Jesus on Marriage...

[BluePhantom]

You have my sympathies... but there are many more churches out there than just Catholic ones who don't teach that meaning.

There are, yes....generally the ones who have no problem with contraception.

 

[Newby]

Well, you might have a point if anyone was being 'punished' for their sins by other human kind, and in this case, me personally. Criminals are punished for the crimes they commit against society. I, personally, have never punished anyone other than my own children when they misbehaved. You are certainly free to believe that there will be no punishment in the after life for sins you commit here, and I'm free to believe that there's a good chance that you (the general 'you', not the personal 'you', cause I know that's how you'll take it if I don't say otherwise) will be judged for sins that you don't repent or turn away from. I'm also free to defend that belief, and defending it doesn't mean that I don't have mercy or that I'm personally condemning anyone. No human being has that power, when speaking in terms of religion, only God does.

If by any statement I have made, you have drawn the conclusion that I am accusing you specifically of such acts (oppression, condemnation, etc) then you have my apologies. That was not my intent.

My point is that there is a lot of such things out there and they are based on some very problematic evidence and justified according to some really serious misunderstandings of ancient culture and history.

That post wasn't in response to you, it was in response to a post made by Sky.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the rest.

 

[theHawk]

The sexual deviants speak.

Obviously, sexual deviancy makes them experts on the bible.

Fags are always trying to justify their disgusting behavior by attacking the bible and Christianity in particular.

 

[Buford]

uh huh. Buford....there is no question that "you understand according to the wisdom given to you."

The wisdom is the Word of God. The word of God that Peter wrote says Paul's letters are Scripture. Is the NT the Word of God or just part of it?

I have to say my take on "the wisdom" is similar to yours. Not meant as an insult, but meant as saying God gave Paul wisdom....or the word of God.

But that still doesn't mean Paul didn't rely on a faulty translation. After all, he was human. Even Popes aren't infallible, though the Church claims otherwise.

Paul claimed to have received his words by the Holy Spirit. You have two choices. Either Paul wrote the Word of God or he didn't. I believe he did. You believe he didn't. Case closed.

 

[Cenotaph]

The sexual deviants speak.

Obviously, sexual deviancy makes them experts on the bible.

Fags are always trying to justify their disgusting behavior by attacking the bible and Christianity in particular.

I think it's beautiful. On another note... I don't believe they should be attacking something that (for the most part) has a positive impact on people.

With that said, I would be perfectly fine with their attacking the specific part of the Bible that deals with homosexuality. Is this what they were doing, or were they attacking the religion all together?

 

[BluePhantom]

Well, you might have a point if anyone was being 'punished' for their sins by other human kind, and in this case, me personally. Criminals are punished for the crimes they commit against society. I, personally, have never punished anyone other than my own children when they misbehaved. You are certainly free to believe that there will be no punishment in the after life for sins you commit here, and I'm free to believe that there's a good chance that you (the general 'you', not the personal 'you', cause I know that's how you'll take it if I don't say otherwise) will be judged for sins that you don't repent or turn away from. I'm also free to defend that belief, and defending it doesn't mean that I don't have mercy or that I'm personally condemning anyone. No human being has that power, when speaking in terms of religion, only God does.

If by any statement I have made, you have drawn the conclusion that I am accusing you specifically of such acts (oppression, condemnation, etc) then you have my apologies. That was not my intent.

My point is that there is a lot of such things out there and they are based on some very problematic evidence and justified according to some really serious misunderstandings of ancient culture and history.

That post wasn't in response to you, it was in response to a post made by Sky.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the rest.

That's fine. I have no issue with that.

 

[Ravi]

The wisdom is the Word of God. The word of God that Peter wrote says Paul's letters are Scripture. Is the NT the Word of God or just part of it?

I have to say my take on "the wisdom" is similar to yours. Not meant as an insult, but meant as saying God gave Paul wisdom....or the word of God.

But that still doesn't mean Paul didn't rely on a faulty translation. After all, he was human. Even Popes aren't infallible, though the Church claims otherwise.

Paul claimed to have received his words by the Holy Spirit. You have two choices. Either Paul wrote the Word of God or he didn't. I believe he did. You believe he didn't. Case closed.

I believe that he used a word that has no clear meaning and has been translated by others to suit their particular agenda.

 

[mal]

I have to say my take on "the wisdom" is similar to yours. Not meant as an insult, but meant as saying God gave Paul wisdom....or the word of God.

But that still doesn't mean Paul didn't rely on a faulty translation. After all, he was human. Even Popes aren't infallible, though the Church claims otherwise.

Paul claimed to have received his words by the Holy Spirit. You have two choices. Either Paul wrote the Word of God or he didn't. I believe he did. You believe he didn't. Case closed.

I believe that he used a word that has no clear meaning and has been translated by others to suit their particular agenda.

The Book means nothing to you... Stop Agitating people of Faith you Fucking Miserable Twat.



peace...

 

[mal]

So many Consistent References...

But it was a Bad Translation each and every time...

God really LOVES Homosexuality.



peace...

Yeah you are starting to get it now. It's about fucking time.

So the part about Lying with an Animal... Translated Incorrectly also?...

You know, right there next to Homosexuality?...

Because God really LOVES Beastiality...



peace...

 

[theHawk]

The sexual deviants speak.

Obviously, sexual deviancy makes them experts on the bible.

Fags are always trying to justify their disgusting behavior by attacking the bible and Christianity in particular.

I think it's beautiful. On another note... I don't believe they should be attacking something that (for the most part) has a positive impact on people.

With that said, I would be perfectly fine with their attacking the specific part of the Bible that deals with homosexuality. Is this what they were doing, or were they attacking the religion all together?

The thing is they can't attack parts of the Bible that deals with homosexuality because in every instance homosexuality is mentioned it is condemned as a sin. They have to resort to lies like claiming "Jesus didn't say he hates homosexuals, so that must mean he accepts them".

But, as the OP has pointed out, Jesus clearly spoke of marriage being when a man leaves his parents for a woman, not a another man.

Jesus did not teach us to accept sins, he taught us to reject them. But that is something the liberals and homo-enablers will never admit, because they expend all their energy trying to get the rest of us to accept their sins like homosexuality and abortion.

 

[del]

The sexual deviants speak.

Obviously, sexual deviancy makes them experts on the bible.

it hasn't stopped you, cupcake

 

[Buford]

I have to say my take on "the wisdom" is similar to yours. Not meant as an insult, but meant as saying God gave Paul wisdom....or the word of God.

But that still doesn't mean Paul didn't rely on a faulty translation. After all, he was human. Even Popes aren't infallible, though the Church claims otherwise.

Paul claimed to have received his words by the Holy Spirit. You have two choices. Either Paul wrote the Word of God or he didn't. I believe he did. You believe he didn't. Case closed.

I believe that he used a word that has no clear meaning and has been translated by others to suit their particular agenda.

You go ahead and believe that, although you haven't made that case here.

 

[Buford]

The sexual deviants speak.

Obviously, sexual deviancy makes them experts on the bible.

it hasn't stopped you, cupcake

If you think the bible condones homosexuality, then you're deceived and choosing to believe a lie.

 

[Cenotaph]

Fags are always trying to justify their disgusting behavior by attacking the bible and Christianity in particular.

I think it's beautiful. On another note... I don't believe they should be attacking something that (for the most part) has a positive impact on people.

With that said, I would be perfectly fine with their attacking the specific part of the Bible that deals with homosexuality. Is this what they were doing, or were they attacking the religion all together?

The thing is they can't attack parts of the Bible that deals with homosexuality because in every instance homosexuality is mentioned it is condemned as a sin. They have to resort to lies like claiming "Jesus didn't say he hates homosexuals, so that must mean he accepts them".

But, as the OP has pointed out, Jesus clearly spoke of marriage being when a man leaves his parents for a woman, not a another man.

Jesus did not teach us to accept sins, he taught us to reject them. But that is something the liberals and homo-enablers will never admit, because they expend all their energy trying to get the rest of us to accept their sins like homosexuality and abortion.

You mentioned about Jesus' take on marriage, if you continued to read through that segment, you'll find that he also spoke of the exceptions of this kind of marriage in Matthew 19:12

"For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.”

Some people believe the first instance ("eunuchs who have been so from birth") might have been a way of referring to homosexuals. It really just dwindles down to one's own interpretation To me personally, I don't care if people accept my sexuality or not, and I don't really feel the need to convince them through a way that doesn't apply to me (biblical scripture).

 

[Ravi]

Paul claimed to have received his words by the Holy Spirit. You have two choices. Either Paul wrote the Word of God or he didn't. I believe he did. You believe he didn't. Case closed.

I believe that he used a word that has no clear meaning and has been translated by others to suit their particular agenda.

You go ahead and believe that, although you haven't made that case here.

BP certainly has. There is no good translation for the word Paul used.

After revisiting some other threads with your input I've come to the conclusion that your confirmation bias rules your life.

Enjoy, and beware of the Negroes.

 

[BluePhantom]

So many Consistent References...

But it was a Bad Translation each and every time...

God really LOVES Homosexuality.



peace...

Yeah you are starting to get it now. It's about fucking time.

So the part about Lying with an Animal... Translated Incorrectly also?...

You know, right there next to Homosexuality?...

Because God really LOVES Beastiality...



peace...

You are missing the point that it's highly doubtful that it references homosexuality in those areas, therefore your attempt to connect it to bestiality is invalid.

 

[BluePhantom]

The thing is they can't attack parts of the Bible that deals with homosexuality because in every instance homosexuality is mentioned it is condemned as a sin.

Boy did you come in late. You might want to scroll back through the pages because I discredited every single one of them

 

[del]

The sexual deviants speak.

Obviously, sexual deviancy makes them experts on the bible.

it hasn't stopped you, cupcake

If you think the bible condones homosexuality, then you're deceived and choosing to believe a lie.

if you think you're opinion matters to me, you're even more batshit crazy than your posts indicate.

 

[theHawk]

I think it's beautiful. On another note... I don't believe they should be attacking something that (for the most part) has a positive impact on people.

With that said, I would be perfectly fine with their attacking the specific part of the Bible that deals with homosexuality. Is this what they were doing, or were they attacking the religion all together?

The thing is they can't attack parts of the Bible that deals with homosexuality because in every instance homosexuality is mentioned it is condemned as a sin. They have to resort to lies like claiming "Jesus didn't say he hates homosexuals, so that must mean he accepts them".

But, as the OP has pointed out, Jesus clearly spoke of marriage being when a man leaves his parents for a woman, not a another man.

Jesus did not teach us to accept sins, he taught us to reject them. But that is something the liberals and homo-enablers will never admit, because they expend all their energy trying to get the rest of us to accept their sins like homosexuality and abortion.

You mentioned about Jesus' take on marriage, if you continued to read through that segment, you'll find that he also spoke of the exceptions of this kind of marriage in Matthew 19:12

"For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.”

Some people believe the first instance ("eunuchs who have been so from birth") might have been a way of referring to homosexuals. It really just dwindles down to one's own interpretation To me personally, I don't care if people accept my sexuality or not, and I don't really feel the need to convince them through a way that doesn't apply to me (biblical scripture).

Eunuchs are not homosexuals, not by a long shot.

 

[theHawk]

The thing is they can't attack parts of the Bible that deals with homosexuality because in every instance homosexuality is mentioned it is condemned as a sin.

Boy did you come in late. You might want to scroll back through the pages because I discredited every single one of them

Oh boy, the BluePhagdom has "discredited" every passage in the bible regarding homosexuality.