Executing homosexuals

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
YES, you are.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homophobe

homophobe - a person who fears or hates homosexuals and homosexuality.

It takes a special kind of hatred to have such a gleeful wish to have homosexuals legally put to death via the death penalty.

Deny it all you like. As someone who is also PRO-death penalty, I will guarantee you that those who I want to see put to death for criminal actions are not on my "happy happy joy joy love letter list".

Good post!
 

genuineoriginal

New member
You keep gravitating back to the Old Testament and the House
of Israel, who were under the law!

I am seeing a pattern.
You keep rejecting the question of why God would say that homosexual sex is an abomination an a crime worthy of death.
Whenever you are asked why God did that, you keep throwing up the "House" of Israel (which shows your ignorance), and refusing to address the question.

God chose the children of Israel to be His chosen people, to live in the land He promised Abraham, and to follow the Law that He gave through Moses.

Maybe now you are ready to say why the law giving homosexual sex offenders the death penalty was the right thing to do for the time period when the children of Israel inhabited the promised land and the Law was in effect.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
YES, you are.
No, I am not.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homophobe

homophobe - a person who fears or hates homosexuals and homosexuality.
Isn't that just the stupidest thing ever?
Who was the moron that came up with a word that means "same" "fear"?
Are you trying to surround me with stupidity to the point I give in and agree?
Is this the Orwellian double-think in action?

It takes a special kind of hatred to have such a gleeful wish to have homosexuals legally put to death via the death penalty.
No, it is a normal reaction to an abominable act, as proven over and over again throughout history.
You really should get your facts straight.
However, I don't have that kind of hatred.
I have pity for the fools that think it is a normal and natural act, so I try to warn them that God said it was so vile it was punishable by death.

Deny it all you like. As someone who is also PRO-death penalty, I will guarantee you that those who I want to see put to death for criminal actions are not on my "happy happy joy joy love letter list".
I am sure you would dance on my grave because I dared to quote a Bible verse you don't agree with.
:rolleyes:
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
I am seeing a pattern.
You keep rejecting the question of why God would say that homosexual sex is an abomination an a crime worthy of death.
Whenever you are asked why God did that, you keep throwing up the "House" of Israel (which shows your ignorance), and refusing to address the question.

God chose the children of Israel to be His chosen people, to live in the land He promised Abraham, and to follow the Law that He gave through Moses.

Maybe now you are ready to say why the law giving homosexual sex offenders the death penalty was the right thing to do for the time period when the children of Israel inhabited the promised land and the Law was in effect.

You're a real prize, you know that? You are consistently unable
to absorb anything I post! I find that quite fascinating!
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I am sure you would dance on my grave because I dared to quote a Bible verse you don't agree with.
:rolleyes:

This comment alone shows that you either incapable of deciphering what is written or out and out lying because you have no other argument and know it.

BTW, in regards to your ignorant comment ... I only dance at happy events. The word *happy* does not correspond with anything about you.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
This comment alone shows that you either incapable of deciphering what is written or out and out lying because you have no other argument and know it.

BTW, in regards to your ignorant comment ... I only dance at happy events. The word *happy* does not correspond with anything about you.

Either that or it just shows how he thinks, so...
 

genuineoriginal

New member
You're a real prize, you know that? You are consistently unable
to absorb anything I post! I find that quite fascinating!
I can't find anything relevant to the conversation in your posts.
I have asked you to explain, but you keep refusing to do so.

Do you know why you keep saying the same thing over and over as if it means something?
Could you share that information?
 

Doormat

New member
Doormat said:
There is not one single verse in the entire Bible that states homosexuality per se is sin.
Well, that is a lie straight from the pit of hell.
Whoever taught you that nonsense?

I'm not lying, but stating what I believe to be a fact. The two verses in Leviticus are not about homosexuality in general, but are about a married man committing adultery with another man. Nothing in the law about female homosexuality, you agree. The verses in the New Testament that are allegedly about homosexuality don't stand up to scrutiny, and I gave you an example of that with the dubious translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9.

Doormat said:
A prohibition against male homosexuality in general would read, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind." Period.
No, it would state it exactly as it states it.
Thou shalt not lie with mankind (males) as with womankind (females).

The clause "as with womankind" is superfluous, and the underlying Hebrew has been mistranslated. You aren't aware how the Hebrew scriptures have been mistranslated in many places? Here, read this.


Leviticus 18:22-23
22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.​

These verses are very straightforward in their descriptions.
Men are not to have sex with men.
Neither men nor women are to have sex with animals.

In verse 22 the Hebrew word mishkab is mistranslated to "as with." The actual meaning of the word is laying place, and we find example of that word in scripture used in the context of adultery, which is evidence in support of my claim. The fact the verse uses the word for "laying place" and "wife" should be big read flags to you.

Furthermore, I don't believe a man can have sex with another man in the same way he has sex with a woman unless he is engaging in sodomy with women. Consider your interpretation necessarily implies heterosexual sodomy (oral and anal) was lawful at that time.

Doormat said:
The law is transformational when the person understands why behavior contrary to Matthew 7:12 is sin, and that understanding comes through grace not law.
Then you should try to understand why God declared homosexual sex to be a crime worthy of the death penalty.

Explain how two female homosexuals can violate the principle of Matthew 7:12?

If you can't, you've got nothing.

If you notice, the person that hates his neighbor will refuse to rebuke him and will allow him to continue sinning.

If it turns out that you are wrong about homosexuality you would be the one sinning, bearing false witness against acts that are not sin.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Kids and grandkids are going to shake their heads, wonder what the fuss was about...and also wonder just how wrong-headed their own parents and grandparents were back in the weird old days.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
The clause "as with womankind" is superfluous, and the underlying Hebrew has been mistranslated. You aren't aware how the Hebrew scriptures have been mistranslated in many places?
The Rabbis mentioned in the Talmud were all Hebrew scholars that understood the meanings of the words written in the Torah (even if they were poor at how to apply those words).
The Talmud treats the verse as speaking about homosexual sex.

This has nothing to do with mistranslations, since it is about how the Hebrew words were understood by native Hebrew speakers.

An english translation of the Talmud uses the word Pederasty to describe the act, but mentions that it is between two adult males.
 

chair

Well-known member
It is curious to note that Jews, to whom the law was given, don't call for executing homosexuals, while some Christians- who are not expected to follow the law- call for executing them.
 

Doormat

New member
An english translation of the Talmud uses the word Pederasty to describe the act, but mentions that it is between two adult males.

That's all you have, a single comment about pederasty in the Talmud? That's not evidence against anything I've claimed. My interpretation of Leviticus accommodates that interpretation.
 

Doormat

New member
Anyone interested in understanding what Levitcus 18:22 is really about should read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviticus_18#Sexuality.

I was amazed to find that article today and see that it essentially states what I believe is the correct interpretation of Leviticus 18:22, what I was trying to explain to poster genuineorginal.

Regarding the Hebrew word mistranslated to "as with" we read:

mishk’vei - This is a noun. The base form of the noun is mishkav, and it can be seen that the las tthree letters of the base, sh-k-v, are also the three letters of the verb root above, meaning “lie down”. This noun means “bed”. Hebrew nouns have more than one form. In addition to having singular and plural forms, many nouns also have absolute and construct forms. An absolute noun stands alone, with its own meaning. A construct noun is grammatically tied to the noun that follows it. In English it often translates by placing the English word “of” between the two nouns. A good example is the Hebrew Beit Lechem(Bethlehem), which in English translates as “House of Bread”. This is because the first word, Beit, is in the construct state. Mishk’vei is in the plural construct state, meaning “beds of”.

That's what I claimed.

Does anyone have an argument with proofs that refutes anything claimed in that article?
 
Last edited:

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
It is curious to note that Jews, to whom the law was given, don't call for executing homosexuals, while some Christians- who are not expected to follow the law- call for executing them.
And yet they refuse to eat anything not kosher, even going beyond by extrapolating these rules areas they weren't intended. And they also refuse to work on the Sabbath. Bunch of hypocrites.
 
Top