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.
Again, show us where it says adultery after a divorce ceases to be adultery if the adulterous couple gets married. You want to play these dumb semantic games, and you can't even back your own position. You keep saying things are no longer sinful after meeting Christ. Are you saying the ongoing adulterous relations are fine after meeting Christ, but ongoing LGBT relations are not? Why? Give us one good reason.
The same way murder after a divorce ceases to be murder?
The same way murder after a divorce ceases to be murder?
It's a one-time act.
So the act of marriage is the adultery, but not the relationship? How do you figure that? If it is adultery to even get married, how does it cease to be adultery after that? Murder is apples and oranges, because you don't murder during marriage to your first wife, and then again after you get remarried (although I am sure some people do this). Not a good analogy from you.
So the act of marriage is the adultery, but not the relationship? How do you figure that? If it is adultery to even get married, how does it cease to be adultery after that? Murder is apples and oranges, because you don't murder during marriage to your first wife, and then again after you get remarried. Not a good analogy from you.
Once married, it's not adultery. When a man has relations with his wife he's not committing adultery.
None of them show Jesus telling such a man to divorce his wife and go back to the first. It states that by divorcing the first wife he causes her to commit adultery. But it says nothing about how to go forward after it's done.
Did you plan to show that?
Nonsense. Adultery is an ongoing sin every time sexual relations take place in the second marriage. Marriage in itself is not adultery. That's where you go wrong in your attempt to deflect the point. The sin is the sexual act itself, not the formality of marriage. The man and woman in the second marriage are not in a lawful marriage, so each sex act is a new sin. That's what the Bible says, that's what the Catholic church before Protestantism taught, and that is what Jesus meant.
You just have to explain it away because it would affect too many Protestants, like so much else the Protestants change. So you do exactly what you deride gays for doing, change the Bible to suit your needs and beliefs. You are no different than those you take a holier than thou approach to regarding the Bible. You change it when you need to, as you do here. The Bible teaches the act of sex in a second marriage is adultery, every time it takes place. It has nothing to do with the rite of marriage, it refers to a sexual sin taking place when the participants are not married in the eyes of God.
Nonsense. Adultery is an ongoing sin every time sexual relations take place in the second marriage. Marriage in itself is not adultery. That's where you go wrong in your attempt to deflect the point. The sin is the sexual act itself, not the formality of marriage. The man and woman in the second marriage are not in a lawful marriage, so each sex act is a new sin. That's what the Bible says, that's what the Catholic church before Protestantism taught, and that is what Jesus meant.
You just have to explain it away because it would affect too many Protestants. So you do exactly what you deride gays for doing, change the Bible to suit your needs and beliefs. You are no different than those you take a holier than thou approach to regarding the Bible. You change it when you need to, as you do here. The Bible teaches the act of sex in a second marriage is adultery, every time it takes place. It has nothing to do with the rite of marriage, it refers to a sexual sin taking place.
I've told you my position. You can persist in your understanding of it, but at this point it's way off topic. So I'm done.
Once married, it's not adultery. When a man has relations with his wife he's not committing adultery.
So if a gay couple is married, they are good?
Again, you can't explain how an adulterous relationship ceases to be adultery after marriage. Simply saying "Can't be adulterous when married" really only applies to the first marriage. Your own Bible says getting remarried is adultery. So once again, please show us where it says, "but even though you are both committing adultery by even getting married, you're cool now that you said I do".
Nonsense. Adultery is an ongoing sin every time sexual relations take place in the second marriage. Marriage in itself is not adultery. That's where you go wrong in your attempt to deflect the point. The sin is the sexual act itself, not the formality of marriage. The man and woman in the second marriage are not in a lawful marriage, so each sex act is a new sin. That's what the Bible says, that's what the Catholic church before Protestantism taught, and that is what Jesus meant.
You just have to explain it away because it would affect too many Protestants, like so much else the Protestants change. So you do exactly what you deride gays for doing, change the Bible to suit your needs and beliefs. You are no different than those you take a holier than thou approach to regarding the Bible. You change it when you need to, as you do here. The Bible teaches the act of sex in a second marriage is adultery, every time it takes place. It has nothing to do with the rite of marriage, it refers to a sexual sin taking place when the participants are not married in the eyes of God.
Exactly what I keep saying. How in the world would you read those passages and think it is only referring to the act of getting married, and not all of the adulterous relations thereafter? It makes no sense to see it that way. But like you said, they have to cling to this understanding, otherwise their pews would be emptying at a rapid rate.
I believe you were also asked to show a verse that backs your position, yet you have not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
What position, exactly?
You're merely being obstinate. And nowhere does the term homosexuality appear in the Scriptures prior to 1946.
But we've already discussed this, BaptistFudie! Therefore, enough of you playing the ignorant/dumb card.
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.
But we've already discussed this, BaptistFudie! Therefore, enough of you playing the ignorant/dumb card.