They Made Me Gay

[annabenedetti]

You can do better than that.

How am I a hypocrite based on my past story of all I did, in light of who I am now?

AB already explained it. You want to call another man a homosexual if he can be aroused by the thought of homosexual contact and yet you yourself entertained the thought once.

Since you know your thought didn't mean you were gay, show me where you have the right to make that assumption of other men.


There's your hypocrisy.

 

[musterion]

No, how does it? I used your definition against you, I never agreed with it.

You have always said, or at least implied, that I must be homosexual because I admitted I was once tempted by it. Yet if I'm reading you correctly, you never actually considered me to be a homosexual. So you're a liar and a hypocrite for continually trying to use that admission against me.

 

[musterion]

AB already explained it. You want to call another man a homosexual if he can be aroused by the thought of homosexual contact and yet you yourself entertained the thought once.

Yes, before the man I used to be was declared DEAD in Christ. That man is no longer ME.

That is the #1 point you keep missing because you simply don't believe it for yourself so you don't believe it can be true for anyone else either. That's where I've been going with all of this.

 

[ok doser]

AB already explained it. You want to call another man a homosexual if he can be aroused by the thought of homosexual contact and yet you yourself entertained the thought once.

do you understand that those are two different things?

 

[ok doser]

... you're a liar and a hypocrite for continually trying to use that admission against me.

iow, he's trolling you

 

[musterion]

iow, he's trolling you

Yes. He just went into evasion mode.

 

[annabenedetti]

do you understand that those are two different things?

thought

thought

I see you made the same word two different colors.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You have always said, or at least implied, that I must be homosexual because I admitted I was once tempted by it. Yet if I'm reading you correctly, you never actually considered me to be a homosexual. So you're a liar and a hypocrite for continually trying to use that admission against me.

No, I haven't and I'm going to flat out say you're being disingenuous at best to say that I have. Either that or you're somehow confusing me with aCW. Pull up the quotes where I've 'implied' or stated that you must be a homosexual. You tried this tack once before and didn't provide any proof for it...

 

[ok doser]

thought

thought

I see you made the same word two different colors.

"aroused by" =/= "entertained"

 

[musterion]

No, I haven't and I'm going to flat out say you're being disingenuous at best to say that I have. Either that or you're somehow confusing me with aCW. Pull up the quotes where I've 'implied' or stated that you must be a homosexual. You tried this tack once before and didn't provide any proof for it...

Proof is, every time I post in a thread on this topic, and everytime I say something against homosexuality as sin, you always come up with what I said years ago about college. So does Anna. You both did it again today. So you can stop lying anytime now.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Yes, before the man I used to be was declared DEAD in Christ. That man is no longer ME.

That is the #1 point you keep missing because you simply don't believe it for yourself so you don't believe it can be true for anyone else either. That's where I've been going with all of this.

So, someone who had just the same brief homosexual flirtation as yourself - and who isn't *saved* - is a homosexual? Your definition would seem to say that so is that where you stand on the matter?

 

[ok doser]

Yes. He just went into evasion mode.

yep, now he's trying to turn it back on you

what a scumbag

 

[annabenedetti]

Yes, before the man I used to be was declared DEAD in Christ. That man is no longer ME.

That is the #1 point you keep missing because you simply don't believe it for yourself so you don't believe it can be true for anyone else either. That's where I've been going with all of this.

No. The statement about other men was made in your saved state. That's the statement I'm interested in.

I couldn't care less what you did in your saved vs. unsaved state. I'm interested in how you said other men were homosexual for having a homosexual thought when you know you're not a homosexual although you had a homosexual thought.

There's your hypocrisy. In this instance.

 

[musterion]

thought

thought

I see you made the same word two different colors.

AB says I am not a homosexual. So tell me where my hypocrisy is in this matter.

 

[annabenedetti]

Proof is, every time I post in a thread on this topic, and everytime I say something against homosexuality as sin, you always come up with what I said years ago about college. So does Anna. You both did it again today. So you can stop lying anytime now.

"Always?" :freak:

There is no "again." This is the first time I've ever brought it up, so you can stop lying anytime now.

 

[ok doser]

... you had a homosexual thought.

:doh:


:nono:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Proof is, every time I post in a thread on this topic, and everytime I say something against homosexuality as sin, you always come up with what I said years ago about college. So does Anna. You both did it again today. So you can stop lying anytime now.

The only reason I brought it up today is because I read your bizarre definition of what a homosexual is. When was the last time I mentioned it?

:AMR:

 

[musterion]

No. The statement about other men was made in your saved state. That's the statement I'm interested in.

I couldn't care less what you did in your saved vs. unsaved state. I'm interested in how you said other men were homosexual for having a homosexual thought when you know you're not a homosexual although you had a homosexual thought.

There's your hypocrisy. In this instance.

You're well aware that Christ said if a man lusts after a woman, he has committed adultery with her in his heart. That makes him an adulterer.

Do I need to spell out the logical next step of this principle for you?

 

[annabenedetti]

"aroused by" =/= "entertained"

:chuckle:

 

[musterion]

"Always?" :freak:

There is no "again." This is the first time I've ever brought it up

That is a lie.