Let's hope that we have enough righteous men in the USA to avoid the fireworks display that occurred at the first annual pride parade

pic.twitter.com/3X6RgXeDJi

— Eternal Memri TV (@EMTVmemes) June 1, 2024

pic.twitter.com/gZezsXdblN

— Eternal Memri TV (@EMTVmemes) June 1, 2023

Amen, OP.

Pride Month is about breaking the laws of hospitality? That's news.

Happy Pride Month, LGBTQ TexAggies. Ignore the *******s and enjoy your lives.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Pride Month is about breaking the laws of hospitality? That's news.

Happy Pride Month, LGBTQ TexAggies. Ignore the *******s and enjoy your lives.

---

No it's about celebrating sodomy, and trying to force society to accept something that is cancerous by inundating us with it until we're inured.

You think the destruction of S&G was about breaking the laws of hospitality?

Catag94 said:

---

You think the destruction of S&G was about breaking the laws of hospitality?

---

Yes of course, Lot offered his daughters who had never had sex with a man to a crowd of strangers who committed the horrible sin of asking to "know" the two gentlemen upstairs, and obviously not to have sex with them, even though scripture uses the same word as when Adam had "knowledge" of Eve and sired Cain.

Furthermore God calls what the sodomites did "an abomination" in front of him, which is the exact same as homosexual sex is called in Leviticus, but again, it is all circumstantial and advanced biblical scholarship by homoadjacent biblical scholars know sodom was destroyed because dudes wanted to meet some travelers

Guess you missed this part:

Genesis 19:12-13 NKJV
[12] Then the men said to Lot, "Have you anyone else here? Son-in-law, your sons, your daughters, and whomever you have in the city-take them out of this place! [13] For we will destroy this place, because the outcry against them has grown great before the face of the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it."

They were already there to destroy it due to the grave sin of the people there.

This can be found in the chapters leading g up to the on referenced by the OP. But, I think you probably knew that.

Catag94 said:

---

You think the destruction of S&G was about breaking the laws of hospitality?

---

Ezekiel is pretty clear about that. That was the dominant interpretation for centuries, including in the Talmud, which was not pro-queer in the least. And to imagine that an entire city is gay and their gayness is what leads to the destruction is a pretty dumb reading of the text.

Serviam said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

You think the destruction of S&G was about breaking the laws of hospitality?

---

Yes of course, Lot offered his daughters who had never had sex with a man to a crowd of strangers who committed the horrible sin of asking to "know" the two gentlemen upstairs, and obviously not to have sex with them, even though scripture uses the same word as when Adam had "knowledge" of Eve and sired Cain.

Furthermore God calls what the sodomites did "an abomination" in front of him, which is the exact same as homosexual sex is called in Leviticus, but again, it is all circumstantial and advanced biblical scholarship by homoadjacent biblical scholars know sodom was destroyed because dudes wanted to meet some travelers

---

So if the crowd had said, "You know what, Lot, you're right. We shouldn't be gay. We're going to rape your daughters instead," then God would have breathed a sigh of relief and let the city stand?

Sapper Redux said:

---

Serviam said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

You think the destruction of S&G was about breaking the laws of hospitality?

---

Yes of course, Lot offered his daughters who had never had sex with a man to a crowd of strangers who committed the horrible sin of asking to "know" the two gentlemen upstairs, and obviously not to have sex with them, even though scripture uses the same word as when Adam had "knowledge" of Eve and sired Cain.

Furthermore God calls what the sodomites did "an abomination" in front of him, which is the exact same as homosexual sex is called in Leviticus, but again, it is all circumstantial and advanced biblical scholarship by homoadjacent biblical scholars know sodom was destroyed because dudes wanted to meet some travelers

---

So if the crowd had said, "You know what, Lot, you're right. We shouldn't be gay. We're going to rape your daughters instead," then God would have breathed a sigh of relief and let the city stand?

---

Objection! Irrelevant. Stick to your original argument counselor, we're not talking hypotheticals here. Why would God have destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because some guys said "we'd like to know the gentleman upstairs"?

The only argument you need is "I don't believe in the Bible and being gay is fine", stick with that. Don't flail haymakers hoping you've got some special understanding into scripture.

Lol. I like how you can't even engage in the thought experiment. Is it a little too uncomfortable?

Sapper Redux said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

You think the destruction of S&G was about breaking the laws of hospitality?

---

Ezekiel is pretty clear about that. That was the dominant interpretation for centuries, including in the Talmud, which was not pro-queer in the least. And to imagine that an entire city is gay and their gayness is what leads to the destruction is a pretty dumb reading of the text.

---

The text, in multiple places, says "their sin" was the reason.
I didn't say they were gay.

Edit:
And, since you like what Ezekiel has to say about it, you enjoy this:

Ezekiel 16:49-50 NKJV
[49] Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had PRIDE, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. [50] And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Lol. I like how you can't even engage in the thought experiment. Is it a little too uncomfortable?

---

Would be more than happy to engage in a thought experiment, but that wasn't your claim. You claimed the sin of Sodom was inhospitality and not homosexuality, then tried to throw up a hypothetical as a smokescreen to try and deflect from your failure to support

Biblical marriage is between a man and a woman. There are over 100 references to this including mentions of husband and wife. There is no mention of "husband and husband". S&G is a distraction other than a stark warning about degenerate behavior which homosexuality is but one example.

Trying to reinterpret scripture to exclude people is nothing new. Just sad that it is still a thing.

PabloSerna said:

---

Trying to reinterpret scripture to exclude people is nothing new. Just sad that it is still a thing.

---

Yes, totally terrible when people like *checks notes* St John Chrysostom think they have some insight into scripture

Quote:

---

Consider how great is that sin, to have forced hell to appear even before its time!... For that rain was unwonted, for the intercourse was contrary to nature, and it deluged the land, since lust had done so with their souls. Wherefore also the rain was the opposite of the customary rain. Now not only did it fail to stir up the womb of the earth to the production of fruits, but made it even useless for the reception of seed. For such was also the intercourse of the men, making a body of this sort more worthless than the very land of Sodom. And what is there more detestable than a man who hath pandered himself, or what more execrable

---

I can post more if you need it from St Augustine, St Jerome, St Thomas Aquinas and of course St Peter Damian, the scourge of homosexual clergy.

Serviam said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Lol. I like how you can't even engage in the thought experiment. Is it a little too uncomfortable?

---

Would be more than happy to engage in a thought experiment, but that wasn't your claim. You claimed the sin of Sodom was inhospitality and not homosexuality, then tried to throw up a hypothetical as a smokescreen to try and deflect from your failure to support

---

Ezekiel is pretty clear: " Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." And this verse is in reference to the sins of Jerusalem as a comparison. Homosexuality was never listed as a concern in Jerusalem.

Serviam said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Trying to reinterpret scripture to exclude people is nothing new. Just sad that it is still a thing.

---

Yes, totally terrible when people like *checks notes* St John Chrysostom think they have some insight into scripture

Quote:

---

Consider how great is that sin, to have forced hell to appear even before its time!... For that rain was unwonted, for the intercourse was contrary to nature, and it deluged the land, since lust had done so with their souls. Wherefore also the rain was the opposite of the customary rain. Now not only did it fail to stir up the womb of the earth to the production of fruits, but made it even useless for the reception of seed. For such was also the intercourse of the men, making a body of this sort more worthless than the very land of Sodom. And what is there more detestable than a man who hath pandered himself, or what more execrable

---

I can post more if you need it from St Augustine, St Jerome, St Thomas Aquinas and of course St Peter Damian, the scourge of homosexual clergy.

---

It was a big issue for early church fathers writing centuries later and dealing with the Greek and Roman world. Writing at the same time in the Babylonian Talmud, the Jewish sages were clear that it was Sodom's awful treatment of the poor, the visitor, and the sick that brought their judgement.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

You think the destruction of S&G was about breaking the laws of hospitality?

---

Ezekiel is pretty clear about that. That was the dominant interpretation for centuries, including in the Talmud, which was not pro-queer in the least. And to imagine that an entire city is gay and their gayness is what leads to the destruction is a pretty dumb reading of the text.

---

The text, in multiple places, says "their sin" was the reason.
I didn't say they were gay.

Edit:
And, since you like what Ezekiel has to say about it, you enjoy this:

Ezekiel 16:49-50 NKJV
[49] Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had PRIDE, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. [50] And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.

---

Their sin was breaking the laws of hospitality in an egregious manner. Notice how LGBT sex is never mentioned.

---

Please point to text where you draw this conclusion.

There are plenty of examples of Saints misinterpreting a passage of scripture. That is why we have a magisterium, but then again you do not fully accept everything the magisterium teaches.

On this passage that you are arguing- it is not about sexual orientation like you are trying to make out to be. Why are you trying to bend scripture to support your angst against people?

Sapper Redux said:

---

Serviam said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Lol. I like how you can't even engage in the thought experiment. Is it a little too uncomfortable?

---

Would be more than happy to engage in a thought experiment, but that wasn't your claim. You claimed the sin of Sodom was inhospitality and not homosexuality, then tried to throw up a hypothetical as a smokescreen to try and deflect from your failure to support

---

Ezekiel is pretty clear: " Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." And this verse is in reference to the sins of Jerusalem as a comparison. Homosexuality was never listed as a concern in Jerusalem.

---

They were haughty and did a detestable thing, as in singular, in front of me. Again, I'll explain to you that detestable thing, used in the singular form, using the same language in Leviticus is homosexual sex. This is attested to by the Church fathers, who compare the sex that was had in sodom and Gomorrah with rain falling on barren ground, since neither will bear fruit.

PabloSerna said:

---

There are plenty of examples of Saints misinterpreting a passage of scripture. That is why we have a magisterium, but then again you do not fully accept everything the magisterium teaches.

On this passage that you are arguing- it is not about sexual orientation like you are trying to make out to be. Why are you trying to bend scripture to support your angst against people?

---

It's not about sexual orientation, it's about homosexual sex, as I've said several times. How did the Church fathers misinterpret them? And where does the magisterium correct them?

Sapper Redux said:

---

Pride Month is about breaking the laws of hospitality? That's news.

Happy Pride Month, LGBTQ TexAggies. Ignore the *******s and enjoy your lives.

---

Learn something new every day. So "sodomy" means "being rude to travelers" How was that ever enforced when we had anti-sodomy laws?

Dad-O-Lot said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Pride Month is about breaking the laws of hospitality? That's news.

Happy Pride Month, LGBTQ TexAggies. Ignore the *******s and enjoy your lives.

---

Learn something new every day. So "sodomy" means "being rude to travelers" How was that ever enforced when we had anti-sodomy laws?

---

It's a weird double standard where you can also get struck blind for trying to know newcomers.

Serviam said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Read Again. Perhaps start with the discussion with Abraham.

---

I've read it, if they were there to destroy everyone why even come to visit Lot and get him out? Why not just destroy everything and forget the whole staying the night?

---

Because of that conversation with Abraham I mentioned, in which God told Abraham he was going to g to destroy the place
Due to their sin, Abraham "negotiated" with God about righteous people there. So, the Lot visitation was added to the mission at that point and due to Gods agreement with Abraham.
Point is, the destruction of the place due to their sin was already determined. The hospitality or lack thereof the night they stayed with Lot did not cause the destruction. Their son to that point had already doomed them.

Dad-O-Lot said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Pride Month is about breaking the laws of hospitality? That's news.

Happy Pride Month, LGBTQ TexAggies. Ignore the *******s and enjoy your lives.

---

Learn something new every day. So "sodomy" means "being rude to travelers" How was that ever enforced when we had anti-sodomy laws?

---

When was the term "sodomy" created and by whom?

Sapper Redux said:

---

Dad-O-Lot said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Pride Month is about breaking the laws of hospitality? That's news.

Happy Pride Month, LGBTQ TexAggies. Ignore the *******s and enjoy your lives.

---

Learn something new every day. So "sodomy" means "being rude to travelers" How was that ever enforced when we had anti-sodomy laws?

---

When was the term "sodomy" created and by whom?

---

.

Venerable Tom Bodett, who tried to shame other Motel Chains for their inhospitality by not leaving the light on.