Originally posted by @gswilmI believe I did respond to this schoolboy-debating club point of yours about bestiality. You brushed past it.
And how many pages before you answer me on just one question put to you?Shall people go on to beastiality under the assumption that they are champions of "species orientation" or "species equality" in sexual union?
Are you counting pages on how long before you address that ?
- sonship
Originally posted by @sonshipHaving thrown this in there you seemed uninterested in discussing it. Added to that is the fact that this slippery slope argument has been discussed umpteen times on this forum and I have never shied away from it. You showed no interest in discussing it on this thread; you simply ignored my response.Shall people go on to beastiality under the assumption that they are champions of "species orientation" or "species equality" in sexual union?
Originally posted by @fmfActually that wasn’t how I would have predicted you to respond.
Having thrown this in there you seemed uninterested in discussing it. Added to that is the fact that this slippery slope argument has been discussed umpteen times on this forum and I have never shied away from it. You showed no interest in discussing it on this thread; you simply ignored my response.
Originally posted by @sonshipWhen did I suggest that anything remotely like this was the case? You are making stances up and attributing them to me.
Sorry FMF. Your Creator didn't give you a book which has only three lines - like
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Stone gays.
The End."
24 Nov 17
Originally posted by @divegeesterMercurial is my middle name!
Actually that wasn’t how I would have predicted you to respond.
FMF, i wrote and stand by still ...
Your Creator condemns a man lying with a man for sex in Leviticus 18:22 then and also today.
The procedure of dealing with the act is different in the new testament church. But if God's condemnation of the act has changed then God would no longer deem it worthy of death.
Romans 1:27 ,32
" ... males, leaving the natural use of the female, burned in thier craving toward one another, males with males committing unseemliness ..." (v.27)
Paul writing under inspiration says that such things were still worthy of death.
" ... knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are worthy [not were worthy] of death ..." (v.32)
He didn't write that such things were once worthy of death but are no longer so.
Though the procedure of capital punishment is not commanded to the new covenant saints the sin itself is still "worthy of death".
It indicates that God's moral condemnation of the act had not changed.
Many other representative sins were included in this list of sins still worthy of death.
24 Nov 17
Originally posted by @divegeesterOh so you believe the new covenant only applies to a select few and not to everyone?
Yet another admission that morality is not universal and objective.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerLet me throw you a ladder down so can climb out of that hole 😵
Oh so you believe the new covenant only applies to a select few and not to everyone?
24 Nov 17
Originally posted by @divegeesterDodge noted yet again.
Let me throw you a ladder down so can climb out of that hole 😵
Originally posted by @dj2beckerIt’s over dude, go back to being FMJ or bunnybecker.
Dodge noted yet again.
Originally posted by @divegeesterSo you believe you can live as you please and what the Bible says on how we should live is optional at best? Well that certainly explains your behavior.
It’s over dude, go back to being FMJ or bunnybecker.
24 Nov 17
Originally posted by @dj2becker😴
So you believe you can live as you please and the what the Bible says on how we should live is optional at best? Well that certainly explains your behavior.
24 Nov 17
Originally posted by @divegeesterYawn all you want, your dodge is noted yet again. FMF has groomed you well.
😴