[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

Are you one of those fags that believes their only a fag during the act? That it's some sort of light switch? Because that's the argument I'm hearing.

no, I do not lend credit by accepting that homosexuals exist as a living being like fish, dogs, or people.

by creating a term, "homosexual" you have added to God's word too much. Is God's law not good enough for you? Is it not enough to know that men lying with men is an abomination and one should choose not to lye with another? The mythical homosexual is one that does not choose because they act as homosexuals do, just like a cat will act like a cat, or a fish act like a fish. You do not see fish acting like a man do you? A fish that walks on the land and builds a church in which to worship God? I have never seen such a thing.

[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

Why should I believe some unsaved faggot over a True Christian™ Man of God?

You do not need to take my word for it, ask HTannor if he has seen me do it. As a good Christian he will speak the Truth and you can believe his word over mine.

[Benedict A. Davis]

Re: I had to adopt

no, I do not lend credit by accepting that homosexuals exist as a living being like fish, dogs, or people.

by creating a term, "homosexual" you have added to God's word too much. Is God's law not good enough for you? Is it not enough to know that men lying with men is an abomination and one should choose not to lye with another? The mythical homosexual is one that does not choose because they act as homosexuals do, just like a cat will act like a cat, or a fish act like a fish. You do not see fish acting like a man do you? A fish that walks on the land and builds a church in which to worship God? I have never seen such a thing.

please see #21 of this thread

It seems that after someone shows you proof positive that you are wrong you will not admit it. If you disregard something so easy to correct as a spelling error it is no wonder you fight so much when someone tries to point out a real error of your ways.

[Brother Harold Porter]

Re: I had to adopt

no, I do not lend credit by accepting that homosexuals exist as a living being like fish, dogs, or people.

by creating a term, "homosexual" you have added to God's word too much. Is God's law not good enough for you? Is it not enough to know that men lying with men is an abomination and one should choose not to lye with another? The mythical homosexual is one that does not choose because they act as homosexuals do, just like a cat will act like a cat, or a fish act like a fish. You do not see fish acting like a man do you? A fish that walks on the land and builds a church in which to worship God? I have never seen such a thing.

You are a foul troll and I know what you want. You want to address "free will"? More than happy to accomodate you in another thread.

However, you are perilously close to getting yourself banned here with what you think is a clever approach. You are fooling yourself.

Have some respect. I've got a simple sermon in my signature that is meant for foul Philistines like you. Take it or leave it. Your choice.

Yours in Christ!

[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

please see #21 of this thread

post #21 can be found in any dictionary, the only book worth reading is the KJV of the bible. You should account yourself to the loss of time in reading a dictionary, when you should have been reading God's word. it is no wonder you are lost on the path of righteousness. Homosexual is a term found in the dictionary and not in the KJV

here is a link to the letter 'H' in the King James Concordance

http://www.abibleconcordance.com/7Hc.htm

There is absolutely no word "homosexual" in the Bible, it is a term made up by the leftist government to add special recognition for legislative purposes.

[Benedict A. Davis]

Re: I had to adopt

post #21 can be found in any dictionary, the only book worth reading is the KJV of the bible. You should account yourself to the loss of time in reading a dictionary, when you should have been reading God's word. it is no wonder you are lost on the path of righteousness. Homosexual is a term found in the dictionary and not in the KJV

here is a link to the letter 'H' in the King James Concordance

http://www.abibleconcordance.com/7Hc.htm

There is absolutely no word "homosexual" in the Bible, it is a term made up by the leftist government to add special recognition for legislative purposes.

Computerand internet will not be found in the Bible, and may I say you are wasting yours and many others time with your inane semantics.

[Seth Campbell]

Re: I had to adopt

no, I do not lend credit by accepting that homosexuals exist as a living being like fish, dogs, or people.

by creating a term, "homosexual" you have added to God's word too much. Is God's law not good enough for you? Is it not enough to know that men lying with men is an abomination and one should choose not to lye with another? The mythical homosexual is one that does not choose because they act as homosexuals do, just like a cat will act like a cat, or a fish act like a fish. You do not see fish acting like a man do you? A fish that walks on the land and builds a church in which to worship God? I have never seen such a thing.

So you don't use words that aren't in the Bible. Must be very difficult to discuss things with your mechanic. Oh, and just to let you know, cats aren't mentioned in the Bible either. In fact out of your post the following words are not in the KJV Bible

- credit
- creating
- term
- lye
- mythical

So you may want to be more careful if that is the rules you're going to try and live your life by.

[Seth Campbell]

Re: I had to adopt

Computerand internet will not be found in the Bible, and may I say you are wasting yours and many others time with your inane semantics.

Very true, and as was pointed out to another one of these trolls, neither is breathing. Better stop that one right away.

[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

You are a foul troll and I know what you want. You want to address "free will"?

What I want is to say, 'hello' as this is an introduction post. I do not wish to address "free will" at all, but it is pleasant to exercise one's mind in fellowship. How else can I accept correction if not by speaking and asking questions

[Benedict A. Davis]

Re: I had to adopt

What I want is to say, 'hello' as this is an introduction post. I do not wish to address "free will" at all, but it is pleasant to exercise one's mind in fellowship. How else can I accept correction if not by speaking and asking questions

Why do I get the feeling that you would accept correction as easily as I would accept Satan at Sunday dinner?

[Phebe Carlyle]

Re: I had to adopt

I find it interesting that this scherzo fellow tends to want conflict.

I asked him a simple question, not actually related to faggotry and he completely and utterly ignored me.

Perhaps he only wants to deal with the men in the church, knowingly wanting to cause tension and distress! Brothers, take from that what you will!

You should know though, Mr Scherzo, that yes, whilst I am merely a woman, here in LBC, I am several rungs up the ladder from you, so you ARE to treat me with the utmost respect and if I ask you a question, you WILL surely answer it.

I await your reply.

YIC,

Mrs.P.Wintersnow.

[Brother Harold Porter]

Re: I had to adopt

What I want is to say, 'hello' as this is an introduction post. I do not wish to address "free will" at all, but it is pleasant to exercise one's mind in fellowship. How else can I accept correction if not by speaking and asking questions

You aren't asking "questions". You are spewing nonsense like the morning after a bean feed and a pitcher of margaritas.

The crack isn't helping, my friend. We'll get you some help...

Yours in Christ!

[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

Why do I get the feeling that you would accept correction as easily as I would accept Satan at Sunday dinner?

because you do not know me, yet you have seen my words

1 john 4:20

If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

[Benedict A. Davis]

Re: I had to adopt

because you do not know me, yet you have seen my words

1 john 4:20

If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

Isn't it about semantics and false prophets what they are discussing in Luke 20-

45Then in the audience of all the people he said unto his disciples, 46Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;

[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

I asked him a simple question, not actually related to faggotry and he completely and utterly ignored me.

The answer to your question is 'no'

and I'm not wishing to cause conflict, strict following of God's word is what I am trying to accomplish. To accept that homosexuals exist is only the beginning of arguments in Legislation and church. Why would the government need to even address a law that deals with homosexuals if they do not exist? I do not see any laws that give special credit to 'Sasquatch' or 'Martians' because they don't exist, and that is the way government should deal with homosexuals, no laws, no special recognition, because quite simply they don't exist.

God's law is clear, a man should not lye with another man. end of story, if a man is found to lye with another, the only thing we should concern ourselves with is punishment. This way we can all get back to worshiping God, they way He intended us to live.

There is no homosexual debate, because there are no homosexuals, there is only the ACT and the consequence of just punishment. After which we can go back to work, read our bible, bake pies, etc. etc.