(October 8, 2015 at 10:32 pm)sinnerdaniel94 Wrote:(October 8, 2015 at 9:56 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Where does the Bible mention homosexuality in the wickedness of Sodom and Gomorrah? It just says they were wicked. Now I grant you the town wanted to rape a couple angels. But then Lot was willing to give his daughters to the crowd. And he's supposed to be the good guy.
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
Why do you call Lot good? no one is good except God.
Fornication = unmarried, unapproved, and/or "casual" sex.
Going after strange flesh = rape? Angel rape? Gay rape? Virgin daughters of Lot rape? Raping anyone who came to town on visit?
I mean, doesn't it even cross your mind that you could be mistaken about the lesson of S&G?
The fact that Lot thought offering his daughters to the crowd makes it pretty plain that the Bible wasn't suggesting the crowd were homosexuals. They were rapists. It is common knowledge in the field of criminology that rapists, especially child molesters, care far more about power and control than they do about the gender of their victims. It's one of the reasons so many men are raped in the military, by otherwise "straight" soldiers, in addition to the women who are attacked.
Why is the lesson there not, "God burned cities where the society/culture of those cities thought that sexual assault was okay?"
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
