Does the bible condemn homosexuality?

holmes responds to me:

quote:

---

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BESIDES COSMETICS!!!!!!!

---

Then why do you keep saying there is? For example, in Marriage Amendment, Message 32 you say: How? How would the course of same-sex marriage involve more issues when children enter the picture than any other couple who adopts a child?You keep comparing same-sex marriage to polygamous marriage and since I have given multiple examples of how the executions of the legal contract of marriage will have to change with regard to polygamous marriage, I am baffled as to why you say that same-sex marriage will change marriage when now you're saying it won't.

quote:

---

Please Rrhain, do me the courtesy of never mentioning my name in posts again.

---

Then why did you respond to me? You already said you were going to ignore me, so why did you break from your vow?Get over yourself, holmes. If you say something I feel like responding to, I will respond.Nobody is forcing you to read my posts. Nobody is forcing you to respond to them. If you don't want to talk to me, then don't.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Hello Rrhain.I remembered I had an involvement in this thread back in the mists of the vapours. Do you have a response to Message 159 yet - the one about aschemosune?

defenderofthefaith responds to me:

quote:

---

Do you have a response to Message 159 yet - the one about aschemosune?

---

I already answered that a long time ago. The word makes no sense when made to mean something relating to homosexuality as we understand it.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

In another post from long ago, Truthlover stated the following: I will say that even as a Christian, I am not inclined to see homosexual passion as a sin. Homosexual actions, however, are un necessary. I am not your judge, nor are you my judge, but it is my belief that God wants us to focus on loving Him instead of defending our right to lust after each other. Why can't the Creator of the Universe be our primary love? [This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-22-2004]

Because He can't bring you to orgasm?Seriously, humans have a physiology designed to experience orgasm. The fact that a vagina gets you there doesn't mean that it's morally wrong for somebody else to get there with a hand or anus. As Rrhain likes to say, you don't hate circles, just the fact that they're round.Homosexual acceptance doesn't have to mean that you personally have to touch another man's penis. But it does mean that you have to let other men touch each other's penises. Otherwise your "acceptance" is a fraud. To homosexuals, homosexual acts are necessary, just as heterosexual acts are necessary for your orgasm.

And if homosexuality is something built into you rather than learned or chosen then I presume that God is responsible for one's homosexuality. If so it must be ok with God. What is wrong with this simple logic?Note I said "if". I am not arguing that point yet just "if" God did it then it must be ok, am I clear?

---

Common sense isn't

OK...good logic, guys. I can't disagree with you. As Gods official spokesman,(yeah...me!) I guess that I would say that if He did not approve of illicit trysts by either gender, the reason would be because we would have become a culture of orgasmically wild, screaming slithering creatures who were immersed in idolatry for each other and either ignorant or disdainful of our chosen relationship with Him. True that God cannot give you an orgasm, but perhaps He can instill a deeper love and sense of purpose into a species than mere propagation of a species for survival, and mutual gratification after a hard day at work earning money to gratify our own defined purpose. God is not merely the egotistical smiter of the Old Testament. He has big plans for this species...and it is not by trying to be goodie goodies that He desires. It is placing Him as our number One love interest and asking Him to show us what He wants to do with us. Trust and desire Him first, then watch your passions mature beyond mere candles and scented oil with your lover.

I don't think there's any rule that says you can't have both a fulfilling sex life and a fulfilling spiritual life. My guess is, based on the message of Jesus, if God exists and cares about us, who we're having sex with is the least of his worries. Apparently he's much more concerned about what we're doing with our money, not our genitals.

True. The Bible is outdated and irrelevant in many respects. So, this is why the Lord Himself has revealed the full truth and has given us more scripture to clarify and compliment the Bible. He has given us the Book of Mormon, ancient scripture written by prophets FOR OUR DAY, specifically written to US. These ancient prophets lived in the America's (BC and AD), one of the prophets name was Mormon. We are given this knowledge by the Prophet Joseph Smith called of God to restore truth in these latter-days.The Church of Jesus Christ has been restored on the earth and we have living prophets called of God who have the authority to teach and clarify things like homosexuality and what God's law is in regard. Prophets teaching truths to us today, as in day's of old. It's a wonderful thing and it is true. The restored Church of Jesus Christ clarifies all things with modern-day prophets and additional scripture to help us in the last days. Find out for yourself if the Book of Mormon is a true book from God. Invite the LDS (Mormon) Missionaries over from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (or go to Home | ComeUntoChrist to learn more, or just visit one of the churches). Learn about it, pray about it and you will know what I am telling you is true by the power of the Holy Ghost who teaches us the truth of all things.There is so much confusion today about theology, as is evident by this forum, yet, so very much has been clairified through the restored Church of Jesus Christ - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, through the prophet Joseph Smith and succeeding prophets. If you are offended by what I am saying here, you shouldn't be. Just find out for yourself from an actual source of The Church (not some guy who thinks he knows a lot about 'Mormons'). Just read the Book of Mormon prayerfully, several chapters at least, and you will know too. It's an amazing thing. Revealed truth is sitting right there before our eyes. Do be blind to it.I hope this can help you obtain divine clarification as it has me.[This message has been edited by latter-day, 03-21-2004]

Did you know that Joseph Smith's ability to translate the supposed ancient holy "Kinderhook Plates" texts was tested?As it turned out, he was somehow able to "translate" them, but it turned out that those plates were fabricated specifically to test Smith's claims of being able to use his magic rocks.What do you make of that?http://www.utlm.org/...urces/josephsmithkinderhookplates.htm

hi schrafinator, I also read that the book of mormon contains some of the same grammatical errors as the King James Verson which would indicate that someone copied the text verbatum. Although I do not remember what site I read this at.

I see you have obtained your information from the Tanners. I hope you understand that the Tanners are the most non-credible source you could possibly use in citing any kind of research done on the matter. They are bitter once-mormons who distort LDS history and severely take it out of context because they immensely despise the LDS Church. Their research is severely biased, selective and false, rendering to all kinds of ridiculous assumptions posed as facts. I won't even go into how inaccurate their material is.
If interested you can read more on this website for information as to why the Tanner's anti-mormon doctrine is so erroneous. XMission 404 - Not foundTruthfully, this is a waste of my time and yours. Everything done by the Tanners is a waste of time to read - they just are not credible.If you want to know more of the actual history of the Kinderhook plates you can read about it here. http://www.lightplanet.com/...onse/kinderhook/kinderhook.htmThe facts are obvious that Joseph Smith never translated the Kinderhook plates. And besides, the story is so irrelevant to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon that it is a total waste to even discuss the matter.If you really want to know about the authenticity of the Book of Mormon then simply READ IT. That book will tell you more about it's authenticity than anything or anyone. Some people are afraid to just pick it up and start reading. This I truly do not understand. I don't see any harm in reading a proposed "sacred book" with an open mind and with prayer to find for oneself the authenticity.I will not entertain any replies that are based on the research of bitter once-mormons. Their research is just too biased. Just use the facts from authentic Church history please.And, I will not entertain replies from anyone purporting that the Book of Mormon is a fluke unless they have SINCERELY READ a substantial amount of the book THEMSELVES, with an open heart and with prayer to God asking in sincerity to know of it's truthfulness. God does answer prayers and is the ultimate source of truth, (as opposed to the Tanners or other bitter anti-mormons.) In fact, you can have your own free copy of the Book. Home | ComeUntoChristThe Book of Mormon speaks for itself on its own, like the Bible. Who would attempt to disprove the Bible without first reading it anyway?? Sounds ridiculous, I know.There is more truth and clairification for us in these Last Days. It is sitting before our eyes. Yet, many chose to be blind to the Truth as the Jews were blind to their very own Messiah they were waiting for.God's ways of doing things are not always our own so don't be suprised if it seems somewhat different to have additional scripture reveled in our day.God still works the same as he always has in the past to teach His childeren: God calls prophets and apostles who have the priesthood authority to teach in His name, those teachings are written down as scripture for our learning and growth (like the scripture complied in the Bible). The Book of Mormon was written by ancient propehts living in the America's who had the priesthood authority to teach the gospel of Jesus Christ, those teachings were written down as scripture for us in this day - called the Book of Mormon.It's true. You'll love the light and knowledge it will give you - it will answer many questions, clarify what you are unsure of, and reinforce your own beliefs in Jesus Christ the Savior of the world and Son of God. It's beautiful and precious scripture given to all of us if we will just read it and find out for ourselves!The Book of Mormon is Holy Scripture - the Word of God.
Another Testament of Jesus Christ and compliment to the Holy Bible.
[This message has been edited by latter-day, 03-21-2004]

HI,Thank you for your reply.I have read a fair bit of the Book of Mormon, and I am afraid it just isn't for me, but thanks for taking the time to reply.Brian.

Hi Brian-My response was a more general response to those who make alligations about the Book of Mormon when they haven't even read it. Sorry my response wasn't more specific to you. It gets really old when people attack the Book of Mormon but haven't, and for some reason will not, take the time to sincerely read the Book of Mormon for themselves.I got kind of long winded there because I do love the Book of Mormon for the way it has given me amazing clarity in regards to understanding more fully the Gospel of Jesus Christ and helped me understand better the often unclear teachings of the Bible. I have received such a strong witness of the Book or Mormon's divinity for myself and I wish everyone would take the time to know for themselves as well.I am very happy to hear you have read the Book of Mormon and I respect your position that it is "not for you". Thank you for your honesty and for not attacking my personal belief in the Book.My wish is that everyone would form their own belief of the Book of Mormon, through their own efforts of reading and sincere prayer, instead of succuming to hearsay and piggybacking on what others think because it "sounds good" and doesn't disrupt their current belief.After reading the Book they may feel as you do, that it just isn't for them. Or, they may feel as I feel, that by reading the Book of Mormon they have received an undeniable divine witness that the Book of Mormon is authentic scripture given to us in these last days by the hand of the Lord through the Prophet Joseph Smith. ...It is certainly an individual pursuit.Again, thank you for your respectful reply Brian."If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.
And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Your first link attacks the source, but not the information...classic move. Since it does not address the evidence I presented at all, it's irrelevant.Then you go on to quote an official LDS publication as, apparently, an "unbiased" source. That's a funny one!That link says, yes, the plates are fakes, but no Smith didn't translate them, despite all the official church testimonials that Smith WAS in the process of translating them. The explanation is long, and maze-like, and many key assertions are unreferenced. Much of the evidence that Smith translated a portion of the plates is simply waved away as misinformation, without justification. If that article was submitted to a peer-reviewed history journal, it would be sent back.For example, how is this specific information from the Tanners refuted?**********************
"The evidence comes from the diary of William Clayton, Joseph Smith's private secretary. Clayton wrote the following:'I have seen 6 brass plates... covered with ancient characters of language containing from 30 to 40 on each side of the plates. Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.' (William Clayton's Journal, May 1, 1843, as cited in Trials of Discipleship - The Story of William Clayton, a Mormon, page 117)The information in Clayton's journal was deemed so important that it was used as a basis for the story of the Kinderhook plates which is printed in the History of the Church. The following is attributed to Joseph Smith:'I insert facsimiles of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook...'I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.' (History of the Church, Vol. 5 page 372)Since Clayton's journal was apparently used as the major source for the statement attributed to Joseph Smith in the History of the Church, it shows that the highest leaders of the church at the time the History was compiled believed that Joseph Smith did, in fact, 'translate a portion' of the plates. It is evident that President Brigham Young and other church leaders seriously believed in Joseph Smith's work on the Kinderhook plates for at least eleven years after the plates were discovered."
************************and this...************************
"The fact that Joseph Smith was actually preparing a translation of the plates is verified by a broadside published by the Mormon newspaper, The Nauvoo Neighbor, in June, 1843. On this broadside, containing facsimiles of the plates, we find the following: "The contents of the plates, together with a Fac-simile of the same, will be published in the 'Times and Seasons,' as soon as the translation is completed."
**********************These are just a couple of items; there are many. Maybe I'm missing something, but as far as I can tell Kimball's article in the Ensign doesn't refute any of this.For instance, this is the only "refutation" of the first item I can find: "Where the ideas written by William Clayton originated is unknown".Not very persuasive.[edit to clean up quotes][This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-21-2004]