₦airaland Forum

Shepherd00:

Wait!!! are you saying you did not say God permits homosexuality? Why then is this thread in page 18? You said there are types of homosexualities.
1 The one done in Pagan Temples (sex Orgies) or the one done by male prostitutes.

2. The one that is consensual which involves adult homosexuals/lesbians and/or same sex attraction and union(s), especially one that is in, a kind, trusting, caring, loving, helpful, faithful, honest, not harmful and committed life long until death do them part relationships.

You said God permits the later because He sees nothing wrong with it.

You quoted the Lord talking about Eunuchs and said He meant homosexuals. You even talked about God promising them rewards in the book of Isaiah. Do you remember saying that? Again, to proof that God indeed permits homosexuality, you said The Lord Jesus 'Highly Praised Homosexuality' above Heterosexuality.

I'm shocked now to hear you say you didn't say God permits homosexuality. I wouldn't be in this thread if you didn't say that?

The bone of contention, is I was alleged to have said: "I had SCRIPTURES that shows where God permits homosexual acts", but when asked to produce verbatim where and when I made that statement, the resident over zealous dedicated heckler fan of mine is found wanting. He made an accusation, same way he did with Naomi and Ruth about me, but is unable to back either up with proof or evidence. Why would anyone descend so low and have to resort to cooking up stories about a fellow human being. Whose does that, hmm? Is he your friend or brother, because I'll say show me your company, and I'll tell you what sort of person you are.

Please I've nothing else or more to say on this matter of my over zealous fan and the antics he gets up to.

OkCornel:

And you've thrown up tithing as a red herring which does not in any way answer my questions...


You might as well want to show us where God approved of homosexuality in the Bible... especially after his command that homosexuals should be stoned to death...


Muttley...

1) Those that turned away from homosexuality and lesbianism after encountering Jesus, should we call them liars? Are their testimonies lies?

2) Jesus said in Matthew 19 "in the beginning, God created them male and female, and for this reason, a man shall leave his father and mother, and cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh"

Based on the above;

a) Where did God modify this to include a male/male relationship or a female/female relationship?

b) When are you going to show us where in the scriptures examples of same sex relationship approved by God?

c) In a same sex relationship, who is the husband and who is the wife? After all, this is straightforward to identify in a male/female relationship...

Muttley, we are waiting..

I morely, was letting you know, that unlike me that has proof of God not disapproving SSA relationships, you have no Bible verses of either God or Jesus, disapproving tithes, yet you are well known to kick against ecclesiastical and obligatory tithing. Why are you asking me of biblical proof when you haven't been able to produce such when posters like alBHAGDADI asks you for it, hmm?

You still want me to remind you of the subject titled heading of this thread, huh? Deconstructing, hmm? You do know the meaning of the word, don't you?

Please don't deflect the thread's objective and what it set out to do with your diversionary and derailing ploys. You can't say, in spite, that I haven't been accommodating and tolerating the incessant attempts to deflect and distract me from the thread's objectives.

Please let revert back to deconstructing those words that have been used to deceive many by replacing them with the word homosexual

OkCornel:
Muttleylaff, this write up gives an extensive analysis on the words Malaikos and Arsenokoitai... and it was not just limited to temple prostitution, but even the act of homosexuality itself.

I am also yet to get your answers on my questions regarding

1) Those who turned away from homosexuality and lesbianism after encountering Jesus... are they liars? Are their testimonies lies?

2) Also, Jesus explicitly mentioned in Matthew 19 that in the beginning God made them male and female. Where and how did God modify this to approve a male/male and female/female relationship? Where in the scriptures can we get examples of same sex marriage which was approved and blessed by God (that is if there are any examples of same sex marriage)

So you are happy to accept now that these scriptures had to tithing homosexual activities bordering with temple male prostituting, men dressing up with make ups, jewelleries, nails done looking like women and sexual interest in prepubescent children, hmm?

I don't need to be sign posted to websites please as, unlike you, I visit many dairy farms but make my own cheese. Summarise whatever you've found out from your researching not copy and paste plaster them here.

Listen, maybe, if you can tell me where Jesus in the Bible has disapproved tithing, I am might give in to your request. Meanwhile do I have to be keep reminding you, TV01 and everyone else of the title subject heading of the thread, hmm? It is about deconstructing, remember? Thanks

TV01:
The above is MuttleyLaffs constant refrain. Essentially an attempt to portray ss couples totally normal and analogous to os couples, but more insidiously, portray faithful and committed relationships as the norm for ss couples. But is this true?

I first joined NL in my research about the tithe. Having come to a different understanding to the one commonly taught in Pentecostal churches, I prayed, read and researched for greater insight.

I found the discussions on NL expansive, and much with much insight. Kudos to all those from back in the day – on either side. I see some are still fighting that battle even now .

But one thing that continually frustrated me, and was ultimately the reason I left the discussion, and even the section, was the refusal to move from the doctrinal to the practical. This post is to clearly evidence the practical outworking which falsifies MuttleyLaffs doctrinal thesis.

Gay relationships on the whole experience more domestic violence and more extreme violence. Gay relationships are often short lived, and partners over a lifetime can reach into the hundreds. Furtive public encounters are a hallmark, exacerbated by the use of the internet and hook-up apps.

Drug use is rampant in homosex encounters especially at more organised orgy type gatherings, another hallmark. Gay identified people have heightened indicators for use across the drug spectrum, from cigarettes, to alcohol to hallucogenics and the traditional hard drugs. Disease indicators are also elevated (search gay bowel syndrome), along with suicide ideation and an on average shorter life-span.

Having the perversion codified into law has hurt everyone. This endemic inability to remain faithful has led to calls for “monogamishness”, as gay mores infect traditional norms.

Even where there are what could be termed “committed” gay relationships, they are typically open to 3rd parties or extra-curricula encounters by the individual parties.

Case in point. Elton John and his partner recently mentioned, went to great lengths to keep details of Furnishes involvement in transatlantic orgies out of the UK press - using gagging orders and legal threats. Even as they continue to portray themselves as a model couple and family .

Homosex hardly comes without attendant pathologies. And these pathologies are default behaviours, not defective as they would be considered in opposite sex relationships.

Into this comes MuttleyLaff, trying to lead astray the faithful, butcher and re-write scripture and claim Gods writ for this dysfunction and depravity. Really?

The couple in MuttleyLaffs purview are statistically insignificant, if they do indeed exist. Hence purview is utterly bogus - from a spiritual, scriptural, biological, medical, legal and social perspective as demonstrated .


TV

TV01, you're smart and educated enough, live in the West, not to shamelessly descend to an all time low of being stereotypic. Are you that far removed, you have never come in contact with any SSA couples in long time standing committed, loyal, kind, loving relationship with no scandals, no drug use, no skeletons, no hanky pankies etcetera erh TV01?

I doubt you go into the world like Jesus commands us, but rather want the world to come to you, that's probably why you have a funny perspective and myopic views of SSA couples. For your information, the mention of Elton John was incidental, I could have mention a few others, like my neighbour that I l've known for over 20 years or friends and colleagues know in dedicated single SSA relationships, some even have kids, but you wouldn't know them, hence why Elton or Ricky had the mentions.

@^^^^
As I've been saying, it's my way of doing a FYI to the posters I cc. As for budaatum, that you keep referring to, he doesn't understand this, that's why he got grouchy and because of lies you make about that I opened the thread, to talk or give scriptures of God supporting homosexuality, which isn't and was never the case. I opened the thread to deconstruct lies and myth, just as the subject title heading of the thread says. The buck of the thread ends with me, I dictate the tune, not me dancing to yours or anyone's tune. Capisce?

You have no records, no proof, no evidence, you have nada. All you have is fantasy, wishful thinking I said that. It is nothing except being a figment of your lazy and warped twisted imagination. Satan will be proud of you. Satan probably now sees you as competition sef. Well done.

@^^^^^
My lawyer will love this my over zealous dedicated heckler fan in a court of law with this his fabricated lie statement he alleged that I made. He has no proof except for making lies up trying to stitch me up with them. My lawyer will have a field day with him and the judge will throw out the notorious made up lie out of his court and give him a good telling off for wasting everyone's time. Now I know this chap is a bona fide, certified and konfam "ase"

Must he know everything or the reason I do things, hmm, the mister nosey parker. OK, I and that poster go way back, on another thread, where he/she asked me pertinent question and since after done an AWOL, now that I had content that I think the poster should be aware of, I cc'ed the poster, that's what I do, whenever I cc posters, it's just to let them be aware of the content and/or information therein.

^^^^
Please for crying out loud, can someone please tell me how the alleged "I had SCRIPTURES that shows where God permits homosexual acts" correlates with what this time waster, time stealer over zelous fan and heckler has put up there, hmmm? SMH. I wash my hands off and wouldnt be commenting on the lies again. Mtchew.

Where did I say?: "I had SCRIPTURES that shows where God permits homosexual acts". I know your Dad, is all I say. I really do.

Shepherd00, as you can see everything that this my dedicated over zealous fan types or says is scam, even his good morning, apart from the rain checking I told you about, should also be investigated henceforth. Look at him lying through his teeth. Just keeps on making up lies, where is it verbatim, when and where I typed that "I had SCRIPTURES that shows where God permits homosexual acts", hmm? SMH. Even the alleged Naomi and Ruth one, he is now chomping teeth because it is a fabricated big fat lie. It wasnt me.

As I previously said, if it is only just one person, it will be worth the effort. I am not like my lovely dedicated heckler makes me out to be, saying about me "this is a game or challenge that I needed to WIN to show off". Bound to win?. No! far from it, nothing about win but I am bound to be true to the facts as they are and show themselves.

The question my lovely dedicated heckler asks are dead simple questions, the answers and/or replies are littered all over the Bible. Will only cross that bridge when I come to it, not and never before anyway.

Doesnt even know that it has nothing to do with needing assistance, winning anything, likes, supportive comments, being disgraced or not being disgraced etcetera. Nah, nothing at all to remotely do with anything like that. I am just pleased to be a source of enjoyment for you, it is a blessing to be that for you. Thank you very much for the privilege

Flier:
You should get an award for these lies.
Nothing justifies what the fooool did at the embassy
I am sure he is going to jail 100%

It is a Premium service and you'll get the PP within 4 hours. Naija hasnt come to that level yet. I know it's stranger than you can imagine, but its true, anybody else can testify to having done same.

He obviously wasnt stable when he was edged over

Sunofgod:
I'm sure the embassy no get insurance on those cars..... Common windscreen damage and you are making this much noise.

Better still..... Have you people settled your congestion fees that are in the millions owed to the British govt?

The guy did well..... Upon all the people you people frustrate daily with your backward processes.

To renew a British passport you do it all online......

Did mine online, took the passport picture with my smartphone in the comfort of my bedroom, submitted everything from my bedroom and went to Victoria to pick it up same day and within 4 hours after submitting form online from my bedroom. Payment, everything and all, was done from my bedroom. It was a sweet experience, I tell you. Technology dey sweet for belle ooo.

OkCornel:
Hi Muttley, please what Bible version was used here? Thanks...

I dont necessarily at any given time, have or use a specific Bible version OkCornel. The reason for that is because, I often only use Bible versions after reviewing them, as in, compared with the original Hebrew or Greek text to see which version is best closest to what's shown, as in, which conveys the most for almost every single word I see, in the original Hebrew or Greek text.

Now to answer your question, OkCornel, I used King James version (i.e. KJV) for the above Deuteronomy 23:17-18 scripture, and at some points, the added "i.e." is either New Living Translation (i.e. NLT) or Good News Translation versions (i.e. GNT)

As for the Ezekiel 4:15 scripture OkCornel, I used the Berean Study Bible version (i.e. BSB)

In the light of facts, someone like Shepherd00, like how he typed on page 13 of this thread, will be saying:
"MuttleyLaff, Issues are raised here which are outside Temple Prostitution, why did you conclude with (The Lord hates Temple Prostitution?) I didn't even see where Temple Prostitution is mentioned here ..."
cc Bejusttoall

TV01:
Indeed, God only knows the heart of man. I can only see the outworking of yours based on your submissions here .

It's 4 posts actually and, I am not actually asking for responses - have I at any point requested them? This is a public forum. There is no protocol as such and, I always post with the fully understanding that those addressed may choose not to reply. There is no compulsion.

Moreover, I am seeing this as less a discussion and more a slow moving car crash as you increasingly tie yourself in knots trying to justify your position from the bible. You can't ride the beast, just swallow the frog .

MuttleyLaff, e caan done! All attempts to squeeze a positive ss theology into scripture is doomed to fail. Attempting it is just foolhardy. And, you are failing woefully.


TV

Will you look at that, he's keeping tabs. Well, all outstanding posts each and every one now responded to. We now even. I owe you nothing anymore.

Just one person makes the effort worthwhile. Cant wait to carry out deconstructing the lies with OkCornel now, Yippee!

TV01:
Don't attempt a diversionary manoeuvre Muttley. I have a number of posts which you have steadfastly ignored. I have raised a new one, feel free to ignore like the others, but don't attempt a deceitful non-response. Even so, I see OKCornel's submission re meaning and have no contention with it - it does not change the clear reading of scripture. Now to my post/s.

1. Why did God allow LGBTQ+-x/ to suffer these past 6'000 years - or even longer as you don't subscribe to a 6 thousand year old creation?
2. Why did Gods plan for creation include an interminable length of time without children for LGBTQ+-/X?
3. If, as you state marriage is not for ss couples, how are these children sanctified?
4. The bible; holy children as those born to at least one believing parent in a male-female marriage. How far for children parented by ss?


TV

1/ I am not going to answer this question, since you've decided to slander me, just like that my dedicated over zealous fan lied about me with Naomi and Ruth. The only Naomi, I've ever mentioned in my Nairaland MuttleyLaff life is Naomi Campbell, and none other than that. I have never typed Naomi, except for Naomi Campbell, anywhere in the Religion forum. This is your reward for getting your fact wrong TV01. You'll now appreciate more, why that, this my dedicated over zealous fan is on permanent "Ignore Mode ON" and why I dont bat him an eyelid
2/ God is waiting for man to come up with the miraculous ideas He has placed in them for this to happen. Besides God isnt in a hurry, He has all the time in His Hands. I guess, as a consolation, you might say, it answers #1 above not attended to by me
3/ SMH, I said marriage is an imitation, a copy of a real thing in heaven. Marriage is a union between the soul and God. It is beyond sexuality or gender
4/ Check previous post above. Please stop repeating questions I've previously answered. Small time now, you'll be accusing me of repeating myself, why wouldnt I, when you lot wont read but keep re-asking about issues or questions I've previously addressed

TV01:
First, for the 6’000 years up until literally yesterday, did “Gods plan for creation/humanity” as you have proclaimed it mean
1. that “LGBT+x/- would be persecuted?
2. That LGBTx-+/ would not be able to have children??

Further you are essentially stating the following, even though you’ve tried to make it sound like a question for deniability;

One of the reasons God blesses us with children aka the fruit of the womb is as follows;

1 Corinthians 7:14 - For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.

MuttleyLaff, how are such children holy or considered the result of procreation? Children that are not the result of man and woman, male and female, husband and wife in a consecrated marital union?

The children being “parented” by Elton John and David Furnish, are not as a result of natural procreation or the offspring of a scripturally based (male and female) marital union.

MuttleyLaff, pray tell are such children holy? The “biological mother” of such children is not a wife to either of the men, nor indeed in situ for the raising of the children – are such children holy MuttleyLaff?

Muttley you said this
MuttleyLaff:
No, I was not and never did claim that the institution of marriage was designed for SS couples. Please dont saying scripture fails to mention, foreshadow or present a positive archetype for relationships of this kind, especially when there is evidence in scripture about it. Just say, you arent aware of it because that is what you've being made and led to believe

You also stated this;
MuttleyLaff:
"Are there cases of same sex relationship that led to procreation"?, you earlier asked me, at which I replied: "Yes, there are, case in point Elton John and partner, and using methods like in vitro fertilization, gestational surrogacy or medically assisted insemination".

Is that procreation Muttleylaff. Are the most worldy figures now iconic for Christians? Are the most depraved now role models for the brethren.
If SS couples cannot enter into marriage - according to your word - how are children holy? How are the children ss couples parent the result of procreation.

MuttleyLaff, this doctrine is twisting you into all kinds of shapes. You must be pretzel like by now . Further, the deeper you commit, the further from the truth you stray. You sound like an unabashed homosexualst and LGBT-+x/ advocate. Full fledged. campaigning for everything exactly as the world does .

TV

I cant believe you'll have the audacity to ask me such a lame question like this hmm and be quoting 1 Corinthians 7:14 in line with it. Tell me TV01, are SSA persons who are believers not sanctified by Christ, ehn? SMH.

Please o wise one, not, what is procreation that is good in your books, that makes you sniff at and have a low opinion of in vitro fertilization, gestational surrogacy or medically assisted insemination, because it is only a wicked person at heart, that would stand in the way of anyone who loves and yearns to have his/her own children in whichever de jure way is permissibly possible. To think you find this issue laughable is strange.

TV01:
For completeness, I am responding to part 3 of MuttleyLaffs tri-post screed ahead of possibly summarising and closing this one out.

That was the abomination of confusion, of going after "strange flesh" as it were. A depraved and detestable thing.

"Ah, argh irọ nla nla, o de bẹru Ọlọrun, ti o ba tiẹ ni, ibẹru ikunle abiamọ nau" loosely translated means "why this big lie nau, fear God please" TV01 do you really understand what Bible calls "strange flesh" at all? I honestly doubt you remotely know, You woudnt have passingly used it the manner you've just did, if you do know. Going after "strange flesh" in Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 indeed. SMH. Tsk.

TV01:
MuttleyLaff, you have repeatedly referred to "deceitful/misleading/mis-interpreted translations" " kindly provide the original and correct translations that Christian orthodoxy has overlooked these past 2'000 years

Puleeease, stop all these pretence and nonchalant shrugging already.

Though still de facto in pocket areas, like in Middle East countries, for example, how long was slavery and serfdom going on and overlooked before its eventual abolition, hmm TV01? Didnt it have a good run ehn? Asking for the original and correct translations is just not being candid or sincere when the facts are out there for all to see and examine, just as I've done in my comments on the previous post to this one

Isnt it shameful, what's been done to the true and original meanings of words like "arsenokoites", "malakoi/malakos" "sodomites" etcetera twisted their meaning and thereby used to victimise and demonise caring, kind, committed, SSA person romantic relationships associated with love thats till death do apart, ehn?

TV01:
Christianity does not and cannot condemn gays - Christianity does not recognise such a category of person. What Christianity recognises is ss intimate behaviour as abominable.

God recognises all creatures embodied in a human flesh. When the chips are down, it isnt going to be about asking who did you love but the question, will be how did you love

TV01:
We have done as requested and found your submissions, wanting. Ill considered as a result of ideological conviction, counter-factual, weasley, deceptive, wilfully twisted and chock full of falsehood.

Liar, liar, pants on fire, you know in your heart you're lying and havent done any sort thing. SMH vigorously at you and with disgust too.

TV01:
We know - and this was touched on earlier in the thread. Although this word was used to try and justify ss acts, needless to say, regardless of the descriptives used, physical intimacy between members of the ss is disordered and dysfunctional.

When faced with facts, acceptance of what I said is inevitable, as you've just done with "We know" What more do you know but because of inflated ego, arrogance, high horse, chip on the shoulder etcetera dont want to admit to, hmm?

TV01:
This is your intentionally false assertion, based on an intentionally false interpretation of the words used. Pauls use of the words arsenos and koites directly refers to Greek renderings of the OT prohibitions against ss intimacy in Leviticus (18;22 and 20:13 as noted).

Your pusillanimous attempt to pluralise the word "bed" and reach to claim it means "promiscuity", and promiscuity is the issue is stunning in it's audacity.

It's actually you being pusillanimous here not me TV01 because I have repeately said there is no example of the word arsenokoites ever before being used aside those two uses of it in the Bible by Paul when tackling the issue of temple male prostitutes hopping from one bed to another bed, having multiple and/or casual sexual liasons, screwing around with patrons seeking ritual sex wrongly believing its a gateway to receiving divine blessing indulging in it.

TV01:
LEVITICUS!!!!!

Shout until your throat goes sore, you are deludedly wrong about that. There is nowhere in the Bible nor anywhere that God condemns caring, kind, committed, SSA person romantic relationships associated with love thats till death do apart.

TV01:
Lies. First, the condemnation of ss activity only starts from around v18. Second it is a universal outcry against mankind suppressing, denying and rebelling against God, not specifically about temple prostitution or ritual sex orgies.

You havent brush up you Bible properly, no wonder you have truth decay. SMH.

The wrath of God against promicuous ss activity starts from around the verse Romans 1:18, then it, at Romans 1:26-27, in a way that leaves no room for doubt, stated that they burned with lust for one another, as men committed indecent acts with other men etcetera. Now tell me TV01, do couples in a caring, kind, committed, romantic relationships associated with love of any sorts indulge in lust after another person or committing indecent acts with other people, hmm?. No, it doesnt happen like that and you know that, so stop all this your hanky panky hide and seek, peek a boo games you're playing with real truth and facts please ojaare. The whole of Romans 1:1-32 contextually was an indictment against temple male and female prositution. Read the book nah, you'll see.

TV01:
Paul was "ranting" against all forms of ss activity/behaviour. The OT verses noted above just show that if Paul had wanted to refere to temple prostitutes, there were extant words that would have been quite suitable.

You surely are a bonafide and confirmed drowning man still clutching at any available straw in sight sha.

TV01:
Answered above

You thought you have.

TV01:
Shoot yourself in the foot. The Levitical prohibitions were universally against ss activity. If the verses in the NT echoed them, then they are also universal.

You can keeping on saying this till the cows come home, but you aren't saying it at all, as it is TV01

TV01:
Yes. God decrees the confusion and depravity of ss behaviour abominable - standalone or as part of idolatrous temple worship

If upon what you've just read and this is how you replied to it, then you really must be one confused *^%$*&£@%

TV01:
Jesus actively engaged with sinners -it's why he came. And Jesus would not have recognised anyone as homosexual. Further The Lord pointed to the creational design and intent of sex between male and female within marriage.

You are quite right because we dont serve a homophobic God, and that is why Jesus, even when on earth didnt see anything untoward with SSA people, but actually was filled with wonder and astonishment, He just couldnt help not publicly praise formally & officially one particular SSA person in the Gospel of Luke and in Matthew.

TV01:
Oh yes He did. Directly - Leviticus etc. And indirectly - The Lord pointing to the male/female & marriage archetypes, and via Apostles, including Paul, Peter & Jude.

Oh no, He didnt. And directly - The Lord pointing to the fact that there is no male/female & marriage in heaven. I'll take the Lord's word anything first and above the Apostles, including Paul, Peter & Jude

TV01:
All responded to - repeatedly.

but you miserably failed on each and every account

TV01:
It's over MuttleyLaff - quit while you are behind, lest you end up in the behind


TV

You think, its over, but it is actually you, its over for, as you dont know momoh and jack.

TV01:
One feels like he is cleaning out the Augean stables here - a mile high pile of homosexualist excrement. Below is a response to post 2 of MuttleyLaffs fantasy delusion posted earlier .

MuttleyLaff:
1/ From time immemorial, same sex attraction and/or same sex relationship always make up, less than 5% of worldwide population, so has never being and wont ever be a threat to anything or anyone, just as infertiles of all sorts arent.

A pointless and scripturally unattested assertion, and questionable piece of information. A believer should have zero tolerance towards sin which is "...reproach to a nation". Specifically the type which defiles a person and pollutes the land, potentially leading to a "vomiting"...judgement!

"“Look,” He replied, “I will let you use cow dung instead of human excrement, and you may bake your bread over that."
- Ezekiel 4:15

Excrement isnt necessarily a bad thing but when retained in the body, it becomes poison. So, it's imperative to purge the body of Christ off the extrement of lies perpetrated by the church to demonise SSA persons when in cahoot with Canon laws regulated homosexual activity backed through decrees issued by a number of synods, starting from the 5th century Council of Elvira

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
2/ God never said he hated homosexual(s) or homosexual acts per se, so please if you believed this, stop lying to yourself and stop deceiving others with your crass ignorance.

MuttleyLaff:
3/ If you are adamant, then show me in the Bible where God outrightly said he hates homosexuality, homosexual or homosexual acts per se and be prepared to clearly, cleanly and correctly defend it

The abominable nature of ss intimacy is repeated throughout the bible. OT, NT. Clearly enunciated within in the biblical narrative. Scripture repeatedly referenced and exegeted here.

Per 2 above. Meanwhile, feel free to show the board where God said he loves "homosexuality or homosexual acts. For bonus points, please show us where God confirms the distinction between, yet equivalence of, "heterosexual" and "homosexual" relationships, and/or how the He instituted the marriage institution for both opposite and same sex couples. For yet more reward points, please show us how ss couples cleave to one another .

It is the abominable nature of the fact or state of being promiscuous that is repeated throughout the Bible. In the OT and NT, it is expressed in clear and definite terms that God found the practice of the Canaanites of Ancient Israel practice of honoring the fertility goddess Asherah with ritual sex an abomination and detestable. Similar narrative unfolds when this same practice reared its head among the gentiles in Rome, that Paul had to voice out with making reference to Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13, when writing Romans 1:26-27 etcetera

This is like asking OkCornel, to please show you, in the Bible where God said He has stopped tithes. You are just exhilarating yourself with all these your bonus reward points dead-ended out of place third-degree questions and the way you are deliberately trying to ignore the facts of how the original meanings of words in the Bible were changed to mean something else used with the inception of another two words homosexual & homosexuality, and everything was used to demonise consensual adult SSA committed, faithful, caring, kind, love thats till death do part relationships

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
4/ The words, homosexuality and homosexual are not in the original texts of the Bible
In fact, the words homosexuality and/or homosexual, actually are words that's barely 200 years old.
The word "homosexual" was invented in 1868, and the word "homosexuality" certainly was not around in Biblical times
Another fact, is that, the word "homosexual" was first printed in a German book in 1869, and then after placed in the German Bible in 1946 and later then in the English bible in 1950s.

Something I pointed out on this thread earlier. Whatever the rendering of the words used to describe the acts, the acts themselves are clearly condemned .

This is lie from the pit of hell and you know it, because it isnt consensual adult SSA committed, faithful, caring, kind, love thats till death do part relationships that the Bible condemns in Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 et cetera or elsewhere

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
5/ God has never had any objection to the homosexuality act of my purview

Learned friend, please demonstrate it, kindly evidence it from scripture. Scholarly nwanne, assertions, no matter how strenuous or repeated, are not evidence .

TV01, we will cross that bridge when we come to it. Get this straight that no one, before we come to it, is crossing the bridge. We have to deconstruct those lies first together, then we can mount, climb and cross the bridge after.

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
6/ It is glaring, except if in denial, what the meaning of Paul's "malakois" and "arsenokoites" used in 1 Timothy 1:10 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 translated to "homosexual" or homosexual acts in 1946 and 1950s are

On the contrary, the use of these words by Paul attest to a blanket condemnation of any form of homosexual activity. And relatining it to the prohibitions on Leviticus - which were themselves universal - and unambiguously so - makes the case all the more.

https://www.instagram.com/p/By0iFA6goIQ/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
This is untrue because for starters, Paul had never used the word "homosexual" when describing the sinful behaviors of the time.

Each of the words now used to demonise SSA persons, OkCornel with good judgement or sense has looked up and researched on a few, and it shows that even words like "malakoi/malakos", that is in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and a word that was later translated in 1958 to mean homosexuals, originally and actually is a word, that meant moral weakness and was used to describe the immorality of the temple prostitutes of Corinth etcetera. One of the meanings of "malakoi/malakos" in the first century was it being an effeminate man who pretties himself with daily shaving of the face in the Greek manner, using makeup, hair coloring, putting on jewelleries and fancy clothing to attract male & female customer with whom to have sex.

The above Instagram link shows the nomadic Wodaabe community belonging to the Fulani ethnic group with make-up on, though they are not into temple ritual sex etcetera, but India is the last bastion of where this temple ritual sex, temple male prostitutes etcetera practised by the Canaanites in Leviticus times and by the heathen gentiles in Paul's Rome and Corinth times, is to date, still done. They are called "arsenokoites" or sodomites in India but are called by another word vernacular to that area

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
7/ If you know, you know, that there is no sin grading. No sin, except for the one against the Holy Spirit, is bigger than any other sin. If you're sinful, you are a sinner. Period and that's all, even if the occassional lies, white lies and all too. So even, if same sex attraction were to a be a sin, thank God it isnt, then stop being like a lot of inexcusable people on this thread, looking and pointing at the speck, in a brother's eye, but failing to notice, the beam log in their own hollier than thou eye.

Sin grading is not the point of this discussion and merely a ruse by you - and a clear flaw in your argument. No one argues that lies are acceptable to God, which is what you assert with regards to ss acts.

I am just pointing out your hypocrises, that you kind lie every single day, you'll lie at least one lie tomorrow, but you have the audacity to be pointing at one fathom speck in somebody's else eye, without mind the big fat log beam in your own santimonious eyes.

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
8/ Greed, covetousness, and lust are improper homosexual and heterosexual desires and/or faults that when acted upon not only leads to prostitution, adultery, fornication, lewdness, promiscuity etcetera but equally is at a detriment to, betrayal of or cheating on another or other person(s) whom love, faithfulness, commitment, honesty, lasting that's life-long and loyalty was professed to whilst in a relationship, that's same sex or otherwise

God did not create heterosexual or homosexual categories of person. God created humans sexed male & female, and with a complimentary sexual function. "Homosexual" is merely a social euphemism for dysfunction, and "heterosexual" is an attempt to present that dysfunction as a natural/normal option. That is the deceitful narrative presented by the world. The scriptures - the word of our Creator - clearly states otherwise.

If you want it that way, OK, that's just semantics, "homosexual" and "heterosexual" are semantics, yet it does not change the fact and reality that greed, covetousness, lack of self-control and lust are improper desires and/or faults that when acted upon not only leads to prostitution, adultery, fornication, lewdness, promiscuity, cheating, sleeping around etcetera but also cause friction, harm, pain to another whom love, faithfulness, commitment, honesty, lasting that's life-long and loyalty was supposedly professed to whilst in a relationship, that's same sex or otherwise

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
9/ There's a lot of things when you read in the Bible you have to know what you're reading about, know the context, the history of it and the customs of the land and so you know what these words, like in #6 etcetera originally means

Cultural context and historical understanding certainly help, however, they don't advance your case in this instance.

On the contrary. I have already and again explained to you above how you've pulled wool(s) over your eyes and led yourself up the garden path with tissues of lies. You really ought to be reading scripture in context, in order to be able to get the real picture TV01.

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
10/ All the scriptures, that most Christians, whatnot or otherwise, the likes of TV01, elated177, jesusjnr, shepherd00, solite3, Goshen360, openmine, alBHAGDADI, VBCampaign, Ubenedictus, ujnwachukwu, Image123, Ranchhoddas, ThothHermes, kkins25 etcetera use to condemn consensual SS attraction and SS relationships adults, do not talk about consensual SS attraction and SS relationships adults at all.

In a very limited sense you are right here - they do not talk specifically about consensual ss acts - they are a blanket condemnation of all ss acts.

They do not talk specifically about consensual ss acts because just as when talking of adultery, fornication isnt making a blanket condemnation of all coituses, so never has the Bible condemned consensual SS attraction and SS relationships adults

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
11/ The word sodomite, historically and originally, was never and is not another word for consensual SS attraction and SS relationships adults (i.e. not gays or homosexual). The word sodomite, from the on set, as in the Bible, is a word originally meant for a male temple prostitute(s) and never the definition of consensual adults same sex couples, that are in a kind, trusting, caring, loving, faithful, no harm done to each other or any other person and committed life long, until death do them apart relationships (i.e. gays)
so be a good idea to understand the

Sodomite 0, catamite 0, rent boy 0, whatever. The prohibition is against all acts of a ss nature. Your attempt to find cause for a certain kind fails woefully. Flat on your face buddy .

You are wrong and just being incorrigible, as in, incapable of being corrected.

The reason there is a cause for this certain relationship is because it is born of mutual love, and you cant make such love into a bad thing. You cant TV01, fault a committed, faithful, kind, caring and love until death do part relationship that has no bad fruit(s)

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
12/ In Paul's day there were at least, 17 words in Greek that Paul could have used to talk about gays if he wanted to say gay is sin but instead of using any of those already existing 17 Greek words, Paul invented and coined a new Greek word, "arsenokoites", it is the word I have been mentioning up above. Now for the attention of my lovely two brothers TV01 and Shepherd00, Paul in Romans 1:18-32, especially verses 24 & 27 is echoing what happened around when the pronouncement Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 were made and/or given

And the words Paul coined in Greek reflect the Hebrew words used to utterly condemn it in Leviticus..

Paul didnt use any of those 17 words that ordinarily means gays, SSA persons or homosexual/lesbian, but used the words associated and synonymous with cheating, sleeping around, unfaithfulness, cruelty to children, pedophilia as in sexual attraction to prepubescent children, temple prostitution, ritual sex etcetera

I am 110% sure that neither you or OkCornel know that Romans 1:18-32, especially verses 24, 26 & 27, is a rehash of Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13, where at, Paul, is echoing what happened around when Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 were issued and is prevailing again in Paul's time, there in Rome. Hmm?

Do you guys want me to give and explain to youse, the true and original meanings of the words "malakoi/malakos" and "arsenokoites" ? Also inform youse why "arsenokoites" is defined as sodomites. Hmm? You TV01, like waving and banding about the word sodomite(s), I've noticed. Meet me immediately below down then, just for "arsenokoites" to start with, we can catch up with "malakoi/malakos" and meaning of sodomite(s) later TV01 and OkCornel, yeah?

TV01:
MuttleyLaff:
13/ Bearing in mind, that, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and 1 Timothy 1:8-11 are the only two times, in the Bible's entire history, that the word "arsenokoites" is used and seen. Now TV01, Shepherd00, openmine and others, dont you think, it would be exciting to know, why Paul, in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and 1 Timothy 1:8-11, when inventing this word "arsenokoites", that, in his construct, he used, man (i.e. arseno- or arsen-) as in, singular and then used beds, (i.e. koites), as in plural, hmm? Has the penny dropped yet, erh?

The term is clearly capturing men in the bed, something of a reflection of the Hebrew verse which states that "the marriage bed is undefiled". Here any bed shared by ss couples is abominable. It was a blanket condemnation and universal prohibition of what is an abominable, depraved, detestable and defiling act. Period.

TV

"¹⁷There shall be no whôre of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel (i.e. No Israelite, man or woman, is to become a temple prostitute)
¹⁸Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whôre, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the LORD thy God. (i.e. also, no money earned in this way may be brought into the house of the Lord your God in fulfillment of a vow. The Lord hates temple prostitutes.)"
- Deuteronomy 23:17-18

This bit here, I know, will be of the utmost interest to OkCornel, because I am going to tell you, him OkCornel and others something that you dont know about "arsenokoites" Now remember that I mentioned that Paul invented this word all by himself. He ignored 17 already existing words identified with SSA men to use this new word "arsenokoites" he created from two words, namely "arseno- or arsen- " (i.e. man) as in, singular and then used "koites", (i.e. beds), as in plural. The "arsenokoites" term usage is not really a reflection of any Hebrew verse which states that "the marriage bed is undefiled" because its like you going far-fetched with that, but is used in context of the epidemic and endemic practice of male temple prostitutes offering ritual sex services hopping from one patrons bed to another patron's bed, hence why and how Paul constructed the man (i.e. arseno- or arsen-) as in, singular and then used beds, (i.e. koites), as in plural TV01

Did you TV01 and OkCornel notice Deuteronomy 23:17-18 reproduced above, hmm? Hin don tay wey yansh don dey back of fowl ooo. This temple male prostitutes, also known as sodomites, the Isrealites met it on the ground or land from when they inherited the land flowing with milk and honey from the Canaanites. Nobi small thing ooo, and God was without mincing words, expressly against it

Shepherd00:
A lying MoG. I spit on your title.

Being a moG, is for every believer, son of God, and especially one that submits to the Holy Spirit. It means belong to God Shepherd00.

You rubbished the Romans 8:14 verse I previously quoted, like as if you're a hater. Na wa for you ooo, all this yours and my over zealous fan's venoms showing in both your attitudes, comments or behaviours

Shepherd00:
With all the noise you made, you failed to say what porneia, malakoi/malakos and arsenokoites means within the context they were used.

You just mentioning is enough for you to think they will mean what you want them to mean?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gaychristian101.com/Malakoi.html&ved=2ahUKEwjjzqKLk_HiAhU9RRUIHYzjDf8QFjACegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw2oDbI8vvuscfryAMmjVJs1
This is the homosexual site where you copy and paste from. By all mean they try to pervert the Word of God to suit them.
Rev. M.Turner is a gay pastor whose gay partner is Bill and has been together for 37yrs and got recently married.

Rev. Turner and his partner, Bill, will celebrate their 37th anniversary in June 2019, the same month that the Supreme Court made marriage equality the law of the land, and they legally tied the knot on November 21, 2015. They are proud residents of East Decatur, where their family includes a young 8 year old Border Collie, Rowdy, a 20 year old Cockatiel named Rose, and a 30 year old Catalina Macaw named Jimmy.

He is the champion of 'Loving, faithful consenting adults same sex relationship

Shepherd00, have you got evidence or proof of me copying the contents from that site or any other sites for that matter
Be careful how you slander a moG. I've warned you before, please take heed of the warning, I beg you. I wont say more than that.

Shepherd00:
@bolded What??

When that overzealous fan of mine tells you, it's raining, you're better off, getting off the seat and go check yourself, is all I'll be saying.

The guy has upgraded from mere dedicated heckling to peddling fake news about me. Making a false written statement about saying what I never and nowhere said. It is sheer and all calumny. SMH

budaatum:
17 pages and you have not responded to anything they've asked you so stop using buda as some lame excuse for your inadequacy muttleylaff.

Your apology is accepted all the same.

budaatum though the thread didn't set out to respond to what they are asking me, I still to some certain degree accommodated and obliged them. The thread was opened to deconstruct lies and myths surrounding homosexuality and SSA unions and not giving in to strawman mining antics or other distracting ploys.

OkCornel has got the thread on its deconstructing footing. Ghenghen will soon happen, and lies are going to be exposed.

Progress has been made in those 17 pages, some readers have come to know things, they never knew before and things they have been misinformed about. It's still good in spite...

OkCornel:
I hope you did not skip the meaning of Arsenokoites or Malakos up there...


Especially Arsenokoites that never mentioned anything about male prostitution.

I am sorry I can't comment. There is a restraining order on me until I do certain things, but trust me, we will both deconstruct that word arsenokoites together, once it's over. Just note this combo word is, one part is singular and the other is plural. I can't comment anymore after this until when my restraining order is over.

budaatum:

You do not need to cc me since I already follow you! You definitely don't need to cc me in three consecutive posts in the same thread! And you don't need to cc me in a thread in which I have already commented or liked or shared as doing either of those three will flag up any post in my list of followed topics!

Please know. Where anybody puts their pricks is of no interest to buda unless like you they are putting it in buda, to which buda begs you please muttley, stop raping buda!

Hmm, that's what they all say, until when it hits closer home, which by then, would be too late to be of any interest to them.

Chief, I've taken in your point. I am sorry, and it wouldn't happen again.

TV01:

Don't attempt a diversionary manoeuvre Muttley. I have a number of posts which you have steadfastly ignored. I have raised a new one, feel free to ignore like the others, but don't attempt a deceitful non-response.

1. Why did God allow LGBTQ+-x/ to suffer these past 6'000 years - or even longer as you don't subscribe to a 6 thousand year old creation?
2. Why did Gods plan for creation include an interminable length of time without children for LGBTQ+-/X?
3. If, as you state marriage is not for ss couples, how are these children sanctified?
4. The bible; holy children as those born to at least one believing parent in a male-female marriage. How far for children parented by ss?


TV

Forgive me TV01, God knows my heart, that I am not intending, wasn't and didn't intend to ignore or planned not to respond to those outstanding two posts of yours. I am not like that, not especially to a worthy someone like you. I promise you, I'll restrain and discipline myself from responding to other posts except this niggling budaatum post I am dealing with.

I just got carried away, that at least that OkCornel post was right up the alley of the thread's subject title heading. Pardon my excitement.

TV01:
First, for the 6’000 years up until literally yesterday, did “Gods plan for creation/humanity” as you have proclaimed it mean
1. that “LGBT+x/- would be persecuted?
2. That LGBTx-+/ would not be able to have children??

Further you are essentially stating the following, even though you’ve tried to make it sound like a question for deniability;


One of the reasons God blesses us with children aka the fruit of the womb is as follows;

1 Corinthians 7:14 - For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.

MuttleyLaff, how are such children holy or considered the result of procreation? Children that are not the result of man and woman, male and female, husband and wife in a consecrated marital union?

The children being “parented” by Elton John and David Furnish, are not as a result of natural procreation or the offspring of a scripturally based (male and female) marital union.

MuttleyLaff, pray tell are such children holy? The “biological mother” of such children is not a wife to either of the men, nor indeed in situ for the raising of the children – are such children holy MuttleyLaff?

Muttley you said this


You also stated this;


Is that procreation Muttleylaff. Are the most worldy figures now iconic for Christians? Are the most depraved now role models for the brethren.
If SS couples cannot enter into marriage - according to your word - how are children holy? How are the children ss couples parent the result of procreation.

MuttleyLaff, this doctrine is twisting you into all kinds of shapes. You must be pretzel like by now . Further, the deeper you commit, the further from the truth you stray. You sound like an unabashed homosexualst and LGBT-+x/ advocate. Full fledged. campaigning for everything exactly as the world does .


TV

1/ First did you notice the OkCornel presentation of the real meanings of the words perpetrated and used to demonise SSA persons TV01, hmm?
2/ Do you agree and accept that they either have to do with homosexuality bordering with prostituting and/or paedophilia, hmm?

budaatum:
Muttley! Why are you missing the point so stupidly! If I were not grouchy would I have made my request, twice now not to be cced, in bold and in red?

This thread is on page 17! Go and check how many times your buda cc posts have been quoted and you just might understand how grouchy it has made me!

I added toxic too, you missed that.

I only cc you or anyone when I suspect the content of the cc is interesting & also might be of interest to the cc'ed

It takes less face muscles to smile than frowning does. Frowning accelerates getting aged wrinkly and old looking in the face

budaatum:
So says the one who lifts his hands against his neighbour with no regard, a pitfall a simple read would help one avoid.

I'm shaking my head at you muttley. You take the good in you and just ruin it with your own mouth.

Olive Tree branch, you're getting too grouchy and toxic for my liking. It's not healthy for either of us both, so I'll retreat on the side of peace making.

budaatum:
I guess some people just are cursed already but like to delude themselves. The next time you cc buda in your nonsense muttley you will be paid back in coin you are sure to not like.

I am blessed, blessed in the morning, blessed in the afternoon and blessed in the night. Blessings abound all over me, blessings run after me. Na so-so gragra mouth mouth you get. It's with your own hands you'll do yourself. You can't lift your hands against God's anointed, God's own.

budaatum:
Muttley, everytime I see buda mentioned in this prick talk I curse you. Be warned!

" Weapons made to attack you won't be successful; words spoken against you won't hurt at all..."
- Isaiah 54:17a.

So says Isaiah 54:17a above budaatum, as we know it.

Your curse is impotent my friend, as you can't curse him, whom God has not cursed, besides you aren't doing yourself any favour either, because the curse boomerangs on your konkoro dear shiny head

OkCornel:
Muttley, this does not answer my question. I asked if those who were delivered from their homosexual and lesbian habits after encountering Jesus were liars or not...

Besides, what do you make of this scripture in 2 John 9;

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

Either ways, a homosexual or lesbian relationship can never lead to procreation if you go through the natural route. There is nowhere I have ever seen two sperm cells or two ovas fuse together to create a child. It goes against the way nature has designed it...

This only lends credence to the fact that homosexuality and lesbianism can never allow procreation THE WAY GOD DESIGNED IT TO BE...

What kind of homosexuality is acceptable to God? Does it also mean sex between two consenting adults, especially outside the confines of marriage is also acceptable to God? Be it that they are of the same sex or not?

Yes...we'll look at them. Meanwhile, when Jesus spoke on marriage, pay close attention to His words...

Matthew 19 v 4-5;
4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause, shall a man leave father and mother, and cleave unto his wife, and they which were two, shall be one flesh?

This was God's original design, now how did this deviate from man/woman relationship to man/man or woman/woman relationship?

Where did God give approval of a same sex relationship just like the above?

Yes, we'll look at the words of Paul and analyze them in subsequent posts...

OkCornel, you know what the title of this thread says, especially the first word of the subject heading. Now, nonetheless, you seem to be bent on doing a strawman mining and going on a tangent from the subject heading title, I'll still respectfully indulge you

You are proof-texting with 2 John 1:9, it is neither here or there, has no place in the present discussion OkCornel

Did Elton John, Enrique "Ricky" Martín Morales aka Ricky Martin, Mpho Andrea Tutu-van Furth, Beyonce's husband, Jay-Z's mum etcetera tell you anything about going against nature hmm? There are quite a lot of things that happen that is natural or that does go with nature. Case in point, I've seen quite a few people "naturally" driving their cars with their feet. It is unnatural for me to do so, but it is easily natural for them to drive their cars with their feet

When people have straightforward and easy fertility challenges, and they take advantages of methods like in vitro fertilization, gestational surrogacy or medically assisted insemination" arent they going against the way nature has designed it, hmm?

I previously told OkCornel, that being homosexual/lesbian, doesnt biblically exclude or prohibit you officially from having kids, or does it? It does not prohibit anyone from having kids any other legal and permissible way

Life long committed relationship, one that is faithful, has love until death do part, caring and kind, this is what we are talking of OkCornel. Can you fault something like that, hmm?

OkCornel, now, if we are both, to be honest and sincere, you would accept and agree with me that, the context of that Matthew 19:4-5, you referenced and by the way Matthew 19:12, had more to do with talking about divorce than marriage and eunuchs. It started as a trap question at Jesus, then by divine intervention, it descended to other things being said and then ended up with talking about men who dont want to marry women (i.e. Matthew 19:10 - His disciples said to Him, "If this is the case between a man and his wife, it is better not to marry" like, same sex attraction men not attracted to women.

By God's design of man's bodily parts, God has given approval of a same sex relationship just like anything else He permits.

Yes please, as I cant wait, to we look at the words of Paul and analyze them in your subsequent posts, and with that I know you'll stop derailing the thread with all these your red herrings and/or distractions

OkCornel:
Network on my laptop is messed up.
I'm typing this from my phone right now...and I can't do much...
Lemme get the network issue sorted...
Good morning everyone.

[img]https://s2/images/MuttleyDriveLaff.gif[/img]
Top of the morning to you too & everyone.
Pẹẹlẹ, ndo, sorry about that.
What network are you using?
#sipsTea, not strong coffee, like Shepherd00 does

OkCornel:
Mr MuttleyLaff, what then should we say of homosexuals and lesbians that repented from such acts after having an encounter with Jesus... Do we call them liars?

What does Romans 8:1 say Mr OkCornel?

Never mind, I'll tell. It states that:
"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

So OkCornel, how can you try to, now curse those whom God has not cursed, hmm?

OkCornel:
Besides...if your father happened to be a staunch homosexual, you won't be here discussing with us...

If I am meant by God to be here, whether my father happened to be or didnt happen to be a staunch homosexual, I'll be here and be here discussing with everyone. Case in point, some happily fit in "go into the world and multiply and fill the earth..." with children via surrogacy, cases in point, Elton John, Enrique "Ricky" Martín Morales aka Ricky Martin, etcetera whilst other some, already earlier or along the way, have had kids, just like Mpho Andrea Tutu-van Furth, google her up, then there's also someone like, Beyonce's husband, Jay-Z's mum (i.e. staunch lesbian)

"Are there cases of same sex relationship that led to procreation"?, you earlier asked me, at which I replied: "Yes, there are, case in point Elton John and partner, and using methods like in vitro fertilization, gestational surrogacy or medically assisted insemination".

OkCornel, being homosexual/lesbian, you see, doesnt exclude biblically or prohibit you officially from having kids, or does it? Please advise me, if it does.

OkCornel:
Anyways, back to the matter on ground. Is homosexuality acceptable before God?

Of course homosexuality, of and/or to a certain degree is acceptable to God

OkCornel:
The scriptures to be discussed will be put up now...

OkCornel, I've earlier, more than one time, told you, I dont want to know who Paul was speaking against in 1 Timothy 1 v 8-11 but what in fact, I did ask you, was about the original and true meanings of the words changed in 1 Timothy 1:10 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 from what Paul wrote and he meant.

Let's look at scriptures, to discuss, as you put it. Let's from the discussion, confirm the true and original meaning of the words "porneia" and "arsenokoites", both in 1 Timothy 1:10 and then, another one, like, "malakoi/malakos", that is in 1 Corinthians 6:9, along with "porneia" and "arsenokoites", the two earlier mentioned to be in 1 Timothy 1:10, before the lies they are now and currently are stating them to be, though they arent at all so, hmm?

Lets start with deconstructing those first before grabbing and/or holding on to Leviticus 18:22, or its sister verse Leviticus 20:13, to explain, what they really mean, why and how the term abomination that appears in them is so to God. Romans 1:26-27, too is up for grabs as well, we can check it together and find out, what contextually that scripture is about OkCornel. Other passages are fair game, I am wiling to stand alongside you, reviewing them together

One of my overzealous fans, that I put on "Ignore Mode On" because of his dedicated heckling conduct, in a way that shows poor judgement, mentioned paedophilia on this thread, when all we've been talking about is consensual adults in a mutual faithful, caring, loving, kind, truthful settings. Would you believe it OkCornel, he tried to sling in sexual attraction to prepubescent children into the discussion. That is not just "wikid" but is WIVIL (i.e. wicked+evil) thinking. Funny people everywhere. Nothing wey meh-guard gateman no go see for gate.

Another one, in the person of Shepherd00, had the audacity to ask me, that where in the Bible, does it categorically and/or specifically talk against paedophilia and necrophilia. I am not surprised as Shepherd00 doesnt read, talkess read the Bible to know where. Very soon or later, someone else will bring up and be yanking my leg about bestiality, you just watch OkCornel. The whole joke things just tire me. Wetin vigilante, no go see and read for midnight or dead in the night 3:10 am time like this, erh OkCornel?

Lets see OkCornel, whether or not these lies, havent been perpetrated and used to demonise homosexuality that is acceptable before God. I've known you OkCornel, to be an objective person on other matter(s), let's see how far you maintain your objectivity or how far it goes, hmm?

If it is only just one person, it will be worth the effort. I am not like my lovely heckler makes me out to be, saying "this is a game or challenge that I needed to WIN to show off". Bound to win?. No! nothing about win but I am bound to be true to the facts.

All I am pleading with you OkCornel, is to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. I am not asking nor suggest you convince me or anyone else for the matter, but let's present the facts, let's examine and/or inspect them closely and thoroughly together, deconstruct these lies & myths, then leave the facts, to speak for themselves.
cc: Goshen360, elated177, PrecisionFx, TV01, Alexandro15, Image123, jesusjnr, luvmijeje, budaatum, Ranchhoddas, ThothHermes, VBCampaign, Michellekabod2, Baddiezz, Agrogbeide, fykes, EmperorHarry, Heathen777, Ubenedictus, FOLYKAZE, Paraltero, alBHAGDADI, Maestro21, shadeyinka, HappyPagan, ujnwachukwu, solite3, bloodofthelamb, OLAADEGBU, Bejusttoall, kkins25