Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

Expand Messages
  • MikeM
    I have joined a christian goy group. Goys think that it s ok to have oral sex, and mutual mastrabation with men as long as you don t have anal. It5 makes sence
    Message 1 of 22 , Mar 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      I have joined a christian goy group. Goys think that it's ok to have oral sex, and mutual mastrabation with men as long as you don't have anal. It5 makes sence because anal is the only part of gay sex that hurts, and is degrading.
    • NewKnightRider
      as a former member of g0y groups, I say that it still leads you down the path that starts with lust. ... From: MikeM Subject:
      Message 2 of 22 , Mar 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        as a former member of g0y groups, I say that it still leads you down the path that starts with lust.

        --- On Mon, 3/1/10, MikeM <mmkewl@...> wrote:

        From: MikeM <mmkewl@...>
        Subject: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
        To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 10:03 AM

         
        I have joined a christian goy group. Goys think that it's ok to have oral sex, and mutual mastrabation with men as long as you don't have anal. It5 makes sence because anal is the only part of gay sex that hurts, and is degrading.

      • Thom Hunter
        Guys,   I think the GOY movement is very dangerous and is a tool of deception.  I ve been to the group website to check it out.  SOme of them even portray
        Message 3 of 22 , Mar 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Guys,
           
          I think the GOY movement is very dangerous and is a tool of deception.  I've been to the group website to check it out.  SOme of them even portray themselves as ministries and suggest that members reduce the money they give to churches and give it to the Goys so they can reach more men with their message.
           
          Oral sex is still sex.  And the only sex God approves is that of a man and a woman in a monogomous marital relationship.  If you take what the Goys suggest, then it would be suitable for men and women to have sex with each other outside of marriage, since that would not be anal or unnatural.  Sex that is in response to lust is not something that God approves of . . . and I don't think the Goys are above God.
           
          Everyone would like a pass on sexuality and for someone to tell them it is okay to satisfy someone orally, but it just isn't.  It defeats the purpose of self-control and it separates us from God.
           
          God Bless
           
          Thom
           


          --- On Mon, 3/1/10, NewKnightRider <nmic28732@...> wrote:

          From: NewKnightRider <nmic28732@...>
          Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
          To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 11:30 AM

           
          as a former member of g0y groups, I say that it still leads you down the path that starts with lust.

          --- On Mon, 3/1/10, MikeM <mmkewl@yahoo. com> wrote:

          From: MikeM <mmkewl@yahoo. com>
          Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
          To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
          Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 10:03 AM

           
          I have joined a christian goy group. Goys think that it's ok to have oral sex, and mutual mastrabation with men as long as you don't have anal. It5 makes sence because anal is the only part of gay sex that hurts, and is degrading.


        • jay orknay
          you are absolutely right.  Thanks for reminding us Thomj   Blessings and Gods love anddrew ... From: Thom Hunter Subject: Re:
          Message 4 of 22 , Mar 1, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            you are absolutely right.  Thanks for reminding us Thomj
             
            Blessings and Gods love
            anddrew

            --- On Mon, 1/3/10, Thom Hunter <th2950@...> wrote:

            From: Thom Hunter <th2950@...>
            Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
            To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Monday, 1 March, 2010, 19:51

             
            Guys,
             
            I think the GOY movement is very dangerous and is a tool of deception.  I've been to the group website to check it out.  SOme of them even portray themselves as ministries and suggest that members reduce the money they give to churches and give it to the Goys so they can reach more men with their message.
             
            Oral sex is still sex.  And the only sex God approves is that of a man and a woman in a monogomous marital relationship.  If you take what the Goys suggest, then it would be suitable for men and women to have sex with each other outside of marriage, since that would not be anal or unnatural.  Sex that is in response to lust is not something that God approves of . . . and I don't think the Goys are above God.
             
            Everyone would like a pass on sexuality and for someone to tell them it is okay to satisfy someone orally, but it just isn't.  It defeats the purpose of self-control and it separates us from God.
             
            God Bless
             
            Thom
             


            --- On Mon, 3/1/10, NewKnightRider <nmic28732@yahoo. com> wrote:

            From: NewKnightRider <nmic28732@yahoo. com>
            Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
            To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
            Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 11:30 AM

             
            as a former member of g0y groups, I say that it still leads you down the path that starts with lust.

            --- On Mon, 3/1/10, MikeM <mmkewl@yahoo. com> wrote:

            From: MikeM <mmkewl@yahoo. com>
            Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
            To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
            Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 10:03 AM

             
            I have joined a christian goy group. Goys think that it's ok to have oral sex, and mutual mastrabation with men as long as you don't have anal. It5 makes sence because anal is the only part of gay sex that hurts, and is degrading.



          • John Spooner
            In regards to this matter I have been asked by the moderator of another group to post the message below which I am doing for him without opinion, prejudice or
            Message 5 of 22 , Mar 2, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              In regards to this matter I have been asked by the
              moderator of another group to post the message below which I am doing for
              him without opinion, prejudice or comment.
              Regards.
              John S.






              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------First of all Mr. Hunter, it's g0y or g0ys. Not GOY or goys. If one uses theproper spelling, one will see the vast difference in results when one doesan online search. Perhaps this might be how you are getting all yourmisinformation, by not simply realizing the spelling makes a hugedifference, both in representation and understanding. The only one that hasbeen deceived is yourself. You lead fellow readers to perhaps think you arean 'expert' on what the g0y movement is or stands for, but you can't evenget the spelling right, which right away puts your whole premise on a shakyfooting. And regarding the spelling, that IS a very important aspect and inthe g0y web site - www.g0ys.org - there IS a whole page on WHY -theologically - the name is spelled with a zero...but you must have missedthat point when you went to the site to "check it out".I know of no g0ys that portray themselves as ministers, nor do we, as awhole, portray the g0y movement as a ministry, in the 'religious' sense.G0ys, such as myself, do however, give freely of our time and energy toreach out to men who struggle with the misconception that their feelings ofsame-gender-affection are an abomination, when the real abomination, spelledout literally in God's Word is specific sexual BEHAVIORS.I've been involved with g0ys for 6+ years and nobody has ever suggested Ireduce any church donation and redirect it to the movement. WE have noTreasury, no budget, no president or CEO, etc. I don't believe in tithing(to the present day religions) anyway, as the money often nowadays getsmisused. I prefer to donate my time and my own resources directly to thosein need.how is it that Men of God claim to have the direct pipeline to informationand know for a fact that intimacy - or forget intimacy, as that oftenerroneously implies sex - relationships are only approved between man andwoman? The Bible states man will not LIE with man AS with a woman...whichspeaks to specific BEHAVIOR. Two men cannot LIE with each other AS with awoman, unless they mimic penetrative sex. A man only has one closely similarmanner in which to accomplish this...oral sex doesn't fit the criteria...andby the way, where is the prohibition for two women? I see no statement thattwo women shall not lie with each other AS with a man and woman, so whatwould the direct pipeline (please limit your clarification strictly to theoriginal Hebrew texts) say in response to that?By the way, King James...he was a homosexual...so why do fundamentalistChristians often put so much stock in the King James Version of the Bible?Back to my distinction between BEHAVIOR and Orientation; the latter tying inspecifically to a situation where men have bonded to one another - heart,soul and lives - those men whose 'souls were knit together as one', while ofcourse, eschewing the specific prohibited sexual behaviors. I ask you, whatdo you make of the relationship - and there clearly WAS a relationship,whether it was sexual or platonic is not the issue - of David & Jonathan inthe Bible? Two men whose 'souls were knit together as one', whose 'loveexceeded even the love of women', 'whose 'love found favor in God's eyes'.Hmmm, I wonder what that means...it sure sounds like they were much morethan just 'good ol' buddies'. Just what was it that made Saul so angry aboutDavid & Jonathan's relationship that motivated him to try to have Davidkilled? Surely if they were just mere friends...or was Saul mad that David &Jonathan had a deeper relationship, and one approved and celebrated by Godhimself?http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&q=#hl=en&source=hp&q=David+%26+JonathanTalk about the 'love that dare not speak its name'? This is the love storythat most 'fundamentalists' dare not acknowledge, because it would weakentheir strategy of instilling guilt, teaching flawed theology, and promotinghatred for 'different emotions' rather than ~~rightly dividing the word~~and teach that the SIN is about SPECIFIC BEHAVIOR, not about emotionalfeelings or loving relationships gathered in one household.There were many soldiers of the time who shared a bond of brotherhood -whether platonic or intimate - there is historical, and as I just described,Biblical evidence. Would you presume to be God's spokesman and deny twoloving (present-day) individuals a chance at happiness, (Saul)? Note veryspecifically I am NOT promoting prohibited BEHAVIOR. I am still anti-analsex. I find it repugnant and hypocritical that 'Men of God' would claim torepresent a God of Love, but would attempt to intertwine (prohibited) sexualbehavior with (God-pleasing) soul/life bonding as if they are synonymous andpromote a view that two people so bound to each other cannot have anapproved union in God's eyes. Do you, sir, think that there is somerequirement that simply because two men make a emotionally-close lifetogether (even as David and Jonathan did, both also having women (plural) intheir lives as well), that automatically indicts them as sinful and theirunion dictates they surely MUST be engaging in prohibited sexual behavior?Or are you simply applying your own struggle and guilt (with lust, etc.) toall men?You state that "...g0ys promote that it would be suitable for men and womento have sex with one another outside of marriage..." Your statement isincorrect. Oh, I forgot...you only visited the g0y website to "check itout", but you didn't spend 6+ years exploring and studying it. I doubt you,sir, have spent the length of time studying the original Hebrew texts thatthe later translations and revisions of "The Bible" were based on, as thefounder(s) of the G0y Movement and Philosophy have. I suspect you have notstudied the g0y material. Indeed, we believe, whether male/male ormale/female...any intimacy must have a solid core foundation upon which itis built. I guess the heterosexual community missed that important basis,judging from the 50% divorce rate across the USA (75% in California), to saynothing of the rate of infidelity across the board. I'm sure in manysocieties, globally, I'd find little difference in the infidelities,regardless of sexual orientation or gender.You are correct, "Sex that is in response to lust is not something that Godapproves of" and this IS the stance of g0ys as well. With male/male we pushthe premise of Friendship First, with NO expectation of any intimateprogression. G0y friendships are encouraged to begin on a NON-sexual level,period. After this initial stage, we promote strengthening Bonds ofBrotherhood; this progression comes about as a result of Masculine Respectand Trust, STILL at this stage with NO expectation of any intimacy. This maygo on for months or years, and certainly, as a man has a core group of malefriends/brothers/compadres...some of these alignments may NEVER progressbeyond friendship or platonic brotherhood. If, and only IF, there happens tobe an intimate progression...g0ys make it clear it must proceed in themanner that we believe is pleasing to God (ref. back to David &Jonathan)...Love Works No ILL; no prohibited behavior (anal); a union basedon love - whether platonic, agape, or intimate - and based on faith.Painting all males whom experience feelings of same-gender-affection withthe stink and stain of anal sex and rampant lustful, multiple animalpairings as if we simply can't help ourselves...and married man/womansomehow has the moral high ground...is extremely damaging to men who alreadyhave had their psyche damaged (and spirituality twisted) by thefundamentalist and feminist extremists that dominate the landscape. It's nowonder why so many men - heterosexual; bisexual; homosexual; single ormarried (especially the married man trapped in a marriage with a domineeringwife) are so painfully lonely and dysfunctional. Then yet another self-helporganization comes along and tells them how sick they are - characterizingtheir emotional feelings and thoughts as defined by the stigma ofanal-focused, lust-bound gayness - and that they can simply be cured, ifthey only replace the first LIE with another.It comes down to each of us, as individuals. I can only present what g0ysstate as their philosophy, and what I believe and use as a tool to guide myown life and intimate behavior (single and celibate, for the last decade).Surely, yes, there can be guys that claim to be 'goy', but they are no moreg0y than blue is yellow. What it all comes down to is how each man conductshis own life. When a young man is confronted with his own conflicted ideasof what defines his feelings of affection for others, you would steer themdown a path of self-loathing and confusion, rather than make distinctionbetween prohibited behavior and clearly defined 'love that found favor inGod's eyes'.This is precisely another affront to our Heavenly Father we soundly speakout against, as your beliefs clearly mimic many of the hypocriticalfundamentalist factions who spread their mis-translated and misrepresentedwords of "Gawd". Because we make see no difference between the LIES of gAysand the LIES of false preachers is why we are so equally hated by the gAyson one side - for speaking the truth about their life-threatening fetishes -and on the other side, by the fundamentalist Christians and other religions,whom do not base their teachings on the original Hebrew texts, but rather onself-serving mutations which only aim, over the centuries, was to keeppeople 'in line', not spread Jesus' Message of Love.http://www.g0ys.org/newthang.htmIn your closing line, you give those men who might be interested, buthaven't visited and explored the g0y philosophy in depth for themselves afalse impression, that g0ys present a view that sex - even oral sex (ormutual masturbation, since it was mentioned previously by another poster) -is a wide open frontier and anything goes is the buzzword of the day. Sorry,that's the GAY mantra...G0ys present, and promote a far more clearly-defined paradigm ofself-control and responsibility when it comes to sex than a majority of theheterosexual, bisexual and homosexual factions combined. The fact that youmake claims, but appear to have not studiously explored the material ong0ys, to deflect a discussion about your organization, is reprehensible. Itmakes me wonder what other hypocrisies - all in the name of the "LawdGeeesus" - you have lurking just under the surface...:-DRespectfully,Patrick Dennisonwww.g0ys.org ----------------------------------------------------------- Original Message -----From: Thom HunterTo: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.comSent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 6:21 AMSubject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if youdon't have anal?
            • John Spooner
              Further to my last post, the moderator of the other group has also requested I post this further second message from him, again I am doing so on his behalf and
              Message 6 of 22 , Mar 2, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Further to my last post, the moderator of the other group has
                also requested I post this further second message from him, again I am doing
                so on his behalf and without opinion or prejudice.
                Regards.
                John S.


                ---------------------------------------------------------



                Mike,

                Your post was forwarded to me - for my information - by a fellow g0y and my
                co-mod of g0yaltgroup.

                You state you have joined a "christian goy group". Judging by your spelling
                of the term g0y as "goy", I have to inquire... which group you are referring
                to? It's likely NOT a bona-fide g0y group...unless the misspelling - goy -
                is indeed an error on your part.

                Maybe "Goys" think '...that it's ok to have oral sex, and mutual
                mastrabation (spelling?) with men as long as you don't have anal...' but
                that's describing the g0y movement and philosophy a bit simplistically. Yes,
                we do oppose anal sex and other such dangerous and degrading practices and
                fetishes, but that does not mean there is a blanket approval of 'other'
                behaviors. Those other 'acceptable' behaviors must still be engaged in
                within the proper context. Friendship First and developing a strong
                framework of brotherhood between two men (WITHOUT any expectation of any
                sexual contact) is the basic foundational core belief of G0YS. There are
                also many g0ys who identify primarily as heterosexual and are not interested
                in any physical (sexual) contact with men.

                "It5 makes sence because anal is the only part of gay sex that hurts, and is
                degrading."


                I'm glad to see that you understand that part of it...it is dangerous and
                degrading. By hurt...not only is it often painful...the evidence is in
                plenty of gAy porn media...rarely, if at all do you see the recipient of
                anal assault (and that's what it is) smiling...usually there is an
                expression of pain and 'trying to get used to it', but it also hurts in ways
                that has nothing to do with physical discomfort.

                G0ys - spelled with a zer0 - believe that "Love Works No ILL" and anal sex
                creates a multitude of ILLS, some in the immediate and intermediate sense -
                lack of self esteem; risk of physical damage; risks of disease; to much
                longer lasting effects. Generally I don't put a lot of faith in what laymen
                write on Wikipedia, but the following I have little quarrel with:


                a.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_sex
                b.. Anal sex is considered a high-risk sexual practice, and unprotected
                anal sex is the riskiest of all forms of sexual intercourse.
                c.. The hazards are due to the vulnerability of the tissues, as the
                penetration of the anus causes tearing and bleeding of the soft tissues, and
                can damage the sphincter muscles, causing incontinence and anal prolapse. It
                is also due to the high concentration of disease causing organisms in the
                anus and the introduction of pathogens during the sex act itself, exposing
                the participants to a spectrum of contagious diseases. Some authorities
                judge that all anal sex is unsafe, due to the high rates of condom failure,
                including those brands that claim to be specially strengthened.

                I'm glad they made clear the point that 'protected' anal sex is basically a
                sham, and a deception. Naturally, gAy apologists and anal sex/sodomy
                promoters will respond that 'other' forms of sexual behavior can be
                dangerous as well.

                True. And that is WHY g0ys form their relationships and bonds with their
                fellow men WITHIN a framework of allowing a situation to develop from the
                ground up...Friendship First, develop an atmosphere of Masculine Respect and
                Trust, Bonds of Brotherhood developing over the long term - generally months
                or years - without an expectation of sex...if it is meant to be, and things
                progress to that intimate threshold and proceeds beyond, well...that is just
                the dessert. The main course: Friends for life, brothers whose bonds are
                cemented firm...

                Often gAys proceed down the path backward...having a multitude of sexual
                liaisons, hoping for one of them to be'the one'. How cheap and tawdry. I'd
                take a dozen friends that have my back for me over the shallow hope that a
                anonymous sex encounter will result in a potential 'lover'.

                And as far as "goys" go, I don't know what they believe...I only know what
                G0YS believe. And the characterization that Mr. Thom Hunter presents is far
                off base and inaccurate. Mr. Hunter, I refuse to play tit-for-tat with
                you...you have taken the discussion of YOUR organization and tried to
                deflect by spreading inaccuracies about G0YS. It just shows how childish you
                are. Attacking another movement's philosophy does not defend the questions
                about your own organization. It just makes you appear childish.


                To Mr. NewKnightRider, who writes:

                "...as a former member of g0y groups, I say that it still leads you down the
                path that starts with lust..."

                You may certainly have been a "...former member of g0y groups...", but I
                submit you were NEVER g0y. If you say it "...still leads you down the path
                that starts with lust..." then that is in your own mind and heart and is
                your own character flaw. We have plenty of guys who drift through the g0y
                groups...certainly the proof of any man in in their own behavior and how
                they present themselves. If you believe that aman cannot be in control of
                his own lusts (and behavior) I think that speaks more to yourself than to
                the g0y movement and philosophy. Applying your own flaws to men you
                apparently have no inkling of what bonds them together is a cheap shot.


                Sincerely,

                Patrick Dennison
                www.g0ys.org














                ----- Original Message -----
                From: John Spooner
                To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 9:00 PM
                Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you
                don't have anal?
              • Thom Hunter
                John,   My greatest regret in responding to the original post is that it opened up the opportunity for you, John, to promote g0ys by putting in this group the
                Message 7 of 22 , Mar 2, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  John,
                   
                  My greatest regret in responding to the original post is that it opened up the opportunity for you, John, to promote g0ys by putting in this group the links to their group sites and allow Patrick a podium for his harmful work.  Other than the misspelling of the word g0y, which is irrelevant, I stand completely by what I said in my post.  I spelled it goys because I think the whole concept goes beyond silly to dangerous and demeaning.  Anyone who chooses to go down that path will find it separates them from the will of God.  Merely accepting an enabling justification for sexual release does not make it right. 
                   
                  I think, John, that you have again done a diservice to the men in the group who are actually seeking freedom by posting a sign to a detour.  G0ys is a very dangerous concept and they grasp at straws to justify their behavior.  I hope none of your group members fall for the propaganda.  John . . . posting things as controversial as this "without opinion, prejudice or comment" is spiritual cowardice.
                   
                  We do not find our freedom in sexual bonding with men.  We find our freedom in spiritual bonding with Christ. 
                   
                  I am sorry that you have empowered Patrick in such a way and I hope the members of the group will ignore him
                   
                  Thom
                   

                  --- On Tue, 3/2/10, John Spooner <skunk16@...> wrote:

                  From: John Spooner <skunk16@...>
                  Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                  To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2010, 4:30 AM

                   
                  In regards to this matter I have been asked by the
                  moderator of another group to post the message below which I am doing for
                  him without opinion, prejudice or comment.
                  Regards.
                  John S.

                  ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -First of all Mr. Hunter, it's g0y or g0ys. Not GOY or goys. If one uses theproper spelling, one will see the vast difference in results when one doesan online search. Perhaps this might be how you are getting all yourmisinformation, by not simply realizing the spelling makes a hugedifference, both in representation and understanding. The only one that hasbeen deceived is yourself. You lead fellow readers to perhaps think you arean 'expert' on what the g0y movement is or stands for, but you can't evenget the spelling right, which right away puts your whole premise on a shakyfooting. And regarding the spelling, that IS a very important aspect and inthe g0y web site - www.g0ys.org - there IS a whole page on WHY -theologically - the name is spelled with a zero...but you must have missedthat point when you went to the site to "check it out".I know of no g0ys that portray themselves as ministers, nor do we, as awhole, portray the g0y movement as a ministry, in the 'religious' sense.G0ys, such as myself, do however, give freely of our time and energy toreach out to men who struggle with the misconception that their feelings ofsame-gender- affection are an abomination, when the real abomination, spelledout literally in God's Word is specific sexual BEHAVIORS.I' ve been involved with g0ys for 6+ years and nobody has ever suggested Ireduce any church donation and redirect it to the movement. WE have noTreasury, no budget, no president or CEO, etc. I don't believe in tithing(to the present day religions) anyway, as the money often nowadays getsmisused. I prefer to donate my time and my own resources directly to thosein need.how is it that Men of God claim to have the direct pipeline to informationand know for a fact that intimacy - or forget intimacy, as that oftenerroneously implies sex - relationships are only approved between man andwoman? The Bible states man will not LIE with man AS with a woman...whichspeaks to specific BEHAVIOR. Two men cannot LIE with each other AS with awoman, unless they mimic penetrative sex. A man only has one closely similarmanner in which to accomplish this...oral sex doesn't fit the criteria...andby the way, where is the prohibition for two women? I see no statement thattwo women shall not lie with each other AS with a man and woman, so whatwould the direct pipeline (please limit your clarification strictly to theoriginal Hebrew texts) say in response to that?By the way, King James...he was a homosexual.. .so why do fundamentalistChris tians often put so much stock in the King James Version of the Bible?Back to my distinction between BEHAVIOR and Orientation; the latter tying inspecifically to a situation where men have bonded to one another - heart,soul and lives - those men whose 'souls were knit together as one', while ofcourse, eschewing the specific prohibited sexual behaviors. I ask you, whatdo you make of the relationship - and there clearly WAS a relationship, whether it was sexual or platonic is not the issue - of David & Jonathan inthe Bible? Two men whose 'souls were knit together as one', whose 'loveexceeded even the love of women', 'whose 'love found favor in God's eyes'.Hmmm, I wonder what that means...it sure sounds like they were much morethan just 'good ol' buddies'. Just what was it that made Saul so angry aboutDavid & Jonathan's relationship that motivated him to try to have Davidkilled? Surely if they were just mere friends...or was Saul mad that David &Jonathan had a deeper relationship, and one approved and celebrated by Godhimself?http://www.google. com/webhp? hl=en&q=# hl=en&source= hp&q=David+ %26+JonathanTalk about the 'love that dare not speak its name'? This is the love storythat most 'fundamentalists' dare not acknowledge, because it would weakentheir strategy of instilling guilt, teaching flawed theology, and promotinghatred for 'different emotions' rather than ~~rightly dividing the word~~and teach that the SIN is about SPECIFIC BEHAVIOR, not about emotionalfeelings or loving relationships gathered in one household.There were many soldiers of the time who shared a bond of brotherhood -whether platonic or intimate - there is historical, and as I just described,Biblical evidence. Would you presume to be God's spokesman and deny twoloving (present-day) individuals a chance at happiness, (Saul)? Note veryspecifically I am NOT promoting prohibited BEHAVIOR. I am still anti-analsex. I find it repugnant and hypocritical that 'Men of God' would claim torepresent a God of Love, but would attempt to intertwine (prohibited) sexualbehavior with (God-pleasing) soul/life bonding as if they are synonymous andpromote a view that two people so bound to each other cannot have anapproved union in God's eyes. Do you, sir, think that there is somerequirement that simply because two men make a emotionally- close lifetogether (even as David and Jonathan did, both also having women (plural) intheir lives as well), that automatically indicts them as sinful and theirunion dictates they surely MUST be engaging in prohibited sexual behavior?Or are you simply applying your own struggle and guilt (with lust, etc.) toall men?You state that "...g0ys promote that it would be suitable for men and womento have sex with one another outside of marriage..." Your statement isincorrect. Oh, I forgot...you only visited the g0y website to "check itout", but you didn't spend 6+ years exploring and studying it. I doubt you,sir, have spent the length of time studying the original Hebrew texts thatthe later translations and revisions of "The Bible" were based on, as thefounder(s) of the G0y Movement and Philosophy have. I suspect you have notstudied the g0y material. Indeed, we believe, whether male/male ormale/female. ..any intimacy must have a solid core foundation upon which itis built. I guess the heterosexual community missed that important basis,judging from the 50% divorce rate across the USA (75% in California), to saynothing of the rate of infidelity across the board. I'm sure in manysocieties, globally, I'd find little difference in the infidelities, regardless of sexual orientation or gender.You are correct, "Sex that is in response to lust is not something that Godapproves of" and this IS the stance of g0ys as well. With male/male we pushthe premise of Friendship First, with NO expectation of any intimateprogression . G0y friendships are encouraged to begin on a NON-sexual level,period. After this initial stage, we promote strengthening Bonds ofBrotherhood; this progression comes about as a result of Masculine Respectand Trust, STILL at this stage with NO expectation of any intimacy. This maygo on for months or years, and certainly, as a man has a core group of malefriends/ brothers/ compadres. ..some of these alignments may NEVER progressbeyond friendship or platonic brotherhood. If, and only IF, there happens tobe an intimate progression. ..g0ys make it clear it must proceed in themanner that we believe is pleasing to God (ref. back to David &Jonathan).. .Love Works No ILL; no prohibited behavior (anal); a union basedon love - whether platonic, agape, or intimate - and based on faith.Painting all males whom experience feelings of same-gender- affection withthe stink and stain of anal sex and rampant lustful, multiple animalpairings as if we simply can't help ourselves... and married man/womansomehow has the moral high ground...is extremely damaging to men who alreadyhave had their psyche damaged (and spirituality twisted) by thefundamentalist and feminist extremists that dominate the landscape. It's nowonder why so many men - heterosexual; bisexual; homosexual; single ormarried (especially the married man trapped in a marriage with a domineeringwife) are so painfully lonely and dysfunctional. Then yet another self-helporganizati on comes along and tells them how sick they are - characterizingtheir emotional feelings and thoughts as defined by the stigma ofanal-focused, lust-bound gayness - and that they can simply be cured, ifthey only replace the first LIE with another.It comes down to each of us, as individuals. I can only present what g0ysstate as their philosophy, and what I believe and use as a tool to guide myown life and intimate behavior (single and celibate, for the last decade).Surely, yes, there can be guys that claim to be 'goy', but they are no moreg0y than blue is yellow. What it all comes down to is how each man conductshis own life. When a young man is confronted with his own conflicted ideasof what defines his feelings of affection for others, you would steer themdown a path of self-loathing and confusion, rather than make distinctionbetween prohibited behavior and clearly defined 'love that found favor inGod's eyes'.This is precisely another affront to our Heavenly Father we soundly speakout against, as your beliefs clearly mimic many of the hypocriticalfundame ntalist factions who spread their mis-translated and misrepresentedwords of "Gawd". Because we make see no difference between the LIES of gAysand the LIES of false preachers is why we are so equally hated by the gAyson one side - for speaking the truth about their life-threatening fetishes -and on the other side, by the fundamentalist Christians and other religions,whom do not base their teachings on the original Hebrew texts, but rather onself-serving mutations which only aim, over the centuries, was to keeppeople 'in line', not spread Jesus' Message of Love.http:// www.g0ys. org/newthang. htmIn your closing line, you give those men who might be interested, buthaven't visited and explored the g0y philosophy in depth for themselves afalse impression, that g0ys present a view that sex - even oral sex (ormutual masturbation, since it was mentioned previously by another poster) -is a wide open frontier and anything goes is the buzzword of the day. Sorry,that's the GAY mantra...G0ys present, and promote a far more clearly-defined paradigm ofself-control and responsibility when it comes to sex than a majority of theheterosexual, bisexual and homosexual factions combined. The fact that youmake claims, but appear to have not studiously explored the material ong0ys, to deflect a discussion about your organization, is reprehensible. Itmakes me wonder what other hypocrisies - all in the name of the "LawdGeeesus" - you have lurking just under the surface...:- DRespectfully, Patrick Dennisonwww. g0ys.org ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - Original Message -----From: Thom HunterTo: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.comSent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 6:21 AMSubject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Is it ok to have sex with men if youdon't have anal?

                • John Spooner. South Oz.
                  Dear Mr. Hunter. Could we dispense with the rhetoric and would you have the courtesy to answer the questions and address the points raised by Patrick please as
                  Message 8 of 22 , Mar 3, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Mr. Hunter.
                    Could we dispense with the rhetoric and would you have the courtesy to answer the questions and address the points raised by Patrick please as requested by him.
                    Regards and thanks in anticipation.
                    John S.

                    ----------------------------



                    "I would certainly like to know why he can attack me and the g0y movement, but he could not refute or even comment on one point I made...nothing about David & Jonathan, nothing about behavior vs. orientation, not even a peep about King James being homosexual...nor did he address any other points I made. He simply could only state he thinks I am dangerous. OK fine...but what about responding to the points I made, and try to refute them!

                    I think at this point details and testimonials are secondary. I want to know why he can't or doesn't refute what I've written. Why is that, Mr. Hunter?

                    Answer: Because what I wrote can't be refuted. And he'd rather dance around the issues with personal attacks, rather than provide responses to the facts of the discussion."
                  • Thom Hunter
                    John and Patrick,   I actually go by Thom, not Mr. Hunter.  I m not sure why you used that, unless it is an effort to intimidate, which should not be
                    Message 9 of 22 , Mar 3, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      John and Patrick,
                       
                      I actually go by Thom, not Mr. Hunter.  I'm not sure why you used that, unless it is an effort to intimidate, which should not be necessary.  We simply disagree on some points.
                       
                      Regarding David and Jonathan, I believe that David had a love for Jonathan that exceeds sexuality and stands as an example of how two heterosexual men can love each other.  Prior to Kinsey's research on sexuality, no serious theologian or psychologist had even considered the possibility it was homosexual.  The interpretation Patrick embraces is culture-driven.  I suggest he go to this link and he will find a great deal of information that aligns with my personal beliefs:  http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/Were_David_and_Jonathan_Homosexual_Lovers
                       
                      Regarding King James?  He may well have been gay.  There is certainly plenty of evidence he had extramarital affairs and his attitude was clearly "This is who I am.  Get over it."  However, God can use whomever He wishes to do whatever He pleases.  The Bible is filled with stories of men with siginificant issues who were nonetheless used by God to accomplish His purposes.  There are many Christians today who struggle with homosexuality.  The fact that this problem exists in their lives does not make them unusable by God.  One of the biggest issues I myself have faced is that when people found out I had struggled with homosexuality, they wanted to discount the good things I had done as a Christian.  We all sin.  King James had a desire to see the Gospel shared with all people.  It does not take a perfect man to do the will of God.
                       
                      I thought I made it clear what I believe about behavior versus orientation.  Many people may never know what caused their orientation towards their own gender.  It does, at this point, seem to be beyond our understanding.  However, behavior is another matter.  We clearly have a choice there.  My reading of the Bible makes it clear to me that homosexual behavior -- not the orientation -- is the sin.  And the Bible makes it clear that God is able to help us resist temptation.  G0ys believe that having oral sex with another man is acceptable to God and is merely an extension of love for someone of the same sex.  I do not believe that.  Show me why you do?
                       
                      I do believe the g0y movement is simply a way to offer an excuse . . . a man-made grace.  
                       
                      I think, Patrick, that you are being mislead. 
                       
                      Thom
                      http://thom-signsofastruggle.blogspot.com/ 

                      --- On Wed, 3/3/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@...> wrote:

                      From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@...>
                      Subject: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                      To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                      Date: Wednesday, March 3, 2010, 10:38 AM

                       
                      Dear Mr. Hunter.
                      Could we dispense with the rhetoric and would you have the courtesy to answer the questions and address the points raised by Patrick please as requested by him.
                      Regards and thanks in anticipation.
                      John S.

                      ------------ --------- -------

                      "I would certainly like to know why he can attack me and the g0y movement, but he could not refute or even comment on one point I made...nothing about David & Jonathan, nothing about behavior vs. orientation, not even a peep about King James being homosexual.. .nor did he address any other points I made. He simply could only state he thinks I am dangerous. OK fine...but what about responding to the points I made, and try to refute them!

                      I think at this point details and testimonials are secondary. I want to know why he can't or doesn't refute what I've written. Why is that, Mr. Hunter?

                      Answer: Because what I wrote can't be refuted. And he'd rather dance around the issues with personal attacks, rather than provide responses to the facts of the discussion."


                    • jay orknay
                      Hi Thom.  Thankyou so much for your post on this subject.  I totally agree with you.  Reading the subject it is not ok to have any kind of sex with man
                      Message 10 of 22 , Mar 3, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Thom.  Thankyou so much for your post on this subject.  I totally agree with you.  Reading the subject it is not ok to have any kind of sex with man regardless of whether it anal or not.  For years I have always wanted such a David and Jonathan type relationship and God brought a man into my life who is 25 years younger than I am. I am 60. We met 11 years ago and he moved into our house over 7 years that I share with my wife and family. He is godly and was a support to us as well as to the church.  We would give our lives for each other and yes we have hugged each other several times and he has cried on my shoulder a few times.  Our relationship is a very close one. He has moved out to start another job quite a distance away from us. I am pleased for him and our love is still the same.
                        I am with you on this Thom.  I am have sexuality issues caused by an interruption of bonding with the parent of the same sex. God can give the power to overcome this.  God loves the sinner but hates the sin.  Unfortunately we have become a sexualised society. When we live as God intends we will be happy
                        Blessings and Gods love and protection and wisdom
                        Andrew

                         
                        John and Patrick,
                         
                        I actually go by Thom, not Mr. Hunter.  I'm not sure why you used that, unless it is an effort to intimidate, which should not be necessary.  We simply disagree on some points.
                         
                        Regarding David and Jonathan, I believe that David had a love for Jonathan that exceeds sexuality and stands as an example of how two heterosexual men can love each other.  Prior to Kinsey's research on sexuality, no serious theologian or psychologist had even considered the possibility it was homosexual.  The interpretation Patrick embraces is culture-driven.  I suggest he go to this link and he will find a great deal of information that aligns with my personal beliefs:  http://www.pleaseco nvinceme. com/index/ Were_David_ and_Jonathan_ Homosexual_ Lovers
                         
                        Regarding King James?  He may well have been gay.  There is certainly plenty of evidence he had extramarital affairs and his attitude was clearly "This is who I am.  Get over it."  However, God can use whomever He wishes to do whatever He pleases.  The Bible is filled with stories of men with siginificant issues who were nonetheless used by God to accomplish His purposes.  There are many Christians today who struggle with homosexuality.  The fact that this problem exists in their lives does not make them unusable by God.  One of the biggest issues I myself have faced is that when people found out I had struggled with homosexuality, they wanted to discount the good things I had done as a Christian.  We all sin.  King James had a desire to see the Gospel shared with all people.  It does not take a perfect man to do the will of God.
                         
                        I thought I made it clear what I believe about behavior versus orientation.  Many people may never know what caused their orientation towards their own gender.  It does, at this point, seem to be beyond our understanding.  However, behavior is another matter.  We clearly have a choice there.  My reading of the Bible makes it clear to me that homosexual behavior -- not the orientation -- is the sin.  And the Bible makes it clear that God is able to help us resist temptation.  G0ys believe that having oral sex with another man is acceptable to God and is merely an extension of love for someone of the same sex.  I do not believe that.  Show me why you do?
                         
                        I do believe the g0y movement is simply a way to offer an excuse . . . a man-made grace.  
                         
                        I think, Patrick, that you are being mislead. 
                         
                        Thom
                        http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/ 

                        --- On Wed, 3/3/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                        From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                        Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                        To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                        Date: Wednesday, March 3, 2010, 10:38 AM

                         
                        Dear Mr. Hunter.
                        Could we dispense with the rhetoric and would you have the courtesy to answer the questions and address the points raised by Patrick please as requested by him.
                        Regards and thanks in anticipation.
                        John S.

                        ------------ --------- -------

                        "I would certainly like to know why he can attack me and the g0y movement, but he could not refute or even comment on one point I made...nothing about David & Jonathan, nothing about behavior vs. orientation, not even a peep about King James being homosexual.. .nor did he address any other points I made. He simply could only state he thinks I am dangerous. OK fine...but what about responding to the points I made, and try to refute them!

                        I think at this point details and testimonials are secondary. I want to know why he can't or doesn't refute what I've written. Why is that, Mr. Hunter?

                        Answer: Because what I wrote can't be refuted. And he'd rather dance around the issues with personal attacks, rather than provide responses to the facts of the discussion."



                      • John Spooner. South Oz.
                        Response from Patrick to Mr. Hunter. ... From: Thom Hunter To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:48 AM Subject: Re:
                        Message 11 of 22 , Mar 6, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Response from Patrick to Mr. Hunter.


                          --------------------


                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Thom Hunter
                          To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:48 AM
                          Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?



                          John and Patrick,

                          I actually go by Thom, not Mr. Hunter. I'm not sure why you used that, unless it is an effort to intimidate, which should not be necessary. We simply disagree on some points.


                          {{{In the circle I travel, it's used as a matter of respect, especially when addressing strangers. When strangers have an opposing viewpoint, I simply believed respect was required. To me, an air of casualness with strangers in a serious discussion indicates a flippant disregard for the other party...no offense meant to you, as I never stated I required I be called anything specific. I only refer to my treatment of others. But...as you wish.}}}



                          Regarding David and Jonathan, I believe that David had a love for Jonathan that exceeds sexuality and stands as an example of how two heterosexual men can love each other.


                          {{{This is precisely the g0y philosophy. The g0y philosophy is not rooted in, nor does it have sex as its starting point in relations between men - nor is it a required component as an ultimate end as well. That is the gAy lifestyle. G0ys is about Friendship First, Brotherhood, Camaraderie, Masculine Respect and Trust. A high number of men that identify with g0ys are seeking to regain a connection with their male peers, just as you describe above, without a sexual component. I won't deny that there are homosexual g0ys as well. The great thing is that we are all looking for the above factors - and the 'sex' for that latter group - is likewise, far, far down the list, if it is even a factor at all. Homosexual men can have the SAME kind of love for each other, without SEX being a component.}}}

                          {{{Men that try to apply a 'sex first' perspective to the g0y philosophy, rather than a Brotherhood perspective simply indicates how deeply rooted their thinking is (still) in the gAy lifestyle. The brainwashing used by proponents of the gAy lifestyle has an effect on anyone, not just homosexuals who support the gAy lifestyle.}}}

                          {{{Many men that agree with the g0y philosophy of Brotherhood etc., very surprisingly happen to be heterosexual, married; many have families...but they have one vital component missing in their life. A close buddy, a male friend, counterparts in their lives that were often quite plentiful in their single life - or in their youth. Society has bred an atmosphere where women are allowed to have their 'girlfriends', but men are supposed to leave their bonds of camaraderie behind when speaking their marriage vows and live a life of solitude (and sadly, a life where their every move is dominated by the will of their spouse). G0ys says "No More".}}}

                          {{{It - g0y philosophy - really has very little to do with sex (between men) except when we speak against the shameful state of the gAy lifestyle. It is that lifestyle (behavior) which has damaged the very premise of Brotherhood and Male Friendships. Anything with the remote sense of 'closeness' is labeled gAy, cloaked in 'drag' or smeared with the stink of anal sex. G0ys say "No More".}}}



                          Prior to Kinsey's research on sexuality, no serious theologian or psychologist had even considered the possibility it was homosexual.


                          {{{So there we have it...bad science and bad theology - until they had their eyes opened to a literal interpretation. Rather than it be a bad thing, perhaps some people actually started reading the original Hebrew texts as they were written. Those serious theologians and psychologists are still serious scholars. In any case, their perspectives are not suddenly diminished, simply because some fundamentalist laymen disagree.}}}



                          The interpretation Patrick embraces is culture-driven. I suggest he go to this link and he will find a great deal of information that aligns with my personal beliefs: http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/Were_David_and_Jonathan_Homosexual_Lovers


                          {{{No, not ONCE did I say they were homosexual lovers. It is you that keeps attaching sexual behavior to what I am speaking of. It is you that keeps attaching the sexual component (Behavior) to what g0ys promote (the Brotherhood traits outlined previously above). Nor is my interpretation culture-driven. I reject gAy culture, which is what I believe, is your implication. I rejected gAy culture over 6 years ago, after discovering g0ys. The reasons I believe that David & Jonathan had an emotionally close (whether sexual or not) relationship is not because of present day (gAy) culture which is a fairly recent phenomenon, attempting to justify gay marriage or other shams. My belief goes back to what we know historically of ancient soldiers and male culture of their period in time, not our society's recent gAy mindset (which I reject soundly 100%).}}}



                          Regarding King James? He may well have been gay.


                          {{{I'd say he was homosexual. GAY is a relatively recent term and (once again) really is applied to behavior and refers to the gAy lifestyle...he may well have been a homosexual whom exhibited gAy behavior is more accurate, I believe. Semantics you say? Yes, most definitely. And it speaks VOLUMES as to vast difference between orientation and behavior!}}}



                          There is certainly plenty of evidence he had extramarital affairs and his attitude was clearly "This is who I am. Get over it." However, God can use whomever He wishes to do whatever He pleases. The Bible is filled with stories of men with siginificant issues who were nonetheless used by God to accomplish His purposes. There are many Christians today who struggle with homosexuality. The fact that this problem exists in their lives does not make them unusable by God. One of the biggest issues I myself have faced is that when people found out I had struggled with homosexuality, they wanted to discount the good things I had done as a Christian. We all sin. King James had a desire to see the Gospel shared with all people. It does not take a perfect man to do the will of God.


                          {{{But you so casually reject the efforts of g0ys to turn men away from the gAy lifestyle and attempt to equate us with gAys. We are not a subset of gAy, we are not 'part of' the gAy community, nor do we wish to draw the gAy community into our paradigm...we do not identify with their mannerisms, their politics, their behaviors, their fetishes, etc.}}}



                          I thought I made it clear what I believe about behavior versus orientation.


                          {{{You may have tried, but time and again, I got the impression that you equate behavior and orientation as synonymous, and interchange the two at will, especially when implying that you can successfully change a person's orientation.}}}



                          Many people may never know what caused their orientation towards their own gender.


                          {{{Intelligent design; God's Will; genetics; a natural state just like blond or brown hair; blue or green eyes; dark or light skin; just as we don't know what causes a person's orientation to the opposite gender. But I don't see you professing to be able to change any of those traits.}}}



                          It does, at this point, seem to be beyond our understanding. However, behavior is another matter. We clearly have a choice there.


                          {{{Yes. G0ys say the same thing. So perhaps you should focus on addressing behavior, and stop telling the public you are changing men's orientations. You are not.}}}

                          {{{If you still believe that, then I challenge you...take a heterosexual man and explain to him how he can change HIS orientation, and then have him change it back again. Do this a 1/2 dozen times and you might have a gold mine there. Even then, how can either prove his orientation has changed at all, except by exhibiting behavior...which might still be a lie? If homosexuals can 'change' their orientation, then likewise heterosexuals can as well. We all know that there isn't a heterosexual alive that will agree with this, but they seem to think that ~homosexuals~ can change on a whim (if they really 'desire' to). The can certainly live a lie, and change their behavior...but orientation cannot be changed, no more than a zebra can change its stripes.}}}



                          My reading of the Bible makes it clear to me that homosexual behavior -- not the orientation -- is the sin.


                          {{{So we agree, to a degree. Where we disagree is in our literal interpretation of God's law. It seems that in the end, we both are opposed to the 'gAy lifestyle' (behavior).}}}



                          And the Bible makes it clear that God is able to help us resist temptation. G0ys believe that having oral sex with another man is acceptable to God and is merely an extension of love for someone of the same sex. I do not believe that. Show me why you do?


                          {{{Your statement about what g0ys believe is false. There is no statement by g0ys to that fact, because God does not address oral sex in any of his statements to man.}}}

                          {{{I never said I did either. But that is not relevant...what is relevant is that we interpret the original Hebrew texts literally, as God is a God of Laws...and nothing beyond what he writes should be inferred. "Thou shalt not LIE with a man AS with a woman"...refers to penetrative sex, intending to mimic and make a mockery of procreative sex. There is no reference to oral sex; there are no references to lesbians; there are no references to many things. Likewise there are references to many things that our present society casually ignores. Many things related to diet, health, and so on...where is your indignation for the 'sinful' nature of man on these other issues?}}}



                          I do believe the g0y movement is simply a way to offer an excuse . . . a man-made grace.


                          {{{Man-made grace is a common trait with mortals. You give that to your followers as well; every time we pick up a recent copy of the Bible, it is man made...much of God's original intent is diluted and awash in man's interpretation and translation, which we believe is far and away from God's intent and original words.}}}

                          {{{You have diluted the your interpretation intent of the g0y philosophy to simply be a decree giving blanket approval to meaningless sex, when that is 180 degrees from our core foundational beliefs. I doubt you truly really explored and studied it...and I suspect you based your views of g0ys on a few semi-graphic images of unclad men embracing one another and applied the 'gAy' label to that. As if heterosexual men could not express their emotional attachment for one another in that (sensual, but non-sexual) way. It is you that placed their penises in each others anuses and mouths. I doubt any of the ~~words~~ of our philosophy (Friendship, Brotherhood, Camaraderie, Non-Sexual Foundational Basis for Male Relationships) have even sunk in, even partially.}}}



                          I think, Patrick, that you are being mislead.


                          {{{No, but let's state for argument's sake that it is I that am misinterpreting g0y philosophy (I'm not), the honorable, non-sexual based traits that I promote are what I believe...personally, so your characterization of me is misplaced.

                          I also believe that homosexual is an orientation, and that 'gAy' is a lifestyle, awash in shameful, degrading, decadent and dangerous BEHAVIOR.

                          I also believe that not all homosexuals are GAY (see previous definitions).

                          I also believe that there are homosexuals that do not put SEX as their primary concern, just as the same applies to heterosexuals, and that emotional bonds do not necessarily incorporate sexual expression as their primary component. Indeed, that component may never manifest itself.}}}


                          {{{Patrick}}}
                        • Thom Hunter
                          Patrick,   I can t dissuade you.  I know that.  We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations.  I hope for you
                          Message 12 of 22 , Mar 6, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Patrick,
                             
                            I can't dissuade you.  I know that.  We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations.  I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.  I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies.  I just don't agree.
                             
                            Others can certainly do their own research:  http://www.g0ys.org/initialize.htm
                             
                            There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.  I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation, and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.
                             
                            God Bless,
                             
                            Thom
                            http://thom-signsofastruggle.blogspot.com/

                            --- On Sat, 3/6/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@...> wrote:

                            From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@...>
                            Subject: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                            To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                            Date: Saturday, March 6, 2010, 9:15 AM

                             
                            Response from Patrick to Mr. Hunter.

                            ------------ --------

                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: Thom Hunter
                            To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                            Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:48 AM
                            Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                            John and Patrick,

                            I actually go by Thom, not Mr. Hunter. I'm not sure why you used that, unless it is an effort to intimidate, which should not be necessary. We simply disagree on some points.

                            {{{In the circle I travel, it's used as a matter of respect, especially when addressing strangers. When strangers have an opposing viewpoint, I simply believed respect was required. To me, an air of casualness with strangers in a serious discussion indicates a flippant disregard for the other party...no offense meant to you, as I never stated I required I be called anything specific. I only refer to my treatment of others. But...as you wish.}}}

                            Regarding David and Jonathan, I believe that David had a love for Jonathan that exceeds sexuality and stands as an example of how two heterosexual men can love each other.

                            {{{This is precisely the g0y philosophy. The g0y philosophy is not rooted in, nor does it have sex as its starting point in relations between men - nor is it a required component as an ultimate end as well. That is the gAy lifestyle. G0ys is about Friendship First, Brotherhood, Camaraderie, Masculine Respect and Trust. A high number of men that identify with g0ys are seeking to regain a connection with their male peers, just as you describe above, without a sexual component. I won't deny that there are homosexual g0ys as well. The great thing is that we are all looking for the above factors - and the 'sex' for that latter group - is likewise, far, far down the list, if it is even a factor at all. Homosexual men can have the SAME kind of love for each other, without SEX being a component.}} }

                            {{{Men that try to apply a 'sex first' perspective to the g0y philosophy, rather than a Brotherhood perspective simply indicates how deeply rooted their thinking is (still) in the gAy lifestyle. The brainwashing used by proponents of the gAy lifestyle has an effect on anyone, not just homosexuals who support the gAy lifestyle.}} }

                            {{{Many men that agree with the g0y philosophy of Brotherhood etc., very surprisingly happen to be heterosexual, married; many have families...but they have one vital component missing in their life. A close buddy, a male friend, counterparts in their lives that were often quite plentiful in their single life - or in their youth. Society has bred an atmosphere where women are allowed to have their 'girlfriends' , but men are supposed to leave their bonds of camaraderie behind when speaking their marriage vows and live a life of solitude (and sadly, a life where their every move is dominated by the will of their spouse). G0ys says "No More".}}}

                            {{{It - g0y philosophy - really has very little to do with sex (between men) except when we speak against the shameful state of the gAy lifestyle. It is that lifestyle (behavior) which has damaged the very premise of Brotherhood and Male Friendships. Anything with the remote sense of 'closeness' is labeled gAy, cloaked in 'drag' or smeared with the stink of anal sex. G0ys say "No More".}}}

                            Prior to Kinsey's research on sexuality, no serious theologian or psychologist had even considered the possibility it was homosexual.

                            {{{So there we have it...bad science and bad theology - until they had their eyes opened to a literal interpretation. Rather than it be a bad thing, perhaps some people actually started reading the original Hebrew texts as they were written. Those serious theologians and psychologists are still serious scholars. In any case, their perspectives are not suddenly diminished, simply because some fundamentalist laymen disagree.}}}

                            The interpretation Patrick embraces is culture-driven. I suggest he go to this link and he will find a great deal of information that aligns with my personal beliefs: http://www.pleaseco nvinceme. com/index/ Were_David_ and_Jonathan_ Homosexual_ Lovers

                            {{{No, not ONCE did I say they were homosexual lovers. It is you that keeps attaching sexual behavior to what I am speaking of. It is you that keeps attaching the sexual component (Behavior) to what g0ys promote (the Brotherhood traits outlined previously above). Nor is my interpretation culture-driven. I reject gAy culture, which is what I believe, is your implication. I rejected gAy culture over 6 years ago, after discovering g0ys. The reasons I believe that David & Jonathan had an emotionally close (whether sexual or not) relationship is not because of present day (gAy) culture which is a fairly recent phenomenon, attempting to justify gay marriage or other shams. My belief goes back to what we know historically of ancient soldiers and male culture of their period in time, not our society's recent gAy mindset (which I reject soundly 100%).}}}

                            Regarding King James? He may well have been gay.

                            {{{I'd say he was homosexual. GAY is a relatively recent term and (once again) really is applied to behavior and refers to the gAy lifestyle... he may well have been a homosexual whom exhibited gAy behavior is more accurate, I believe. Semantics you say? Yes, most definitely. And it speaks VOLUMES as to vast difference between orientation and behavior!}}}

                            There is certainly plenty of evidence he had extramarital affairs and his attitude was clearly "This is who I am. Get over it." However, God can use whomever He wishes to do whatever He pleases. The Bible is filled with stories of men with siginificant issues who were nonetheless used by God to accomplish His purposes. There are many Christians today who struggle with homosexuality. The fact that this problem exists in their lives does not make them unusable by God. One of the biggest issues I myself have faced is that when people found out I had struggled with homosexuality, they wanted to discount the good things I had done as a Christian. We all sin. King James had a desire to see the Gospel shared with all people. It does not take a perfect man to do the will of God.

                            {{{But you so casually reject the efforts of g0ys to turn men away from the gAy lifestyle and attempt to equate us with gAys. We are not a subset of gAy, we are not 'part of' the gAy community, nor do we wish to draw the gAy community into our paradigm...we do not identify with their mannerisms, their politics, their behaviors, their fetishes, etc.}}}

                            I thought I made it clear what I believe about behavior versus orientation.

                            {{{You may have tried, but time and again, I got the impression that you equate behavior and orientation as synonymous, and interchange the two at will, especially when implying that you can successfully change a person's orientation. }}}

                            Many people may never know what caused their orientation towards their own gender.

                            {{{Intelligent design; God's Will; genetics; a natural state just like blond or brown hair; blue or green eyes; dark or light skin; just as we don't know what causes a person's orientation to the opposite gender. But I don't see you professing to be able to change any of those traits.}}}

                            It does, at this point, seem to be beyond our understanding. However, behavior is another matter. We clearly have a choice there.

                            {{{Yes. G0ys say the same thing. So perhaps you should focus on addressing behavior, and stop telling the public you are changing men's orientations. You are not.}}}

                            {{{If you still believe that, then I challenge you...take a heterosexual man and explain to him how he can change HIS orientation, and then have him change it back again. Do this a 1/2 dozen times and you might have a gold mine there. Even then, how can either prove his orientation has changed at all, except by exhibiting behavior...which might still be a lie? If homosexuals can 'change' their orientation, then likewise heterosexuals can as well. We all know that there isn't a heterosexual alive that will agree with this, but they seem to think that ~homosexuals~ can change on a whim (if they really 'desire' to). The can certainly live a lie, and change their behavior...but orientation cannot be changed, no more than a zebra can change its stripes.}}}

                            My reading of the Bible makes it clear to me that homosexual behavior -- not the orientation -- is the sin.

                            {{{So we agree, to a degree. Where we disagree is in our literal interpretation of God's law. It seems that in the end, we both are opposed to the 'gAy lifestyle' (behavior).} }}

                            And the Bible makes it clear that God is able to help us resist temptation. G0ys believe that having oral sex with another man is acceptable to God and is merely an extension of love for someone of the same sex. I do not believe that. Show me why you do?

                            {{{Your statement about what g0ys believe is false. There is no statement by g0ys to that fact, because God does not address oral sex in any of his statements to man.}}}

                            {{{I never said I did either. But that is not relevant...what is relevant is that we interpret the original Hebrew texts literally, as God is a God of Laws...and nothing beyond what he writes should be inferred. "Thou shalt not LIE with a man AS with a woman"...refers to penetrative sex, intending to mimic and make a mockery of procreative sex. There is no reference to oral sex; there are no references to lesbians; there are no references to many things. Likewise there are references to many things that our present society casually ignores. Many things related to diet, health, and so on...where is your indignation for the 'sinful' nature of man on these other issues?}}}

                            I do believe the g0y movement is simply a way to offer an excuse . . . a man-made grace.

                            {{{Man-made grace is a common trait with mortals. You give that to your followers as well; every time we pick up a recent copy of the Bible, it is man made...much of God's original intent is diluted and awash in man's interpretation and translation, which we believe is far and away from God's intent and original words.}}}

                            {{{You have diluted the your interpretation intent of the g0y philosophy to simply be a decree giving blanket approval to meaningless sex, when that is 180 degrees from our core foundational beliefs. I doubt you truly really explored and studied it...and I suspect you based your views of g0ys on a few semi-graphic images of unclad men embracing one another and applied the 'gAy' label to that. As if heterosexual men could not express their emotional attachment for one another in that (sensual, but non-sexual) way. It is you that placed their penises in each others anuses and mouths. I doubt any of the ~~words~~ of our philosophy (Friendship, Brotherhood, Camaraderie, Non-Sexual Foundational Basis for Male Relationships) have even sunk in, even partially.}} }

                            I think, Patrick, that you are being mislead.

                            {{{No, but let's state for argument's sake that it is I that am misinterpreting g0y philosophy (I'm not), the honorable, non-sexual based traits that I promote are what I believe...personall y, so your characterization of me is misplaced.

                            I also believe that homosexual is an orientation, and that 'gAy' is a lifestyle, awash in shameful, degrading, decadent and dangerous BEHAVIOR.

                            I also believe that not all homosexuals are GAY (see previous definitions) .

                            I also believe that there are homosexuals that do not put SEX as their primary concern, just as the same applies to heterosexuals, and that emotional bonds do not necessarily incorporate sexual expression as their primary component. Indeed, that component may never manifest itself.}}}

                            {{{Patrick}} }


                          • John Spooner. South Oz.
                            Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter. ... Patrick, I can t dissuade you. I know that. {{{You don t have to worry about me...I m not sexually active
                            Message 13 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                              ----------------------


                              Patrick,

                              I can't dissuade you. I know that.


                              {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that's not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}



                              We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.


                              {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                              But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}



                              I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                              Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys.org/initialize.htm

                              There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                              {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                              {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                              But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}



                              I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,


                              {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}



                              and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.


                              {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                              {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                              I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                              {{{God Bless you as well.

                              Patrick}}}



                              God Bless,

                              Thom
                              http://thom-signsofastruggle.blogspot.com/
                            • Thom Hunter
                              Patrick,   I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.   I do want to remind
                              Message 14 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Patrick,
                                 
                                I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.
                                 
                                I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is:  "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?"  That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.
                                 
                                My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion:  no.
                                 
                                I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.
                                 
                                God Bless,
                                 
                                Thom
                                 
                                 
                                 

                                --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@...> wrote:

                                From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@...>
                                Subject: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                                Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM

                                 
                                Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                                ------------ --------- -

                                Patrick,

                                I can't dissuade you. I know that.

                                {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}

                                We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.

                                {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                                But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}

                                I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                                Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm

                                There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                                {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                                {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                                But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}

                                I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,

                                {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}

                                and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.

                                {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                                {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                                I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                                {{{God Bless you as well.

                                Patrick}}}

                                God Bless,

                                Thom
                                http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/












                              • jay orknay
                                Hi Thom.  Thanks so m;uch for your stance on this.  I agree with you.  I have gone to the goy site and what I have seen would draw me back into
                                Message 15 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Hi Thom.  Thanks so m;uch for your stance on this.  I agree with you.  I have gone to the goy site and what I have seen would draw me back into unwholesomeness which I am struggling against.  Some of the photos were explicit.   Goys are wrong but they are still loved by God and by Christians with Gods love
                                  blessings and Gods love and protection
                                  andrew

                                   
                                  Patrick,
                                   
                                  I can't dissuade you.  I know that.  We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations.  I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.  I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies.  I just don't agree.
                                   
                                  Others can certainly do their own research:  http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm
                                   
                                  There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.  I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation, and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.
                                   
                                  God Bless,
                                   
                                  Thom
                                  http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/

                                  --- On Sat, 3/6/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                                  From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                  Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                  To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                  Date: Saturday, March 6, 2010, 9:15 AM

                                   
                                  Response from Patrick to Mr. Hunter.

                                  ------------ --------

                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: Thom Hunter
                                  To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                  Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:48 AM
                                  Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                  John and Patrick,

                                  I actually go by Thom, not Mr. Hunter. I'm not sure why you used that, unless it is an effort to intimidate, which should not be necessary. We simply disagree on some points.

                                  {{{In the circle I travel, it's used as a matter of respect, especially when addressing strangers. When strangers have an opposing viewpoint, I simply believed respect was required. To me, an air of casualness with strangers in a serious discussion indicates a flippant disregard for the other party...no offense meant to you, as I never stated I required I be called anything specific. I only refer to my treatment of others. But...as you wish.}}}

                                  Regarding David and Jonathan, I believe that David had a love for Jonathan that exceeds sexuality and stands as an example of how two heterosexual men can love each other.

                                  {{{This is precisely the g0y philosophy. The g0y philosophy is not rooted in, nor does it have sex as its starting point in relations between men - nor is it a required component as an ultimate end as well. That is the gAy lifestyle. G0ys is about Friendship First, Brotherhood, Camaraderie, Masculine Respect and Trust. A high number of men that identify with g0ys are seeking to regain a connection with their male peers, just as you describe above, without a sexual component. I won't deny that there are homosexual g0ys as well. The great thing is that we are all looking for the above factors - and the 'sex' for that latter group - is likewise, far, far down the list, if it is even a factor at all. Homosexual men can have the SAME kind of love for each other, without SEX being a component.}} }

                                  {{{Men that try to apply a 'sex first' perspective to the g0y philosophy, rather than a Brotherhood perspective simply indicates how deeply rooted their thinking is (still) in the gAy lifestyle. The brainwashing used by proponents of the gAy lifestyle has an effect on anyone, not just homosexuals who support the gAy lifestyle.}} }

                                  {{{Many men that agree with the g0y philosophy of Brotherhood etc., very surprisingly happen to be heterosexual, married; many have families...but they have one vital component missing in their life. A close buddy, a male friend, counterparts in their lives that were often quite plentiful in their single life - or in their youth. Society has bred an atmosphere where women are allowed to have their 'girlfriends' , but men are supposed to leave their bonds of camaraderie behind when speaking their marriage vows and live a life of solitude (and sadly, a life where their every move is dominated by the will of their spouse). G0ys says "No More".}}}

                                  {{{It - g0y philosophy - really has very little to do with sex (between men) except when we speak against the shameful state of the gAy lifestyle. It is that lifestyle (behavior) which has damaged the very premise of Brotherhood and Male Friendships. Anything with the remote sense of 'closeness' is labeled gAy, cloaked in 'drag' or smeared with the stink of anal sex. G0ys say "No More".}}}

                                  Prior to Kinsey's research on sexuality, no serious theologian or psychologist had even considered the possibility it was homosexual.

                                  {{{So there we have it...bad science and bad theology - until they had their eyes opened to a literal interpretation. Rather than it be a bad thing, perhaps some people actually started reading the original Hebrew texts as they were written. Those serious theologians and psychologists are still serious scholars. In any case, their perspectives are not suddenly diminished, simply because some fundamentalist laymen disagree.}}}

                                  The interpretation Patrick embraces is culture-driven. I suggest he go to this link and he will find a great deal of information that aligns with my personal beliefs: http://www.pleaseco nvinceme. com/index/ Were_David_ and_Jonathan_ Homosexual_ Lovers

                                  {{{No, not ONCE did I say they were homosexual lovers. It is you that keeps attaching sexual behavior to what I am speaking of. It is you that keeps attaching the sexual component (Behavior) to what g0ys promote (the Brotherhood traits outlined previously above). Nor is my interpretation culture-driven. I reject gAy culture, which is what I believe, is your implication. I rejected gAy culture over 6 years ago, after discovering g0ys. The reasons I believe that David & Jonathan had an emotionally close (whether sexual or not) relationship is not because of present day (gAy) culture which is a fairly recent phenomenon, attempting to justify gay marriage or other shams. My belief goes back to what we know historically of ancient soldiers and male culture of their period in time, not our society's recent gAy mindset (which I reject soundly 100%).}}}

                                  Regarding King James? He may well have been gay.

                                  {{{I'd say he was homosexual. GAY is a relatively recent term and (once again) really is applied to behavior and refers to the gAy lifestyle... he may well have been a homosexual whom exhibited gAy behavior is more accurate, I believe. Semantics you say? Yes, most definitely. And it speaks VOLUMES as to vast difference between orientation and behavior!}}}

                                  There is certainly plenty of evidence he had extramarital affairs and his attitude was clearly "This is who I am. Get over it." However, God can use whomever He wishes to do whatever He pleases. The Bible is filled with stories of men with siginificant issues who were nonetheless used by God to accomplish His purposes. There are many Christians today who struggle with homosexuality. The fact that this problem exists in their lives does not make them unusable by God. One of the biggest issues I myself have faced is that when people found out I had struggled with homosexuality, they wanted to discount the good things I had done as a Christian. We all sin. King James had a desire to see the Gospel shared with all people. It does not take a perfect man to do the will of God.

                                  {{{But you so casually reject the efforts of g0ys to turn men away from the gAy lifestyle and attempt to equate us with gAys. We are not a subset of gAy, we are not 'part of' the gAy community, nor do we wish to draw the gAy community into our paradigm...we do not identify with their mannerisms, their politics, their behaviors, their fetishes, etc.}}}

                                  I thought I made it clear what I believe about behavior versus orientation.

                                  {{{You may have tried, but time and again, I got the impression that you equate behavior and orientation as synonymous, and interchange the two at will, especially when implying that you can successfully change a person's orientation. }}}

                                  Many people may never know what caused their orientation towards their own gender.

                                  {{{Intelligent design; God's Will; genetics; a natural state just like blond or brown hair; blue or green eyes; dark or light skin; just as we don't know what causes a person's orientation to the opposite gender. But I don't see you professing to be able to change any of those traits.}}}

                                  It does, at this point, seem to be beyond our understanding. However, behavior is another matter. We clearly have a choice there.

                                  {{{Yes. G0ys say the same thing. So perhaps you should focus on addressing behavior, and stop telling the public you are changing men's orientations. You are not.}}}

                                  {{{If you still believe that, then I challenge you...take a heterosexual man and explain to him how he can change HIS orientation, and then have him change it back again. Do this a 1/2 dozen times and you might have a gold mine there. Even then, how can either prove his orientation has changed at all, except by exhibiting behavior...which might still be a lie? If homosexuals can 'change' their orientation, then likewise heterosexuals can as well. We all know that there isn't a heterosexual alive that will agree with this, but they seem to think that ~homosexuals~ can change on a whim (if they really 'desire' to). The can certainly live a lie, and change their behavior...but orientation cannot be changed, no more than a zebra can change its stripes.}}}

                                  My reading of the Bible makes it clear to me that homosexual behavior -- not the orientation -- is the sin.

                                  {{{So we agree, to a degree. Where we disagree is in our literal interpretation of God's law. It seems that in the end, we both are opposed to the 'gAy lifestyle' (behavior).} }}

                                  And the Bible makes it clear that God is able to help us resist temptation. G0ys believe that having oral sex with another man is acceptable to God and is merely an extension of love for someone of the same sex. I do not believe that. Show me why you do?

                                  {{{Your statement about what g0ys believe is false. There is no statement by g0ys to that fact, because God does not address oral sex in any of his statements to man.}}}

                                  {{{I never said I did either. But that is not relevant...what is relevant is that we interpret the original Hebrew texts literally, as God is a God of Laws...and nothing beyond what he writes should be inferred. "Thou shalt not LIE with a man AS with a woman"...refers to penetrative sex, intending to mimic and make a mockery of procreative sex. There is no reference to oral sex; there are no references to lesbians; there are no references to many things. Likewise there are references to many things that our present society casually ignores. Many things related to diet, health, and so on...where is your indignation for the 'sinful' nature of man on these other issues?}}}

                                  I do believe the g0y movement is simply a way to offer an excuse . . . a man-made grace.

                                  {{{Man-made grace is a common trait with mortals. You give that to your followers as well; every time we pick up a recent copy of the Bible, it is man made...much of God's original intent is diluted and awash in man's interpretation and translation, which we believe is far and away from God's intent and original words.}}}

                                  {{{You have diluted the your interpretation intent of the g0y philosophy to simply be a decree giving blanket approval to meaningless sex, when that is 180 degrees from our core foundational beliefs. I doubt you truly really explored and studied it...and I suspect you based your views of g0ys on a few semi-graphic images of unclad men embracing one another and applied the 'gAy' label to that. As if heterosexual men could not express their emotional attachment for one another in that (sensual, but non-sexual) way. It is you that placed their penises in each others anuses and mouths. I doubt any of the ~~words~~ of our philosophy (Friendship, Brotherhood, Camaraderie, Non-Sexual Foundational Basis for Male Relationships) have even sunk in, even partially.}} }

                                  I think, Patrick, that you are being mislead.

                                  {{{No, but let's state for argument's sake that it is I that am misinterpreting g0y philosophy (I'm not), the honorable, non-sexual based traits that I promote are what I believe...personall y, so your characterization of me is misplaced.

                                  I also believe that homosexual is an orientation, and that 'gAy' is a lifestyle, awash in shameful, degrading, decadent and dangerous BEHAVIOR.

                                  I also believe that not all homosexuals are GAY (see previous definitions) .

                                  I also believe that there are homosexuals that do not put SEX as their primary concern, just as the same applies to heterosexuals, and that emotional bonds do not necessarily incorporate sexual expression as their primary component. Indeed, that component may never manifest itself.}}}

                                  {{{Patrick}} }



                                • jay orknay
                                  Hi Thom.  As I have mentioned  I agree with you on this and support your stand. It is something to be avoided Blessings and Gods love andrew ... From: Thom
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hi Thom.  As I have mentioned  I agree with you on this and support your stand. It is something to be avoided
                                    Blessings and Gods love
                                    andrew

                                    --- On Sun, 7/3/10, Thom Hunter <th2950@...> wrote:

                                    From: Thom Hunter <th2950@...>
                                    Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                    To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                                    Date: Sunday, 7 March, 2010, 18:56

                                     
                                    Patrick,
                                     
                                    I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.
                                     
                                    I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is:  "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?"  That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.
                                     
                                    My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion:  no.
                                     
                                    I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.
                                     
                                    God Bless,
                                     
                                    Thom
                                     
                                     
                                     

                                    --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                                    From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                    Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                    To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                    Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM

                                     
                                    Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                                    ------------ --------- -

                                    Patrick,

                                    I can't dissuade you. I know that.

                                    {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}

                                    We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.

                                    {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                                    But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}

                                    I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                                    Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm

                                    There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                                    {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                                    {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                                    But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}

                                    I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,

                                    {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}

                                    and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.

                                    {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                                    {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                                    I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                                    {{{God Bless you as well.

                                    Patrick}}}

                                    God Bless,

                                    Thom
                                    http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/













                                  • John Cliford
                                    Thom, I believe that as soon as we say this is ok and this is not ok,,,,,,,we become a Pharisee. They took the 10 Commandments and produced books of rules.
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Thom,

                                      I believe that as soon as we say this is ok and this is not ok,,,,,,,we become a Pharisee.  They took the 10 Commandments and produced books of rules.  Jesus was not kind to the Pharisees or their rules.

                                      We live in a fallen word,,,, we are born with a penchant for sin.  We never out-grow this desire to sin.  We just have to except that we sin,,, it's comes with being human on this planet,,,, get over it,,, learn to live with that reality.  Now look to Jesus as our redemption.  With Jesus we walk a better life,,,,, but not a sinless life,,,,so do not start writing rules for others to live by,,,, it only sets you and them up for failure when sin enters and we  do not live up to that standard.

                                      This is one of the major reasons that so many gay teenagers/men kill them-selfs,,, they just can not live up to the rules others have written for them.  

                                      Just like not all are healed when we pray for them,,,,, not all men are changed form gay to straight when they/we pray for them.  

                                      So take your opportunity to lead a gay man to Jesus,,,,, so do not spend your one chance telling him the same thing he has been told every day of his life.

                                      John



                                      From: Thom Hunter <th2950@...>
                                      To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                                      Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 10:56:33 AM
                                      Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                       

                                      Patrick,
                                       
                                      I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.
                                       
                                      I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is:  "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?"  That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.
                                       
                                      My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion:  no.
                                       
                                      I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.
                                       
                                      God Bless,
                                       
                                      Thom
                                       
                                       
                                       

                                      --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                                      From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                      Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                      To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                      Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM

                                       
                                      Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                                      ------------ --------- -

                                      Patrick,

                                      I can't dissuade you. I know that.

                                      {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}

                                      We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.

                                      {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                                      But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}

                                      I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                                      Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm

                                      There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                                      {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                                      {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                                      But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}

                                      I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,

                                      {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}

                                      and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.

                                      {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                                      {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                                      I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                                      {{{God Bless you as well.

                                      Patrick}}}

                                      God Bless,

                                      Thom
                                      http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/












                                    • Thom Hunter
                                      John,   I agree with much of what you said.  However, we don t do anyone favors by telling them that something the Bible says is sin is not sin.  Certainly
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        John,
                                         
                                        I agree with much of what you said.  However, we don't do anyone favors by telling them that something the Bible says is sin is not sin.  Certainly we have to be understanding and compassionate and forgiving . . . but we should stand as brothers trying to help brothers walk to freedom.  Truly, as one who engaged in homosexuality for many years, I understand how difficult it is, and I was greatly damaged by the judgement poured out by churches and Christians towards those who struggle with a sexual sin, as if it were greater than other sins.  Sin is sin.
                                         
                                        However, I would not tell a gossiper it is okay to gossip as long as what you are saying is true.  No . . . gossip is sin.  I would tell them they need to ask God for the strength to eventually overcome the sin of gossip.
                                         
                                        We need to support and love and forgive . . . but when you see a brother who is compromising his own journey willingly . . . not because he is tempted, but because he is being mislead . . . it is not loving at all to ignore it.
                                         
                                        I did not make the presumption that Patrick does not know Jesus.  In fact, I presumed that He is a Christian, but just struggles with something common to us all:  sin.
                                         
                                        His question framed it in the realm of sex, not friendship or male bonding.  Sex outside of a monogomous marital relationship between a man and a woman is a sin.  You won't be doing him or any other Christians favors by watering down the truth.  We need to help each other walk in the truth and do so out of genuine love and compassion.
                                         
                                        Thom
                                        http://thom-signsofastruggle.blogspot.com/

                                        --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Cliford <john_c_55@...> wrote:

                                        From: John Cliford <john_c_55@...>
                                        Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                        To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                                        Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 8:03 PM

                                         
                                        Thom,

                                        I believe that as soon as we say this is ok and this is not ok,,,,,,,we become a Pharisee.  They took the 10 Commandments and produced books of rules.  Jesus was not kind to the Pharisees or their rules.

                                        We live in a fallen word,,,, we are born with a penchant for sin.  We never out-grow this desire to sin.  We just have to except that we sin,,, it's comes with being human on this planet,,,, get over it,,, learn to live with that reality.  Now look to Jesus as our redemption.  With Jesus we walk a better life,,,,, but not a sinless life,,,,so do not start writing rules for others to live by,,,, it only sets you and them up for failure when sin enters and we  do not live up to that standard.

                                        This is one of the major reasons that so many gay teenagers/men kill them-selfs,, , they just can not live up to the rules others have written for them.  

                                        Just like not all are healed when we pray for them,,,,, not all men are changed form gay to straight when they/we pray for them.  

                                        So take your opportunity to lead a gay man to Jesus,,,,, so do not spend your one chance telling him the same thing he has been told every day of his life.

                                        John



                                        From: Thom Hunter <th2950@yahoo. com>
                                        To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                        Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 10:56:33 AM
                                        Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                         
                                        Patrick,
                                         
                                        I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.
                                         
                                        I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is:  "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?"  That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.
                                         
                                        My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion:  no.
                                         
                                        I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.
                                         
                                        God Bless,
                                         
                                        Thom
                                         
                                         
                                         

                                        --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                                        From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                        Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                        To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                        Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM

                                         
                                        Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                                        ------------ --------- -

                                        Patrick,

                                        I can't dissuade you. I know that.

                                        {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}

                                        We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.

                                        {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                                        But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}

                                        I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                                        Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm

                                        There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                                        {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                                        {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                                        But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}

                                        I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,

                                        {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}

                                        and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.

                                        {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                                        {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                                        I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                                        {{{God Bless you as well.

                                        Patrick}}}

                                        God Bless,

                                        Thom
                                        http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/













                                      • terry settles
                                        I don t know about the rest of you but the WORD OF GOD IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY ON ALL MATTERS. Whose rules or standards will you follow when same sex marriage
                                        Message 19 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          I don't know about the rest of you but the WORD OF GOD IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY ON ALL MATTERS. Whose rules or standards will you follow when same sex marriage becomes legal across America? The goys are nothing more than an instrument of deception. Terry.

                                          ----------
                                          Sent from AT&T's Wireless network using Mobile Email

                                          ------Original Message------
                                          From: John Cliford <john_c_55@...>
                                          To: <Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com>
                                          Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010 6:03:45 PM GMT-0800
                                          Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                          Thom,

                                          I believe that as soon as we say this is ok and this is not ok,,,,,,,we become a Pharisee. They took the 10 Commandments and produced books of rules. Jesus was not kind to the Pharisees or their rules.

                                          We live in a fallen word,,,, we are born with a penchant for sin. We never out-grow this desire to sin. We just have to except that we sin,,, it's comes with being human on this planet,,,, get over it,,, learn to live with that reality. Now look to Jesus as our redemption. With Jesus we walk a better life,,,,, but not a sinless life,,,,so do not start writing rules for others to live by,,,, it only sets you and them up for failure when sin enters and we do not live up to that standard.

                                          This is one of the major reasons that so many gay teenagers/men kill them-selfs,,, they just can not live up to the rules others have written for them

                                          Just like not all are healed when we pray for them,,,,, not all men are changed form gay to straight when they/we pray for them.

                                          So take your opportunity to lead a gay man to Jesus,,,,, so do not spend your one chance telling him the same thing he has been told every day of his life.

                                          John




                                          ________________________________
                                          From: Thom Hunter <th2950@...>
                                          To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                                          Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 10:56:33 AM
                                          Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?


                                          Patrick,

                                          I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.

                                          I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is: "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?" That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.

                                          My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion: no.

                                          I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.

                                          God Bless,

                                          Thom
                                          http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/




                                          --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:


                                          >From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                          >Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                          >To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                          >Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.
                                          >
                                          >------------ --------- -
                                          >
                                          >Patrick,
                                          >
                                          >I can't dissuade you. I know that.
                                          >
                                          >{{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}
                                          >
                                          >We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.
                                          >
                                          >{{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...
                                          >
                                          >But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my
                                          > peers.}}}
                                          >
                                          >I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.
                                          >
                                          >Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm
                                          >
                                          >There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.
                                          >
                                          >{{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}
                                          >
                                          >{{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion
                                          > of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.
                                          >
                                          >But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually,
                                          > is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}
                                          >
                                          >I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual
                                          > orientation,
                                          >
                                          >{{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}
                                          >
                                          >and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.
                                          >
                                          >{{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}
                                          >
                                          >{{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys
                                          > as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.
                                          >
                                          >I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}
                                          >
                                          >{{{God Bless you as well.
                                          >
                                          >Patrick}}}
                                          >
                                          >God Bless,
                                          >
                                          >Thom
                                          >http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot.
                                          > com/
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                        • John Cliford
                                          Thom, I know what my character flaw is,,,, it s the subject of this group. It has been the same all my life,, high school and college the peer pressure was
                                          Message 20 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Thom,

                                            I know what my character flaw is,,,, it's the subject of this group.  It has been the same all my life,, high school and college the peer pressure was great,,,,, I was very careful to hide it well.   I never acted on it and was very good at hiding it until my wife died.   Now it is very easy to be anonymous living alone in a large metro area.  The desire is there so the sin is there even when I do not act on it.  

                                            I am not going to judge anyone else's life,,,,,,, I'm not going to waist my one time with a gay men pointing out his sin,,,,gay men get that almost every day from many parts of society,,,,,, I will use that one opportunity to tell him about the love and redemption offered by Jesus.  

                                            It seems to me that most of the Christian Church thinks that they must fix a gay man before they will allow him to become a Christian.  I believe a gay man has a much greater chance of living a victorious life if they are born-again, filled with the Holly Spirit.  

                                            Yes I get criticized for ignoring the sin,,,,,, I think I'm giving them the tools they need to live that victorious life in or out of the gay life style,,,, that is between them and the Lord,,,,I'm not the accuser,,,, Satan is...

                                            I have been a born-again Spirit Filled Christian for 54 years,,,,I'm still that same sinner,,, but with Jesus,,,, I live in Victory that can only come with the Spirit of Jesus living in me.  I will do all I can to pass that along to all who will listen.

                                            John




                                            From: Thom Hunter <th2950@...>
                                            To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                                            Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 6:20:41 PM
                                            Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                             

                                            John,
                                             
                                            I agree with much of what you said.  However, we don't do anyone favors by telling them that something the Bible says is sin is not sin.  Certainly we have to be understanding and compassionate and forgiving . . . but we should stand as brothers trying to help brothers walk to freedom.  Truly, as one who engaged in homosexuality for many years, I understand how difficult it is, and I was greatly damaged by the judgement poured out by churches and Christians towards those who struggle with a sexual sin, as if it were greater than other sins.  Sin is sin.
                                             
                                            However, I would not tell a gossiper it is okay to gossip as long as what you are saying is true.  No . . . gossip is sin.  I would tell them they need to ask God for the strength to eventually overcome the sin of gossip.
                                             
                                            We need to support and love and forgive . . . but when you see a brother who is compromising his own journey willingly . . . not because he is tempted, but because he is being mislead . . . it is not loving at all to ignore it.
                                             
                                            I did not make the presumption that Patrick does not know Jesus.  In fact, I presumed that He is a Christian, but just struggles with something common to us all:  sin.
                                             
                                            His question framed it in the realm of sex, not friendship or male bonding.  Sex outside of a monogomous marital relationship between a man and a woman is a sin.  You won't be doing him or any other Christians favors by watering down the truth.  We need to help each other walk in the truth and do so out of genuine love and compassion.
                                             
                                            Thom
                                            http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/

                                            --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Cliford <john_c_55@yahoo. com> wrote:

                                            From: John Cliford <john_c_55@yahoo. com>
                                            Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                            To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                            Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 8:03 PM

                                             
                                            Thom,

                                            I believe that as soon as we say this is ok and this is not ok,,,,,,,we become a Pharisee.  They took the 10 Commandments and produced books of rules.  Jesus was not kind to the Pharisees or their rules.

                                            We live in a fallen word,,,, we are born with a penchant for sin.  We never out-grow this desire to sin.  We just have to except that we sin,,, it's comes with being human on this planet,,,, get over it,,, learn to live with that reality.  Now look to Jesus as our redemption.  With Jesus we walk a better life,,,,, but not a sinless life,,,,so do not start writing rules for others to live by,,,, it only sets you and them up for failure when sin enters and we  do not live up to that standard.

                                            This is one of the major reasons that so many gay teenagers/men kill them-selfs,, , they just can not live up to the rules others have written for them.  

                                            Just like not all are healed when we pray for them,,,,, not all men are changed form gay to straight when they/we pray for them.  

                                            So take your opportunity to lead a gay man to Jesus,,,,, so do not spend your one chance telling him the same thing he has been told every day of his life.

                                            John



                                            From: Thom Hunter <th2950@yahoo. com>
                                            To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                            Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 10:56:33 AM
                                            Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                             
                                            Patrick,
                                             
                                            I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.
                                             
                                            I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is:  "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?"  That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.
                                             
                                            My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion:  no.
                                             
                                            I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.
                                             
                                            God Bless,
                                             
                                            Thom
                                             
                                             
                                             

                                            --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                                            From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                            Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                            To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                            Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM

                                             
                                            Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                                            ------------ --------- -

                                            Patrick,

                                            I can't dissuade you. I know that.

                                            {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}

                                            We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.

                                            {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                                            But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}

                                            I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                                            Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm

                                            There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                                            {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                                            {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                                            But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}

                                            I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,

                                            {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}

                                            and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.

                                            {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                                            {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                                            I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                                            {{{God Bless you as well.

                                            Patrick}}}

                                            God Bless,

                                            Thom
                                            http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/













                                          • jay orknay
                                            God loves all people including gays He sent His son to die for the worlds andrew ... From: John Cliford Subject: Re:
                                            Message 21 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              God loves all people including gays
                                              He sent His son to die for the worlds
                                              andrew

                                              --- On Mon, 8/3/10, John Cliford <john_c_55@...> wrote:

                                              From: John Cliford <john_c_55@...>
                                              Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our-victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                              To: Jesus-is-our-victory@yahoogroups.com
                                              Date: Monday, 8 March, 2010, 2:03

                                               
                                              Thom,

                                              I believe that as soon as we say this is ok and this is not ok,,,,,,,we become a Pharisee.  They took the 10 Commandments and produced books of rules.  Jesus was not kind to the Pharisees or their rules.

                                              We live in a fallen word,,,, we are born with a penchant for sin.  We never out-grow this desire to sin.  We just have to except that we sin,,, it's comes with being human on this planet,,,, get over it,,, learn to live with that reality.  Now look to Jesus as our redemption.  With Jesus we walk a better life,,,,, but not a sinless life,,,,so do not start writing rules for others to live by,,,, it only sets you and them up for failure when sin enters and we  do not live up to that standard.

                                              This is one of the major reasons that so many gay teenagers/men kill them-selfs,, , they just can not live up to the rules others have written for them.  

                                              Just like not all are healed when we pray for them,,,,, not all men are changed form gay to straight when they/we pray for them.  

                                              So take your opportunity to lead a gay man to Jesus,,,,, so do not spend your one chance telling him the same thing he has been told every day of his life.

                                              John



                                              From: Thom Hunter <th2950@yahoo. com>
                                              To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                              Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 10:56:33 AM
                                              Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                               
                                              Patrick,
                                               
                                              I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.
                                               
                                              I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is:  "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?"  That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.
                                               
                                              My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion:  no.
                                               
                                              I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.
                                               
                                              God Bless,
                                               
                                              Thom
                                               
                                               
                                               

                                              --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                                              From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                              Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                              To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                              Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM

                                               
                                              Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                                              ------------ --------- -

                                              Patrick,

                                              I can't dissuade you. I know that.

                                              {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}

                                              We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.

                                              {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                                              But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}

                                              I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                                              Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm

                                              There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                                              {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                                              {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                                              But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}

                                              I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,

                                              {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}

                                              and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.

                                              {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                                              {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                                              I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                                              {{{God Bless you as well.

                                              Patrick}}}

                                              God Bless,

                                              Thom
                                              http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/













                                            • jay orknay
                                              Hi Thom.  Thank you so much for your loving sensible and compassionate post on this subject. You are totally correct and I can relate to what you say
                                              Message 22 of 22 , Mar 7, 2010
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Hi Thom.  Thank you so much for your loving sensible and compassionate post on this subject. You are totally correct and I can relate to what you say
                                                Blessings and Gods love
                                                andrew

                                                 
                                                John,
                                                 
                                                I agree with much of what you said.  However, we don't do anyone favors by telling them that something the Bible says is sin is not sin.  Certainly we have to be understanding and compassionate and forgiving . . . but we should stand as brothers trying to help brothers walk to freedom.  Truly, as one who engaged in homosexuality for many years, I understand how difficult it is, and I was greatly damaged by the judgement poured out by churches and Christians towards those who struggle with a sexual sin, as if it were greater than other sins.  Sin is sin.
                                                 
                                                However, I would not tell a gossiper it is okay to gossip as long as what you are saying is true.  No . . . gossip is sin.  I would tell them they need to ask God for the strength to eventually overcome the sin of gossip.
                                                 
                                                We need to support and love and forgive . . . but when you see a brother who is compromising his own journey willingly . . . not because he is tempted, but because he is being mislead . . . it is not loving at all to ignore it.
                                                 
                                                I did not make the presumption that Patrick does not know Jesus.  In fact, I presumed that He is a Christian, but just struggles with something common to us all:  sin.
                                                 
                                                His question framed it in the realm of sex, not friendship or male bonding.  Sex outside of a monogomous marital relationship between a man and a woman is a sin.  You won't be doing him or any other Christians favors by watering down the truth.  We need to help each other walk in the truth and do so out of genuine love and compassion.
                                                 
                                                Thom
                                                http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/

                                                --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Cliford <john_c_55@yahoo. com> wrote:

                                                From: John Cliford <john_c_55@yahoo. com>
                                                Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                                To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                                Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 8:03 PM

                                                 
                                                Thom,

                                                I believe that as soon as we say this is ok and this is not ok,,,,,,,we become a Pharisee.  They took the 10 Commandments and produced books of rules.  Jesus was not kind to the Pharisees or their rules.

                                                We live in a fallen word,,,, we are born with a penchant for sin.  We never out-grow this desire to sin.  We just have to except that we sin,,, it's comes with being human on this planet,,,, get over it,,, learn to live with that reality.  Now look to Jesus as our redemption.  With Jesus we walk a better life,,,,, but not a sinless life,,,,so do not start writing rules for others to live by,,,, it only sets you and them up for failure when sin enters and we  do not live up to that standard.

                                                This is one of the major reasons that so many gay teenagers/men kill them-selfs,, , they just can not live up to the rules others have written for them.  

                                                Just like not all are healed when we pray for them,,,,, not all men are changed form gay to straight when they/we pray for them.  

                                                So take your opportunity to lead a gay man to Jesus,,,,, so do not spend your one chance telling him the same thing he has been told every day of his life.

                                                John



                                                From: Thom Hunter <th2950@yahoo. com>
                                                To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                                Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 10:56:33 AM
                                                Subject: Re: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?

                                                 
                                                Patrick,
                                                 
                                                I too am not quite sure why the rest of the group has been silent on this, other than John, who has expressed no opinion.
                                                 
                                                I do want to remind you that your original question in the subject line is:  "Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't do anal?"  That tells me that you are not convinced; otherwise you would not have been asking the group members that question.
                                                 
                                                My answer remains as it was when we started this discussion:  no.
                                                 
                                                I truly do hope that the g0y thing does not just lead you down a path that separates you further from God.
                                                 
                                                God Bless,
                                                 
                                                Thom
                                                 
                                                 
                                                 

                                                --- On Sun, 3/7/10, John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com> wrote:

                                                From: John Spooner. South Oz. <skunk16@bigpond. com>
                                                Subject: [Jesus-is-our- victory] Re: Is it ok to have sex with men if you don't have anal?
                                                To: Jesus-is-our- victory@yahoogro ups.com
                                                Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 4:51 AM

                                                 
                                                Further reply from Patrick for Mr. Hunter.

                                                ------------ --------- -

                                                Patrick,

                                                I can't dissuade you. I know that.

                                                {{{You don't have to worry about me...I'm not sexually active anyway...that' s not my purpose for being involved with g0ys.}}}

                                                We would only end up arguing back and forth, refuring points and refining interpretations. I hope for you that your involvement with g0ys will not lead you further away fromk what God intends for men.

                                                {{{What God intends for men is only for God to know...

                                                But, personally, despite being a Christian before I discovered g0ys, after, it has solidified my relationship with God, because I am comfortable knowing how I am is a product of his infinite wisdom, and that behavior which I have rejected was a factor completely separate from who I am and how he created me. If anything, I am closer to God than ever before. This is something that would be echoed by many of my peers.}}}

                                                I have been to the site, read the justifications, the historical references and the philosophies. I just don't agree.

                                                Others can certainly do their own research: http://www.g0ys. org/initialize. htm

                                                There is a great deal of information on the pages and in the links and it is clear that while bonding may certainly be a great motivation, sexual activity between the g0y men is common.

                                                {{{"...sexual activity between the g0y men is common..." ----- Have you any firsthand proof of this???}}}

                                                {{{Sexual activity between ~~men~~ (in general) is common. @40% of men identify as heterosexual; @10% identify as homosexual; [BOTH, by themselves, minorities]; @50% fall in between...despite what anyone says, this is how God made man. So this makes the ~potential~ g0y demographic approach the 60% range. We know the 40% aren't interested, and a portion of the homo 10% will always be stubbornly seduced by gAy. It's not a case where 10% are homosexual and 90% are heterosexual (and exclusively so). The numbers indicate that there is a whole sliding scale, a vast range of intrinsic differences in each human being - no different than our fingerprints or the colors of our eyes. Evidence of the wondrous range of God's creation. To infer that God didn't figure all this (diverse ORIENTATION) into his plan is pretty insulting to his infinite wisdom.

                                                But, responding to how you worded your comment, sexual activity between g0y men is UNcommon. 1) I refer you back to the primary focus of g0y philosophy - Friendship First. 2) The logistics dictate that g0y men do not become sexual all that often. G0y is not something that is known widespread at the present time. Those that do know about it likely become part of a community that is flung so widely geographically that connecting in real-time, even non-sexually, is a rarity. It's not like we have a clubhouse atmosphere, or that we have g0y rallies or parades, or frequent 'g0y bars' (they don't exist, they would be a hypocrisy), or go on g0y cruises, etc. G0y is not a 'thing'...it is part of a guy's innate being...it's how he treats his fellow man, it's how he defines his relationship with the world around him. If a man calls himself g0y, and then presents himself as otherwise, or behaves as a slut, then he's not g0y and the rest of us will shun that individual faster than the Amish ever have turned their back on anyone. I'm not naive, I know there are men that claim g0y that are really frauds looking for masculine gay men to have sex with...just like there are plenty of heterosexual Christian 'leaders' that betray themselves through their hypocritical gay behavior...but they don't fool us for long.}}}

                                                I remain convinced that g0y is just a way to help men better accept their homosexual orientation,

                                                {{{And is that a bad thing? If it helps a homosexual man understand the difference between orientation and behavior and it turns him away from the gAy lifestyle? Aside from that, did you completely miss the point I made that a LARGE percentage of the men that have discovered and joined the g0y movement are heterosexual, married and NOT interested in sex with men??? What possible reason could there be that they identify with statements that g0ys make if g0ys was a homosexual-centric movement?}}}

                                                and, in that sense, replaces dependency on God.

                                                {{{Many of our supporters are also Christian in their beliefs, both before and AFTER their discovery of g0ys.}}}

                                                {{{If I could trust you to ask questions of actual g0y members without going on a crusade to change their lives, I'd invite you to join a few g0y groups and ask guys to clarify misconceptions you have, or at least come to understand that actual g0ys do not see g0ys as you see g0ys and do not exhibit the behavior you assume. But I feel that would have disastrous results...as in you might get booted out before anything productive would be exchanged, simply because you would continue to attempt to link us with gAy sexual behavior. That's something no one of my peers would have put up with as long as I did here. I will say, you have at least been far more respectful that any of the pathetic queens in any of the gAy venues I have visited.

                                                I'm surprised that your fellow members have nothing to say...or are you an army of one? Out of respect for them and you, I haven't persuaded any of my peers to come barging in here behind me...}}}

                                                {{{God Bless you as well.

                                                Patrick}}}

                                                God Bless,

                                                Thom
                                                http://thom- signsofastruggle .blogspot. com/














                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.