homosexuality

"Because to a theist sex for pleasure is evil and dirty and a sin and thus must be denied to one's self. You know the so-called Original Sin nonsense."
--False------------------

KJV - Proverbs 5
18 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.
19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.
20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?--Erotic enough for you? Sexual pleasures are most welcome while in the confines of marriage. Your usage of 'theist' as others pointed out to you, was also a problem.------------------[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-30-2002]

Is there a book-chapt-verse you'd like to attribute to your quote?--N/M - didn't take enough time to read the quote, I would put emphasis on the segment I cited in my last post.------------------[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-30-2002][This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-30-2002]

And? The guy was an Italian missionary in the 500's, & thusly does not exactly have the final word as to whether his biblical interpretation is correct or not.------------------

"That would be Saint Augustine, so his opinion does carries some weight. And Christianity does frown on sex for pleasure for the most part now."
--The only way your argument would carry sufficient merit, would be to include Augustine's interpretive bible cementations within a specific Christian denomination. By living in the 500's, he played no part in forming initial scriptural documents. Keep in mind my scriptural quote (it is rare you get quotes of scripture from me, you don't find me in the bible forums), was that not erotic enough as to imply pleasure from satisfaction? Your argument requires that this not be present, also, feel free to read Song of Solomon unless its too 'juicy' for you.------------------

"It does not do you well to downplay the influence tha Augustine has had on Christianity. That influence is second only to Paul's influence, IMHO.You are correct that his is not the final word, but calling him 'some missionary' is like calling Ghengis Khan some guy who led an army."
--I can agree to the most part with you on this, John, excuse the format by which I represented Augustine regarding his credibility.------------------[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-31-2002]