Give me one example. Just one.

[forkup]

Well if people wouldn't go into gay bars and go on shooting rampages I might not equate it. If you wouldn't have these guys 10 Most Wildly Anti-Gay Preachers in America I might not equate it. If you wouldn't try to link a virus to a punisment of God, I might not equate it. But since all these things happen and all are religiously inspired, I do. You asked about societal ills, this is a clear one. And I don't care if you are posturing or are not as far down the spectrum as the worst of them. You consider yourself superior to another human being and you feel superior not because of intellect, physical prowess, wealth or anything. You feel superior because of your sexual orientation. An orientation that in no way adversely effect society. So yes it is a societal ill, a false sense of superiority and in a lot of cases, a perceived right to wish and do harm on people different from you.

You're delusional. I never claimed to be superior to anyone. I'm a sinner. Saved by grace. And I repeat. The behavior you equate with Christians , in the examples you gave, Are not what the Bible teaches, religiously inspired or not. Can you point to a passage in the New Testament, that instructs Christians to participate in the destructive behavior you mentioned?

Leviticus 20:13King James Version (KJV)
13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
That's of course the old testament but,Jesus taught, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18
So altough this of course is not clearcut. But it took me about 5 minutes of internet search, to come up with these 2 statements. And if I can quite easily can come up with a way to condone homophobia from a religious standpoint, its quite easy to see why other people do it. And even if I wouldn't be able to do it, the fact remains that in all these examples the people who did this did it while feeling Gods personal soldiers. And btw, YOU equated aids to a punishment from God so YOU were guilty of one of those things.

Pay attention. I said New Testament. You're quoting Old Testament Jewish law. It was a law for a certain people at a certain period of time. It is no longer applicable to Christians. And I never said aids was a punishment from God. It is, however, a consequence of their lifestyle. That's a fact.

Ah so mattews gospel isn't the NT? He sites Jesus opinion there of the applicability of the Old Testament. So that statement goes against Jesus his opinion doesn't it? And again what's in the NT or isn't in the NT doesn't change, in any way the interpretation that certain religious people give it. It is a clear societal ill inspired by religion. In that way answering your OP. You asked an example I gave you not one but 3. And you can try to explain as to how these people don't represent you and by extention what you consider the right interpretation of scripture. But they use the same book mostly and that book, they feel gives them the right to do what they do.

But the ultimate cause is the gays themselves. If they weren't gay, in violation of Scripture, there would be no problem. No matter how you twist the facts, homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible. So the root cause of this particular social ill is disobedience to God, on the part of the gay community. By the way, You might want to check out my recent thread on what Jesus meant about old testament law. Then consider the fact that the conversation in Matthew took place before Christ fulfilled the law.

That's the abused wife argument. A lot of wives don't report abusive husbands, because they convince their wives, that the reason they got hit was because of the fact that they did something to make the man lose his temper. How is a victim responsible for the crimes commited against them? That same reprehensable argument that a lot of rape victims face. Homosexuality is not a choice. Claiming it is, is only a argument you find in religious circles. And by your defenition, if it's not a choice then surely God has made them that way. So claiming their sinfull is counterintuitive.

 

[Sbiker]

Our most religious are guilty of some of societies worst ills

Capital Punishment
Hatred of gays
Subjugation of women

Guilty? Such a stereotype...

 

[Lutroo]

You're delusional. I never claimed to be superior to anyone. I'm a sinner. Saved by grace. And I repeat. The behavior you equate with Christians , in the examples you gave, Are not what the Bible teaches, religiously inspired or not. Can you point to a passage in the New Testament, that instructs Christians to participate in the destructive behavior you mentioned?

Leviticus 20:13King James Version (KJV)
13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
That's of course the old testament but,Jesus taught, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18
So altough this of course is not clearcut. But it took me about 5 minutes of internet search, to come up with these 2 statements. And if I can quite easily can come up with a way to condone homophobia from a religious standpoint, its quite easy to see why other people do it. And even if I wouldn't be able to do it, the fact remains that in all these examples the people who did this did it while feeling Gods personal soldiers. And btw, YOU equated aids to a punishment from God so YOU were guilty of one of those things.

Pay attention. I said New Testament. You're quoting Old Testament Jewish law. It was a law for a certain people at a certain period of time. It is no longer applicable to Christians. And I never said aids was a punishment from God. It is, however, a consequence of their lifestyle. That's a fact.

Ah so mattews gospel isn't the NT? He sites Jesus opinion there of the applicability of the Old Testament. So that statement goes against Jesus his opinion doesn't it? And again what's in the NT or isn't in the NT doesn't change, in any way the interpretation that certain religious people give it. It is a clear societal ill inspired by religion. In that way answering your OP. You asked an example I gave you not one but 3. And you can try to explain as to how these people don't represent you and by extention what you consider the right interpretation of scripture. But they use the same book mostly and that book, they feel gives them the right to do what they do.

But the ultimate cause is the gays themselves. If they weren't gay, in violation of Scripture, there would be no problem. No matter how you twist the facts, homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible. So the root cause of this particular social ill is disobedience to God, on the part of the gay community. By the way, You might want to check out my recent thread on what Jesus meant about old testament law. Then consider the fact that the conversation in Matthew took place before Christ fulfilled the law.

That's the abused wife argument. A lot of wives don't report abusive husbands, because they convince their wives, that the reason they got hit was because of the fact that they did something to make the man lose his temper. How is a victim responsible for the crimes commited against them? That same reprehensable argument that a lot of rape victims face. Homosexuality is not a choice. Claiming it is, is only a argument you find in religious circles. And by your defenition, if it's not a choice then surely God has made them that way. So claiming their sinfull is counterintuitive.

Even if it was true that it's not a choice having homosexual feelings, that does not excuse someone from acting on those feelings. And your argument does not change the fact that those actions are disobedience to God. Their actions lead to the difficulties they experience. I never said that it excuses others behavior toward them. But the fact remains that if they did not practice a homosexual lifestyle, they would not suffer for it.

 

[Holos]

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from, that is the result of human agents, is the direct result of disobeying Gods word. I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

To refute belief?

Is that the challenge?

Or to refute the words?

A question, or three of them, is not an appropriate example for refutation.

 

[Lutroo]

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from, that is the result of human agents, is the direct result of disobeying Gods word. I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

To refute belief?

Is that the challenge?

Or to refute the words?

A question, or three of them, is not an appropriate example for refutation.

Basically, I'm asking people to refute the truth that disobedience to God is the cause of every man made ill we suffer from. No one has even come close yet.

 

[Holos]

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from, that is the result of human agents, is the direct result of disobeying Gods word. I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

To refute belief?

Is that the challenge?

Or to refute the words?

A question, or three of them, is not an appropriate example for refutation.

Basically, I'm asking people to refute the truth that disobedience to God is the cause of every man made ill we suffer from. No one has even come close yet.

Is it a challenge or a request then?

 

[forkup]

Leviticus 20:13King James Version (KJV)
13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
That's of course the old testament but,Jesus taught, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18
So altough this of course is not clearcut. But it took me about 5 minutes of internet search, to come up with these 2 statements. And if I can quite easily can come up with a way to condone homophobia from a religious standpoint, its quite easy to see why other people do it. And even if I wouldn't be able to do it, the fact remains that in all these examples the people who did this did it while feeling Gods personal soldiers. And btw, YOU equated aids to a punishment from God so YOU were guilty of one of those things.

Pay attention. I said New Testament. You're quoting Old Testament Jewish law. It was a law for a certain people at a certain period of time. It is no longer applicable to Christians. And I never said aids was a punishment from God. It is, however, a consequence of their lifestyle. That's a fact.

Ah so mattews gospel isn't the NT? He sites Jesus opinion there of the applicability of the Old Testament. So that statement goes against Jesus his opinion doesn't it? And again what's in the NT or isn't in the NT doesn't change, in any way the interpretation that certain religious people give it. It is a clear societal ill inspired by religion. In that way answering your OP. You asked an example I gave you not one but 3. And you can try to explain as to how these people don't represent you and by extention what you consider the right interpretation of scripture. But they use the same book mostly and that book, they feel gives them the right to do what they do.

But the ultimate cause is the gays themselves. If they weren't gay, in violation of Scripture, there would be no problem. No matter how you twist the facts, homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible. So the root cause of this particular social ill is disobedience to God, on the part of the gay community. By the way, You might want to check out my recent thread on what Jesus meant about old testament law. Then consider the fact that the conversation in Matthew took place before Christ fulfilled the law.

That's the abused wife argument. A lot of wives don't report abusive husbands, because they convince their wives, that the reason they got hit was because of the fact that they did something to make the man lose his temper. How is a victim responsible for the crimes commited against them? That same reprehensable argument that a lot of rape victims face. Homosexuality is not a choice. Claiming it is, is only a argument you find in religious circles. And by your defenition, if it's not a choice then surely God has made them that way. So claiming their sinfull is counterintuitive.

Even if it was true that it's not a choice having homosexual feelings, that does not excuse someone from acting on those feelings. And your argument does not change the fact that those actions are disobedience to God. Their actions lead to the difficulties they experience. I never said that it excuses others behavior toward them. But the fact remains that if they did not practice a homosexual lifestyle, they would not suffer for it.

And if people stopped believing in God, they wouldn't perpetrate those crimes against them. You can play that game all night, your OP asked 1 example I gave you one.Mission acomplished. Oh and btw in regards to homosexuality apparently.None of the Gospels touch the subject so we don't know what Jesus thought about it at all. There's only 3 references to it to begin with. 2 of wich are speculative and the other one only condemns certain types.What the New Testament Says about Homosexuality - Westar Institute

 

[Lutroo]

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from, that is the result of human agents, is the direct result of disobeying Gods word. I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

To refute belief?

Is that the challenge?

Or to refute the words?

A question, or three of them, is not an appropriate example for refutation.

Basically, I'm asking people to refute the truth that disobedience to God is the cause of every man made ill we suffer from. No one has even come close yet.

Is it a challenge or a request then?

I guess you could call it a challenge, but the fact is that no one could possibly win it.

 

[Lutroo]

Pay attention. I said New Testament. You're quoting Old Testament Jewish law. It was a law for a certain people at a certain period of time. It is no longer applicable to Christians. And I never said aids was a punishment from God. It is, however, a consequence of their lifestyle. That's a fact.

Ah so mattews gospel isn't the NT? He sites Jesus opinion there of the applicability of the Old Testament. So that statement goes against Jesus his opinion doesn't it? And again what's in the NT or isn't in the NT doesn't change, in any way the interpretation that certain religious people give it. It is a clear societal ill inspired by religion. In that way answering your OP. You asked an example I gave you not one but 3. And you can try to explain as to how these people don't represent you and by extention what you consider the right interpretation of scripture. But they use the same book mostly and that book, they feel gives them the right to do what they do.

But the ultimate cause is the gays themselves. If they weren't gay, in violation of Scripture, there would be no problem. No matter how you twist the facts, homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible. So the root cause of this particular social ill is disobedience to God, on the part of the gay community. By the way, You might want to check out my recent thread on what Jesus meant about old testament law. Then consider the fact that the conversation in Matthew took place before Christ fulfilled the law.

That's the abused wife argument. A lot of wives don't report abusive husbands, because they convince their wives, that the reason they got hit was because of the fact that they did something to make the man lose his temper. How is a victim responsible for the crimes commited against them? That same reprehensable argument that a lot of rape victims face. Homosexuality is not a choice. Claiming it is, is only a argument you find in religious circles. And by your defenition, if it's not a choice then surely God has made them that way. So claiming their sinfull is counterintuitive.

Even if it was true that it's not a choice having homosexual feelings, that does not excuse someone from acting on those feelings. And your argument does not change the fact that those actions are disobedience to God. Their actions lead to the difficulties they experience. I never said that it excuses others behavior toward them. But the fact remains that if they did not practice a homosexual lifestyle, they would not suffer for it.

And if people stopped believing in God, they wouldn't perpetrate those crimes against them. You can play that game all night, your OP asked 1 example I gave you one.Mission acomplished. Oh and btw in regards to homosexuality apparently.None of the Gospels touch the subject so we don't know what Jesus thought about it at all. There's only 3 references to it to begin with. 2 of wich are speculative and the other one only condemns certain types.What the New Testament Says about Homosexuality - Westar Institute

The New Testament says that homosexuality is a “shameful lust” (Romans 1:26), a “shameful act,” an abandonment of “natural relations” (Romans 1:27), a “wrongdoing” (1 Corinthians 6:9), and “sexual immorality and perversion” (Jude 1:7). Homosexuality carries a “due penalty” (Romans 1:27), “is contrary to the sound doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:10), and is listed among the sins that bar people from the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9). Despite the attempts of some to downplay these verses, the Bible could not be clearer that homosexuality is a sin against God.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Even if it was true that it's not a choice having homosexual feelings, that does not excuse someone from acting on those feelings. And your argument does not change the fact that those actions are disobedience to God. Their actions lead to the difficulties they experience. I never said that it excuses others behavior toward them. But the fact remains that if they did not practice a homosexual lifestyle, they would not suffer for it.

This is an important point.

Though I have no homosexual inclinations, I will admit that I am sexually attracted to any woman who is at all attractive. I am attracted to women other than my wife.

I do not have any choice with regard to being thus attracted to women. It's how I was made; it's how I am.

I do, however, have a choice as to how I will or will not act on this attraction. I know that sexual intimacy is only appropriate and acceptable within marriage, between a man and his wife. I may be tempted to pursue a sexual relationship with some other woman than my wife, but I have the choice to act on that temptation or to resist it; and my moral obligation is to do the latter.

 

[rightwinger]

Our most religious are guilty of some of societies worst ills

Capital Punishment
Hatred of gays
Subjugation of women

Guilty? Such a stereotype...

Call it what it is

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And if people stopped believing in God, they wouldn't perpetrate those crimes against them. You can play that game all night, your OP asked 1 example I gave you one.Mission acomplished. Oh and btw in regards to homosexuality apparently.None of the Gospels touch the subject so we don't know what Jesus thought about it at all. There's only 3 references to it to begin with. 2 of wich are speculative and the other one only condemns certain types.What the New Testament Says about Homosexuality - Westar Institute

The Bible is absolutely clear regarding the standards of sexual morality; and homosexuality is wholly irreconcilable with these standards.

There was no need for Jesus to repeat what was already known and established on this matter; and his lack of attention to it cannot rationally be taken as overturning what was long before established. I don't recall that he said anything about killing, either, but nobody that I know takes that to mean that the commandment that “Thou shalt not kill” is no longer valid.

 

[Syriusly]

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from, that is the result of human agents, is the direct result of disobeying Gods word. I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from is the direct result of manipulation by Lutroo.

I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

 

[Holos]

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from, that is the result of human agents, is the direct result of disobeying Gods word. I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

To refute belief?

Is that the challenge?

Or to refute the words?

A question, or three of them, is not an appropriate example for refutation.

Basically, I'm asking people to refute the truth that disobedience to God is the cause of every man made ill we suffer from. No one has even come close yet.

Is it a challenge or a request then?

I guess you could call it a challenge, but the fact is that no one could possibly win it.

I wouldn't call it a challenge then, even having the ability to do so.
It's a monologue.

 

[Lutroo]

I believe that every societal ill America suffers from, that is the result of human agents, is the direct result of disobeying Gods word. I challenge anyone to give one example that refutes this.

To refute belief?

Is that the challenge?

Or to refute the words?

A question, or three of them, is not an appropriate example for refutation.

Basically, I'm asking people to refute the truth that disobedience to God is the cause of every man made ill we suffer from. No one has even come close yet.

Is it a challenge or a request then?

I guess you could call it a challenge, but the fact is that no one could possibly win it.

I wouldn't call it a challenge then, even having the ability to do so.
It's a monologue.

It was a question. A question no one could answer. That's all it was.

 

[Sbiker]

Our most religious are guilty of some of societies worst ills

Capital Punishment
Hatred of gays
Subjugation of women

Guilty? Such a stereotype...

Call it what it is

Feature... Why not?

Why do you think, for example, feminism is good thing for survival? Have you seen "stone women", remained from matriarchy epoch? Where's powerful tribes with wise rule of Supreme Mistress? Only stones and ashes...

History repeats, while people teaching their lessons with blood and pain. Britain economics have fallen under rule a "wise" Margaret Thatcher...

Damn.. Thousand of topics and only one question as result - Hillary or Trump? )))))))))))))))

 

[cnm]

The question is pretty simple. I asked for an example of a man made societal ill that is not a result of disobeying Gods word.

That is not a question, you yammering imbecile.

 

[cnm]

I asked for an example of a man made societal ill that is not a result of disobeying Gods word.

No, you said you believed every man made societal ill is a result of disobeying Gods word. Then you asked people to tell you that you don't believe that, you fanatical simpleton.

If only you'd start obeying god's word things might improve.

 

[cnm]

Questions have one of these things - ? - shaped like the top of a coat hanger at the end of them, you illiterate goof.

 

[hobelim]

The Bible is absolutely clear regarding the standards of sexual morality; and homosexuality is wholly irreconcilable with these standards.

There was no need for Jesus to repeat what was already known and established on this matter; and his lack of attention to it cannot rationally be taken as overturning what was long before established. I don't recall that he said anything about killing, either, but nobody that I know takes that to mean that the commandment that “Thou shalt not kill” is no longer valid.

When Jesus said that satan was "a murderer from the beginning" he was referring to the story of Adam and Even where the talking serpent deceived them into defying the command of God which resulted in their death which was not a biological death since they continued to live physical lives after their expulsion from Eden.

It follows then if in the eyes of Jesus the subject of murder is to mislead people into doing that which God promises results in death and is not about homicide then it follows that in the eyes of Jesus the subject of the command against men having unnatural relations with another man is not about sex.

How many of you ding dongs out there condemn and revile homosexuals for violating divine law but you all who worship Jesus, a man, as if he was a god have exchanged the natural for the unnatural and are guilty of violating the deeper implications of the exact same law against a man having unnatural relations with another man.

Hypocrite. You condemn other people for violating law that you are guilty of violating yourself.

How do you expect to escape the condemnation hell?