MuttleyLaff:
I have so far been following in the quiet background, your interaction with keen interest and fully enjoying reading your comments on this matter with a gladdened heart

Why are you saying nobody is endorsing gay sex Ubenedictus? Especially when God never, at any instance, is against gay sex huh?.

The Bible never has said, it is a sin to have sexual feelings with anyone of the same sex. God too, has no problems with same sex couples, as in, consenting adults loving each other. God never said homosexuality was an abomination either Ubenedictus and trust me, jesusjnr knows this and more.

Nowhere in the original manuscript of the bible Ubenedictus, is homosexuality, even in the remotest, being mentioned as wrong or a sin. That nonsense and its accomplice other bunch of lies werent put into the bible, until the King James version was written.

Ubenedictus, I repeat the bible does not say same-sex love is sin, but it does say that lust, lasciviousness, being promiscuous, being unfaithful, infidelity, cheating, straying, fornication etcetera are sins.

Being gay is not a sin, gluttony, shaving your beard, eating seafood like lobster, shrimp, crab, catfish or pork etcetera is sin. God encourages people to love everyone even your worst enemies. By loving someone, you're doing what God asks us to do. When homophobes and/or homophobics, the likes of jesusjnr, elated177, Shepherd00, Agrogbeide, Alexandro15, TV01, ThothHermes condemn others for being gay, they're condeming love with hate, and this goes directly against, all that God and the teachings of Jesus says.

Ubenedictus reflect and ponder further more on the subject matter long enough please. Think about it, being gay, as in, same sex couples in a kind, caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship, is the only alleged and so-called "sin thing" that doesn't harm nor hurt anyone, doesnt have a victim, doesnt abuse a partner, doesnt cheat on partner, not into infidelity etcetera

Ubenedictus, if being gay, as in, same sex couples, in a kind caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship is not an affliction, then what is with you having qualms endorsing gay sex, hmm? If you know Ubenedictus, what it feels like to lie, cheat, steal, hurt, hate, lust, be jealous, practice idolatry etcetera and you've felt the negative consequences, please list what are the negative consequences and obvious negatives brought into the world by gays that compels that they be looked at as bad and threatening please?

Isnt it ironic Ubenedictus that being gay, condemned and purported as sin, shares the same passage with forbidding wearing clothing of mixed fabrics, cutting and trimming the hair on the sides of one's head etcetera but they arent the squeaky wheels, like being gay, getting the oil attention, huh?

We can, maybe later Ubenedictus, have you elaborate more on what you in toto mean by sodomy in your "... I am against sodomy" comment
cc Baddiezz, TV01, ThothHermes, noVBCampaign, Michellekabod2

Ubenedictus:
lol, this seems like an argument with an Anglican.

Ubenedictus:
You can happily paste, the time same sex sexual relationship appear in scriptures and their context.

Maybe we can start from there

MuttleyLaff:
Do you always like this play the denomination card, huh?

This is sending me on an "arodan" worthless excercise, so lets cut to the chase, and both agree, accept and start recognising that keeping a beady eye on the times same sex sexual relationship appear in scriptures and their context was not of any particular concern of the Bible. What you ask for, is non existent, it isnt on God's radar list. What God was anxious and more worried about, were issue, like the overarching demand for justice, economic equality and the fair treatment of all right across board, even to foreigners and strangers.

Now, Ubenedictus, please elaborate more on what you, in toto mean by sodomy in your "... I am against sodomy" comment and the sentence in the comment means and is talking all about. Thank you.

MuttleyLaff:
Do you always like this play the denomination card, huh?

This is sending me on an "arodan" worthless excercise, so lets cut to the chase, and both agree, accept and start recognising that keeping a beady eye on the times same sex sexual relationship appear in scriptures and their context was not of any particular concern of the Bible. What you ask for, is non existent, it isnt on God's radar list. What God was anxious and more worried about, were issue, like the overarching demand for justice, economic equality and the fair treatment of all right across board, even to foreigners and strangers.

Now, Ubenedictus, please elaborate more on what you, in toto mean by sodomy in your "... I am against sodomy" comment and the sentence in the comment means and is talking all about. Thank you.

MuttleyLaff:
I have so far been following in the quiet background, your interaction with keen interest and fully enjoying reading your comments on this matter with a gladdened heart

Why are you saying nobody is endorsing gay sex Ubenedictus? Especially when God never, at any instance, is against gay sex huh?.

The Bible never has said, it is a sin to have sexual feelings with anyone of the same sex. God too, has no problems with same sex couples, as in, consenting adults loving each other. God never said homosexuality was an abomination either Ubenedictus and trust me, jesusjnr knows this and more.

Nowhere in the original manuscript of the bible Ubenedictus, is homosexuality, even in the remotest, being mentioned as wrong or a sin. That nonsense and its accomplice other bunch of lies werent put into the bible, until the King James version was written.

Ubenedictus, I repeat the bible does not say same-sex love is sin, but it does say that lust, lasciviousness, being promiscuous, being unfaithful, infidelity, cheating, straying, fornication etcetera are sins.

Being gay is not a sin, gluttony, shaving your beard, eating seafood like lobster, shrimp, crab, catfish or pork etcetera is sin. God encourages people to love everyone even your worst enemies. By loving someone, you're doing what God asks us to do. When homophobes and/or homophobics, the likes of jesusjnr, elated177, Shepherd00, Agrogbeide, Alexandro15, TV01, ThothHermes condemn others for being gay, they're condeming love with hate, and this goes directly against, all that God and the teachings of Jesus says.

Ubenedictus reflect and ponder further more on the subject matter long enough please. Think about it, being gay, as in, same sex couples in a kind, caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship, is the only alleged and so-called "sin thing" that doesn't harm nor hurt anyone, doesnt have a victim, doesnt abuse a partner, doesnt cheat on partner, not into infidelity etcetera

Ubenedictus, if being gay, as in, same sex couples, in a kind caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship is not an affliction, then what is with you having qualms endorsing gay sex, hmm? If you know Ubenedictus, what it feels like to lie, cheat, steal, hurt, hate, lust, be jealous, practice idolatry etcetera and you've felt the negative consequences, please list what are the negative consequences and obvious negatives brought into the world by gays that compels that they be looked at as bad and threatening please?

Isnt it ironic Ubenedictus that being gay, condemned and purported as sin, shares the same passage with forbidding wearing clothing of mixed fabrics, cutting and trimming the hair on the sides of one's head etcetera but they arent the squeaky wheels, like being gay, getting the oil attention, huh?

We can, maybe later Ubenedictus, have you elaborate more on what you in toto mean by sodomy in your "... I am against sodomy" comment
cc Baddiezz, TV01, ThothHermes, VBCampaign, Michellekabod2

LordReed:


Ok so female female cloning is a heterosexual process?

Ubenedictus:
Maybe you don't get get it, but I am not playing the denomination card.

Ubenedictus:
The way my mind works is simple, when I hear an argument I immediately match it to the "scholarship" from which it came, it genre and the group that holds it. That way I know where the person is coming from, his interest and perspective and I am more open to addressing it.

Ubenedictus:
If you are a Christian and you believe Jesus is not God my mind immediately matches your thoughts to Arianism of the 3rd century CE, and it's adherent today chief among them the Jehovah's Witnesses and the oneness groups.

If you believe that scripture contain all necessary for salvation, you may be any type of Christian but if you hold that all that truth is explicitly contained therein, immediately understood by anyone, and needing no explanation, then you are from the reformation time and have embraced a kind of Puritanism and fundamentalism common or originating from the American church, you are a Christian fundamentalist of a Baptist flavor.

By knowing the traditions you have adopted I can know how to speak to you. If I am talking to an orthodox Christian, we can discuss the mysteries, the economy, church fathers, pascal mysteries, Christus Victor... All these themes are totally lost on a protestant, with a Lutheran I could discuss the substantial presence of Jesus in the Eucharistic, that is totally lost on those who accepts the tradition of John Calvin.

Ubenedictus:
When I hear a Christian arguing for homosexual sexual relations, I know those who are doing stuff in that area are majorly the Anglicans and Episcopal Church. Then I know where to begin the discussions.

Ubenedictus:
I'm not playing at denominations, these doctrines you are teaching are tied to specific and very recent interpretative tradition that come from a placing of the present world ideas and superimposing them upon scriptures to make scriptures say what the world says.

Ubenedictus:
I can look at the whole teaching, it's source and the interest it promotes. Then I can answer it well.

Ubenedictus:
God actually is concerned about all parts of human life, not just the overreaching theme of justice, love, and fairness. He is interested in the very things humans think, in their understanding of themselves, their understanding of the world, their understand of him, the use of the gifts he gives to men, their bodies and sexuality and it's right use, in their relationship with family, nations and foreigners. The God of the Bible seems interested in it all.

It is in the understanding of their bodies and sexuality, the right use and end of these gifts that the issue of sexual relations of all kinds fall into.

Ubenedictus:
In analysing all that scripture says about these...
I don't see how anybody will be talking of homosexual sexual relations and approving them by biblical or even Christian standards.

Ubenedictus:
by sodomy in the context I used it, I mean homosexual sexual relations. I thought that was clear.

Ubenedictus:
It Sunday so let me touch this a little.

The first time the bible hints at same sex sexual relations it was in the Torah.

Ubenedictus:
In Genesis the wicked people of Sodom will attempt to rape angels in human form. The epistle of Jude says that among other things the city practiced sexual immorality he called "unnatural desires". It was destroyed.

Ubenedictus:
Then lev says.

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. (Leviticus 20:13

I know you are pretty ready to dismiss this as part of the law, including the dietary restrictions etc.
But the issue appears again in new testament, rm1:26,27. it situate the homosexual desire as part of the distortion of human desires occasioned by our fall, and used the term "unnatural" to describe it. The term for man sex appears in the letter to the Corinthians and again it was condemn.

Each time it is talked about it is condemned, nor is it included in God's plan for human sexuality which is marriage. In fact Jesus would specify that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Ubenedictus:
As for your submission that no one is hurt... Well that argument can be made for pornography and masturbation, bestiality,..., a sin doesn't need to physical hurt anyone, it simply has to be the wrong use of God's gift. In this case human sexuality.

jesusjnr2:
So it's no longer cell to cell cloning (which is false and doesn't exist and you'd soon find out why, if you don't already know), but now female to female, eh?

So if I was your student and relied upon you completely for information concerning cloning, that's how you would come and go and leave out some very key details such as the fact that female eggs are required for the very delicate process that rarely ever succeeds?

And also the fact that an embryo yet also requires a woman to play the role of a mother to produce child out of it?

At least we can first establish that male to male cloning technique doesn't exist! Fact!

So that's 50% homosexuality down with respect to being self-extinctive even from the cloning angle.

Then onto the next one, which is the female to female cloning according to you.

So ask yourself, why are female eggs so vital to the human reproductive cloning procedure?

Now remember that it is cloning, so that also applies to the procedure for human reproduction which is fundamentally heterosexual and male and female, for that is also being cloned.

So the female eggs in the cloning process represent the female eggs in the heterosexual procedure, so what's now missing, the male seed(sperm), which is to be fertilized by the female eggs right?

Now that is where the cell comes in, for the cell takes the role of the male seed in the process, hence the need for the cell to be fertilized by female eggs to form an embryo, which is then implanted into a woman's body for the final stage of the reproductive process.

Therefore the cell despite possibly being from a female body, in the cloning procedure represents the male seed as in the fundamental heterosexual reproductive procedure.

And the only reason the cell is able to represent the male seed in the human reproductive cloning procedure and be fertilized by the female eggs is because it is also a seed in itself, for it's only seeds that could be fertilized by the female eggs.

But since it's only males that are able to produce seeds, never females, how can a cell which is taken from a woman's body possibly be a seed?

It is because the woman's body itself is a seed which was produced by a male body, therefore despite that it is a female body, it is a male seed because it wasn't produced by female body but a male body even though it was a female body that produced the eggs that fertilized the seed of the woman's body.

So even though the cell was taken from a female body, it is not the produce of a female body, but that of a male body since the female body is a male seed. So the cell taken from the female body could be said to be a male seed of the female body in it simplest form.

So just like it is during the beginning of the heterosexual reproductive process where the male seed of the female or male body is in its simplest form of the sperm, during the beginning of the human reproductive cloning procedure, the seed of the female body is in its simplest form of the cell, which is now fertilized with the produce of a woman's body, even her eggs, which results in the formation of the embryo, which is then sown into a woman's body, which now makes a child of the female fertilized male seed.

So even from the angle of the human reproductive cloning technique, there's nothing like cell to cell which is actually male to male, or even female to female as it is in homosexuality, for it's always male to female, which is fundamentally a heterosexual reproductive procedure.

So with all these explanations I hope that I have been able to convince you and not confuse you, that homosexuals strictly adhering to fundamentally homosexual procedure on its own, is self-extinctive. Fact!

Any more questions?

MuttleyLaff:
Where in the Torah specifically sir?

"Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire"
- Jude 1:7

I took the liberty to help you reproduce Jude 1:7 to be seen above, because I know you know what it means to give oneself up to fornication or the meaning of the statement: I am guilty of fornication. That was what is part of Sodom's sin sire, aside being unfriendly and unwelcoming towards people.

"49Behold, this was the iniquity (i.e. the sin) of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
⁵⁰And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good. "
- Ezekiel 16:49-50

Furthermore, from Ezekiel 16:49-50 above, you can see why Sodom and Gomorrah was earmarked for destruction, this in fact, before they even embarked on their gang rape adventure, lusting after strange flesh and having unnatural desires. Na pesin wey get liver, who go wan try go fairk angels nau, no bi so? Which kind of desire be dat. Who does that?

SMH, I just love and enjoy it when I find you guys, TV01, shepherd00, elated177, jesusjnr, Agrogbeide etcetera, without minding the context, start to proof-text with Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:25-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9 and/or 1 Timothy 1:10, its hilarious but at this juncture, I am not, now, going to here, waste any amount of time or effort responding to any of these your above presuppositions. I will however call you, mention you and invite you over, when I respond to TV01, he shares similar SMH misinformations with you.

Pornography harms and hurts if you're lusting after the object you're oggling at. Masturbation harms and hurts if its abused and/or misused. Bestiality harms and hurts defenceless and helpless animals , besides that, who in their right mind does that, fairking animals, huh? Dont try and twist this thing, tell what is the wrong use of God's gift you are rabbiting on about?

Shepherd00:
Your anus shd be jealous of your mouth for all the shit that spews out of it. You are doing a good job falsifying Scriptures. You are a thief sir. Thou shall not steal.

MuttleyLaff:
Ignoranus Goatherd00, Mr Fixated on Anus, instead of just saying, please tell the sriptures I've falsified, tell how I am a thief, tell what I stole?

LordReed:


LMFAO! Wow you really don't like gay people. You had to employ extreme mental gymnastics just to make a point that gay people would go extinct because they can't exist without heterosexual people. Injecting the nucleus of one cell in an ovum is now a heterosexual process even though it is done in a lab by hand. SMH.

Tell me something, why is it important to deny homosexual people reproductive rights?

jesusjnr2:
Lol!

So now it's employing extreme mental gymnastics?

Good thing though that I've made my point from a perspective you should be able to relate to, for all I did was use the basic principles and laws of procreation to arrive at the truth just as it is done in science.

For the law of procreation states that it takes a male + female to procreate, and that any thing else as male + male, or female + female would lead to a dead end.

If saying the truth means hating the gays, then maybe I should lie, as you did and say that cloning reproductive technique is cell + cell instead of cell + female eggs, for that would mean loving the gays.

I didn't say that it's a heterosexual process, but that it copies fundamentals of the heterosexual reproductive procedure which is male + female.

I ain't denying the the homos any reproductive rights, for even if such am unlikely scenario of a strictly gay world takes place, I wouldn't even be there in the first place, needless say deny them any rights.

But this is just to prove a point that there's something fundamentally wrong with the lifestyle from a logical perspective that you could relate to.

Have a good nite.

LordReed:


I ask because these are the arguments people who say gay people should not procreate or adopt children make. I have heard before but you take it a step further.

LordReed:


Anyway I am glad the world is making progress in accepting people of differing lifestyle choices and regressive thinking will not stop that progress.

ololade5597:
Was homosexuality the only sin committed in sodom??

MuttleyLaff:
I have so far been following in the quiet background, your interaction with keen interest and fully enjoying reading your comments on this matter with a gladdened heart

Why are you saying nobody is endorsing gay sex Ubenedictus? Especially when God never, at any instance, is against gay sex huh?.

The Bible never has said, it is a sin to have sexual feelings with anyone of the same sex. God too, has no problems with same sex couples, as in, consenting adults loving each other. God never said homosexuality was an abomination either Ubenedictus and trust me, jesusjnr knows this and more.

Nowhere in the original manuscript of the bible Ubenedictus, is homosexuality, even in the remotest, being mentioned as wrong or a sin. That nonsense and its accomplice other bunch of lies werent put into the bible, until the King James version was written.

Ubenedictus, I repeat the bible does not say same-sex love is sin, but it does say that lust, lasciviousness, being promiscuous, being unfaithful, infidelity, cheating, straying, fornication etcetera are sins.

Being gay is not a sin, gluttony, shaving your beard, eating seafood like lobster, shrimp, crab, catfish or pork etcetera is sin. God encourages people to love everyone even your worst enemies. By loving someone, you're doing what God asks us to do. When homophobes and/or homophobics, the likes of jesusjnr, elated177, Shepherd00, Agrogbeide, Alexandro15, TV01, ThothHermes condemn others for being gay, they're condeming love with hate, and this goes directly against, all that God and the teachings of Jesus says.

Ubenedictus reflect and ponder further more on the subject matter long enough please. Think about it, being gay, as in, same sex couples in a kind, caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship, is the only alleged and so-called "sin thing" that doesn't harm nor hurt anyone, doesnt have a victim, doesnt abuse a partner, doesnt cheat on partner, not into infidelity etcetera

Ubenedictus, if being gay, as in, same sex couples, in a kind caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship is not an affliction, then what is with you having qualms endorsing gay sex, hmm? If you know Ubenedictus, what it feels like to lie, cheat, steal, hurt, hate, lust, be jealous, practice idolatry etcetera and you've felt the negative consequences, please list what are the negative consequences and obvious negatives brought into the world by gays that compels that they be looked at as bad and threatening please?

Isnt it ironic Ubenedictus that being gay, condemned and purported as sin, shares the same passage with forbidding wearing clothing of mixed fabrics, cutting and trimming the hair on the sides of one's head etcetera but they arent the squeaky wheels, like being gay, getting the oil attention, huh?

We can, maybe later Ubenedictus, have you elaborate more on what you in toto mean by sodomy in your "... I am against sodomy" comment
cc Baddiezz, TV01, ThothHermes, VBCampaign, Michellekabod2

Michellekabod2:

You can never answer questions straight up ,you must beat round the bush and claim victorious like you did with advocate 666....
For example if you are caught stealing,u will refuse to be called a thief but will rather talk of others that are stealing as well...I have given you an instance where homosexuals don't need homophobics for proceation,you will not learn and acknowledge the fact that science has evolved but still retain your "truth"...counter what I said with fact,you will not,what is deep or beyond my carnal mind you can't explain plainly with beating round the bush?don't know for you again jesusjnr,in fact...I am done with this conversation as I gained nothing,you didn't pass any point and will not still do with the way you are going...

I expect an epistle from you filled with blame shifting and defensiveness and stubbornness with no point being raised but I will not reply

jesusjnr:
Are you kidding me budaatum? Profligacy reduced lately?

At the same time that you've been on my neck to bring evidence of my claims that you'd been spreading malicious lies about me here that I didn't have time to respond to? Lol!

And when I eventually did respond with three back to back posts, instead of responding to the posts starting from the first one to either disprove of my claims or to confirm it, you are talking about the figment of your imagination with Michelle.

Or is it because of Michelle that you didn't respond to any one of my three posts, for someone that couldn't trust you and me with her real picture, when I did trust you and her with my real picture and you did trust me and her with your real picture?

She's here so you can confirm my saying from yourself, if i'm lying against her or saying the truth.

For when I found out I was quite pissed up especially when we had seen ourselves as some kind of spiritual family then, but she could yet have the mind to deceive us to with a picture of someone else as herself.

And although i would yet maintain that she's special in a good way, that said something about her that she had serious issues of her own.

So leave Michelle's matter because you don't have any idea of what's actually going on between us, it's more than what meets the eye but I don't think that you would be able to fathom it at the spiritually shallow level you've chosen to remain in.

But if you yet choose to continue chasing shadows with your deluded bunch, well you are entitled to your choice.

I am happy that I have probably for old times sake made a painstaking effort
to make you see that you and your likes are chasing shadows, for y'all have serious issues of your own to worry about.

So if you choose to yet continue in the paths of your delusions despite my earnest efforts, it's not because I had not warned you.

Bye.

budaatum:
I'm ignoring your rants is all. What you presented just showed how guilty you are of trying to rob God of God's Glory but I doubt you'd ever see it. Tatime, whom you mentioned, had way more of an impact on me long before you turned up and he is way too wise to steal from God as you do.

And yes, Michellekabod2 said in response to you just about all I would have said so there is no point in me engaging with you while I patiently await the dead day of 1^st of January 2020 that you set for your self.

budaatum:
I'm ignoring your rants is all. What you presented just showed how guilty you are of trying to rob God of God's Glory but I doubt you'd ever see it. Tatime, whom you mentioned, had way more of an impact on me long before you turned up and he is way too wise to steal from God as you do.

And yes, Michellekabod2 said in response to you just about all I would have said so there is no point in me engaging with you while I patiently await the dead day of 1^st of January 2020 that you set for your self.

budaatum:


And yes, Michellekabod2 said in response to you just about all I would have said so there is no point in me engaging with you while I patiently await the dead day of 1^st of January 2020 that you set for your self.