[Pastor Ezekiel]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

But research the rape stats yourself. You'll see I'm right.

You know, you've been repeatedly warned about sexual aggression toward us Pastors before. I'm going to put you on moderation and toss you into the loser corral with clownyboy and his buddies if you don't stop throwing yourself at me, witch!

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by Pastor Ezekiel

You know, you've been repeatedly warned about sexual aggression toward us Pastors before. I'm going to put you on moderation and toss you into the loser corral with clownyboy and his buddies if you don't stop throwing yourself at me, witch!

Ok, I'm astounded.
How you managed to come to the conclusion you've come to after reading what I posted, I can't even imagine. It goes waaaaaay into the realms of utterly bizarre.

What I mean was, research the statistics on rapists, and you will see that most of them will be, or have been, straight men.

How you took my meaning to be a comeon, I will never know.

[SalvationSeeker]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

No, because the act of sodomy itself involves penetration of the poophole by a weiner. I mean, if what you're saying was true then kissing could count as sex. And it doesn't.

SECULAR definition, harlot!
That's not how God defines it!

But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
Genesis 19:4-5

"It doesn't say bring them out that we may".. well, do that vile thing you said.
It says "that we may KNOW them." (ie do all manners of vile things in general to them.)

And even less than kissing can count as sex in the eyes of God!
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Matthew 5:28


And you may be an expert on getting sodomized (as per secular definiton) but please, keep it to yourself..
You may consider your skill at "taking it" an asset, but we simply consider it disgusting.
You need to stop killing the unborn and read the Bible more, harlot!

[Rachael Van Helsing]

SS dear, I know that when the bible talks about 'knowing' someone, it means having sex with them.
Haven't you ever heard someone use the term 'Oh I know them..in the biblical sense!' as a joke?

In the KJV1611 you're so fond of, know=sex.
So there.

[SalvationSeeker]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

SS dear, I know that when the bible talks about 'knowing' someone, it means having sex with them.
Haven't you ever heard someone use the term 'Oh I know them..in the biblical sense!' as a joke?

In the KJV1611 you're so fond of, know=sex.
So there.

Indeed it does and is, harlot.
But it doesn't say "know them" has to be (forgive me, Jesus!) anal sex, now does it?

And as mentioned earlier, God considers thoughts just as vile as actions.
He consider thoughts and lust as sex, and who are you to say He is wrong?

Do you call God Allmighty a liar, you insufferable whore?

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by SalvationSeeker

Indeed it does and is, harlot.
But it doesn't say "know them" has to be (forgive me, Jesus!) anal sex, now does it?

Well for men to know other men, seeing as men don't have a 'cooter', then for them men of Sodom to 'know' those angels, they would have been referring to either mouth or poop hole.
You remember why, in the story, Sodom was destroyed, don't you?

And as mentioned earlier, God considers thoughts just as vile as actions.
He consider thoughts and lust as sex, and who are you to say He is wrong?

It implies that the thoughts carry the same 'sinful weight' as the action, but not that the thought and actions themselves are technically the same.

Do you call God Allmighty a liar, you insufferable whore?

Nah, I don't believe in your god, but if he existed then the answer would definitely be yes.

[SalvationSeeker]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

Well for men to know other men, seeing as men don't have a 'cooter', then for them men of Sodom to 'know' those angels, they would have been referring to either mouth or poop hole.

So you admit that sodomy doesn't have to be anal sex, good.
Now you have succesfully contradicted, and backpedal'd on your first statement.

You remember why, in the story, Sodom was destroyed, don't you?

YOU are trying to teach ME the Bible?

It implies that the thoughts carry the same 'sinful weight' as the action, but not that the thought and actions themselves are technically the same.

So how is there a difference?
Since there is no difference for God, you are a fool to make one for yourself.

Stop walking contrary to God before He smites you!

Nah, I don't believe in your god, but if he existed then the answer would definitely be yes.

You lack of belief is the very reason that you cannot never understand God, nor the scriptures.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by SalvationSeeker

So you admit that sodomy doesn't have to be anal sex, good.
Now you have succesfully contradicted, and backpedal'd on your first statement.

ARG!
That isn't what I meant. I was merely talking about methods of insertation. However, 'know' usually meant sex in the bible. In which case, male to male sex is pretty much anal.
Oral sex is different.

YOU are trying to teach ME the Bible?

No, just pointing out the fact of why Sodom was smited, because those men were having sex with other men, hence, sodomy.

So how is there a difference?
Since there is no difference for God, you are a fool to make one for yourself.

Ok, say you go to a store and buy candy.
Say you buy a Hershey bar. Then say you buy a pack of Reese's pieces for the same price.
Same price, right?
Different candy.

Stop walking contrary to God before He smites you!

I'll worry about that around that around the time I worry about Santy Claus putting coal in my stocking.

You lack of belief is the very reason that you cannot never understand God, nor the scriptures.

One can understand the bible without believing in the biblical deity. Take movies for example. You can understand the characters and the plot, however, do you believe that the movie and the events and people in the movie are real?
Nope.

[SalvationSeeker]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

ARG!
That isn't what I meant. I was merely talking about methods of insertation. However, 'know' usually meant sex in the bible. In which case, male to male sex is pretty much anal.

I didn't realise you were such an expert on the perversions of faggots?
And regardless of what you say they do mostly do, the Biblical definition is clear:

Sodomy is man on man sex, in all it's forms.
Lust commonly equal sex in the eyes of God.
Case closed.

Besides, you obviously admit that oral sex can be sodomy, you even do so again here below:

No, just pointing out the fact of why Sodom was smited, because those men were having sex with other men, hence, sodomy.

And this is what I was saying in my first post, and in this post too..

Ok, say you go to a store and buy candy.
Say you buy a Hershey bar. Then say you buy a pack of Reese's pieces for the same price.
Same price, right?
Different candy.

Beside the point.
If God defined it as the same candy, then it would be the same candy, otherwise not. But God doesn't make a difference between thought and action in this case..
Thus, only a fool would draw one, that is, someone who is stupid enough to believe himself smarter than God..

One can understand the bible without believing in the biblical deity.

No.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him:
Neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Corinthians 2:14

[eliot mayfield]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

I call men and women 'dude'. I often call my female friends 'dude'. I don't see why it should be limited to one sex only.

Ok, the definition of sodomy is for one man's 'tallywhacker' to enter another man's poophole.
Now, a man kissing another man does not involve any such contact, so how is it sodomy?

What in tarnation you are up to when you're calling your lady friends dude is more than I want to even contemplate!

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by SalvationSeeker

I didn't realise you were such an expert on the perversions of faggots?
And regardless of what you say they do mostly do, the Biblical definition is clear:

Sodomy is man on man sex, in all it's forms.
Lust commonly equal sex in the eyes of God.
Case closed.

No it isn't! Look it up in the dictionary, sodomy is the act of anal sex. Oral sex is called that, oral sex. Not oral sodomy.
And that passage didn't say anything about 'bring those men out, that their mouths may accept our seed' did they?

Besides, you obviously admit that oral sex can be sodomy, you even do so again here below:

I didn't say it could be sodomy. I said it could be one way in which a weiner can be...uhh.....received.

Beside the point.
If God defined it as the same candy, then it would be the same candy, otherwise not. But God doesn't make a difference between thought and action in this case..
Thus, only a fool would draw one, that is, someone who is stupid enough to believe himself smarter than God..

Not beside the point.
If something COSTS the same, that doesn't mean it IS the same. What is implied is that the thoughts and the actions have the same price, but are not, in themselves, the same.

No.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him:
Neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Corinthians 2:14

Did you not read the bit about movies?
When you watch a movie, you are aware of the characters and plot, no?
But do you believe the movie and the characters are real? Same here.

Originally Posted by Eliot Mayfield

What in tarnation you are up to when you're calling your lady friends dude is more than I want to even contemplate!

Clearly not the same thing as what you're conteplating.

[Father Maurice Lester]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

ARG!
...you go to a store and buy candy.
Say you buy a Hershey bar. Then say you buy a pack of Reese's pieces for the same price.
Same price, right?
Different candy.

I think you are speaking their language now.


Bless you, my misguided munch-muffin,
Father Mo

[SalvationSeeker]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

No it isn't! Look it up in the dictionary, sodomy is the act of anal sex. Oral sex is called that, oral sex. Not oral sodomy.
And that passage didn't say anything about 'bring those men out, that their mouths may accept our seed' did they?

Sigh.. Once again, that is a SECULAR definiton.
Please think before you write.

And no they didn't, because as I said they didn't plan to do just ONE thing with them, but many vile things.

I didn't say it could be sodomy. I said it could be one way in which a weiner can be...uhh.....received.

So you have no idea whatsoever what you wrote:
"No, just pointing out the fact of why Sodom was smited, because those men were having sex with other men, hence, sodomy."

The- men- of- SODOM! had- sex- with- other- men!
Thus: S O D O M Y.

You must be slow or something...
And without the Bible, there wouldn't even be a word such as sodomy in English nor American!
Thus, the Bible is the only valid definiton of what sodomy is.
Case closed.

Not beside the point.
If something COSTS the same, that doesn't mean it IS the same. What is implied is that the thoughts and the actions have the same price, but are not, in themselves, the same.

You are beyond help, it would seem.
GOD considers it the same, and having made all things, He gets to define what's what.
NOT YOU.

Did you not read the bit about movies?
When you watch a movie, you are aware of the characters and plot, no?
But do you believe the movie and the characters are real? Same here.

No, as you cannot compare such a being as God, nor His Word (which is the same thing) to a movie.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by SalvationSeeker

Sigh.. Once again, that is a SECULAR definiton.
Please think before you write.

Hmm.
This brings up an interesting point.
The word 'sodomy' itself does not appear in the KJV1611.
Which means that the word itself pretty much originated as a 'secular definition', coined from biblical references.
And thus, this same 'secular definition' does mean tallywhacher into poophole.

And no they didn't, because as I said they didn't plan to do just ONE thing with them, but many vile things.

Maybe, but it still doesn't specify.

So you have no idea whatsoever what you wrote:
"No, just pointing out the fact of why Sodom was smited, because those men were having sex with other men, hence, sodomy."

The- men- of- SODOM! had- sex- with- other- men!
Thus: S O D O M Y.

You must be slow or something...
And without the Bible, there wouldn't even be a word such as sodomy in English nor American!
Thus, the Bible is the only valid definiton of what sodomy is.
Case closed.

Like I said, the word 'sodomy' itself doesn't appear in the bible. It was coined from the bible but not in the bible.
So the word isn't defined in the bible, because the word does not exist in the bible.

You are beyond help, it would seem.
GOD considers it the same, and having made all things, He gets to define what's what.
NOT YOU.

Bah.
Seeing as I don't believe in your god, I think 'what's what' can be obtained from much more reliable sources.

No, as you cannot compare such a being as God, nor His Word (which is the same thing) to a movie.

Oh well, maybe my first definition was lacking something. The bible is more like a movie script.

[SalvationSeeker]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

Hmm.
This brings up an interesting point.
The word 'sodomy' itself does not appear in the KJV1611.
Which means that the word itself pretty much originated as a 'secular definition', coined from biblical references.
And thus, this same 'secular definition' does mean tallywhacher into poophole.

It follows that a sodomite is someone who commits sodomy, and sodomites are mentioned in the Bible.
With that very word.

And it says that:
And there were also sodomites in the land:
And they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.
1 Kings 14:24

ALL the abominations, not just one abomination.
But your secular definition is narrow and only mean ONE thing, and thus cannot be correct!

Sodomites, the name given because they do what the men of Sodom did, are thus those who commit sodomy.
So what then, would sodomy be defined as in the Bible?
"Fornication, and going after strange flesh". (Jude 1:7)

So obviously, sodomy is not ONE thing.
It is several vile things, but all are about man on man sex..

Maybe, but it still doesn't specify.

Exactly, it doesn't specify that vile practice you mention.
Thus, that's not the only thing that constitutes sodomy.

Like I said, the word 'sodomy' itself doesn't appear in the bible. It was coined from the bible but not in the bible.
So the word isn't defined in the bible, because the word does not exist in the bible.

As I showed you above, you know too little of the Bible to know anything about these sort of things.
And your "logic" is too flawed.

Bah.
Seeing as I don't believe in your god, I think 'what's what' can be obtained from much more reliable sources.

More reliable than God?

Oh well, maybe my first definition was lacking something. The bible is more like a movie script.

Go ahead and mock us, heathen. God will only bless us for it.
The fact still stands, a nonbeliever cannot understand God nor His Holy Word.


Now stop this sillyness before you get an infraction for uppity backtalk..
We have more important things to do here than explain the obvious to dumb harlots.
We must spread the gospel!

[Brother Temperance]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

Well for men to know other men, seeing as men don't have a 'cooter', then for them men of Sodom to 'know' those angels, they would have been referring to either mouth or poop hole.

So, the sodomites of Sodom may have been attempting to sodomise the angels in the mouth? So you admit that there is such a thing as oral sodomy? Then it is perfectly clear that that Brazilian, under the influence of Marxism and Popishness, was performing mouth-to-mouth sodomy on the referee, and would have attempted to perform anal-to-oral sodomy had he not been stopped. Case closed, Jesus wins again.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by SalvationSeeker

It follows that a sodomite is someone who commits sodomy, and sodomites are mentioned in the Bible.
With that very word. *snip* Sally going off on a rant *snip*

Fact - The word 'sodomy', defined, does not appear in the KJV1611. Sodoom appears. Sodomites appeared. Sodomy does not appear. Which means that all definitions of secular source are the only source for sodomy.
Which, now that I look at dictionary.com, I see it is a matter of opinion, they do include oral in the various versions.
But that, incidentally, is in the hetero definition. There's this definition here:

sodomy

nounintercourse via the anus, committed by a man with a man or woman

But it does NOT mention kissing.
But another important thing to mention is that dictionary.com is US. Therefore, it is slightly more biased towards xtian opinion.
Looking up in an ENGLISH dictionary, however, it comes up with the following:

sodomy Show phonetics
noun [U] FORMAL OR LEGAL
the sexual act of putting the penis into a man's or woman's anus

As I showed you above, you know too little of the Bible to know anything about these sort of things.
And your "logic" is too flawed.

I know more about the bible than you give me credit for, mr rude.

More reliable than God?

Seeing as I don't believe your god exists, I'd say so.

Go ahead and mock us, heathen. God will only bless us for it.
The fact still stands, a nonbeliever cannot understand God nor His Holy Word.

If I can understand a fiction novel, I can understand the bible as it's basically the same thing.

Now stop this sillyness before you get an infraction for uppity backtalk..
We have more important things to do here than explain the obvious to dumb harlots.
We must spread the gospel!

Yes. Go and watch all men and make sure their hands don't accidentally touch another man and therefore commit 'touch sodomy'.

So, the sodomites of Sodom may have been attempting to sodomise the angels in the mouth? So you admit that there is such a thing as oral sodomy? Then it is perfectly clear that that Brazilian, under the influence of Marxism and Popishness, was performing mouth-to-mouth sodomy on the referee, and would have attempted to perform anal-to-oral sodomy had he not been stopped. Case closed, Jesus wins again.

Nope, but dictionary.com evidently agrees with you, being slightly biased towards xtian ways, being US.
The ENGLISH dictionary disagrees and says (for the benefit of those readin who don't want to look up)

sodomy Show phonetics
noun [U] FORMAL OR LEGAL
the sexual act of putting the penis into a man's or woman's anus

You being English should know this.

[Brother Temperance]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

Nope, but dictionary.com evidently agrees with you, being slightly biased towards xtian ways, being US.
The ENGLISH dictionary disagrees and says (for the benefit of those readin who don't want to look up)

You being English should know this.

The English dictionary is clearly slightly biased towards queer ways, being a product of the same country as the Archbishop of Canterbury. If dictionary.com is slightly biased towards God's POV, that is nothing to be ashamed of: the simple fact of the matter is that I am plainly right and that you are just as plainly wrong.

[SalvationSeeker]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

Fact - The word 'sodomy', defined, does not appear in the KJV1611. Sodoom appears. Sodomites appeared. Sodomy does not appear. Which means that all definitions of secular source are the only source for sodomy.
Which, now that I look at dictionary.com, I see it is a matter of opinion, they do include oral in the various versions.
But that, incidentally, is in the hetero definition. There's this definition here:

You are dumb.
The word 'homosexual' doesn't appear in the Bible either, and neither does 'homosexuality'.
With your "logic" that would mean that the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuality.

The ACT of sodomy is explained & defined in the Bible, just that the word itself is not used.
The word can be derived from the Bible however.. As it has been, it is just that the secular definiton has changed with time..

I know more about the bible than you give me credit for, mr rude.

If you seriously believe this then you don't have a clue whatsoever what the Bible says.
And I mean it.

Seeing as I don't believe your god exists, I'd say so.

Your beliefs doesn't matter, what matters is the truth.

If I can understand a fiction novel, I can understand the bible as it's basically the same thing.

Any proof of this? No?
What a surprise.

Nope, but dictionary.com evidently agrees with you, being slightly biased towards xtian ways, being US.
The ENGLISH dictionary disagrees and says (for the benefit of those readin who don't want to look up)

You being English should know this.

So there is not even ONE secular defintion, but several?
And you dismiss one merely because YOU THINK it is biased?
That's nothing short of pathetic, obviously you are the biased one here.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by Brother Temperance

The English dictionary is clearly slightly biased towards queer ways, being a product of the same country as the Archbishop of Canterbury. If dictionary.com is slightly biased towards God's POV, that is nothing to be ashamed of: the simple fact of the matter is that I am plainly right and that you are just as plainly wrong.

Well, when you consider that England came BEFORE the US, I'd say that their definitions therefore came FIRST as far as 'secular definitions' go.

You are dumb.
The word 'homosexual' doesn't appear in the Bible either, and neither does 'homosexuality'.
With your "logic" that would mean that the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuality.

The bible mentions the act of homosexuality but does not define the word homosexuality. It does not define the word 'sodomy'.
Now who's dumb.

The ACT of sodomy is explained & defined in the Bible, just that the word itself is not used.
The word can be derived from the Bible however.. As it has been, it is just that the secular definiton has changed with time..

No, the acts that the sodomites perform are explained to an extent. The word 'sodomy' is not defined.
You can look at it any way you like, I'm still right.

If you seriously believe this then you don't have a clue whatsoever what the Bible says.
And I mean it.

I beg to differ.
I didn't say I know the bible better than YOU. I said, I know the bible better than you THINK I do.

Your beliefs doesn't matter, what matters is the truth.

The truth as xtians define it?
That isn't truth, that's only opinion. And opinions are like buttholes, everyone has one.

Any proof of this? No?
What a surprise. old

Bah.
The bible and its origins can easily be traced to their Pagan and Judaic roots, not to mention extensive alterations made by people like Constantine.
History, Sally, is the proof.

So there is not even ONE secular defintion, but several?
And you dismiss one merely because YOU THINK it is biased?
That's nothing short of pathetic, obviously you are the biased one here.

The English source says otherwise.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but England came BEFORE the USA therefore their definitions would have come first.
So there.