Jerry Falwell dead.

quote:

---

So you're anti Jehovah god, anti Jesus, anti Paul, apostle of Jesus who were all anti-gay being the ones who denounced homosexuality

---

Where did Jesus denounce homosexuality ? Are you making things up again ?(And if you care so much about God why do you keep mangling His name ?)

quote:

---

1. Jesus is the son of the god who denounced devient lifestyles. He does the will of the father and the father is the one who sent the son to usher in the new dispensation of grace where the letter of the law was replaced by the spirit of the law via the Holy Spirit.

---

i.e. there is no reference to Jesus himself condemning homosexuality at all. You just won't admit that you were wrong.

quote:

---

2. Nearly all the translators, i.e. the professional scholars are with me on the name of God. You are the rebelling dissenter on this name business. It's another topic and shouldn't even have been brought up here.

---

Nonsense. You know that's not true from the previous discussions. "Jehovah" is a mistaken transliteration from Hebrew into German - it's not even a transliteration into English ! Modern scholars reject it in favour of Yahweh.

quote:

---

Jesus does say repeatedly in the NT to avoid sexual immorality mentioned in the OT. Sexual immorality in the OT includes man on man hairy ass sex.

---

Where ? Buz certainly doesn't know or he'd have said so. Most of the anti-gay Christians don't seem to know either - because they never reference any such verses.

quote:

---

Paul, I know the references

---

You didn't know any relevant references when I asked.

quote:

---

You have no case and beating a dead horse

---

It seems not. Unlesss you cnn produce those references and show that they support your claim.

quote:

---

It's obvious that you don't know nearly as much Bible as you try to make folks think you do

---

I don't try to make people think that I do a lot about the Bible. You do. And the falsehoods in your post are just part of your campaign of pretence.

quote:

---

it's obvious that you lack the ability to correlate scripture with scripture as is so important in understanding scripture.

---

If you remember our discussion of the Olivet Discourse it's clear that even there I do better than you. You repeatedly failed to connect the three accounts.In short this is just more petty bluff and bravado produced in the hope that people will forget all the times I've trounced you.

quote:

---

I find that with you it's useless to try and support anything. No matter what I produce, you reject it, regardless of how substantial it is, just like in the Olivet Discourse debate where you apply centuries worth of events to a few decades. You allege it's not prophetic when significant segments of it clearly apply to the latter days. FYI, the discourse goes the whole chapter in all four gospels.

---

You mean that because I actually read the Bible I spot all your efforts to twist and misrepresent it. That is what happened in the discussion of the Olivet Discourse.Do you want to reme r some of your lowlights ? Like you isnsitence that we should let the phrasing of the Disciples question in Matthew dictate our reading of the Discourse - ignoring the content of the Discourse itself, even though the phrasing in Mark was different. Your twisting of the Biblical requirement for three witnesses so you wouldn't have to admit that you were wrong ? Hey' it's on;ly the Bible, it's MUCH less important than Buzsaw's ego !And FYI the Olivet Discourse isn't even IN John.

quote:

---

If I produce the references you'll deny as usual with more demands for responses, so don't be surprised if I decline to respond to some of your input.

---

In other words you're either refusing to look up the references because you're too lazy or because you know you'd have to twist and misrepresent them and you're fed up with being caught doing it.