…I don’t think the person who posted this on CL likes use…lol…

[charles-smythe]

…I don’t think the person who posted this on CL likes use…lol…
.


Gay/Homosexual should be called Sodomites < >
http://images.craigslist.org/00x0x_7sqzmWehfQu_600x450.jpg







I am always deeply grieved (as I know the Holy Spirit of God is) when I see the rainbow desecrated by some godless Sodomites. I do not call them "homosexuals," simply because that is what they like to be called. I surely do not call them "gay" because they are not a happy bunch in the eyes of God. Though some would dare to call them "names of the world ," I prefer to call them what God calls them... SODOMITES. Thus named after the wicked city of Sodom which was destroyed by fire and brimstone in the Old Testament.
"Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, 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
Sodom was destroyed by God Almighty as an EXAMPLE to those who would live ungodly.
"And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." -Romans 1:27-32
Need I say more... the Word of God speaks for itself. Homosexuality is a wicked sin.
Most people think that the rainbow is only a token from God that He would never destroy the earth again with water. Even though this is very true, the rainbow means more. The rainbow is a reminder to all humanity that GOD KEEPS HIS PROMISES! We read in Titus 1:2 that God cannot lie. Any time you see a rainbow, you remember that God keeps His Word. This is the beauty of the Word of God... It is filled with thousands of promises from God.
It is sickening that the Sodomites would dare desecrate such a holy object as the rainbow with their wickedness. God will hold each and every one of them accountable. The rainbow is God's gift to humanity... NOT the sodomites. They have no claims to the rainbow (or the once decent word "gay"). There is nothing "gay" about the sodomites. So the next time you see a rainbow in the sky, think about the fact that God never lies! God has promised that the unrighteous will burn in hell (Psalm 9:17). Sodomites can desecrate the rainbow, but they can never change it's TRUE meaning!
By the way, the Bible never calls the rainbow a "rain bow"; but rather, it is God's bow. Amen!
Listen friend, did you know that God has made a way for you and I to go to Heaven? God has made us each a promise concerning salvation (Romans 10:13). If you are a homosexual reading this article, God loves you and wants to forgive you! Jesus promised that He would not cast away anyone who comes to Him (John 6:37). God promises to forgive you if you'll simply come to Him as a repentant sinner, that is, admit that you are a sinner (1st John 1:9). The gospel is not good news to be achieved; but rather, received to be believed. If you'd like to learn more about to be saved.

[Browne]

The fall of man was the beginning of history, as in, when we were able to write a common language down, those in the position of having social power were able to bind people to written law. But before this, there was no written word. No labels. The was no "gay". No "straight". No "bisexual". There were simply people living along wth nature, doing whatever they felt they needed to do. And no fuel for judgements by others adhearing to some dogma that was written down on paper and followed by enough people, people motivated by FEAR, not Love, so that it became engrained into the society.


------

[charles-smythe]

The fall of man was the beginning of history, as in, when we were able to write a common language down, those in the position of having social power were able to bind people to written law. But before this, there was no written word. No labels. The was no "gay". No "straight". No "bisexual". There were simply people living along wth nature, doing whatever they felt they needed to do. And no fuel for judgements by others adhearing to some dogma that was written down on paper and followed by enough people, people motivated by FEAR, not Love, so that it became engrained into the society.


------ …as usual…well said…

[pepperjack]

He sounds really old school, like this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elmer_Gantry_%28film%29 ! Actually, if one were to look more closely at what God considers " abomination, " there are many things, dishonest business practices, for instance. Where does that leave this world?

[charles-smythe]

He sounds really old school, like this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elmer_Gantry_%28film%29 ! Actually, if one were to look more closely at what God considers " abomination, " there are many things, dishonest business practices, for instance. Where does that leave this world? …as hypocrites…& surprised when they meet their maker…

[pepperjack]

If you consider it, hypocrisy put Jesus on the cross more than anything else, that of the self-righteous, pious, religious scholars & leaders of the time who insisted on his crucifixion! He was a pawn, a political scapegoat, an embarrassment to the Romans who just wanted to appease the Jews & quell a possible uprising.

[sysper]

isn't rape justified in the bible under certain circumstances? just asking....

[pepperjack]

Read this last summer: http://killingjesusthebook.com/. If you'll notice the bloodstained footrest of where Jesus' feet were supposedly nailed, on the cover; according to the author, near the end of the book, Jesus' cross had no such feature! But he approved this illustration for its best-selling cover! Made millions, natch. Noticed other discrepancies that eventually turned me off to the hype. Be discerning, discriminating!

[charles-smythe]

Read this last summer: http://killingjesusthebook.com/. If you'll notice the bloodstained footrest of where Jesus' feet were supposedly nailed, on the cover; according to the author, near the end of the book, Jesus' cross had no such feature! But he approved this illustration for its best-selling cover! Made millions, natch. Noticed other discrepancies that eventually turned me off to the hype. Be discerning, discriminating! …if I understand correctly…it wasn’t a cross…it was a ‘T’…& you’re right…no foot rest…that was part of the punishment…the body pulled down & comprassed the chest…causing the victum to smuther from not being able to breath…

[pepperjack]

You basically got it right.

[pole_smoker]

Read this last summer: http://killingjesusthebook.com/. If you'll notice the bloodstained footrest of where Jesus' feet were supposedly nailed, on the cover; according to the author, near the end of the book, Jesus' cross had no such feature! But he approved this illustration for its best-selling cover! Made millions, natch. Noticed other discrepancies that eventually turned me off to the hype. Be discerning, discriminating!
LMAO!!!!!!!!! A hypocritical closet queen conservative ass-licker from flyover country. Your type are a dime a dozen where you're from. You hate LGBT people, and are a total hypocrite towards everything LGBT activists and bisexual activists such as myself and my husband have been fighting for our rights for decades. No wonder why you have to troll sex sites to hook up.

With what Charles originally posted about Noah and the Ark there was a great flood thousands of years ago in the Middle East but the entire world did not flood, and like all things in the old testament it's best to take it as a myth or story and not the truth.

[pepperjack]

Good grief! What an out-of control lunatic! Is he going berserk, breaking furniture in his pace right now?

[pole_smoker]

Good grief! What an out-of control lunatic! Is he going berserk, breaking furniture in his pace right now?
Nope; but you probably are. ;)

[darkeyes]

…if I understand correctly…it wasn’t a cross…it was a ‘T’…& you’re right…no foot rest…that was part of the punishment…the body pulled down & comprassed the chest…causing the victum to smuther from not being able to breath…

The earliest reference to Christ having been crucified on a cross is made a century after he is supposed to have died..crucifixions occured with Y X and T format as well as how Christian churches generally depict the cross on which he is supposed 2 have died.. it was also sometimes a simple single stake. A suppadaneum or foot rest was sometimes attached contrary 2 what has been said... it is not known for certain whether or not Christ's cross, assuming it was a cross, had such a foot rest... it may well have been a T or any other design but there is no historical data for us to know for certain... indeed, there is no contemporary record of his crucifixion at all (Roman or anyone else's) far less his resurrection... it is all a matter of faith and folks, as Pepper knows of old, it isn't a faith I have... :)

Crucifixion was practised by other civilisations prior to the Roman.. Persians and Macedonians for instance, and after... and a certain Vlad II of Walachia in the 15th century in his wars against the Ottoman empire... we know him today as Vlad the impaler.. Vlad Dracul, or Dracula the vampire of modern fiction...

[darkeyes]

Good grief! What an out-of control lunatic! Is he going berserk, breaking furniture in his pace right now?
WB 2 .com c2015, Pepper... nice 2 cya.:love87:

[snowcrazee]

I got so incredibly sick of all of the crap that people push about how bad LGBT is, that I just went numb to it. Comic strips like this and posts (on craigslist of all places... HAHA) of this type either make me laugh or make me start grading them like a school teacher grades an essay... If the post is well written and at least attempts to have reason and sincere belief behind it, I will usually give it a mental applause for the effort, but if it is littered with complete untruth, has nothing to support the seriousness it is trying to push onto it's readers, and/or attempts to use words and phrases that try to make the author and his target audience out to be better then people it is discriminating against, I start picking at everything that is wrong with the grammar and references it might contain.


The comic itself is rifled with issues I cant even figure out... what the hell... "God DIDN'T SAY: To get a pair of the same kind but, male and female." .... Stop. So this comic is literally saying that in the story of Noah and the Ark, God did NOT tell Noah to get 2 of every species, one male and one female?????? I SWEAR in both the kids story and the biblical version, God DID IN FACT tel Noah to get 2 of each, one male... one female. Why does this comic say that he DIDN'T SAY THAT? And why does it say "God DIDNT say....." and within the same thought, "...it's unnatural and an abomination to God." Was the God this comic refers to speaking about himself in the third person, to himself? Now we start looking like a Bible story as the comic contradicts itself and states that he did say one male, one female. Was this a multiple-personality argument within he creator of the comic strip? I wonder if they resolved it... moving on... As far as I remember, in the kid's story, recorded on tape by Burl Ives, there was mention that the rainbow was God's promise that the world would not be destroyed by water again. But um... I can make a rainbow with a garden hose while washing my car on a sunny day... is this Comic God telling me I should turn off the water so I dont flood the world? And why does he mention I was wearing it? Clearly it was within the optical illusion created by the water refracting the light and separating the prismatic colors into the spectrum, creating the rainbow look (I am clearly not a rainbow expert and may have completely misquoted the actual terms used to describe the scientific process used to create a rainbow, and the events that take place within that process... my bad if I offended any science people. but you get the idea). I was wearing a white tank top and blue shorts. Finally we come to the art work... I am concerned that this comic strip author believes that an entire population, consisting of multiple different religions, has belief in a God that would choose this apparently senile fellow who has to have his name on his shirt, and is trying to play the "i Squish Your Head" game with the little rainbow person icon while holding what appears to be Santa Claus's Naughty and Nice list. I am fairly certain God would have chosen someone of reasonable intelligence and sound mind to perform he very big job he was about to ask Noah to do..... all of this combined with extremely poor grammar in general, AND the big mistake to spell God's creation "earth" as if the planet we live on is not a proper noun. Earth has a capital E when referring to the planet as a whole, 'earth' refers to the solid components that make up the planet, such as dirt, rock, etc. So the Comic Strip Author already lost the fight and gets an "F" for screwing up so horribly in what is probably their first ever comic strip.


To the post's author; Apparently this person is ok with Bi-sexuals and Transgendered individuals, as both the title of the post and the entire body of the post only point at "Gay/Homosexuals" and "Sodomites".


I am not sure how only "Gays and homosexuals" or for that matter "LGBT" is desecrating the rainbow. If this person truly believes that the rainbow is "God's symbol as HIS promise never again will a flood destroy the earth," then wouldn't anyone wearing any rainbow be desecrating it, simply by displaying it, thus taking away that power from God himself? As an alternate example, one of my favorite music groups is Def Leppard, an 80's + rock/pop band from England. The drummer of the band used to always wear a pair of shorts that were patterned with the British Flag. From what I read, the Queen of England actually had an issue with this at one point, saying that it was disrespectful to sit on the Flag of England, and thus was disrespecting the country of England as a whole. Apparently somewhere along the line, this was cleared up because he still wears shorts, as well as other garments that sport the British Flag on them and has even played concerts with Her Majesty, The Queen of England in attendance. So would anyone who wore the rainbow in any way be disrespecting God and all of God's promise not to flood the world again? Is it disrespecting all of Earth? I dunno. Can we get a ruling? I am not an expert in rainbow desecration.


The author also states that the rainbow is a reminder that God keeps his promises. Wait.... anyone ever hear this part before? I have never heard that. Anyone have a reference or source material I can find this particular info in? Or is this author making stuff up now?


Backtracking, why would this author not call gay people "gay". He says they are clearly not a happy group in the eyes of God. So God thinks that gay/homosexual people are not happy? They would be if people would stop making it seem like they are a plague and started treating them like people with difference BIRTH GIVEN PREFERENCES then straight people. i dunno... I am for the most part, a happy person. I try hard NOT to be unhappy because I dont like the feeling or what it does to others around me.


Finally, the author stresses all over the rainbow issue, then at the end, states that the Bible calls it God's Bow, not a rain bow. Ok.... HUH? First, what the hell is all the complaining about... i have never seen anyone wearing, or otherwise desecrating God's Bow. I have never seen the reference in my Bible that calls it God's Bow. And I have also never seen ANY literature or other reference which refers to it as a rain bow... the word is rainbow, no space. So of course the Bible doesn't refer to a rain bow, because the word doesn't exist. And I am not sure how far back it was discovered within science, what creates a rainbow, but I highly doubt it was figured out in Biblical times and was therefore used as part of the "control" idea to put "the fear of God" into people. If the rainbow is a symbol by God, it shouldn't be something that can be recreated by anyone with water and light, or glass and light. I gave the post author a "D-". He didn't get a straight "F" because I gave him partial credit for the attempt at using the Bible as reference with scripture quotes and being somewhat accurate about the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. With bad grammar in the post as well, I cant help but wonder if the comic was created by the post author.

To the author of the original post as found on craigslist:
Overall Craigslist Post grade: "D-" Which is a failing grade, therefore this post is a fail.
To quote the comedian Bill Engvall, "Here's your sign"

***********************
** YOU ARE FABULOUS **
***********************

[pepperjack]

Thanx, Dark! Missed ur incredily ( not a typo, my keyoard just won,t type that letter rite now:banghead:) unique style of self-expression. Appears it didn't take me long to acquire a new adversary here.:bigrin:

[pepperjack]

Where else could an atheist & believer, separated by half a globe, find a common ground & develop a fondness for one another?:smilies15

[Browne]

The earliest reference to Christ having been crucified on a cross is made a century after he is supposed to have died..

It is like that game "telephone" where you sit in a circle of friends and one person starts a story and it then gets whispered to the next person and as the story is transfered from person to person around the circle, it becomes distorted until finally it gets back to the original story teller and by that time the story has become a perversion unto itself. The story of Jesus has been going through this process for nearly 2,000 years now, and so you have flocks of people believing in a perversion of the true account.

The Roman Emprie could only function so long as the belief that the Emporer was the ONLY divine being on the planet, and that all others were there to serve him. Now along comes this Jesus character, telling people not to put any middle man between themselves and their Creator. No king. No priest. He brings the "Good News" that we are all divine. And from this point forward, what do we see? We see a (relatively) rapid decline of the Roman Empire. We see "damage control" at the Counsel at Nicea, which is essentially a state sponsored panel, and their task is to edit together only particular scriptures, whilst others like the Gospel of Thomas are left on the cutting room floor.

We see the rise of Catholisicm as it fills the power vacuum left by the collapse of the Roman Empire and it pitches the belief that Jesus, just like Ceasar, was the only divine man who had the ability to connect directly with God.

And the perversions of the the story can be so subtle, yet so powerful.

What is the difference between a Son of God and the Son of God?

The Son of God leads to all of the idolatry that surrounds the topic of Jesus that we see today.

A Son of God?

That means we all are shaman.


http://youtu.be/alRNbesfXXw


------

[darkeyes]

Thanx, Dark! Missed ur incredily ( not a typo, my keyoard just won,t type that letter rite now:banghead:) unique style of self-expression. Appears it didn't take me long to acquire a new adversary here.:bigrin:
New adversary only if u accept the present nic is the one and only and not as is more commonly believed but the latest in a long line of nics, which since Drew has disappeared 2 God knos has allowed dimwit free reign and his posts have become more banal, vaccuous, inane, obnoxious, nasty, unpleasant and base... I have no doubt that his postings have and shall continue 2 put off many decent bisexual people from joining the site.. as it has put off many existing members who have packed this site in...he isn't the only reason peeps have left.. the unreliability of chat is another... the owner's absence 2.... dimwit is in my view at least as responsible and prob more so...

.. but if course wot do I kno as a biphobic, homophobic, misandrist not 2 forget misogynist troll just like every1 else who has the temerity 2 disagree wiv him... chill.. u have had wee taster of Poley, Pepper... play the cards right and u will get the full works;)! Enjoy...:tongue:

[pepperjack]

I noticed some of these changes rite away; appears the site is going downhill. I haven't tried chat since I noticed the posts complaining about it. As for the "nic," I've got him on ignore. Guess I lost patience with him quickly because I saw rite away what an ass he was. Anyway, nice to have you back in my life! :bigrin:

[pole_smoker]

It is like that game "telephone" where you sit in a circle of friends and one person starts a story and it then gets whispered to the next person and as the story is transfered from person to person around the circle, it becomes distorted until finally it gets back to the original story teller and by that time the story has become a perversion unto itself. The story of Jesus has been going through this process for nearly 2,000 years now, and so you have flocks of people believing in a perversion of the true account.

The Roman Emprie could only function so long as the belief that the Emporer was the ONLY divine being on the planet, and that all others were there to serve him. Now along comes this Jesus character, telling people not to put any middle man between themselves and their Creator. No king. No priest. He brings the "Good News" that we are all divine. And from this point forward, what do we see? We see a (relatively) rapid decline of the Roman Empire. We see "damage control" at the Counsel at Nicea, which is essentially a state sponsored panel, and their task is to edit together only particular scriptures, whilst others like the Gospel of Thomas are left on the cutting room floor.

We see the rise of Catholisicm as it fills the power vacuum left by the collapse of the Roman Empire and it pitches the belief that Jesus, just like Ceasar, was the only divine man who had the ability to connect directly with God.

And the perversions of the the story can be so subtle, yet so powerful.

What is the difference between a Son of God and the Son of God?

The Son of God leads to all of the idolatry that surrounds the topic of Jesus that we see today.

A Son of God?

That means we all are shaman.




------
I normally don't say this to too many people unless they clearly have a problem; but lay off the drugs or cut back, they're not doing you any good.

[Browne]

I normally don't say this to too many people unless they clearly have a problem; but lay off the drugs or cut back, they're not doing you any good.

Sure Pole, I'd love for you to walk me through your reasoning on how you came to this conclusion.

Let's have a nice, sober discussion about it. : )

You'll be here all afternoon anyways.

Get comfy and word it out for me.


------

[pole_smoker]

Sure Pole, I'd love for you to walk me through your reasoning on how you came to this conclusion.

Let's have a nice, sober discussion about it. : )

You'll be here all afternoon anyways.

Get comfy and word it out for me.


------
It's painfully obvious.

Eventually you'll get bitch slapped by the drugs you use; but that's already happened.

[Browne]

It's painfully obvious.

Eventually you'll get bitch slapped by the drugs you use; but that's already happened.

Your perception of me is what's painfully obvious.

Do you know why Socrates was considered the wisest of all the Greeks?

It was because he knew that he knew NOTHING.

Your cup is full, bro.


------

[pole_smoker]

Your perception of me is what's painfully obvious.

Do you know why Socrates was considered the wisest of all the Greeks?

It was because he knew that he knew NOTHING.

Your cup is full, bro.


------
LOL as I said before lay off the drugs.

Socrates also killed himself, so he was not that wise or intelligent.

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/dont-think-too-much.jpg

[Browne]

LOL as I said before lay off the drugs.

Socrates also killed himself, so he was not that wise or intelligent.








The Suicide of Socrates, 399 BC

Printer Friendly Version >>> (http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/pfsocrates.htm)
On a day in 399 BC the philosopher Socrates stood before a jury of 500 of his fellow Athenians accused of "refusing to recognize the gods recognized by the state" and of "corrupting the youth." If found guilty; his penalty could be death. The trial took place in the heart of the city, the jurors seated on wooden benches surrounded by a crowd of spectators. Socrates' accusers (three Athenian citizens) were allotted three hours to present their case, after which, the philosopher would have three hours to defend himself.

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/images/socrates1.jpg


Socrates



Socrates was 70 years old and familiar to most Athenians. His anti-democratic views had turned many in the city against him. Two of his students, Alcibiades and Critias, had twice briefly overthrown the democratic government of the city, instituting a reign of terror in which thousands of citizens were deprived of their property and either banished from the city or executed. After hearing the arguments of both Socrates and his accusers, the jury was asked to vote on his guilt. Under Athenian law the jurors did not deliberate the point. Instead, each juror registered his judgment by placing a small disk into an urn marked either "guilty" or "not guilty." Socrates was found guilty by a vote of 280 to 220.The jurors were next asked to determine Socrates' penalty. His accusers argued for the death penalty. Socrates was given the opportunity to suggest his own punishment and could probably have avoided death by recommending exile. Instead, the philosopher initially offered the sarcastic recommendation that he be rewarded for his actions. When pressed for a realistic punishment, he proposed that he be fined a modest sum of money. Faced with the two choices, the jury selected death for Socrates.The philosopher was taken to the near-by jail where his sentence would be carried out. Athenian law prescribed death by drinking a cup of poison hemlock. Socrates would be his own executioner.





Sounds like a pretty strong character to me.


------

[Browne]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spjjc9jyhHo&amp;list=PLZWmbPEkJT28aFjHUX7L4X6p Ts8N1Yojz

*cough*

: )


------

[jem_is_bi]

LOL as I said before lay off the drugs.

Socrates also killed himself, so he was not that wise or intelligent.

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/dont-think-too-much.jpg
So your advice is : “DON’T THINK TOO MUCH” ? Seems to be bad advice to me. But, at least, you seem to take your own advice.

[CameronJason]

isn't rape justified in the bible under certain circumstances? just asking....

Yeah that is a right question. I think people who think that being bisexual is an abomination of God, should think again about it. I don't see anything wrong or like abomination in this.

[Browne]

So your advice is : “DON’T THINK TOO MUCH” ?Seems to be bad advice to me.But, at least, you seem to take your own advice.


You can think as much as you like about any topic. The problem arises when a person becomes attached to a thought or a thoughtform, especially when information is limited or is not clearly understood about a given topic. Somehow I triggered a reaction with Pole in which he became attached to the thought that what he was witnessing from me was due to excessive drug use. He has absolutely convinced himself because he made an outward judgement toward me due to his attaching onto his thoughtform. I was hoping he would try and articulate what it was that triggered his reaction but it looks like that's not going to happen. But I think that because he couldn't understand me, his seemingly weak ability to intuit could only offer excessive drug use as an explanation, imho.

I do enjoy cannabis and I quit smoking it a few months ago in favor of a vaporizer, which definitely gives you a better all around experience. In my own experiences with it, I can now see why it is a drug that many people have wanted to surpress. Other than that? I drink alchohol only rarely. It's been years since I've used psychedelics but I have experienced mushrooms, salvia divinorum, and LSD. My favorite experiences were on mushrooms. I use some nicotine. Caffeine. But I've also learned that there are other things that can put myself into different states of consciousness. One of the most profound highs I've ever had was induced off of reading a particular sequence of information. Music can put me into a trance like state too. Anal sex is another one. I experience very strong orgasms from that, and they can last the better part of an hour.

Consciousness in our society is something that is extremely taken for granted. Everything in our society is designed to keep you distracted on what's going on "out there" and this prevents people from questioning what it is they really are, within, or from experimenting with their consciousness. When you really begin to engage your intuition, and begin to appreciate the subjective part of reality that science does not explain, you'll eventually come to the realization that we live in an intellegent environment. And that's all a shaman is. It's someone who communes with their environment.


------