Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why wouldn't he have known the concept of what "gay" is? Homosexuality goes back a lot further then Jesus' time. I don't believe a whole lot has changed in the past 2000+ years. Its still same sex with same sex.
The idea of someone identifying as a gay person was not solidified. There was a much more fluid sexuality back then. The whole concept of being "gay" came out of modern sociology and psychology developed in the late 19th century.
There's also the issue of translation from the Greek, which had many different words for different sexual offenses of both the homo and hetero variety. I tried to post those earlier but was deleted for being off topic.
You are a master of passive-aggression, Chrome. You most certainly have made personal attacks. Stand by your words and quit obfuscating.
The very position you state is offensive and a personal attack on all North Carolinians. Now it is enshrined in law and good and talented people will now have to waste time and resources beating back this damaging law.
Show one example of a personal attack on this topic. You can not, it just simply isn't there. I have always stood by my words and never, ever backed down, nor will I.
My postion is MY position and unless you want to open that can of worms that because I am Christian, I have no right to vote, you will certainly have to get over it because it is my right, no matter how you percieve it or want to manipulate it. It really doesn't matter. You time would be best utilized taking on the 1 million plus who voted for the amendment.
Rather weak admonition. Buried among much more discussion of love and charity.
It's also a not a legitimate basis of public policy - on which we both agree.
Once the Supreme Court gets a case challenging this Amendment or one of the others, it will not stand.
You find it weak, because you want to find it weak. Its pretty crystal clear that any type of sex outside of marriage is wrong. By your line of thinking Jesus would be ok with bestiality, just because he never mentioned it in the bible it must be ok. Try as you might you can't get past the fact that he defined marriage as in act between one man, and one woman.
The idea of someone identifying as a gay person was not solidified. There was a much more fluid sexuality back then. The whole concept of being "gay" came out of modern sociology and psychology developed in the late 19th century.
There's also the issue of translation from the Greek, which had many different words for different sexual offenses of both the homo and hetero variety. I tried to post those earlier but was deleted for being off topic.
Wow so much stretching twisting, and speculation in that page over one word, but back up to the words before that and it talks about adultery and fornication, which all deals with sex outside of marriage, and since we have established that Jesus's definition of marriage was one man and one woman. Homosexual sex is still wrong.
Show one example of a personal attack on this topic. You can not, it just simply isn't there. I have always stood by my words and never, ever backed down, nor will I.
Here you go, Chrome.
"Don't argue the bible, it really is not becoming. And your willful ignorance is showing. But this much I promise you. A day will come that you will have to answer for your vile words about God and his words."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromekitty
My postion is MY position and unless you want to open that can of worms that because I am Christian, I have no right to vote, you will certainly have to get over it because it is my right, no matter how you percieve it or want to manipulate it. It really doesn't matter. You time would be best utilized taking on the 1 million plus who voted for the amendment.
No one has said anything close to this. The premise that ANYONE would be allowed to vote on the rights of the minority is what people take issue with. The entire ballot initiative should have never been presented - whether it was introduce by a Christian, Buddhist, Jew, Islamist, or Atheist.
You find it weak, because you want to find it weak. Its pretty crystal clear that any type of sex outside of marriage is wrong. By your line of thinking Jesus would be ok with bestiality, just because he never mentioned it in the bible it must be ok. Try as you might you can't get past the fact that he defined marriage as in act between one man, and one woman.
Context, context, context. This was a direct response to a Pharisee who asked a question specifically about heterosexual divorce. I'm willing to admit that many forms of homosexuality were viewed as sin, but they were pretty minor compared to other sins. The second half of Matthew 19 is admonishments on greed and accumulation of wealth. Modern day Christians sure have thrown that out.
Bestiality is wrong because an animal can't consent. Another human of the same sex can. There is no "slippery slope" from homosexuality to bestiality.
Wow so much stretching twisting, and speculation in that page over one word, but back up to the words before that and it talks about adultery and fornication, which all deals with sex outside of marriage, and since we have established that Jesus's definition of marriage was one man and one woman. Homosexual sex is still wrong.
This is a text translated through three languages Aramaic - Greek - English (not to mention the King James dialect). There is going to be a lot of disagreement on word precision.
"Don't argue the bible, it really is not becoming. And your willful ignorance is showing. But this much I promise you. A day will come that you will have to answer for your vile words about God and his words."
No one has said anything close to this. The premise that ANYONE would be allowed to vote on the rights of the minority is what people take issue with. The entire ballot initiative should have never been presented - whether it was introduce by a Christian, Buddhist, Jew, Islamist, or Atheist.
Oh hunny, those aren't personal attacks, they are facts. You see ignorance can be forgiven and corrected, willful ignorance can not. Willful ignorance is a choice. And you arguing the bible is not becoming for you, you don't know of what you speak. You are dealing in fantasy and fairytales here.....
Oh hunny, those aren't personal attacks, they are facts. You see ignorance can be forgiven and corrected, willful ignorance can not. Willful ignorance is a choice. And you arguing the bible is not becoming for you, you don't know of what you speak. You are dealing in fantasy and fairytales here.....
Don't patronize me. I've never attacked you personally. Just your ideas. I have no idea what you've written here even means.
I do agree, though, the Bible is an excellent collection of fantasy and fairytales. This is why I prefer Thomas Jefferson's Bible, which took out all of the supernatural mess and focused only on Jesus' teachings.
You are dealing in fantasy and fairytales here.....
You mean like burning bushes, splitting the red sea with a staff, people turning to salt, 4 horsemen and beast with horns and feet like lions?
I believe in Christ but I don't believe everything I read in a book written by man. Especially when man has used the bible to enslave, kill, rape, etc....
There is a reason for the separation of church and state.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
