1 by 99percentatheism]

What does the rainbow flag represent again? Wellllll gay pride. What does the "Gay Pride Movement" represent again? Pride of sexual behavior. THAT is what the bottom-line IS about. Marriage, cannot be defined as just a business partnership concerned with financial and property rights of those garnering a settlement after the death of a spouse.

Have you ever really stopped to think about why we gays have such pride movements? I don't really care for the flashiness of the parades, but we don't just do it to irritate Christians. Kinda. We do it to show that we're proud to be gay, acknowledging that it's not evil nor a sin. Homosexuality is condemned by many cultures. In the Middle East, we can still be put to death. So, maybe instead of going back to that, we can actually get a little progressive and civilized.

Besides, marriage is really just an agreement between two (or more) adults to live together, share finances, occasionally have sex, and wear shiny rings. It's not a religious custom ordained by god. Marriage (or something like it) was probably around way before religions were invented.

What does all of the gay theology represent? Forced acceptance of gay pride and homosexual behavior OTHERWISE, it would be just like Mormonism or Watch Tower theology. But it is not only forced, but attached to SECULAR criminal charges and SECULAR charges of bigotry, hate and whatever else can be hung on those that choose to define marriage as the New Testament immutably does.

"Gay theology." Yeah, being gay is not a theology. Some gays are Christian, some are Muslim, and some, like me, avoid that nonsense altogether. And why are anti-discrimination laws bad, as long as they're reasonable? How would you like it if you were kicked out of a store simply for being Christian, or white, or whatever? It is hatred and it's cruel. Hatred, cruelty, and bigotry should never be tolerated simply because the offender is a Christian. It shouldn't be tolerated anywhere. Christianity does not own marriage. I'll say that again. Christianity does NOT own marriage. In no way is marriage strictly ordained by god. One can have their marriage religion-based, but that should never be the default on which to base laws and restrictions.

There is no such thing as same gender marriage OR the celebration OR the affirming of same gender sex acts ANYWHERE, ANYPLACE in any section, sentence or word in the entire Bible.

So?

[99percentatheism]

Princess Luna On The Moon
[Replying to post 1 by 99percentatheism]

What does the rainbow flag represent again? Wellllll gay pride. What does the "Gay Pride Movement" represent again? Pride of sexual behavior. THAT is what the bottom-line IS about. Marriage, cannot be defined as just a business partnership concerned with financial and property rights of those garnering a settlement after the death of a spouse.

Have you ever really stopped to think about why we gays have such pride movements?

Obviously yes.

I don't really care for the flashiness of the parades, but we don't just do it to irritate Christians. Kinda. We do it to show that we're proud to be gay, acknowledging that it's not evil nor a sin. Homosexuality is condemned by many cultures. In the Middle East, we can still be put to death. So, maybe instead of going back to that, we can actually get a little progressive and civilized.

So you validate the position that it is about behavior. Thanks.

Besides, marriage is really just an agreement between two (or more) adults to live together, share finances, occasionally have sex, and wear shiny rings.

"Two adults?" Marriage is two adults that are man and woman/husband and wife. I don't have to ever accept the propaganda of neologism to redefine marriage. Not even in secular life. All that is needed is tolerating it.

It's not a religious custom ordained by god. Marriage (or something like it) was probably around way before religions were invented.

Um, yeah. Marriage (or something like it) which was a man and woman/husband and wife, was around a lot longer than religion. In hope the gay theologians are taking notes.

What does all of the gay theology represent? Forced acceptance of gay pride and homosexual behavior OTHERWISE, it would be just like Mormonism or Watch Tower theology. But it is not only forced, but attached to SECULAR criminal charges and SECULAR charges of bigotry, hate and whatever else can be hung on those that choose to define marriage as the New Testament immutably does.

"Gay theology." Yeah, being gay is not a theology.

Agreed. Thank you for that realization. I can now rest in that I am not a homophobe or bigot. Just an honest Christian. Nor is any other Christian or Church or denomination that will not bow to secular demands to redefine marriage. It IS an other-worldly position.

Some gays are Christian, some are Muslim, and some, like me, avoid that nonsense altogether.

Ever notice that Christians refuse to redefine Jesus like the Muslims demand? It costs some of us our lives and jobs, but truth is important.

And why are anti-discrimination laws bad, as long as they're reasonable?

The laws being implemented to harm Christians and to force the celebration of gay behavior are unreasonable.

How would you like it if you were kicked out of a store simply for being Christian, or white, or whatever?

If it were because I am a Christian, that would be persecution.

It is hatred and it's cruel. Hatred, cruelty, and bigotry should never be tolerated simply because the offender is a Christian.

You can't redefine sin and sinning by secular laws. That is oppression and persecution.

It shouldn't be tolerated anywhere.

Are you saying that if someone comes into a place of business and offends everyone in the place that that should be celebrated?

Christianity does not own marriage.

Jesus reasserted that marriage is man and woman/husband and wife. That is certainly how Christianity owns marriage. Immutably so in fact. What homosexuals want to about marriage is outside of Christian life.

I'll say that again. Christianity does NOT own marriage.

Are you saying that Christians do not have a voice or vote in a democracy because of their religion?

In no way is marriage strictly ordained by god.

The God of the Christians sure does. Christian marriage is immutably man and woman/husband and wife. And even homosexuals are looking at the Church for ultimate validation of their "life partnerships."

One can have their marriage religion-based, but that should never be the default on which to base laws and restrictions.

You want laws based on people's libido?

Just looking around in reality, that is not going so well for society at the moment.

There is no such thing as same gender marriage OR the celebration OR the affirming of same gender sex acts ANYWHERE, ANYPLACE in any section, sentence or word in the entire Bible.

So?

So affirms the correctness of the position. And, it establishes that the Christian that stands on marriage as man and woman/husband and wife is the honest and correct (Christian) person. As does the following:

The "clobber passages" in the Bible stretch from Genesis to Jude. There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced!!!!!

"LGBT" and "Q" activists are free to invent their own religion OR patronize any religious organization that they find willing to celebrate homosexuality. Like I have written, the overwhelming history of gay pride has come to the forefront through completely secular political power. And any Christian Church that wants to have the rainbow flag planted as far away from their Church property as that can possibly happen is not doing anything wrong.

Not one gay pride activist, liberal theologian or "affirming religious body" has yet to produce any supportive scriptures to base the homosexualization of Christianity as just the next step in the gay agenda. The only justification that has been offered is the two wrongs ploy. That The Church has accepted adulterers, the divorced and the remarried into congregations. Yet, not one adulterer, divorcee or remarried person in any Church anywhere has a movement and well funded organizations that demand to have their sins affirmed and ignored.

The response we hear is reminiscent of the threats from the men of Sodom towards Lot: You want to play the judge over us? We will treat you worse then them.

How incredibly ironic and a bit hypocritical that it was "minority rights" that were all important and all encompassing to validate the concerns of gay pride adherents and proponents, and yet now is the pronouncement from the very same gay pride proponents that there is a minority percentage of Christians that will not submit to gay authority over them and that this ends the debate for good.

My how the shoe is on the other foot.

When ANY scripture can be produced that clearly, unambiguously and directly affirms, celebrates and encourages same gender sexuality, within or without a "marriage" then the issue will be settled for The Church universal. The consistency of scripture supports the Christians that are not in concert with the "LGBT Community." No matter how small that number is or becomes.

With a turning away of the ad hominem attack:

If anyone that calls themselves a Christian, has scriptures that support a doing away with the preaching to repent of sins, or that thoughts in ones own mind can redefine sin and sinning in and for the sinner. . . produce them.

[Joab]

to activists now that want to force pride of same gender sex acts into and onto Christianity,

I'm sick of seeing this claim continually and never seeing any evidence whatsoever.
Can you supply any evidence at all that this fantasy has any basis in reality?

What does the rainbow flag represent again? Wellllll gay pride. What does the "Gay Pride Movement" represent again? Pride of sexual behavior. THAT is what the bottom-line IS about. Marriage, cannot be defined as just a business partnership concerned with financial and property rights of those garnering a settlement after the death of a spouse.

What does all of the gay theology represent? Forced acceptance of gay pride and homosexual behavior OTHERWISE, it would be just like Mormonism or Watch Tower theology. But it is not only forced, but attached to SECULAR criminal charges and SECULAR charges of bigotry, hate and whatever else can be hung on those that choose to define marriage as the New Testament immutably does.

There is no such thing as same gender marriage OR the celebration OR the affirming of same gender sex acts ANYWHERE, ANYPLACE in any section, sentence or word in the entire Bible.

Thank you, you have proven beyond any doubt that you have no evidence for your claim.
You have claims and more claims and more claims and no evidence for any of them.
There is no "gay theology".
There is no "forced" acceptance of gay pride.
There is no "forced" acceptance of homosexual behaviour.
Marriage can be defined as whatever humanity decides it is, after all, we created it.

Would you like to try again to provide evidence for your claims, because you have failed abysmally in this attempt.

[KCKID]

Comparing the Mob in Sodom to the two homosexuals in the Movie deliverance brings to mind the rape scene of the actor Ned Beatty's character "Bobby." I watched this movie once in a class I was in at UCLA many years ago. The "rapist" looked over his intended victim lasciviously for quite an extended period of time before having forced sex with him.

No offense to Ned Beaty but I would hardly think that anyone could look at Ned 'lasciviously' as you say ...particularly after an extended period of time!

No. What I had to say about the rape scene as being an act of humiliation and dominance still stands as this YouTube clip from the stars of Deliverance indicates:

The other man with the rapist was enjoying the sex between the two men and goes on to pointing out the attractive features of his intended victim. Clearly these two "hillbilly" characters in Deliverance were not heterosexuals that happened to want to get rid of people that stumbled on to their Moon Shine operations.

Nonsense! And you know it! I've already stated what the rape scene indicates as well as having provided a YouTube clip backing this up. And, I firmly believe, the intended act of rape by the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah would have been for a similar reason. You KNOW this! If by some chance you don't know and it's SO important for you then do some research as I did. If you're honest you will arrive at the same place. So, leave the gays alone. There's plenty of cleaning up by Christians to be done in the rest of the world ...probably starting in one's own back yard . . .

Looking at the "men of Sodom" ALL of them, and you see that homosexuality does indeed enter the scenario. How does a heterosexual get sexually aroused by the sight of a naked man?

Well, I don't want to get too crass but when a sperm sample was required from astronaut John Glenn he would hum "The Battle Hymn Of The Republic" inreasing in volume the more aroused he became! See that terrfic 1983 movie, The Right Stuff. Your question is silly and I'd prefer not to take it any further.

As for the rest of your post, I'll confess that it's over my head.

[Princess Luna On The Moon]

[Replying to post 2 by 99percentatheism]

Obviously yes.

Right...

So you validate the position that it is about behavior. Thanks.

What, being gay?

"Two adults?" Marriage is two adults that are man and woman/husband and wife. I don't have to ever accept the propaganda of neologism to redefine marriage. Not even in secular life. All that is needed is tolerating it.

All marriage should be is an agreement between two or more people to live together and such. Why restrict it to only the Christian way? What good comes from that? What fabric of society is being torn by allowing gay marriage? Show some proof about how allowing it is detrimental without using the bible or religion.

Um, yeah. Marriage (or something like it) which was a man and woman/husband and wife, was around a lot longer than religion. In hope the gay theologians are taking notes.

How do you know marriage back in those days was only between one man and one woman? Also, in the days of the early bible, polygamy was legal.

Agreed. Thank you for that realization. I can now rest in that I am not a homophobe or bigot. Just an honest Christian. Nor is any other Christian or Church or denomination that will not bow to secular demands to redefine marriage. It IS an other-worldly position.

I guess this Gay Theology will forever remain a bizarre secret.

Ever notice that Christians refuse to redefine Jesus like the Muslims demand? It costs some of us our lives and jobs, but truth is important.

There's a difference between wanting to be treated like people and threatening to behead you if you don't.

The laws being implemented to harm Christians and to force the celebration of gay behavior are unreasonable.

Who said anything about celebrating? I just want to be treated like a person without having the bible thrown at my face when I go in to measure for a prom dress.

If it were because I am a Christian, that would be persecution.

So it's bad for you to be put off because you're a Christian, but it's perfectly fine if I'm discriminated against because I'm just some liberal gay agenda fascist?

You can't redefine sin and sinning by secular laws. That is oppression and persecution.

And openly calling something an abomination and evil is not oppression and persecution?

Are you saying that if someone comes into a place of business and offends everyone in the place that that should be celebrated?

Offends them in what way? Like if two gay men kiss in a store? Or something more colorful like a group of gay pride activists making a filthy mess of a Christian bookstore? If it's the former, no one should care. If it's the latter, no, they're being disruptive and should be removed from the property. Your question is awfully generic and seems to suggest that all gays are offensive. Either that, or it's worded poorly to suggest such a thing.

Jesus reasserted that marriage is man and woman/husband and wife. That is certainly how Christianity owns marriage. Immutably so in fact. What homosexuals want to about marriage is outside of Christian life.

The bible says Jesus said it so that instantly makes marriage the official property of Christianity?

Are you saying that Christians do not have a voice or vote in a democracy because of their religion?

Religion should not belong under any political matter. Instead, it should be replaced with reason.

The God of the Christians sure does. Christian marriage is immutably man and woman/husband and wife. And even homosexuals are looking at the Church for ultimate validation of their "life partnerships."

Lots of gays are Christian and churches make good wedding settings. Some churches even offer gay weddings willingly because they knew we're just people and not gay theologian satanists.

You want laws based on people's libido?

Just looking around in reality, that is not going so well for society at the moment.

How is that in any relevant to wanting religion out of the law-making process?

So affirms the correctness of the position. And, it establishes that the Christian that stands on marriage as man and woman/husband and wife is the honest and correct (Christian) person. As does the following:

Whatever it is you're using as proof provides no basis on which to suggest that the one-man-one-woman marriage rule is the best option for society or anyone else. There's no reason to suggest that it's a sin, morally corrupt, or damaging to youth. Rather, I find that teaching children it's a sin is far more damaging as many will grow up believing we're horrible people who hate god or something. It's an awful feeling to be confronted by a ten-year-old and hear, "Are you gay? Mommy says gays are going to hell."

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 87 by Joab]

It fascinates me that you will not address my posts in depth, but rather just provide drive by responses. But I know why so don't trouble yourself with futility.

Thank you, you have proven beyond any doubt that you have no evidence for your claim.

Just the gay pride movement since Stonewall.

You have claims and more claims and more claims and no evidence for any of them.

You don't seriously mean that do you?

There is no "gay theology".

Start with Mel White and I'll get you others to study.

There is no "forced" acceptance of gay pride.

With absolutely no doubt, there is.

There is no "forced" acceptance of homosexual behaviour.

The school system proves otherwise.

Marriage can be defined as whatever humanity decides it is, after all, we created it.

I am not concerned with non and anti Christians. You are right, anyone can do whatever they wish if they are adults. Adults with adults that is.

Would you like to try again to provide evidence for your claims, because you have failed abysmally in this attempt.

Let's see, you don't actually engage in rebuttal of my posts and just use snippet-responses . . . and "I" am the one that failing abysmally? Hardly.

Here try an answer to this:

The "clobber passages" in the Bible stretch from Genesis to Jude. There simply is no such thing as same gender marriage, or same gender sexuality anywhere supported, condoned, affirmed, approved, celebrated or even mentioned or referenced!!!!!

"LGBT" and "Q" activists are free to invent their own religion OR patronize any religious organization that they find willing to celebrate homosexuality. Like I have written, the overwhelming history of gay pride has come to the forefront through completely secular political power. And any Christian Church that wants to have the rainbow flag planted as far away from their Church property as that can possibly happen is not doing anything wrong.

Not one gay pride activist, liberal theologian or "affirming religious body" has yet to produce any supportive scriptures to base the homosexualization of Christianity as just the next step in the gay agenda. The only justification that has been offered is the two wrongs ploy. That The Church has accepted adulterers, the divorced and the remarried into congregations. Yet, not one adulterer, divorcee or remarried person in any Church anywhere has a movement and well funded organizations that demand to have their sins affirmed and ignored.

The response we hear is reminiscent of the threats from the men of Sodom towards Lot: You want to play the judge over us? We will treat you worse then them.

How incredibly ironic and a bit hypocritical that it was "minority rights" that were all important and all encompassing to validate the concerns of gay pride adherents and proponents, and yet now is the pronouncement from the very same gay pride proponents that there is a minority percentage of Christians that will not submit to gay authority over them and that this ends the debate for good.

My how the shoe is on the other foot.

When ANY scripture can be produced that clearly, unambiguously and directly affirms, celebrates and encourages same gender sexuality, within or without a "marriage" then the issue will be settled for The Church universal. The consistency of scripture supports the Christians that are not in concert with the "LGBT Community." No matter how small that number is or becomes.

With a turning away of the ad hominem attack:

If anyone that calls themselves a Christian, has scriptures that support a doing away with the preaching to repent of sins, or that thoughts in ones own mind can redefine sin and sinning in and for the sinner. . . produce them.

[Haven]

[Replying to post 87 by Joab]

It fascinates me that you will not address my posts in depth, but rather just provide drive by responses.

It fascinates me that you completely ignore any substantive points I make or relevant questions I ask, but cherry-pick one-line statements from my and others' posts that you personally feel are easy to respond to or will make us look bad. You've consistently avoided almost all of my questions and arguments in this thread and others. Please don't criticize other posters for something you do quite routinely yourself.

I'll respond to your "green text" this weekend. It requires a very in-depth and detailed response, and I'm all tied up at the moment by a very intense graduate class (100+ pages of reading every day) and moving into a new house.

Until then, be well, friend.